Rock mass classification

Lesson Outcomes
Student should be able to: (CO4 – PO1, PO8)

Describe the RQD and UCS classification

Define the Q-system / Bieniawski classification system

Engineering rock mass classifications
Types of the multi-parameter classifications schemes
Wickham et al (1972)
Bienawski (1973, 1989)
Barton et al (1974)
Were developed from civil engineering case histories
in which all of the components of the engineering
geological characters of the rocks mass were included.
 In underground hard rock mining, especially at deep
levels, rock mass weathering and the influence of
water usually are not significant and may be ignored.
Different classification systems place different
emphases on the various parameters, and it is
recommended that at least two methods be used at
any site during the early stages of a project.
 Terzaghi's rock mass classification
 Classifications involving stand-up time
 Rock quality designation index (RQD)
 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)
Terzaghi's rock mass classification
The earliest reference to the use of rock mass
classification for the design of tunnel support is in a
paper by Terzaghi (1946) in which the rock loads,
carried by steel sets, are estimated on the basis of a
descriptive classification.
While no useful purpose would be served by including
details of Terzaghi's classification in this discussion on
the design of support.
The clear and concise definitions and the practical
comments included in these descriptions are good
examples of the type of engineering geology
information, which is most useful for engineering
design.
Terzaghi's descriptions (quoted directly from
his paper):
 Intact rock: neither joints nor hair cracks. Hence, if it breaks, it breaks across sound rock. On
account of the injury to the rock due to blasting, spalls may drop off the roof several hours or days
after blasting. This is known as a spalling condition. Hard, intact rock may also be encountered in the
popping condition involving the spontaneous and violent detachment of rock slabs from the sides or
roof.
 Stratified rock: of individual strata with little or no resistance against separation along the
boundaries between the strata. The strata may or may not be weakened by transverse joints. In such
rock the spalling condition is quite common.
 Moderately jointed rock: joints and hair cracks, but the blocks between joints are locally grown
together or so intimately interlocked that vertical walls do not require lateral support. In rocks of this
type, both spalling and popping conditions may be encountered.
 Blocky and seamy rock: chemically intact or almost intact rock fragments which are entirely
separated from each other and imperfectly interlocked. In such rock, vertical walls may require lateral
support.
 Crushed but chemically intact rock: has the character of crusher run. If most or all of the
fragments are as small as fine sand grains and no recementation has taken place, crushed rock below
the water table exhibits the properties of a water-bearing sand.
 Squeezing rock: slowly advances into the tunnel without perceptible volume increase. A prerequisite
for squeeze is a high percentage of microscopic and sub-microscopic particles of micaceous minerals
or clay minerals with a low swelling capacity.
 Swelling rock: advances into the tunnel chiefly on account of expansion. The capacity to swell seems
to be limited to those rocks that contain clay minerals such as montmorillonite, with a high swelling
capacity.
Classifications involving stand-up time
The significance of the stand-up time concept is that an
increase in the span of the tunnel leads to a significant
reduction in the time available for the installation of
support.

The New Austrian Tunnelling Method includes a number

of techniques for safe tunnelling in rock conditions in
which the stand-up time is limited before failure occurs.

These techniques are applicable in soft rocks such as

shales, phyllites and mudstones in which the squeezing
and swelling problems, described by Terzaghi, are likely to
occur.
The techniques are also applicable when tunnelling in excessively broken
rock, but great care should be taken in attempting to apply these techniques
to excavations in hard rocks in which different failure mechanisms occur.

In designing support for hard rock excavations it is prudent to assume that
the stability of the rock mass surrounding the excavation is not time-
dependent. Hence, if a structurally defined wedge is exposed in the roof of an
excavation, it will fall as soon as the rock supporting it is removed. This can
occur at the time of the blast or during the subsequent scaling operation.

If it is required to keep such a wedge in place, or to enhance the margin of

safety, it is essential that the support be installed as early as possible,
preferably before the rock supporting the full wedge is removed.

In a highly stressed rock, failure will generally be induced by some change in
the stress field surrounding the excavation. The failure may occur gradually
and manifest itself as spalling or slabbing or it may occur suddenly in the
form of a rock burst. In either case, the support design must take into account
the change in the stress field rather than the ‘stand-up’ time of the excavation.
Rock quality designation index (RQD)
The Rock Quality Designation index (RQD) was
developed by Deere (Deere et al 1967) to provide a
quantitative estimate of rock mass quality from drill
core logs.

RQD is defined as the percentage of intact core pieces

longer than 100 mm (4 inches) in the total length of
core. The core should be at least NW size (54.7 mm or
2.15 inches in diameter) and should be drilled with a
double-tube core barrel.
The correct procedures for measurement of the length
of core pieces and the calculation of RQD are
summarised in Figure 1.
Palmström (1982) suggested that, when no core is available but
discontinuity traces are visible in surface exposures or
exploration adits, the RQD may be estimated from the number
of discontinuities per unit volume.

The suggested relationship for clay-free rock masses is:

RQD = 115 - 3.3 Jv (1)
where Jv is the sum of the number of joints per unit length for
all joint (discontinuity) sets known as the volumetric joint
count.

RQD is intended to represent the rock mass quality in situ.

When using Palmström's relationship for exposure mapping,

blast induced fractures should not be included when estimating
Jv.
Rock Structure Rating (RSR)
Described a quantitative method for describing the quality of a rock mass and for selecting
appropriate support on the RSR classification.

 The significance of the RSR system is that it introduced the concept of rating each of the
components listed below to arrive at a numerical value of RSR = A + B + C.
1. Parameter A, Geology: General appraisal of geological structure on the basis of:
 a. Rock type origin (igneous, metamorphic, sedimentary).
 b. Rock hardness (hard, medium, soft, decomposed).

 C. Geologic structure (massive, slightly faulted/folded, moderately faulted/folded, intensely faulted/folded).

2. Parameter B, Geometry: Effect of discontinuity pattern with respect to the direction of the
tunnel drive on the basis of:
 a. Joint spacing.
 b. Joint orientation (strike and dip).
 c. Direction of tunnel drive.

3. Parameter C: Effect of groundwater inflow and joint condition on the basis of:
 a. Overall rock mass quality on the basis of A and B combined.
 b. Joint condition (good, fair, poor).

 c. Amount of water inflow (in gallons per minute per 1000 feet of tunnel).
Three tables from Wickham et al's 1972 paper are
reproduced in Tables 1, 2 and 3.
These tables can be used to evaluate the rating of each
of these parameters to arrive at the RSR value
(maximum RSR = 100).
Table 2 gives the rating for B = 24 for driving with dip (defined below)

The value of A + B = 46 for joints of fair

condition (slightly weathered and altered) and
a moderate water inflow of between 200 and
1,000 gallons per minute, Table 3 gives the
rating for C = 16. Hence, the final value of the
rock structure rating RSR = A + B + C = 62.

A typical set of prediction curves for a 24 foot

diameter tunnel are given in Figure 2 which
shows that, for the RSR value of 62 derived
above, the predicted support would be 2
inches of shotcrete and 1 inch diameter
rockbolts spaced at 5 foot centres. As
indicated in the figure, steel sets would be
spaced at more than 7 feet apart and would
not be considered a practical solution for the
support of this tunnel.
 Figure 2: RSR support estimates for a 24 ft. (7.3 m) diameter circular
tunnel
Geomechanics Classification
 The following six parameters are used to classify a
rock mass using the RMR system:
1. Uniaxial compressive strength of rock material.
2. Rock Quality Designation (RQD).
3. Spacing of discontinuities.
4. Condition of discontinuities.
5. Groundwater conditions.
6. Orientation of discontinuities.
The Rock Mass Rating system is presented in Table 4,
giving the ratings for each of the six parameters listed
above.
It should be noted that Table 5 has not had a major revision since 1973. In many mining and civil engineering applications, steel fibre
reinforced shotcrete may be considered in place of wire mesh and shotcrete.
Modifications to RMR for mining
Laubscher (1977, 1984), Laubscher and Taylor (1976) and
Laubscher and Page (1990) have described a Modified Rock Mass
Rating system for mining. This MRMR system takes the basic
RMR value, as defined by Bieniawski, and adjusts it to account for
in situ and induced stresses, stress changes and the effects of
blasting and weathering.

Cummings et al (1982) and Kendorski et al (1983) have also

modified Bieniawski's RMR classification to produce the MBR
(modified basic RMR) system for mining. It involves the use of
different ratings for the original parameters used to determine
the value of RMR and the subsequent adjustment of the resulting
MBR value to allow for blast damage, induced stresses, structural
features, distance from the cave front and size of the caving block.
Rock Tunnelling Quality Index, Q
 
The first quotient (RQD/Jn), representing the structure of the rock mass, is a crude measure of the
block or particle size, with the two extreme values (100/0.5 and 10/20) differing by a factor of 400.

The second quotient (Jr/Ja) represents the roughness and frictional characteristics of the joint walls or
filling materials.

The third quotient (Jw/SRF) consists of two stress parameters. SRF is a measure of:
loosening load in the case of an excavation through shear zones and clay bearing rock
rock stress in competent rock
squeezing loads in plastic incompetent rocks.

 It can be regarded as a total stress parameter.

The parameter Jw is a measure of water pressure, which has an adverse effect on the shear strength of
joints due to a reduction in effective normal stress.

Function of only three parameters which are crude measures of:

Block size (RQD/Jn)
Inter-block shear strength (Jr/ Ja)
Active stress (Jw/SRF)
The crusher station discussed earlier falls into the category of permanent
mine openings and is assigned an excavation support ratio ESR = 1.6. Hence,
for an excavation span of 15m, the equivalent dimension, De = 15/1.6 = 9.4.

The equivalent dimension, De, plotted against the value of Q, is used to

define a number of support categories

From Figure 3, a value of De of 9.4 and a value of Q of 4.5 places this

crusher excavation in category (4) which requires a pattern of rockbolts
(spaced at 2.3 m) and 40 to 50 mm of unreinforced shotcrete.

Assuming that the RQD value for the destressed rock around the crusher
chamber drops to 50 %, the resulting value of Q = 2.9.

From Figure 3, this value of Q, for an equivalent dimension, De of 9.4, places

the excavation just inside category (5) which requires rockbolts, at
approximately 2 m spacing, and a 50 mm thick layer of steel fibre reinforced
shotcrete.
Using rock mass classification systems
When using either of these methods, two approaches can be taken.
One is to evaluate the rock mass specifically for the parameters included in the
classification methods
the other is to accurately characterise the rock mass and then attribute parameter
ratings at a later time.
The latter method is recommended since it gives a full and complete description of
the rock mass which can easily be translated into either classification index.
In Figure 4 which is reproduced from field notes prepared by Dr. N. Barton on a
project.
In this particular case, the rock mass is dry and is subjected to 'medium‘ stress
conditions (Table 6.6.K) and hence Jw = 1.0 and SRF = 1.0.
Histograms showing the variations in RQD, Jn, Jr and Ja, along the exploration
adit mapped, are presented in this figure.
The average value of Q = 8.9 and the approximate range of Q is 1.7 < Q < 20.
The average value of Q can be used in choosing a basic support system while the
range gives an indication of the possible adjustments which will be required to
meet different conditions encountered during construction.