Engineering classification of rocks and rock masses

● Classification systems in rock engineering

● Classification of intact rocks
● Classification of rockmass
● Terzaghi’s rock load

● RQD

● Rock Structure Rating

● Bieniawski’s RMR

● Barton’s Q-System

● Laubscher’s-MRMR

● Hoek’s-GSI

● Palmstrom’s RMi

● CMRI-ISM Rock mass classification and

● Recent developments; correlations between different classification systems;

Applications of Rockmass Classification in rock engineering (being discussed
in respective topics).
●
Rock mass classification systems are used for various
engineering design and stability analysis.
●
These are based on empirical relations between rock mass
parameters and engineering applications, such as tunnels,
slopes, foundations, and excavatability. 
●
rock mass classification, methods are extensively used for
feasibility and pre-design studies, and often also for the final
design
●
We cannot change the ground conditions, but we can understand
the conditions, and according to that we can select excavation
methodology, that offer optimum performance in the given
conditions and we can improve the ability to cope with adverse
geological conditions.
The objectives of rock mass classifications are (after Bieniawski 1989):

1. Identify the most significant parameters influencing the behaviour of a rock mass.

2. Divide a particular rock mass formulation into groups of similar behaviour – rock
mass classes of varying quality.

3. Provide a basis of understanding the characteristics of each rock mass class

4. Relate the experience of rock conditions at one site to the conditions and
experience encountered at others

5. Derive quantitative data and guidelines for engineering design

6. Provide common basis for communication between engineers and geologists

 The main benefits of rock mass classifications:
1. Improving the quality of site investigations by calling for the minimum input data as
classification parameters.
2. Providing quantitative information for design purposes.
3. Enabling better engineering judgement and more effective communication on a
project.
4. provide a basis for understanding the characteristics of each rock mass
Engineering Classification of Rock Mass are usually applied
for the evaluation of

stability of excavations,

rock support requirements, and

determination of rock mass deformation and strength
parameters.

Rock mass classification puts a number to the quality of the

rock mass. It divides the rock mass into groups of similar
behavior
 Disadvantages of rock mass classification
According to Bieniawski (1993), the major pitfalls of rock mass classification
systems arise when:
1) using rock mass classifications as the ultimate empirical ‘cook book’, i.e.
ignoring analytical and observational design methods;
2) using one rock mass classification system only, i.e. without cross-checking
the results with at least one other system;
3) using rock mass classifications without enough input data;
4) using rock mass classifications without full realization of their conservative
nature and their limits arising from the database on which they were
developed.
Some people are of the opinion that
a) natural materials cannot be described by a single number,
b) other important (often dominating) factors are not considered,
c) results of rock mass classification are prone to misuse (e.g., claims for changed
conditions) (Bieniawski, 1989).
 CLASSIFICATION OF ROCK MATERIAL BASED ON UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
Manual Indent Tests
Grade Description Field identification Approx. range
of UCS (MPa)
S1 Very soft clay Easily penetrated several inches by fist < 0.025
S2 Soft clay Easily penetrated several inches by thumb 0.025-0.05
S3 Firm clay Can be penetrated several inches by thumb with moderate strength 0.05-0.10
S4 Stiff clay Readily indented by thumb but penetrated only with thumb with great effort 0.10-0.25
S5 Very stiff clay Readily indented by thumbnail with 0.25-0.50
S6 Hard clay Indented by with difficulty by thumbnail >0.50
R0 Extremely weak Indented by thumbnail 0.25-1.0
rock
R1 Very weak rock Crumbles under firm blow with point of geological hammer, can be peeled by 1.0-5.0
pocket knife
R2 Weak rock Can be peeled by a pocket knife with difficulty, shallow indentation made by firm 5.0-25
blow with point of geological hammer
R3 Medium strong Cannot be scraped or peeled by pocket knife, specimen can be fractured with 25-50
rock single blow of geological hammer
R4 Strong rock Specimen requires more than one blow of geological hammer to fracture it 50-100
R5 Very strong rock Specimen requires many blows of geological hammer to fracture it 100-250
R6 Extremely strong Specime can only be chipped with geological hammer >250
rock
 ●
Typical S-shape stress-strain curves
may be obtained for rocks with micro-
fractures.
●
Post-peak curve for Class II rocks
shows reduction of strain after failure.
The lateral strain increases rapidly
after peak stress in Class II rocks.
Brittle rocks, therefore, may be kept in
the Class II category.
●
A deep tunnel within dry, massive,
hard Class II and laminated rocks may
fail because of rock bursts due to
uncontrolled fracturing where
tangential stress exceeds the strength
of the rock material. Hence, it is
necessary to test rock material in a
Stress-strain curve for six representative Servo-controlled closed loop testing
rocks in uniaxial compression (Wawersik, machine to get the post-peak curve.
1968)
The geotechnical engineer should apply theory and
experimentation but temper them by putting them into the
context of the uncertainty of nature. Judgement enters through
engineering geology.
Karl Terzaghi
●
probably the first successful attempt at
classifying rock masses for engineering
purposes
●
The rock load factors (H P) were estimated by
Terzaghi from a 5.5-m-wide steel-arch
supported railroad tunnel in the Alps during the
late 1920s.
●
wooden blocks of known strengths were used
for blocking the steel arches to the surrounding
rock masses.
●
Rock loads were estimated from the known
strengths of the failed wooden blocks
●
Subsequently, he conducted “trap-door”
experiments on different sands and found that
the height of loosened arch above the roof
increased directly with the opening width in the
sand
 Definitions of Rock Classes of Terzaghi’s Rock Load Theory
Rock Type of Definition
class rock
I Hard and The rock is unweathered. It contains neither joints nor hair cracks. If fractured, it
intact breaks across intact rock. After excavation the rock may have some popping and
spalling failures from the roof. At high stresses spontaneous and violent spalling
of rock slabs may occur from the sides or the roof. The unconfined compressive
strength is equal to or more than 100 MPa.
II Hard The rock is hard and layered. The layers are usually widely separated. The rock may or may
stratified and not have planes of weakness. In this type of rock, spalling is quite common.
schistose
III Massive A jointed rock. The joints are widely spaced. The joints may or may not be cemented. It may
moderately also contain hair cracks, but the huge blocks between the joints are intimately interlocked so
jointed that vertical walls do not require lateral support. Spalling may occur.
IV Moderately Joints are less spaced. Blocks are about 1 m in size. The rock may or may not be hard. The
blocky and joints may or may not be healed, but the interlocking is so intimate that no side pressure is
seamy exerted or expected.
V Very blocky Closely spaced joints. Block size is less than 1 m. It consists of almost chemically intact rock
and seamy fragments that are entirely separated from each other and imperfectly interlocked. Some side
pressure of low magnitude is expected. Vertical walls may require supports.
Rock Type of rock Definition
class

VI Completely Comprises chemically intact rock having the character of a crusher-run aggregate. There
crushed but is no interlocking. Considerable side pressure is expected on tunnel supports. The block
chemically intact size could be a few centimeters to 30 cm.

VII Squeezing rock Squeezing is a mechanical process in which the rock advances into the tunnel opening
— without perceptible increase in volume. Moderate depth is a relative term and could be
moderate depth 150 to 1000 m.

VIII Squeezing rock The depth may be more than 150 m. The maximum recommended tunnel depth is 1000
— m.
great depth

IX Swelling rock Swelling is associated with volume change and is due to chemical change of the rock
usually in the presence of moisture or water. Some shales absorb moisture from air and
swell. Rocks containing swelling minerals such as montmorillonite, illite, kaolinite, etc.,
can swell and exert heavy pressure on rock supports.
Rock Conditionc Rock load Hp (ft) Remarks
1. Hard and intact Zero Light lining required only it spalling or popping occurs.
2. Hard strafified or 0-0.5B Light support, mainly for protection against spalls.
schistose Load may change erratically from point to point.
3. Massive, 0-0.25B
moderately jointed
4. Moderately blocky 0.25B-0.35 (B + Ht) No side pressure.
and seamy
5. Very blocky and (0.35-1.10) (B + Ht) Little or o side pressure.
seamy
Considerable side pressure.
6. Completely crushed 1.10 (B + Ht) Softening effects of seepage loward bottom of tunnel
require either continuous support for lower ends of ribs
or circular ribs.
7. Squeezing rock, (1.10-2.10) (B + H )
moderate depth t Heavy side pressure, invert struts required. Circular
8. Squeezing rock, (2.10-4.50) (B + H ) ribs are recommended.
great depth. t

9. Swelling rock Up to 250 ft, irrespective Circular ribs are required in extreme cases, use yielding
of the value of (B + Ht) support.
Rock in field is generally jointed. It was classified by core recovery in the past and latter in
sixties by modified core recovery (RQD)
Rock Quality Designation (RQD) is a
modified core recovery percentage in
which all the pieces of core >10 cm
long are counted as recovery and is
expressed as percentage of length
𝑅𝑄𝐷=
∑ 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡h 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑖𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑠>10 𝑐𝑚 ×100 % drilled
𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡h 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑟𝑢𝑛

Artificial fractures can be

Calculation of RQD identified by close fitting cores
and unstained surfaces. All of
35+17 +20+ 35 the artificial fractures should be
𝑅𝑄𝐷= ×100 %=55 %
200 ignored while counting the core
length for RQD. A slow rate of
drilling will also give better RQD.
 Indirect Methods for Determination of RQD

V F = in situ compressional wave velocity

V L = compressional wave velocity in intact rock core

RQD for rock masses (Palmstrom, 2005)

J v = total number of joints per cubic meter or the volumetric joint count.

S i = average joint spacing in meters for the i th joint set

J = total number of joint sets except the random joint set
N r = number of random joints in the actual location
A = the area in m 2
 APPLICATION OF RQD

Used to estimate the deformation modulus of the rock mass

(Zhang and Einstein 2004)

E d and E r are the deformation moduli of the rock mass and the
intact rock, respectively
 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)
• Wickham et al (1972) described a quantitative method for
describing the quality of a rock mass and for selecting
appropriate support on the basis of their Rock Structure Rating
(RSR) classification.
• Most of the case histories, used in the development of this
system, were for relatively small tunnels supported by means
of steel sets, although historically this system was the first to
make reference to shotcrete support.
• In spite of this limitation, it is worth examining the RSR
system in some detail since it demonstrates the logic involved
in developing a quasi-quantitative rock mass classification
system.
 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)

• it introduced the concept of rating each of the components

listed below to arrive at a numerical value of
RSR = A+B+C

• where A, B and C are parameters related to Geology,

Geometry and Groundwater.
 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)

i. 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) Geological structure (massive, slightly, faulted/folded,
moderately
 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)

ii. 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
 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)
iii. Parameter C : Effect of Groundwater
• Effect of ground water inflow and joint condition on the basis of:
a) Overall rock mass quality on the basis of combined A and B
b) Joint condition (good, fair, poor)
c) Amount of water inflow (in gallons per minute per 1000 feet of
tunnel)
• There are three tables (Tables 1, 2 and 3) which can be used to
evaluate the rating of each of these parameters to arrive at the RSR
value (maximum RSR value = 100)
 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)
Example:
In a hard metamorphic rock which is slightly folded or faulted has a rating of A
= 22 (from Table 1). The rock mass is moderately jointed, with joints striking perpendicular
to the tunnel axis which is being driven east-west, and dipping at between 20 o and 50°.
 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)
Example:
• The rock mass is moderately jointed, with joints striking perpendicular to the
tunnel axis which is being driven east-west, are dipping at between 20° and 50°.
• The rating for B = 24 driving with dip.
 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)
Example:
• The value of A + B = 46 and this means that, for joints of fair condition (slightly weathered and
altered) and a moderate water inflow of between 200 and 1000 gallons per minute. The rating
gives C = 16.
• Hence, the final value of the rock structure rating
RSR = A + B + C = 62
 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)

Example:
• Remedial Measure:
• RSR support estimates for a 24
ft (7.3m) diameter circular
tunnel.
• Note that rock bolts and
shotcrete are generally used
together.

8 WF 31 steel sets
= 8 inch deep wide flange I section
weighing 31 lb per foot
33
 Rock Mass Rating (RMR)

• Bieniawski (1973) developed RMR method popularly known as geo-

mechanics classification system at the South African Council of
Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR).
• Over the years, it has been modified several times by Bieniawski
(1979, 1989, 1993).
• The most significant use of RMR is in various geo-engineering fields
such as mining operations, tunnels, hydro-power projects and stability
of rock slopes.
 Rock Mass Rating (RMR)
• RMR is estimated by adding the rating of following five parameters.
RMR = RRS + RRQD + RJS + RJC + RGC

where

• RRS is rating of Rock Strength and it can be estimated by using UCS or PLSI values.

• RRQD is rating of Rock Quality Designation and it can be estimated by field procedure or
empirical formulae

• RJS is rating of Joint Spacing among the discontinuities and it can be estimated in the field

• RJC is rating of Joint Conditions and it can be estimated in the field

• RGC is rating of Groundwater Condition and it can be observed in the field

 Rock Mass Rating (RMR)
1. Rock Strength:

• The strength of intact rock is determined either by finding the Uniaxial Compressive
Strength (UCS) or Point Load Strength Index (PLSI) in laboratory.
Rating based on intact rock strength
Strong Weak
Qualitative
description Extreme Very Strong Medium Weak Very Extreme

Compressive
> 250 250-100 100-50 50-25 25-5 5-1 <1
strength

Point load For this low range uniaxial

8 8-4 4-2 2-1
strength compressive test is preferred
Rating 15 12 7 4 2 1 0
 Rock Mass Rating (RMR)
2. RQD:
• It should be determined either from the core logs or from the volumetric joint
count (Jv).
• The direct method involves the percentage of rock recovery in 1 m of drill run
(Deere, 1963).
• The indirect method includes an empirical formula based on Jv (Palmstrom, 1982)
which can be estimated in the field survey. Jv is defined as the number of joints
occurring in one of volume.
• RQD=115-3.3× Jv
Rating based on RQD

Qualitative
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
description
100-90 90-75 75-50 50-25 < 25
Rating 20 17 13 8 3
 Rock Mass Rating (RMR)
3. Joint Spacing:
• It can be measured as a perpendicular distance between two neighbouring
discontinuities in the field.
• The spacing should be measured for all sets of discontinuities to account for the
maximum vulnerability of slope failure. The vulnerability of slope failure is higher
for closely spaced discontinuities.

Rating based on spacing of discontinuities

Description Very wide Wide Moderate Close Very Close

Spacing >2 2-0.6 0.6-0.2 0.2-0.06 < 0.06

Rating 20 15 10 8 5
 Rock Mass Rating (RMR)
4. Joint Conditions:
• The condition of discontinuities includes length of discontinuity, their separation,
roughness of its surfaces, weathering of rock surface or the weak planes and
infilling material.
Rating based on the condition of discontinuities
Persistence <1 1-3 3-10 10-20 > 20
Rating 6 4 2 1 0
Aperture None < 0.1 0.1-1 1-5 >5
Rating 6 5 4 1 0
Slightly
Roughness Very Rough Rough Smooth Slickensided
Rough
Rating 6 5 3 1 0
Weathering Unweathered Slightly Moderately Highly Decomposed
Rating 6 5 3 1 0
Infilling - Hard filling Soft filling
None <5 >5 <5 >5
Rating 6 4 2 2 0
 Rock Mass Rating (RMR)
5. Groundwater Conditions:
• The rating for the condition of groundwater is assigned on the basis of the rate of
inflow of groundwater or availability of actual data of water pressure or a general
description.

Rating based on the condition of ground-water

Inflow per 10 m tunnel
None < 10 10-25 25-125 > 125
length
Ratio of joint water
pressure to major 0 0-0.1 0.1-0.2 0.2-05 > 0.5
principal stress
Completely
General description Damp Wet Dripping Flowing
dry
Rating 15 10 7 4 0
Rock Mass Rating (RMR): Example

Parameter Condition

UCS 41-80 MPa

RQD 92-100%
Joint Spacing 0.25 - 6.0 m

Persistance up to 20 m

Aperture up to 5 mm
Joint
Cond- Roughness Slightly
ition
Infilling None
Weathering Moderate

Ground Water Condition Dry

Rock Mass Rating (RMR): Example
Parameter Condition Rating
UCS 41 MPa 4
RQD 92 % 20
Joint Spacing 0.256 m 10
Persistance 20 m 1
Joint Aperture 5 mm 1
Con
ditio
Roughness Slightly 3
n Infilling None 6
Weathering Moderate 3
Ground Water
Condition Dry 15
RMR 63
 Rock Mass Rating (RMR)
• Further, RMR value is used in the estimation of various design parameters and
engineering properties such as cohesion and angle of internal friction for rock mass,
allowable bearing pressure, average stand-up time and slope angle for safe cut.

score 100-81 80-61 60-41 40-21 <20

Rock class I II III IV V
Classification Very good Good Fair Poor Very Poor
Cohesion of rock mass
>0.4 0.4-0.3 0.3-0.2 0.2-0.1 <0.1
(MPa)
Angle of internal friction
>45° 45°-35° 35°-25° 25°-15° <15°
of rock mass
20 years for 1 year for 1 week for 10 hours for 30 minutes
Average stand-up time
15m span 10m span 5m span 2.5m span for 1m span
Allowable bearing
600-440 440-280 280-135 135-45 45-30
pressure (T/m 2)
Safe cut slope >70° 65° 55° 45° <40°
Average Stand-up Time for an
Arched Roof
• The stand-up time depends upon an effective (unsupported) span of the opening, which
is defined as the width of the opening or the distance between the tunnel face and the
last support (whichever is smaller).
• For arched openings the stand-up time would be significantly higher than for a flat roof.
Controlled blasting further increases the stand-up time as damage to the rock mass is
decreased. For tunnels with an arched roof the stand-up time is related to the rock mass
class in Table 1 (Figure 1).
• Do not unnecessarily delay supporting the roof in a rock mass with high stand-up time
as this may lead to deterioration in the rock mass, which ultimately reduces the stand-
up time.
• Lauffer (1988) observed that the stand-up time improves by one class of RMR value in
excavations by TBM.
Average Stand-up Time for an Arched Roof
Guidelines for excavation and support of 10 m span horseshoe shaped rock tunnels constructed using drill
and blast method at a depth of < 900 m, in accordance with the RMR system (after Bieniawski, 1989)
Direct relations between rock mass classification and properties of rock mass (Aydan, Ulusay, & Tokashiki,
2014)
Direct relations between rock mass classification and properties of rock mass (Aydan, Ulusay, & Tokashiki,
2014)
Direct relations between rock mass classification and properties of rock mass (Aydan, Ulusay, & Tokashiki,
2014)
 Direct relations between rock mass classification and properties of rock mass (Aydan, Ulusay, & Tokashiki,
2014)

Em deformation modulus of rock mass, Ei Young’s modulus of intact rock, RMR rock mass rating, Q
rock mass quality, GSI Geological Strength Index, D Disturbance factor, σci uniaxial compressive
strength of intact rock, σcm uniaxial compressive strength of rock mass, RQD Rock Quality
Designation, RMi Rock Mass Index, WD weathering degree, ϕ m friction angle of rock mass, cm
cohesion of rock mass, vm Poisson's ratio of rock mass, Jn joint set rating, Jr joint roughness rating,
Jw joint water rating, Ja joint alteration rating, SRF stress reduction factor, γ rock density (t/m3)
Approximate
support
guidelines
(after Hoek,
1981)
Integration of Rock Mass Rating with support characteristics and roof deformation in coal mines
Correlation between
the RMR and the Q
index (after Jethwa)
Adjustments to the
RMR system for
mining applications
 RQD J r Jw
Q= × ×
Where; Jn J a SRF
Q = Rock Quality
Designation,
Jn= Number of joint set,
Jr= Joint roughness number,
Ja= Joint alteration number,
Jw= Joint water reduction
factor, and
SRF = Stress reduction
factor.
The rock quality can range from Q = 0.001 to Q = 1000 on a
logarithmic rock mass quality scale.
 Rock Quality Designation (RQD)

𝑆𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑃𝑖𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑠> 10 𝑐𝑚

𝑅𝑄𝐷= ×100 % 
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑟𝑢𝑛

If core is not available, RQD is estimated from the number of joints

per unit volume of the rock mass, and calculated using Palmstrom’s
equation
𝑅𝑄𝐷=115 −3.3 𝐽 𝑣
Where Jv= Total number of joints per cubic metre (volumetric joint
count)
(RQD = 100 for Jv < 4.5 and for Jv > 35 RQD = 0)
 Joint Set
Number of Joint Sets Number Joint set No. Jn
Massive/Intact, no or few joints 0.5 ̶ 1.0
One joint set 2
one joint set plus random 3
Two joint sets 4
Two joint sets plus random 6
Three joint sets 9
Three joint sets plus random 12
Four or more joint sets, random, heavily 15
jointed, ‘suger cube’, etc.
Note: Crushed rock, earthlike 20
For intersections use Jn = 3Jn
For portals use Jn = 2Jn
 Joint Roughness Number Jr
Description of joint surface Discontinuous Undulating Planar
roughness
Rough 4.0 3.0 1.5
Smooth 3.0 2.0 1.0
Slickensided 2.0 1.5 0.5
Planes containing gouge
thick enough to prevent rock 1.5 1.0 1.0
wall contact
Note:
Add 1.0 to Jr if the mean spacing of the relevant joint set is
greater than 3.0 m
 Joint Alteration Number Ja
(a) Rock wall contact Ja Фt (approx)
A. Tightly healed, hard, nonsoftening, impermeable filling i.e., quartz or epidote. 0.75 25-350
B. Unaltered joint walls, surface staining only. 1.0
C. Slightly altered joint walls. Nonsoftening mineral coatings, snady particles, clay-free disintegrated 2.0 25-300
rock, etc.
D. silty or sandy clay coatings, small clay fraction (nonsoftening) 3.0 20-250
E. Softening or low-friction clay mineral coatings, i.e., kaolinite, mica Also chlorite, talc, gypsum, and 4.0 8-160
graphite, etc and small quantities of swelling clays(discontinuous coatings, 1-2 mm or less in
thickness.
(b) Rock wall contact before 10 cm shear
F. Sandy particles, clay-free disintegrated rock, etc. 4.0 25-300
G. Strongly over-consolidated, non-softening clay mineral fillings (continuous. < 5 mm in thickness) 6.0 16-240
H. Medium or low over-consolidation, softening clay mineral fillings. (continuous, < 5 mm in thickness) 8.0 12-160
J. Swelling clay fillings, i.e. montimorllonite (continuous, < mm in thickness) value of Ja depends on 8.0-12.0 6-120
percentage of swelling clay sized particles, and access to water ect.
(c) No rock wall contact when sheared.
K. Zones or bands of disintegrated or crused rock and clay (see G.,H., J. for description of clay condition) 6-8. or 8-12 6-240
L. Zones or bands of siltty or sandy clay, small clay fraction (nonsoftening) 5.0
M. Thick, continuous zonesor bands of clay (see G..,H.,J. for description of clay condition) 10-13 or 13- 6-240
20
Note: (i) Values of Ф, are intended as an approximate guide to the mineralogical properties of the alteration products. If present.
 Joint water Reduction Factor Jw
Jw Water Pressure
(kg/cm2)
A. Dry excavations or minor inflow, i.e.,
<5 l/min locally 1.0 <1

B. Medium inflow or pressure occasional 0.66 1.0-2.5

outwash of joint fillings Note:
(i) Factors (C to F) are
C. Large inflow or high pressure in crude estimates.
competent rock with unfilled joints 0.5 2.5-10.0
Increase Jw if drainage
D. Large inflow or high pressure, measures are installed.
considerable outwash of joint fillings 0.33 2.5-10.0 (ii)Special problems
caused by ice
E. Exceptionally high inflow or water formation are not
pressure at blasting, decaying with 0.2-0.1 >10.0 considered.
time.
F. Exceptionally high inflow or water
pressure continuing without noticeable 0.1-0.05 >10.0
decay.
 Stress Reduction Factor (SRF)

(a) Weakness zones intersecting excavation, which may cause loosening of rock
mass when tunnel is excavated. SRF
A. Multiple occurrences of weakness zones containing clay or chemically 10.0
disintegrated rock, very loose surrounding rock (any depth)
B. Single-weakness zones containing clay or chemically disintegrated rock (depth of 5.0
excavation ≤ 50 m)
C. Single –weakness zones containing clay or chemically disintegrated rock (depth of 2.5
excavation > 50 m)
D. Multiple- shear zones in competent rock (clay-free), loose surrounding rock (any 7.5
depth)
E. Single-shear zones in competent rock (clay-free) (depth of excavation ≤ 50 m) 5.0
F. Single- shear zones in competent rock (clay-free) depth of excavation > 50m) 2.5
G Loose open joints, heavily jointed or “sugar cube” etc. (any depth) 5.0
Note: Reduce these SRF values by 25-50% if the relevant shear zones only influence but do not
intersect the excavation
 Stress Reduction Factor (SRF) …..continued
(b) Competent rock, rock stress problems
SRF SRF
qc/s1 sq/qc
(old) (new)
H Low stress, near surface, open joints >200 <0.01 2.5 2.5
J Medium stress, favorable stress condition 200–10 0.01–0.3 1.0 1.0
K High stress, very tight structure; usually favorable
10–5 0.3–0.4 0.5–2.0 0.5–2.0
to stability, may be unfavorable to wall stability
L Moderate slabbing after >1 hour in massive rock 5–3 0.5–0.65 5–9 5–50
M Slabbing and rock burst after a few minutes in
3–2 0.65–1.0 9–15 50–200
massive rock
N Heavy rock burst (strain-burst) and immediate
dynamic deformations in massive rock <2 >1 15–20 200–400

For strongly anisotropic virgin stress field (if measured): when 5 < s 1 /s 3 < 10, reduce q c to
0.75 q c ; when s 1 /s 3 > 10, reduce q c to 0.50 q c (where q c is unconfined compressive
strength), s 1 and s 3 are major and minor principal stresses, and s q is the maximum tangential
stress (estimated from elastic theory). Few case records available where depth of crown below
surface is less than span width; suggest SRF increase from 2.5 to 5 for such cases (see H).
 Stress Reduction Factor (SRF) …..continued
Cases L, M, and N are usually most relevant for support design of deep tunnel excavation in hard
massive rock masses, with RQD/J n ratios from about 50–200.
(c) Squeezing rock; plastic flow of incompetent rock under the influence
of high rock pressures
SRF SRF
(old) (new)
O Mild squeezing rock pressure 1–5 5–10
P Heavy squeezing rock pressure >5 10–20
(d) Swelling rock; chemical swelling activity depending on presence of water
Q Mild swelling rock pressure 5–10
R Heavy swelling rock pressure 10–15

For general characterization of rock masses distant from excavation influences, the use of SRF 5, 2.5, 1.0,
and 0.5 is recommended as depth increases from, say, 0–5, 5–25, 25–250, >250 m. This will help to adjust Q
for some of the effective stress effects, in combination with appropriate characterization values of J w .
Correlations with depth-dependent static modulus of deformation and seismic velocity will then follow the
practice used when these were developed.
Cases of squeezing rock may occur for depth H > 350Q 1/3 (Singh & Goel, 2006). Rock mass compressive
strength can be estimated from q cmass 7g (Q) 1/3 (MPa); g is the rock density in t/m 3 , and q cmass = rock mass
compressive strength.
 3 Joint Sets
3
2 Estimated Spacing?
1
J1 = 1m; J2 = 0.5m; J3 = 0.25m
Jv = 1/1 + 1/0.5 + 1/0.25 = 7

RQD = 115 – 3.3 Jv = 93%

Barton says to closet 5%, so 95%
 Joint Set Number
Number of Joint Sets Joint set No. Jn
Massive/Intact, no or few joints 0.5 ̶ 1.0
One joint set 2
one joint set plus random 3
Two joint sets 4
Two joint sets plus random 6
Three joint sets 9
Three joint sets plus random 12
Four or more joint sets, random, heavily 15
jointed, ‘suger cube’, etc.
Crushed rock, earthlike
Note: 20
For intersections use Jn = 3 Jn
For portals use Jn = 2Jn
 Joint Roughness Number Jr

Description of joint surface Discontinuous Undulating Planar

roughness
Rough 4.0 3.0 1.5
Smooth 3.0 2.0 1.0
Slickensided 2.0 1.5 0.5
Planes containing gouge thick enough 1.5 1.0 1.0
to prevent rock wall contact
Note:
Add 1.0 to Jr if the mean spacing of the
relevant joint set is greater than 3.0 m
(a) Rock wall contact Joint Alteration Number Ja Ja Фt (approx)
A. Tightly healed, hard, nonsoftening, impermeable filling i.e., quartz or epidote. 0.75 25-350
B. Unaltered joint walls, surface staining only. 1.0
C. Slightly altered joint walls. Nonsoftening mineral coatings, snady particles, clay-free disintegrated 2.0 25-300
rock, etc.
D. silty or sandy clay coatings, small clay fraction (nonsoftening) 3.0 20-250
E. Softening or low-friction clay mineral coatings, i.e., kaolinite, mica Also chlorite, talc, gypsum, and 4.0 8-160
graphite, etc and small quantities of swelling clays(discontinuous coatings, 1-2 mm or less in
thickness.
(b) Rock wall contact before 10 cm shear
F. Sandy particles, clay-free disintegrated rock, etc. 4.0 25-300
G. Strongly over-consolidated, non-softening clay mineral fillings (continuous. < 5 mm in thickness) 6.0 16-240
H. Medium or low over-consolidation, softening clay mineral fillings. (continuous, < 5 mm in 8.0 12-160
thickness)
J. Swelling clay fillings, i.e. montimorllonite (continuous, < mm in thickness) value of Ja depends on 8.0-12.0 6-120
percentage of swelling clay sized particles, and access to water ect.
(c) No rock wall contact when sheared.
K. Zones or bands of disintegrated or crused rock and clay (see G.,H., J. for description of clay 6-8. or 8-12 6-240
condition)
L. Zones or bands of siltty or sandy clay, small clay fraction (nonsoftening) 5.0
M. Thick, continuous zonesor bands of clay (see G..,H.,J. for description of clay condition) 10-13 or 13-20 6-240
Note: (i) Values of Ф, are intended as an approximate guide to the mineralogical properties of the alteration products. If present.
 Joint water Reduction Factor Jw
Jw Water
Pressure
(kg/cm2)
A. Dry excavations or minor inflow, Note:
i.e., <5 l/min locally 1.0 <1 (i) Factors (C-F are
crude estimates.
B. Medium inflow or pressure 0.66 1.0-2.5 Increase Jw if
occasional outwash of joint fillings drainage measures
C. Large inflow or high pressure in are installed.
competent rock with unfilled joints 0.5 2.5-10.0 (ii)Special problems
caused by ice
D. Large inflow or high pressure, 0.33 2.5-10.0 formation are not
considerable outwash of joint fillings considered.
E. Exceptionally high inflow or water 0.2- >10.0
pressure at blasting, decaying with 0.1
time.
F. Exceptionally high inflow or water 0.1-
pressure continuing without 0.0 >10.0
noticeable decay. 5
 Stress Reduction Factor (SRF) …..continued
(b) Competent rock, rock stress problems
SRF SRF
qc/s1 sq/qc
(old) (new)
H Low stress, near surface, open joints >200 <0.01 2.5 2.5
J Medium stress, favorable stress condition 200–10 0.01–0.3 1.0 1.0
K High stress, very tight structure; usually favorable
10–5 0.3–0.4 0.5–2.0 0.5–2.0
to stability, may be unfavorable to wall stability
L Moderate slabbing after >1 hour in massive rock 5–3 0.5–0.65 5–9MPa
UCS = qc =200 5–50
M Slabbing and rock burst after a few minutes in s1 = 6 MPa ( tunnel at 150 m)
3–2 0.65–1.0 9–15 50–200
massive rock (qc/s1) = 33
N Heavy rock burst (strain-burst) and immediate
dynamic deformations in massive rock <2 >1 15–20 200–400

For strongly anisotropic virgin stress field (if measured): when 5 < s 1 /s 3 < 10, reduce q c to
0.75 q c ; when s 1 /s 3 > 10, reduce q c to 0.50 q c (where q c is unconfined compressive
strength), s 1 and s 3 are major and minor principal stresses, and s q is the maximum tangential
stress (estimated from elastic theory). Few case records available where depth of crown below
surface is less than span width; suggest SRF increase from 2.5 to 5 for such cases (see H).
Q = 95/9 x 1.5/1 x 1/1
= 15.8

Equivalent RMR, from Bieniawski:

RMR = 9lnQ + 44 = 69 (natural log)

or, from Barton:

RMR = 15logQ = 50 = 68
Rock mass quality (Q) may be considered a function of only three parameters, which
are approximate measures of

a. Block size It represents overall structure of rock mass (Table 4.5 next
(RQD/J n ): slide)

b. Inter -block ●
It has been found that tan-1 (J r /J a ) is a fair approximation of
shear strength the actual peak sliding angle of friction along the clay-coated
(J r /J a ): joints (Table 8.7).
●
This has been later modified by Barton (2008) as given in Eq.
(8.16)
c. Active stress It is an empirical factor describing the active effective
(J w /SRF): stress
It has been found that tan-1 (J r /J a ) is a fair approximation of the actual peak sliding angle
of friction along the clay-coated joints
Source: Barton, 2002.
Barton (2008) suggested the following correlations to obtain the cohesive strength (c p )
and angle of internal friction or frictional strength (f p ) of the rock mass.

Eqn, 8.16
When uncertainty of Parameters exists then use the Weighted Average Method
The rock mass quality (Q) is a very sensitive index and its value varies from 0.001 to
1000. Use of the Q-system is specifically recommended for tunnels and caverns with
an arched roof. On the basis of the Q-value, the rock masses are classified into nine
categories
The rock bolt length (L) can be estimated from the excavation span (B)
and the ESR value: 0.15 𝐵
𝐿=2 +
𝐸𝑆𝑅
Equivalent Dimensions can be obtained using following equation

Type of excavation ESR

A Temporary mine openings etc. 2–5
Permanent mine openings, water tunnels for hydro power (excluding high
B pressure penstocks), pilot tunnels, drifts and headings for large openings, 1.6–2.0
surge chambers.
Storage caverns, water treatment plants, minor road and railway tunnels,
C 1.2–1.3
access tunnels.
Power stations, major road and railway tunnels, civil defence chambers,
D 0.9–1.1
portal, intersections.
Underground nuclear power stations, railway stations, sports and public
E 0.5–0.8
facilities, factories, major gas pipeline tunnel.
 DESIGN OF SUPPORTS

Grimstad and Barton (1993) chart for the design of support including the required energy absorption capacity of SFRS
suggested by Papworth (2002).
 IRS MPa Joint Spacing Joint Condition
X 80% Size adj. Rating = 0 - 35 Rating = 0 - 40
RBS adj. Adjustment for
60-100% Cemented Joints
RBS Value Rating 70-100%
Joint Overall
(MPa) 0-25 Rating = 0-75

RMS (MPa) IRMR = 0 - 100

Presentation, Communication
Basic Design
ADJUSTMENTS
Weathering / orientations / Induced Stress / Blasting / Water Legend
30-100% 63-100% 60-120% 88-100% 70-110% IRS = Intact Rock Strength
RBS = Rock Block Strength
DRMS = Design Rock Mass Strength
DRMS (MPa) MRMR 0-100
Major Structure

Detailed Design
Cavebility, Stability, Fragmentation, Sequence, Geometry, Pillars, Cave Angle, Support, Pit Slope
Deflnltlon of the structural terms
 Nomogram for determining the
“corrected” IRS value
●
The unconfined compressive strength (UCS) is
the value derived from testing cores and is the
value assigned to the IRS.
●
The intact rock specimen may be
homogeneous or have intercalations of weaker
material.
●
In the latter case, the procedure shown in
Figure should be adopted. Care must be taken
in determining this value as the cores that are
selected often represent the stronger material
in the rock mass.
●
Example: Let the UCS values for the strong
and weak rock be 100 (MPa) and 20 MPa,
respectively.
●
It is estimated that 45% is made up of weak
rock. Using Figure, one locates this value on
the Y-axis, moves horizontally to the curve
representing the strength of the weak rock, and
then drops down to the horizontal axis. In
thiscase, the appropriate “corrected” IRS is
37 MPa.
Rock Block Strength: To obtain the RBS from the “corrected
IRS, various factors are applied depending upon whether the Mineral Hardness Scales
rock blocks are homogeneous or contain fractures and veins.
Mineral Mohs
Homogeneous Rock Blocks-If the rock block does not Talc 1
contain fractures or veins, the RBS is the IRS value
Gypsum 2
reduced to 80% to adjust for the small-to-large specimen
Calcite 3
effect.
Fluorite 4
Rock Blocks with Fractures and Veins-Fractures and Apatite 5
veins reduce the strength of the rock block in terms of the Orthoclase 6
number and frictional properties of the features.
Quartz 7
The Moh’s hardness number is used to define the frictional Topaz 8
properties of the vein and fracture filling.
Corundum 9
The standard hardness table is used only up to 5, because Diamond 10
values greater than 5 are not likely to be significant.
Open fractures or veins would be given a value of 1. The
vein and fracture filling must be weaker than the host rock.
example:
IRS = 100 MPa,
To obtain the RBS,
Gypsum veins: Moh’s hardness = 2
the corrected IRS is
Fracture frequency per m = 8.0
adjusted by the size
The product of the inverse of hardness and the fracture
factor of 80% and
frequency is:
then by the fracture
Inverse of hardness index x fracture frequency = 0.5 x 8 = 4.0
frequency and
Using Figure below, one finds that the adjustment is 0.75.
hardness
adjustment.
RBS = 100 x 0.8 x 0.75 = 60 MPa.
 RBS rating = 17.5

Rock block strength rating as a function of rock block strength

joint spacing ratings

Although there
are situations
where there are
more than
three joint sets,
for simplicity they
should be
reduced to three
Adjustment factor for cemented joints

For example, if the

rating for two open
joints at 0.5-m
spacing were 23,

an additional
cemented joint with a
spacing of 0.85 m
would have an
adjustment of 90%.

The final rating

would be 21, which
is equivalent to a
three-joint set with
an average spacing
of 0.65 m.
Chart for considering multiple joint sets
ROCK-MASS VALUES
Rock-Mass Ratlng
The RMR is defined as:
RMR = RBS rating + Overall joint rating
Rock-Mass Strength
RMS = (A - B)/70 (100 - RBS rating) x C
where:
A = RMRvalue
B = RBS rating
C = RBS value in MPa
MRMR ADJUSTMENT PROCEDURE
●
The RMR rating is multiplied by an adjustment factor to give the MRMR
rating.
●
For example, a bad blasting adjustment would apply in a low-stress area,
but in a high-stress area, the damage from the stresses would exceed that
of the blasting, and the only adjustment would be the mining induced stress.
●
The MRMR for a cavability assessment would not have blasting as an
adjustment, nor would it have weathering unless the weathering effects
were so rapid as to exceed the rate of cave propagation as a result of the
structural and stress effects.
●
The joint-orientation and mining-induced stress adjustments tend to
complement each other. The object of the adjustments is for the geologist,
rock mechanics engineer, and planning engineer to adjust the RMR so the
MRMR is a realistic number, reflecting the RMS for that particular mining
situation.
Adjustments for weathering
It does not refer to the existing weathered state of the rock,
Certain rock types weather
readily, and this must be
taken into consideration in
terms of life and size of
opening and the support
Design.
In the case of the fast-
weathering kimberlites, for
example, the rock surface
needs to be sealed.

The weathering
adjustment refers to the
anticipated change in RMS as
the weathering process alters
the exposed surfaces and
joint fillings.
Joint-Orientation Adjustment

●
attitude of the joints, with
respect to the vertical axis
of the block,
●
the frictional properties of
the joints, and
●
whether the bases of the
rock blocks are exposed,

have a considerable influence

on stability; and the RMR
rating must be adjusted
accordingly
●
The adjustment for the orientation of shear zones
at an angle to the development is:

●
Advancing tunnel faces in the direction of the dip is preferable to advancing
against the dip, as it is easier to support blocks with joints dipping in the
direction of advance.
●
An adjustment of 90% should be made when the advance is into the
dip of a set (or sets) of joints.
Adjustments to Mining Induced Stresses

The orientation, magnitude, and ratio of the field stresses should be known either
from stress measurements and/or stress analyses.
A compressive stress at a large angle to structures will increase the stability of
the rock mass and inhibit caving. In this case, the adjustment factor is 120%.
This was the situation in a caving operation where the back was stable and
caving only occurred when adjacent mining removed the high horizontal
stress. Stresses at a low angle will result in shear failure and have an
adjustment of 70%.
Verbatim from original paper
●
The adjustment for high stresses that cause rock failure can be as low as
60%.
●
A classic example of this was on a mine where the RMR was 60 in the low-
stress area, but the same rock mass in a high-stress area was classified as
having an RMR of 40. The 40 is not the RMR, but the MRMR, and the
adjustment in this case is 40/60 = 67%.
DESIGN RATINGS AND STRENGTHS

Design Rating MRMR

The MRMR is used for design. This is the RMR value as adjusted
for weathering, orientation, induced stress, blasting, and water.
MRMR = RMR x adjustment factors
Design Rock Mass Strength
The design rock mass strength (DRMS) is the RMS reduced by
the same adjustment factor relating the RMR to the MRMR. In
the case where:
PRESENTATION
The RMR data should be plotted on plans and sections. The range
of 0-100 covers all variations in jointed rock masses from very
poor to very good. The classification is divided into five classes of
20 rating with A and B subdivisions. A colour scheme is used to
denote the classes on the plan with full colour for the A subdivi-
sion and cross-hatched for the B subdivision. The colours are:
SCALE EFFECTS

●
when examining mass-mining methods. For example, the
stability/cavability of a deposit cannot be based on the
MRMR from a drift assessment alone, as widely spaced
major structures play a significant role.
●
Structures at a spacing of 10 m would have a marginal effect
on the overall IRMR value obtained from drift mapping, but
would have a large effect on the cavability of an orebody by
providing planes along which displacements can occur.
The MRMR value gives a hydraulic radius (HR) required for assuring cavability.
This figure should be adjusted for the influence of major structures by using the
following procedure to obtain an "influence" number.
The rankings are plotted in Table
AdJustment factor for major structures
Applications of MRMR

Alphabets described in next slide

 (ii) Rigid lining
j timber
-
(i) Rock reinforcement k - rigid steel sets
a - local bolting at joint intersections 1 - massive concrete
b - bolts at 1 m spacing m - k and concrete (all low deformation)
c - b and straps and mesh if rock is finely jointed n - structurally reinforced concrete.
d - b and mesh/steel fiber-reinforced shotcrete, bolts as (iii) Yielding lining (a repair technique of
lateral restraint high deformation)
e - d and straps in contact with or shotcreted in o - yielding steel arches; and
f - e and cable bolts as reinforcing and lateral restraint p - yielding steel arches set in
g - f and pinning concrete/shotcrete.
h - spiling (iv)
i - grouting Fil
q - fill.
( v) Spal!ing control
r - bolts and rope laced mesh.
(vi) Rock replacement
s - replace rock with stronger material
t - avoid development if possible
 STOPES

Tunnels
 Geological Strength Index (GSI)

• Hoek et al. (1995) proposed the GSI chart for classification of rock mass.
• GSI chart is more suitable for rock mass classification as it overcomes the
difficulties that are encountered during the evaluation of weak rock mass in

RMR (Hoek and Brown, 1997).

• It is broadly used for quick and qualitative assessment of rock mass based on
two parameters, (i) the structure of the rock mass and (ii) the condition of

the discontinuities..
 Geological Strength Index (GSI)

• Initially, the chart had four categories of rock mass structure and five
categories of surface conditions.

• Later, it was modified by Hoek et al. (1998) and an additional category

of foliated/laminated rock type was added into the rock mass structure.

• After a year, one more category was introduced by Hoek (1999) to

accommodate massive or intact rocks.

 GSI Chart

• It is one of the early chart

provided by Hoek and Brown
(2002).

• The chart have four

categories of rock mass
structure namely blocky,
very-blocky, blocky-disturbed
and disintegrated.

• The five categories of surface

conditions are very-good,
good, fair, poor and very-
poor.
 Geological Strength Index (GSI)
• The main job of GSI is to calculate the rock mass strength using Hoek-Brown

failure criteria (Hoek et al., 2002) and modulus of deformation (Hoek and

Diederichs, 2006).

• The relationships between GSI,RMR and Q was given by Hoek et al. (1995)

as shown below.

• GSI = RMR89 - 5; [for GSI ≥ 18 or RMR ≥ 23]

• GSI=9lnQ+44 [for GSI ≥ 18] (For poor rock masses)

 Geological Strength Index (GSI)

• Later, GSI chart was slightly modified by Marinos and Hoek (2000) that
had six classes of rock structure namely intact or massive, blocky, very
blocky, blocky/folded, crushed/disintegrated and laminated/sheared using
five categories of surface conditions of discontinuities namely very-good,
good, fair, poor and very-poor.
• The purpose of Marinos and Hoek (2000) chart is to provide a range of
GSI based on visual inspection by an expert.
• GSI chart was further simplified by Somnez and Ulusey (2002), Cai et al.
(2004), Russo (2009) and Hoek et al. (2013) to obtain values based on field
measurements in case of difficulty in using the chart provided by Marinos
and Hoek (2000).
 GSI Chart
by Somnez and Ulusey (2002):

• and calculated on the basis

of formula given in
quantified GSI chart (2002).

• The slope shows ‘Blocky’

rock mass with a ‘good’
surface condition.
Based on this research on the nonlinear Griffith failure criterion,
Hoek and Brown (1980) proposed the following empirical
equation to fit the results of a wide range of triaxial tests on intact
rock samples:
 The generalized Hoek & Brown criterion for the estimation
of rock mass strength, introduced by Hoek (1994)

D is a factor which depends upon the degree of disturbance to which the rock mass has
been subjected to blast damage and stress relaxation
 Strength of intact rock
The constants m b , s, and ‘a’ define the shape of the curvilinear failure plot

Mogi (1966) investigated the transition from shear to ductile

failure in a wide range of rock types and found that the average
transition is defined by s 1 = 3.4 s 3 . This is a useful guide for the
maximum confining pressure for triaxial testing of intact
●
Tensile failure ( s 3 < 0) is not dealt with by the Hoeke & Brown criterion. However,
tensile failure is an important factor in some rock engineering problems.
●
as proposed by Fairhurst (1964), can be generalized in terms of the ratio of
compressive to tensile strength, s ci / |s t|, as follows
As an interim measure, the following approximate relationship between the compressive
to tensile strength ratio, s ci / |s t|, and the Hoek & Brown parameter m i was proposed:
Hoek and Martin (2014) proposed that, for practical rock engineering purposes, a
HoekeBrown failure envelope with a tensile cut-off, based on the generalized Griffith
failure criterion theory proposed by Fairhurst (1964), can provide an effective solution.
 Estimating rock mass deformation modulus

Hoek and Diederichs (2006), using a database of rock mass deformation modulus
measurements from projects in China (including Taiwan), proposed the following
equation for estimating rock mass modulus
 Estimating rock mass deformation modulus
when the laboratory measured values for E i are not available, the rock mass reduction
values (MR) proposed by Deere (1968) can be used for estimating the intact rock
modulus. When no information on the intact rock deformation modulus is available, the
following alternative equation for estimating the rock mass modulus E rm (MPa)
was proposed by Hoek and Diederichs (2006)
The overall design process
●
The influence of size is
considered in determining
the use of GSI.
●
The starting point for this
chart is a typical intact
rock core, but there is no
reason why this starting
point should not be the
intrablock structure within
the core as suggested by
Day et al. (2012).
●
They emphasized that the
reduction of the intact
rock strength by this
method must be carried
out with care to avoid
over-penalization of the
rock mass strength
 MOHR-COULOMB STRENGTH PARAMETERS

Relationship between ratio of cohesive strength of rock Friction angle (φ) of rock mass for D = 0 for different
mass to UCS of intact rock (c/qc) and GSI for different mr GSI and mr values. (From Hoek and Brown, 1997)
values for D = 0. (From Hoek and Brown, 1997)
 Typical applications of the GSI chart to exposed faces in a range of rock formations. 

Spalling in the sidewalls

of a mine tunnel in intact
hard rock subjected to
anisotropic horizontal
stresses. GSI is not
applicable in the
analysis of these stress-
induced spalls but it can
be used for other
applications.
 Typical applications of the GSI chart to exposed faces in a range of rock formations. 

Orthogonal jointing in
granitic rock on a dam site.
GSI is not applicable on this
scale since the stability of
the exposed face is
controlled by the geometry
of intersecting joints. It can
be applied to larger scale
excavations.
 Typical applications of the GSI chart to exposed faces in a range of rock formations. 

Interlocking angular
Andesite blocks
defined by several
joint sets, exposed in
an open pit mine
bench. GSI is fully
applicable in this
situation and on this
scale
 Typical applications of the GSI chart to exposed faces in a range of rock formations. 

Complex folding in a
bedded sedimentary
deposit. GSI is
applicable with care
since averaging of the
intact properties is
required to calculate
rock mass properties
 Typical applications of the GSI chart to exposed faces in a range of rock formations. 

Tectonically
deformed
sediments with
almost complete
loss of structural
patterns. Care is
required in using
GSI in this type of
rock mass. Use the
GSI charts by
Marinos et al.
(2005) and Marinos
(2017).
 Rock Mass Index (RMi)
• Palmstrom (1995) proposed a rock mass index (RMi) to characterize rock mass
strength as a construction material.

• The presence of various defects (discontinuities) in a rock mass that tend to reduce
its inherent strength are taken care of in rock mass index (RMi), which is expressed
as:

where,
qc = uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) of the intact rock material in MPa.
J p = jointing parameter composed of mainly four jointing characteristics, namely,
block volume or density of joints, joint roughness, joint alteration, and joint size.
 Selection of Parameters used in RMi:
●
study of more than 15 different classification systems have been used
by Palmstrom (1995) when selecting the following input parameters
for RMi:
1.Size of the blocks delineated by joints—measured as block
volume, Vb
2.Strength of the block material—measured as UCS, qc
3.Shear strength of the block faces—characterized by factors for
the joint characteristics, jR and jA (Tables 10.1 and 10.3 see
subsequent slides)
4.Size and termination of the joints—given as their length and
continuity factor, jL (Table 10.2see subsequent slides)
●
The UCS of intact rock, q c , is defined and can be determined within a reasonable
accuracy.
●
The jointing parameter (J P ), however, is a combined parameter made up of the block
volume, V b , which can be found from field measurements, and the joint condition factor,
jC, which is the result of three independent joint parameters (roughness, alteration, and
size,

It has been shown by Palmstrom (2005), the correlation between the block volume
(V b ) and the volumetric joint count (J v ) {see the RQD slides} is

●
where b is the block shape factor, having the following characterization:l
●
For equi dimensional (cubical or compact) blocks b = 27
●
For slightly long (prismatic) and for slightly flat (tabular) blocks b = 28–32
●
For moderately long and for moderately flat blocks b = 33–59
●
For long and for flat blocks b = 60–200
●
For very long and for very flat blocks b > 200.
●
A common value for b = 36.
Palmstrom (2005) has shown that the block shape factor (b) may crudely be estimated
from
b = 20 + 7(a3)/(a1)
where a1 and a3 are the shortest and longest dimensions of the block.
Determination of J p given V p

V b is given in m3

Please refer following tables to calculate jC

TABLE 10.2 The Joint Length and Continuity Factor (jL)
TABLE 10.1 The Joint Roughness (jR) Found from Smoothness and Waviness
TABLE 10.3 Characterization and Rating of the Joint Alteration Factor (jA)
Flow Chart for Estimating Rock Mass Index
 Applications
SCALE EFFECT

q co is the UCS for a 50 mm sample size

Empirical equations for scale effect of uniaxial

compressive strength. (From Barton, 1990, based
on data from Hoek and Brown, 1980, and Wagner,
1987)
 Applications
Cai and Kaiser (2006), using surface fitting techniques, suggested the following
equation to calculate GSI from J C and V b :
1. Layering
●
Spacing between the bedding planes or planes of discontinuities should be
measured using borehole staratascope in a 2.0 m long drill hole made in the roof.
●
Alternately, all bedding planes or fissile (weak) planes within the roof strata can be
measured in any roof exposure like a roof fall area, shaft section or cross measure
drift.
●
Core drilling should be attempted wherever feasible, and the core log can be used
to evaluate RQD and layer thickness.
●
Average of five values should be taken and layer thickness should be expressed in
cm.
Table 1: Structural Features

Presence of major faults Rating

net displacement > 10 m 15
displacement 2 – 10 m 8
displacement < 2m 5
Presence of minor faults/slips
spacing < 5 m
orientation unfavourable 10
orientation not unfavourable 5
spacing > 5 m
orientation unfavourable 7
orientation not unfavourable 3
Table 1: Structural Features ...contd
Occurrence of joints and cleats
Orientation Orientation
unfavourable favourable
  a) Minimum spacing <30 cm
  single set 6 4
  two sets 7 6
  more than two sets 8 8
  b) Minimum spacing > 30 cm
  single set 5 2
  two sets 6 4
  more than two sets 6 6
Sedimentary features
  lateral thickness variations 3
  sandstone channels 6
  kettlebottoms 4
  plant impressions 3
  ball coal 4
Index for ‘structural features’ = sum of indices for individual features.
2. Weatherability
●
ISRM standard slake durability test should be conducted on fresh, samples of roof
rock collected from the mine to determine the susceptibility of rocks to weathering
failure on contact with water or the atmospheric moisture.
●
Mean of three such first cycle values should be taken. Core may be broken to
obtain the samples.
3. Rock strength
●
Point load test is the standard index test for measuring the strength of rocks in the
field.
●
The load at failure (in kg) divided by the square of the distance between the platens
(in cm) gives the point load index (Is).
●
The mean of the highest five values out of at least 10 sample tests should be
taken.
●
The compressive strength of the rocks can be obtained from the irregular lump
point load index for Indian coal measure rocks by the relation: Co = 14 x Is (in
kg/cm2)
 4. Ground water
●
A 2 m long vertical hole should be drilled in the immediate roof and the water
seeping through the hole after half an hour should be collected in a measuring
cylinder.
●
The average of three values from three different holes should be taken and
expressed in ml per minute.

●
The ratings for the five parameters are given in Table 2 (next slide).
●
Rock Mass Rating (RMR) is the sum of the five parameter ratings.
●
If there are more than one rock type in the roof,
●
RMR is evaluated separately for each rock type, and the combined RMR is obtained
as:

Combined RMR = S (RMR of each bed X bed thickness)/S (thickness of each bed)
●
The RMR so obtained may be adjusted, if necessary, to account for some special
situations in the mine like great depth, stresses and method of work.
 Table 2: Classification ratings for parameters
Parameter Range of values

(cm) <2.5 2.5-7.5 7.5 – 20 20- 50 >50

1. Layer thickness
Rating 0-5 6-12 13-20 21 -26 27-30

(index) > 14 14-11 11-7 7-4 4-10

2. Structural features
Rating 0-4 5- 10 11-16 17-21 22-25

(%) <60 60-80 85 – 97 97-99 >9Q

3. Weatherability
Rating 0-3 4-8 9-13 14- 17 18-20

(kg/sq.cm) < 100 100-300 300-600 600 – 900 >900

4. Strength of the rock
Rating 0- 1 3-6 7-10 11-13 14- 15

(ml/m in) >2000 2000-200 200-20 20-0 Dry

5. Ground water seepage rate
Rating 0- 1 2-4 5-7 8-9 10

RMR 0-20 20 – 40 40-60 60-80 80-100

CLASS V IV III II 1

DESCRIPTION VERY POOR POOR FAIR GOOD VERY GOOD

 Table 3: Adjustment Factors for RMR

Adjustment to RMR Adjusted RMR

1. Depth
Less than 250 m Nil RMR x 1.0
250-400m 10% reduction RMR x 0.9
400- 600 m 20% reduction RMR x 0.8
More than 600 m 30% reduction RMR x 0.7
2. Lateral stress
Assumed stress amount
Small 10% reduction RMR x 0.9
Moderate 20% reduction RMR x 0.8
High 30% reduction RMR x 0.7
 Table 3: Adjustment Factors for RMR ... contd
Adjustment to RMR Adjusted RMR
3. Induced stresses
Stress situation :
No adjacent working in the same seam Nil RMRx1 .0
Extraction area within 20-40 m in the same seam !0% reduction RMR x 0.9
Extraction areas within 10-20 m in the same scam Upto 30% reduction RMR x (0.7 to 0.8)
Working above with 1 0-20 m parting 10% reduction RMR x 0.9
Working above with 3 -10 m parting Upto 30% reduction RMR x {0.9 to 0.8)
4. Method of excavation
Continuous miner 10% increase RMR x 1.1
Undercut and blasting Nil RMR x 1.0
Blasting off -the-solid 10% reduction RMR x 0.9
5. Gallery span
Less than 4.5 m Nil RMR x 1.0
4.5-6.0 m 1 0 – 20% reduction RMR x (0.8 to 0.9)
The final RMR for the roof is classified as

RMR Roof Class Rood Description

0-20 V Very poor
20-40 IV Poor
40-60 III Fair
60-80 II Good
80-100 I Very good
An empirical relation obtained between RMR and rock loads is:

Likely rock load in tonnes/m2 = span in m X mean rock density x

(1.7 -0.037 RMR +0.0002 RMR2)

In the USA, Unal related rock load to RMR by the following expression:

P = VB (100 -RMR) /100

Where
P = rock load in t/m2
B = width of gallery in m
V = density of rock in t/m3
 Pre-Mining Assessment of Roof Quality
●
The Geo-mechanics classification can be applied even at the exploratory stage of a
mine.
●
Most of the parameters can be obtained by core drilling from the surface.
●
The core pieces of the immediate roof of a seam can be measured to determine
RQD and layer thickness. Dry density, strength and weatherability properties can be
obtained by laboratory testing of the cores.
●
Pumping tests above the seam level would indicate the groundwater character of the
roof strata.
●
Most of the structural features like jointing and major faults, and many sedimentary
features could be identified by a set of two or more drill holes.
●
From this information, a rough assessment of the support requirement could be
made prior to mining. This should be updated after making exploratory drivages and
while actual mining.
●
In case there are other working mines in the area, information can be obtained and
used to plan initially which may need to be updated depending on the experience.
Table 4: Recommended support system for development workings
Roof description Boiling systems Conventional supports
(class)
1. Very Poor Roof (a) Yielding steel arches under high stress
conditions, (b) Rigid steel arches under
(Class V)
moderate stress conditions.
2. Poor Roof (a) Full column grouted bolls using quick setting (a) Rigid steel arches for roof with structural
grout, supplemented with steel channel/w-strap. disturbances, (b) Steel beam (200 mm x 100
For flaky roof, wire mesh in addition. (b) For mm) set on brick wall for permanent roadways
(Class IV) temporary roadways, roof stitching along with (c) Steel bars set into pillars or on steel props.
roof bolls and W-straps.
3. Fair Roof (a) Full column grouted bolts using quick selling (a) Steel cross bars set into pillars or on steel
grout, (b) For temporary roadways, roof stitching props for permanent roadways. (b) Steel props
(Class III)
supplemented by spot bolting in disturbed areas. for temporary roadways. Can also be used in
permanent roadways.
4. Good Roof (a) Full column grouted bolts for permanent Steel props for permanent roadways.
roadways, (b) Roof stitching with additional spot
(Class II)
bolting in disturbed areas in permanent
roadways.
5. Very Good Roof No support except for spot bolting in disturbed areas.
(Class I)
N.B.: 1. Grouted bolts also imply the use of cement capsules.
2. ‘Quick setting’ implies the development of an anchorage capacity of al least 10 kN in 30 minutes
and about 50 kN in 2 hours.
Table 5: Recommended support system for freshly exposed roof (upto 10 m from the face)
Roof Bolting systems Conventional supports
description
(class)
1. Very Poor The system of support indicated in Table 4 should
Roof (Class V} be erected closely following the face,
2. Poor Roof (a) Point anchored (mechanical or grouted with quick setting (a) Cross bars on steel chocks or hydraulic props
(Class IV) resin) bolts for immediate tension, to be fully grouted soon with minimum 5 tonnes setting load.
afterwards, W- straps where necessary.(b) Full column
grouted bolts with quick setting grout.
3. Fair Roof (a) Combination bolts as at (a) above.(b) Full column grouted (a) Light duly hydraulic props.(b) Steel props. (c)
(Class III) bolts with quick setting grout. (c) Recoverable, bolls. Triangular chocks at junctions. (d) Safari supports.
4. Good Roof (a) Recoverable bolts.(b) Full column grouted -bolts (a) Steel props. (b) Safari supports.
(Class II)
5. Very Good No support except for spot bolting in disturbed areas.
Roof (Class 1)

N.B.:
1. Grouted bolts also imply the use of cement capsules,
2. ‘Quick setting’ implies the development of an anchorage capacity of at least 10 kN in 30 minutes and
about 50 kN in 2 hours.
3. Vertical supports should be set with minimum 5 tonnes setting load to prevent dislodgement due to
blasting.
4. ‘Very poor’ and ‘poor’ roof should be supported as soon as it has been exposed
 Load bearing capacity of common support systems being used in Indian coal mines
Sl. No. Support type Load bearing capacity (tonnes)
1 Roof bolt (full column grouted with quick setting cement 6
capsules) ( Thermo mechanically treated, TMT, ribbed bolt of 22
mm diameter)
2. Roof bolt (fully grouted with resin capsule) (TMT ribbed bolt of 12
22 mm diameter)
3. Roof stitching 8
4. Rope dowel 4
5. Wooden prop 10
6. Steel prop 30
7. Steel chock 30
8. Wooden chock 20
9. Pit prop (2.5 m height) and (4.5 m height) 15 & 12
10. Roof/rope truss 10
11. Brick walling (40 cm thick) 10
12. Rigid arches (vertical load) and (side loads) 7 (/m length) & 2(/m length)
To estimate the support load density by different support system used in mine, the
equation for applied support load density,
If supports used in the mine are combination of rock bolts, cogs and pit props, then the
applied support load density can be estimated from the modified equation given as
under