Strata Control Preparation Classes

1|
STRATA CONTROL PREPARATION CLASSES
BASIC PRINCIPLES OF ROCK ENGINEERING

1.1. Terms, definitions and basic quantities
1.2. Intact rock strength
1.3. Rock joints and mass strength
Acknowledgement
These course notes are provided as a summary of the syllabus for the Chamber of Mines Strata Control Exam
Syllabus. The notes are therefore not original work. The course notes are provided free of charge on the OHMS course
entitled ‘Strata Control Exam preparation Classes’. Always refer to original work when preparing for exams.
The primary sources that were used to compile these notes are:
Rock Mechanics for underground mining: Brady and Brown

A text book on rock mechanics for tabular hard rock mines: Ryder and Jager
A handbook on rock engineering practice for tabular hard rock mines: Jager and Ryder.
The notes can not be re-sold or duplicated without obtaining permission from OHMS in writing.
Submit corrections in writing to: info@ohms.co.za
Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Use without permission is prohibited
2|
1. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF ROCK ENGINEERING

Strata Control is that part of Rock engineering that is concerned mainly with the support of fractured rock around
underground excavations in order to achieve safe conditions. Rock Mechanics is the engineering science, which
describes the behaviour of rock when excavations are cut within it.
Units
QUANTITY UNIT SYMBOL
Length metre m
Time second s
Mass kilogram kg
Weight newton N
Pressure (stress) pascal Pa
Prefixes
In certain applications very large or small quantities are used and therefor prefixes have been evolved to denote these
multiples.
PREFIX SYMBOL FACTOR OF
MULTIPLICATION
9
giga G 1 000 000 000 or 10
6
mega M 1 000 000 or 10
3
kilo k 1 000 or 10
-3
milli m 0,001 or 10
1.1. Terms, definitions and basic quantities:
Mass: Is the amount of matter in a body.

Units = kg.
Gravity: The force existing between the earth and a body, accelerating the body towards the center of the
earth.
Acceleration rate = 9.81m/s²
Weight: Weight of a body is a measure of the gravitational force acting on the body at a particular location.
Unit = Newton
Density: Mass per unit volume.

Units = kg/m³
Formula: ρ = mass
Volume
Force: An action (vector quantity) that tries to change the state of movement, the rate of movement or the
direction of movement of a body.
Units = Newton (N)
Formula: F = m x a
Normal Force
When a force acts perpendicular to a surface it is known as a normal force.

3|
Normal force
Surface
Shear Force
Shear force is a force that acts parallel to a surface.
Shear force
Surface
Stress
Is a load (force) divided by the area being loaded.
Unit - Pa (N ÷ m²)
Primitive Stress
Is the stress existing in the rock mass before it is changed by any mining activity.
gh  = 2700 kg/m (quartzite)
3
Primitive stress =
(Also known as Virgin Stress) g = 9,81 m/s²
h = depth below surface
Example: Depth = 1000 m
Calculate Virgin Stress

3
= 2700 kg/m x 9,81 m/s² x 1000 m
= 26 487 000 Pa (26,49 MPa)
Note: Stress increases at a rate of ± 0,027 MPa per metre of depth (stress gradient) for quartzites.
Induced Stress
The change in stress, which results at some point in the rockmass, due to the modifying effect of some nearby
excavation.
Pore pressure: The stress that is transmitted by the fluids that fill the voids between particles of the rock mass.
Effective stress: The stress that governs the gross mechanical response of a porous material. It is a function of
the applied stress and the pressure of the fluids in the pores of the material. Stated in a different
manner: It is the stress that accounts for the effect of pore pressure on the stress state.
Effective stress = Total stress (i.e. field stress) - Stress induced by pore pressure
Strain: Strain is the deformation of a stressed body in respect to its original dimensions
Units = No units or expressed as mm/m
(Positive strain = Decrease in length / negative strain = Increase in length)
4|
Formula: ε = ∆ℓ
L
Deformation: As a result of stresses acting on a body the body will deform
Displacement: A change in position along a straight line will take place when the force acting on the object is greater
than the resisting force.
Elasticity: The property of a material whereby it returns to its original form or condition after an applied force
causing deformation is removed.
Constitutive relations
σ σ σ σ
ε ε ε ε
Linear elastic Non – linear elastic Elasto Plastic Pure plastic
Uniaxial tension: The state of a body under the influence of a tensile stress along one axis.
Uniaxial compression: The state of a body under the influence of a compressive stress along one axis.
Triaxial compression: The state of a body under the influence of compressive stress being applied in three
directions.
Shear stress: Shear stress is the stress acting parallel to the strata or a plane tending to cause shear
movement when the shear stress exceeds certain inherent shear strength of the rock
Symbol = τ (Tau)
Units = Pascal
Virgin stress: The natural stress existing before any mining has taken place.
Units = Pascal
Formula: q = ρ g h
Induced stress: The stress imposed on the edges of underground excavations, resulting from the
superimposition of Virgin stresses displaced by mining processes.
Principal stress/strain: The stress acting normal to the plane at which direction no shear stresses or strains
acting at the point.
K – Ratio: The ratio of horizontal to vertical stress.

Unit = None
5|
Formula: K = σh
σv
Coefficient of friction: A constant of proportionality relating the normal stress and the corresponding critical shear
stress at which sliding start between two surfaces.
Friction angle: The angle at which sliding would initiate on a prepared surface.
Unit = Degrees
Cohesion: Shear resistance at zero normal stress.
Safety factor: The relation between the unit strength and the applied stress (if the unit strength is more
than the stress the unit will be stable and if the stress is more than the unit strength, the
unit will fail.)
Rock mass: Rock as it occurs in situ, including its discontinuities.
Intact rock: Usually a sample of rock. Rocks which contains no fractures, neither geological nor stress
related.
Rock quality designation: The ratio of the length of core recovered, counting those pieces of 100mm or longer, to
(RQD) the total length of core and then expressed as a percentage.
RQD = Core recovered 100mm or longer x 100

Total length of the drill run
Calculate areas: Square: L²

Rectangle: LxW
Triangle: ½ base x h
Circle: πr²
Cylinder: 2 πr²h (Total area = 2 πr(r + h)
Sphere: 4 πr²
Pillar calculations:
Total area of reef (Ar): (L x W) = m²
Total area of pillar (Ap): (L x W) = m²
% extraction: Ar – Ap
Ar x100
Volume of pillar: Area of pillar x Mining height (m³)
Volume of reef extracted: Area of boards x Mining height (m³)
Volumetric extracted: Vr
Vp + Vr x 100 %
Average Pillar Stress (APS): q

(1 – e) (MPa), e= extraction ratio

6|
0.5
Pillar strength (PS): Kx w for hard rock (MPa) (Hendley & Grant formula)
0.75
h
0.46
Kx w for coal (MPa) (Salamon & Munro formula)
0.66
h
K is a downgraded U.C.S. (could be determined from the rock mass classification system or back analyses.) K was
found to be 7.2 MPa for Coal
133 MPa for Granite and (Hendley & Grant)
110 – 140 MPa for Quartzite (Spearing)
You can also downgrade a give lab UCS value for the material: 1/3 x UCS, e.g. UCS =90 MPa, i.e.
K=30 MPa.
To calculate effective pillar width on an irregular pillar e.g rectangular: W eff = 4A

R
Where A = Area of irregular pillar
R = Circumference of the pillar
Factor of safety: Strength (PS)

Stress (APS)
An acceptable Safety factor would be larger than 1.6 for coal pillars
Calculate volume of the following cylinders:

Square: L²xh
Rectangle: Lxwxh
Cylinder: πr²h
3
Sphere: 4 πr
3
Summary of commonly found terms, definitions, abbreviations, acronyms and symbols
The areas of un-mined rock at the edges of mining excavations that may carry elevated
Abutment
loads resulting from re-distributions of stress.
Active support Any support that on installation exerts a force onto the rock walls.
Accelerometer A ground motion sensor that measures ground acceleration.
Advanced strike The small tunnel which is mined ahead of the face. It has a greater height than the stope
gully face because of the additional footwall rock removed to facilitate cleaning the face.
Back This is the ore body between a level and the surface, or between two levels.
Back area That area of a stope panel no longer operative and to which access is restricted.
Migration of back area support failure towards the face. Collapse of the back area. Ride of
Back break
back area footwall into gullies accompanied by failure of support.
It is the general aspect of bedded (sedimentary) rocks. It applies to rocks resulting from
consolidation of sediments and exhibiting surfaces of separation (bedding planes) between
Bedding layers of the same or different materials, e.g. shale, siltstone, sandstone, limestone, etc. It
could also mean a more or less continuous body of rock between two layers of rock. (Also
see strata).
Planes of weakness in the rock that usually occur at the interface of parallel beds or
Bedding planes
laminations of material within the rock mass.
Is a significant discontinuity in the hangingwall beam of an excavation, which forms a
Brow
cantilever of a hazardous nature.
A steeply inclined excavation constructed for the purpose of gravitational delivery of broken
Boxhole
rock from the stope to a crosscut or haulage.
Burden Distance between an explosive charge and the free surface in the direction of throw.
Centre gully The term used to describe the reef raise once stoping begins.
Charge The amount of explosive used in a blast hole.
Closure Inelastic process of reduction in the dimensions of an opening.
Closure rate Rate of elastic and inelastic convergence of rock wall into an excavation.
7|
Normal stress tending to shorten the body in the direction in which it acts. Positive sense in
Compressive stress
field of rock engineering
Connecting Means any horizontal tunnel excavated to join two other tunnels usually between a haulage
crosscut and a return airway.
The degree of harm, the potential severity of the injuries or ill health and/or the number of
Consequence
people potentially affected.
All forms of blasting designed to preserve the integrity of the remaining rocks (e.g. smooth
Controlled blasting
blasting, pre-splitting, post-splitting).
Reduction of the distance between two basically parallel surfaces (usually the hangingwall
Convergence
and footwall).
Country rock The rock surrounding an igneous intrusion.
Crack A small fracture, i.e. small with respect to the scale of the fracture.
Creep Time-dependent deformation.
A horizontal opening, like a tunnel, that cuts the rock formation at an angle to the strike in
Crosscut
order to reach an orebody.
Deformation A change in shape or size of a solid body.
Density Mass per unit volume.
Advancing tunnels in or near the orebody in predetermined directions with the purpose of
Development opening ground for mining, providing the grade of the ore reserves, localised faults and
other geological disturbances and to provide services.
Development end Means the immediate face area of any tunnel.
Detonation An extremely rapid and violent chemical reaction producing a relatively large volume of gas.
Dilatancy The property of volume increase under loading.
Dip Angle at which a stratum or other planar feature is inclined from the horizontal.
Dip direction The orientation or direction in which the above features are dipping.
Discontinuity Any surface across which some property of a rockmass is discontinuous (e.g. bedding
surface planes, fractures).
Displacement Change in position of a point in material.
The number, position, depth and angle of the blast holes forming the complete round in the
Drilling pattern
face of the excavation.
Drive A horizontal opening, like a tunnel lying in or near the orebody, parallel to strike.
A sheet like body of igneous rock which is discordant, i.e. cuts across the bedding or
Dyke
structural planes of the host rock.
Property of a material whereby it returns to its original form or condition after an applied
Elasticity
force is removed.
The generic name for timber props which have load bearing capabilities in excess of 3%
Elongate support
closure.
Ratio of seismic energy of a given event to the average energy radiated by events in a
given seismogenic regions (measured E/ expected e). An energy index of 5 means that 5
Energy index
times as much energy was released for this event than the average for all events with the
same amount of deformation in a given area.
Exposure How often and for how long employees are exposed to a hazard.
Face area The area between the face and the first line of permanent support.
Condition in which there is a decrease in the strength of a material as a result of repetitive
Failure
loading.
A naturally occurring plane or zone of weakness in the rock along which there has been
Fault
movement. The amount of movement can vary widely.
Fissure Big crack.
Alignment of minerals into parallel layers – can form planes of weakness / discontinuities in
Foliation
rocks.
Mass of rock beneath a discontinuity surface (in tabular mining, the rock below the reef
Footwall
plane).
An action that tries to move an object from a stationary position, or to change its rate of
Force
movement or its direction of movement.
A discontinuity in a rock of mechanical origin. It is therefore the collective term for joints,
Fracture
faults, cracks, etc.
Frequency Occurrence per unit time (usually per year)
8|
The scientific study of the earth, the rock of which it is composed and the changes which it
Geology
has undergone or is undergoing.
Geological A general term that describes the arrangement of rock formations. Also refers to folds,
structure joints, faults, foliation, schistosity, bedding planes and other planes of weakness in rock.
Geomechanics The subject which is concerned with the mechanical response of all geological materials.
Sensing device used to measure electronically the rate of travel of sound or force waves
Geophones transmitted through the rockmass. May measure displacement, velocity or acceleration of
the rockmass at a point.
Geotechnical The subject which is concerned with the technical response of all geological materials.
A section or portion of the mine where similar geological conditions exist, which give rise to
Geotechnical area a unique set of identifiable rock-related hazards, for which a common set of strategies can
be employed to minimise the risk resulting from mining
Gouge Finely ground rock along a fault zone.
Gravity The property of acceleration which the earth produces in a freely falling body.
Ground control A portion of a mine where similar geological conditions exists which give rise to a unique set
district of identifiable rock-related hazards for which a common set of strategies can be employed.
Force that tends to accelerate any object towards the centre of the earth at a constant
Gravity 2
acceleration rate (of 9,81m/s ).
An excavation cut in the immediate footwall or hangingwall of the reef for the purpose of
Gully enabling the removal of rock from the face or of providing access to the face for men or
material.
Mass of rock above a discontinuity surface (in tabular mining, the rock above the reef
Hangingwall
plane).
Means the main access tunnel usually excavated horizontally from the shaft to gain access
Haulage to the reef horizon for purposes of prospecting, establishing the geological structure and
supplying services for mining operations.
Harm Injury or loss
Hazard A source of, or exposure to danger.
Hydrogeology The study of all underground water.
Hydrology The study of all waters upon the earth. It includes surface water and rainfall.
Location in 3 dimensions of the source of a seismic event. Also known as the focus or
Hypocentre
source location.
Rock which has originated below the earth’s surface and has solidified from a hot, molten
Igneous rock
condition.
Inelastic
The portion of deformation under stress that is not annulled by the removal of the stress.
deformation
The stress that is due to the presence of an excavation. The magnitude of the induced
Induced stress stress developed depends on the magnitude and the orientation of the in situ stress and the
shape and size of the excavation.
A naturally occurring plane of weakness or break in the rock (generally aligned sub-vertical
Joint or traverse to bedding), along which there has been no visible movement parallel to the
plane.
Joint / fault set A group of more or less parallel joints/faults.
Consists of two or more joint/fault sets or any group of joints/faults with a characteristic
Joint / fault system
pattern.
Keyblock A block whose removal would cause the surrounding blocks to fall out.
Ledging The excavating of a slot or slots on one or both side of a longitudinal excavation.
Level All openings at a horizon from which the orebody is opened up and mining is started.
Likelihood Chance per unit time (usually per year).
Magnitude Measure of the size of a seismic event. May encompass energy, moment or both in its
(seismic) calculation.
Is an adjustable elongate made of steel and used as a temporary support in development
Mechanical prop
ends. It is removed prior to the blast.
Mass The quantity of matter a body contains.
Classified into: Shallow - <1000m
Mining depth Intermediate - >1001m & 2250m
Deep - >2250m
9|
The occurrence of seismic events in close proximity to mining operations. During and
Mining induced following blast times, there is a significant increase in the amount of seismic activity in a
seismicity mine. Mining induced seismicity is commonly associated with volumes of highly stressed
rock, sudden movement on faults or intact failure of the rock mass.
Normal force Force directed normal (perpendicular) to the surface element across which it acts.
Normal stress Component of stress normal to the plane on which it acts.
A mineral deposit that can be mined at a profit under current economic conditions taking
Ore
into consideration all costs associated with mine design and operation.
Orepass An inclined underground opening intended for transfer of ore.
Overbreak The quantity of rock that is removed beyond the planned perimeter of the final excavation.
Passive support Any type of support that only reacts once the rock mass starts exerting a force on it.
Peak particle Maximum velocity of the rock mass measured directly at a geophone or calculated from
velocity ground motion relations.
Permanent support Support that once installed is not removed.
That portion of a stope where access of persons is not restricted, i.e. between the
Permanent support temporary support and the back area barricade and all access ways for persons services
area and material including centre, strike, dip and wide gullies, material ways and service ways
within a stope.
Rock left in situ during the mining process to support the local hangingwall, roof or to
Pillar
provide stability to the mine or portion thereof.
Plane of weakness A naturally occurring crack or break in the rock mass along which movement can occur.
Plasticity State in which material continues to deform indefinitely whilst movement can occur.
ratio of shortening in the transverse direction to elongation in the direction of an applied
Poisson’s ratio
force in a body under tension below the proportional limit.
Means any support approved by the manager and which is required to be installed before
Primary support
blasting.
Primitive (virgin)
State of stress in a geological formation before it is disturbed by man-made operations.
stress
Principal stress (or Stress (or strain) normal to one of three mutually perpendicular planes on which the shear
strain) stress (or strain) at the point in the body is zero.
Probability The likelihood of a given event occurring.
Primary or compressive wave emanating from the source of a seismic event. Consists of a
P-wave train of compressions and dilations (like a spring). Moves at approximately 6 000 m/s
through quartzites.
Total elastic energy radiated from a seismic source. Describes the potential for damage to
Radiated seismic
man-made structures better than seismic moment, and is based on the velocity of ground
energy
motion.
Any tunnel having an inclination (above horizontal in the direction of the working of more
Raise
than 5 degrees (but not included under the definition of a shaft).
A vein, bed or deposit (other than a surface alluvial deposit) that contains minerals, except
Reef
in the case of coal or diamondiferous formations.
The use of tensioned rock bolts / studs and cable bolts, placed inside the rock, to apply
large stabilising forces to the rock surface or across a joint tending to open. The aim of
Reinforcement
reinforcement is to develop the inherent strength of the rock and make it self-supporting.
reinforcement is primarily applied internally to the rock mass.
Means a tunnel usually excavated horizontally and adjacent to a haulage primarily for
Return Airway
ventilation requirements.
Risk The likelihood that occupational injury or harm to persons will occur.
Rock Any naturally formed aggregate of mineral matter occurring in large masses or fragments.
Used as a generic term for all types of inflexible rock reinforcement units, as well as to the
process of rock reinforcement (e.g. rock bolting). Often used specifically for end-anchored
Rock bolt bars with bearing plates, spherical seats and tensioning units. (The correct term for such a
unit is rockstud, but this is seldom correctly used; while a true roof bolt was originally a long
bolt with forged head used with a mechanical end-anchor).
Rock engineering Is the engineering application of rock mechanics.
Seismic event that causes damage to underground workings.
Rockburst

10 |
Rockfall (fall of Fall of a rock fragment or a portion of fractured rock mass without the simultaneous
ground) occurrence of a seismic event.
Rock mass Rock as it occurs in situ, including its discontinuities.
Rock mass A softening within a critical volume of rock indicated by accelerating deformation and a drop
instability in stress.
Refers to the overall physical and mechanical properties of a large volume of rock, which is
Rock mass strength controlled by the intact rock material properties, groundwater and any joints or other planes
of weakness present. One of the least well understood aspects of geotechnical engineering.
The scientific study of the mechanical behaviour of rock and rock masses under the
Rock mechanics
influence of stress. It forms part of the broader subject of geomechanics.
Rock Pass (ore or Means a steeply inclined boxhole that has holed and is constructed for the purpose of
waste) gravitational delivery of broken rock from one elevation to another.
A set of holes drilled and charged which are fired instantaneously or with short delay
Round
detonators.
A method of mining, whereby haulages and crosscuts are developed at specific intervals to
Scattered mining
expose the reef. The crosscut/reef intersections are connected by raises along the dip of
method
the reef, and mining of the reef progresses from one raise towards another.
Means any tunnel support approved by the manager required to be installed in addition to
Secondary Support primary support. The secondary support is installed some time after the tunnel has been
excavated.
A seismically active mine is a mine that sustains losses to persons and/or property,
Seismically active
underground or on surface, caused by the dynamic response to a seismic event induced
mine
when creating or enlarging an excavation.
Seismic Event Transient earth motion caused by a sudden release of the strain energy stored in the rock.
Seismic moment Measure of the strength of an earthquake or of a seismic event and an indication of the
(scalar) amount of deformation (displacement) at a seismic source.
Seismic moment Describes completely the equivalent forces acting at a seismic source and is equivalent to
(tensor) the total seismic moment integrated over the source volume of a seismic event.
Seismic strain Sum of all moment tensors of all events within a given volume of the rock mass.
Seismic strain rate Seismic strain over a specified period of time.
Seismic energy radiated by all events recorded within a volume during a specified period of
Seismic stress
time.
Seismometer A device (transducer) that converts ground motion into an electric signal.
Seismicity The geographic and historical distribution of earthquakes.
The scientific study of earthquakes by the analysis of vibrations transmitted through rock
Seismology and soil materials. The study includes the dynamic analysis of forces, energy, stress,
duration, location, orientation, periodicity and other characteristics.
Means any tunnel having a cross-sectional dimension of 3,7m or more and:-
Shaft
a) Having an inclination to the horizontal of 15 degrees or more; or
b) Having an inclination to the horizontal of less than 15 degrees but more than 10
degrees where the speed of traction may exceed 2m per second.
Means any excavation with a cross-sectional area equal to or greater than that of a tunnel
whose primary purpose may be for any of the following functions-
Service Excavation
Hoist Chamber, Refuge Bay, Pump Chamber, Refrigeration Plant, Water Dams, Settlers,
Fan Chamber, Cooling Chamber, Electrical Sub-station, Timber Bay etc.
A mode of failure where two pieces of rock tend to slide past each other. The interface of
Shear the two surfaces of failed rock may represent a plane of weakness, or a line of fracture
through intact rock.
Pneumatically applied cement, water, sand and fine aggregate mix that is sprayed at high
Shotcrete velocity on the rock surface and is thus compacted dynamically. Tends to inhibit blocks
from unraveling from the exposed faces of an excavation.
Siding Is a ledge carried to one side of an excavation.
The use of specialised drill and blast strategies (e.g. low strength explosives, modified
Smooth blasting production blasting, cushion blasting, pre- and post-splitting) to reduce blast damage and
improve wall stability.
Spacing The distance between adjacent blast holes in a direction parallel to the face.
Spalling Longitudinal splitting in uniaxial compression, or the breaking- off of plate-like pieces from a
11 |
free rock surface.

During the course of routine mining an increased risk of rock falls may develop. Such areas
Special Areas
requiring additional attention and precautions must be designated special areas.
Specific gravity
The weight of a substance compared to the weight of an equal volume of water.
(SG)
Spitting Violent ejection of splinters of rock from the surface of an excavation.
The condition of a structure or a mass of material when it is able to support the applied
Stability stress for a long time without suffering any significant deformation or movement that is not
reversed by the release of stress.
Stiffness Ratio of force versus displacement.
An underground excavation made in removal of any ground or mineral, other than coal, but
Stope does not apply to excavation made for engine rooms and pump chambers or for
development purposes such as shafts, drives, winzes and raises.
Stope Face The advancing front of a producing stope, excluding the gullies which access it.
The change in length per unit length of a body resulting from an applied force. Within the
Strain
elastic limit, strain is proportional to stress.
Rock burst at the lower end of the spectrum of violent events occurring essentially at the
Strain burst
surface of an excavation.
Depositional layers in sedimentary rocks. An individual layer is a stratum. In everyday
Strata language, such layers are commonly called beds if their dimensions are fairly large. If the
layers are very thin, they are better called laminations.
It is the tactical branch of rock mechanics aimed at controlling the rock wall stability of
Strata control
mining excavations.
The study of stratified rocks, especially their sequence in time, the character of the rocks
Stratigraphy
and the correlation of the beds in different localities.
Strength The maximum stress that a material can resist without failing for any given loading regime.
Stress Force acting across a surface element divided by the area of the element.
Stress (or strain)
Ensemble of stress (or strain) states defined at all points of an elastic solid.
Field
Direction of the azimuth of a horizontal line in the plane of an inclined stratum (or other
Strike
planar feature) within a rock mass.
Downward movement of the overburden (soil and/or rock) lying above an underground
Subsidence
excavation or adjoining a surface excavation.
A structure or a structural feature built into or around an underground excavation to
Support
maintain its stability.
Support resistance Is the force offered by a support element or system per unit area.
Secondary or shear wave emanated from the source of a seismic event. Consists of elastic
S-wave vibrations perpendicular to the direction of travel. Moves at approximately 3650 m/s
through quartzites.
Constitutive mineralogical nature of the rock by which water is absorbed, causing a
Swelling measurable increase in volume; swelling can exert very large time-dependent forces on
rock or support systems and reduce the size of excavations.
Forces acting in the Earth's crust over very large areas to produce high horizontal stresses
Tectonic force which can cause earthquakes. Tectonic forces are associated with the rock deforming
processes in the Earth's crust.
Support which will be removed in the normal activity of mining and reinstalled as the face (in
Temporary Support
the stopes or tunnels) moves forward.
Tendon Includes the generic "rockbolt", plus flexible forms such as "cable anchors".
Tensile stress Normal stress tending to lengthen a body along the direction in which it acts.
Thickness Perpendicular distance between bounding surfaces (e.g. bedding planes).
Topography Natural and artificial features of a district.
Transverse (shear)
Wave in which the displacement at each point of the medium is parallel to the wave front.
wave
Travelling / Material Usually means an inclined excavation between two primary excavations used specifically
Way for servicing one excavation from another.
An excavation is the rock which can be horizontal, inclined or vertical but not included in the
Tunnel
definition of a shaft.
12 |
Means any tunnel peripheral configuration designed for the purpose of strength, ventilation,
Tunnel Shape
persons, equipment and/or machinery.
Uniaxial
compression or Compression caused by the application of normal stress in a single
unconfined direction.
compression
Veins Cracks and cavities filled by material solidified from hot, aqueous solutions.
Also known as the primary state of stress. It is the stress in the rockmass before it is
Virgin stress
disturbed by man-made works.
Waste rock Barren rock of too low grade to be mined economically.
Water table The groundwater surface below which all openings are filled with water.
Wave form A plot of voltage, current, displacement, velocity, acceleration, etc. as a function of time.
A continuous surface over which the phase of a wave that progresses in three dimensions
Wave front
is constant.
Process of disintegration and decomposition as a consequence of exposure to the
Weathering
atmosphere to chemical action and to the action of frost, water and heat.
A block of rock bounded by joints on three or more sides that can fall or slide out under the
Wedge
action of gravity, unless supported.
Weight Force with which the earth attracts a body.
Wide Heading A tee-shaped excavation with a central access way with shoulders on either side.
Means any tunnel having an inclination below horizontal in the direction of working of more
Winze
than 5 degrees and not included in the definition of a shaft.
Working Place The place where mine workers normally work or travel.
Yield Stress The stress beyond which the induced deformation is not fully.
1.2. Intact Rock Strength
Rock fracture: Failure of rock when in situ stress exceeds the strength of the rock
Peak strength: The maximum strength of a sample of rock when loaded. The load on the rock just before failure
occurs.
Residual strength: When a rock sample is loaded and fracturing takes place, the rock would still be able to
support a certain load. The load supported after failure of the sample.
Brittle failure: When there is a sudden loss of strength with little or no deformation of the sample. The sample
undergoes strain softening following brittle failure
Ductile deformation: Ductile deformation occurs when the rock can sustain further permanent deformation without
losing load-bearing capability.

13 |
Yield: When there is a departure from the elastic behavior in the material and some permanent
deformation occurs.
The stress - strain behavior of brittle rock in uni-axial compression.
The effects of confinement on rock strength.
1. σ1 = σ3 = 3.45 MPa
2. σ2 = σ3 = 6.90 MPa
3. σ2 = σ3 = 13.8 MPa
110 MPa residual strength


14 |
Mohr-Coulomb and Hoek & Brown criteria for estimating strength behaviour of intact rock
The Hoek & Brown empirical criterion was advanced to address two principal weaknesses of the simple
Mohr – coulomb criterion: σ1 = σc + βσ3
(of which, β values varies from 3 to 10 for weakest to strongest rocks)
Weaknesses of this criterion
a) Confinement exhibits an often clearly visible downward curvature on a graph.

b) The Mohr - Coulomb line, simplistically projected to the left, considerably overestimating the actual tensile
strength of the rock.
c) Rock strength estimations are based on laboratory rock samples and not on in-situ fractured rock.
The Hoek & Brown criterion for estimating intact rock strength
An empirically established criterion for rock and rockmass failure based on tests of intact rock and on rock masses.
The peak strength (sigma1) is described in terms of the confining stress (sigma3); m which is laboratory determined
constant for the rock mass; s and a which are constants relating to the rock mass characteristics; and lastly, the UCS
of intact rock.
σ1 = σ3 + mσcσ3 + sσc²
σ1 = Major Principal Stress
σ3 = Minor principal stress
σc = U.C.S.
m & s are constants (depending on rock properties)

s = (Indication of the rock mass condition) Values varies between 0, 01 for granulated rock to 1 for intact rock
(typical values varies between 0.01 – 0.6)
m = (The curvature of the failure characteristic). Values varies typically between 0.05 to 5.
The principal stress from a peak strength criterion is particularly appropriate for use in underground excavations. The
uniaxial strength of unconfined rock is thus given by √sσc²
The criterion is best-fit non-linear yield curve that recognises that rock mass strength is dependant on the state and
properties of intact material and the properties of the discontinuities that separate blocks of intact rock.
Weakness of criterion
 It is like the M-C criterion, shear based and therefore if the failure is for example brittle in nature, then the H-B
is not appropriate to described failure.
 Only sigma1 and sigma3 is considered and not the sigma2
 It applies only to well jointed rockmasses where joints control the behaviour rather than the rock material or
individual planes of weakness. Not applicable to massive rock or discontinuums (large blocks and wedges)
Other strength criteria
Mohr coulomb
Extension strain strength criterion
Griffith’s formulation
Peak strength criterion
Residual strength criterion
Barton’s joint shear strength
Barton-Choubey Shear strength Criterion

15 |
1.3. Rock Joints and Rock Mass Strength
Explain the occurrence of rock joints on your mine, number of sets and their orientation:
Joints are naturally occurring planar geological discontinuities along which, no visible displacement occurs. They
commonly have some infilling material, which defines their cohesion and friction properties. Joints usually occur in
sets, a set being defined as a group of joints with common orientation. Two, three or four joint sets usually occur in a
rock mass with one of the sets predominant in intensity in a specific area. Sets of joints developed in response to major
tectonic events and thus their occurrence can be expected over large areas.
In the Goldfields, joint sets normally occur parallel to the major geological structures, the frequency of jointing often
increasing as a fault or dyke is approached. Complex jointing also occurs in igneous rocks as a result of contraction
due to cooling of the magma. In the Bushveld Complex, three sets of joints occur which are associated with tectonism,
and further complex jointing is associated with ”Potholes” on the reef horizon. The occurrences of peculiar domical
arrangements of joints leads to the formation of treacherous structures ranging in size from a few metres to tens of
metres, resulting in unpredictable, poor ground conditions. Of further importance to hanging wall stability and support
requirements is the presence of flat dipping joints in the hanging wall. As these do not daylight into the excavations,
exploration diamond drill holes may be extended into the hanging wall to ascertain if they are present and at what
height into the hangingwall.
In areas where flat dipping joints are a problem, short geotechnical exploration holes drilled from raises are also able to
provide valuable information.
It is important to determine the orientation and average joint spacing of the dominant joint sets in different areas. In low
stress, shallow mining conditions the most common hazard resulting from jointing is the formation of unstable blocks.
Intersecting joints of unfavourable geometry give rise to key blocks, which may support adjacent blocks susceptible to
falling, or to isolated blocks in a state of unstable equilibrium. If these blocks do not fall out spontaneously as the stope
face exposes them, their presence in the hanging wall is extremely dangerous. They are sensitive to minor deformation
of the rock mass and shock loading due to mining activities, and unless adequately supported can fall out without
warning. For support spacing design, joint data together with provisional support unit spacing can be used as input
data in the J-block computer program to assess the adequacy of the design.
The classification of rock masses based on the occurrence and quality of jointing, for the purpose of delineating areas
of different stabilities and hence support requirements would seem to be useful endeavour. Attempts to apply
established techniques (such as the Q and RMR system used in civil engineering tunnelling and other shallow
underground excavations, to hard rock stoping situations have met with little success. Even the Laubcher scheme,
devised mainly for mines exploiting massive ore bodies, has not been successfully applied in tabular stopes. The main
deficiencies of these systems seems to be that they do not account adequately for the orientation of joints with the
respect to the stope faces nor the mining-induced stress changes experienced by the rock mass.
Some mines have developed their own classification system with the main objective of delineating ground control
districts. These appear to have been applied fairly successfully, but the results are that there are now several systems
in use aiming to achieve the same objective. It would appear therefore that there is a strong need for the development
of a unified practical rock mass characterisation system for stopes, which takes into account support requirements that
could be applied throughout the Gold, Platinum and Chromitite mines.
Apart from their influences on stope hanging wall stability, the effects of joints on the strength or stability of other rock
engineering structures needs to be considered. For example, the strength of the small in-panel pillars used in shallow
mines can be significantly degraded in the presence of unfavourably oriented joints. A joint set slightly oblique to the
direction of the gully can compromise the integrity of the sidewalls of the gully. For this reason and the fact that joints
striking sub-parallel to the axis of the gully increase the probability of unstable blocks being formed, gullies should be
aligned at as high angles as is practicable to the dominant joint direction. Where this is not possible, additional roof
bolts should be installed in the hanging wall and the bolting of sidewall considered. Furthermore, jointing can influence
the location and severity of face related seismic events.

16 |
Explain how the following factors affect the strength of rock joints, infilling type, infilling thickness,
roughness, friction angle and water pressure:
Discontinuities may contain infilling material such as gouge in faults, silt in bedding planes, low-friction material such as
chlorite, graphite and serpentine in joints, and some stronger material such as quartz or calcite in veins or healed
joints.
The presence of such materials will influence the strength of the joints or discontinuities as it influences the shear
behaviour.
The influence the infilling has on the strength of the discontinuities will depend on the characteristics of the infilling.
Clayish or soft material will decrease the shear strength and stiffness of the discontinuities, while strong material can
increase the strength.
The thickness of the infilling will also influence the shear and strength behaviour of the discontinuity.
Explain the differences between a strength criterion and a constitutive relation (4 marks)
Constitutive relation: mathematical or numerical relationship which describes the evolution of stress a
and strains as a material is subjected to loading or changes in loading.
Strength criterion: Predicts the material strength under various permitted stress combinations. It defines the
combinations of limiting values of combinations of stress (e.g. sigma1 and 3) for which a material will not fail. When
these limiting values are exceeded, the material fails.
Homework: explain the difference between a strength criterion, design criterion and a failure criterion

17 |
According to laboratory studies by Ladanyi and Archambault (1977), the following conclusions on the strength of the in
filled discontinuity could be made:
a) For most filled discontinuities, the peak strength envelope is located between that for the filling and that for a
similar clean discontinuity.
b) The stiffness and shear strength of a filled discontinuity decrease with increasing fill thickness, but always remain
higher than those of the filling alone.
c) The shear stress-displacement curves of filled discontinuities often have two portions, the first reflecting the
deformability of the filling material before rock to rock contact is made, and the second reflecting the
deformability and shear failure of rock asperities in contact.
d) The shear strength of a filled discontinuity does not always depend on the thickness of the filling. If the
discontinuity walls are flat and covered with a low friction material, the shear surface will be located at the filling-
rock contact.
e) Swelling clay is a dangerous filling material because it loses strength on swelling and can develop high swelling
pressures if the swelling is inhibited.
Shear strength of discontinuities
All rock masses contain discontinuities such as bedding planes, joints, shear zones and faults. At shallow depth, where
stresses are low, failure of the intact rock material is minimal and the behavior of the rock mass is controlled by sliding
on the discontinuities. In order to analyze the stability of this system of individual rock blocks, it is necessary to
understand the factors that control the shear strength of the discontinuities, which separate the blocks. These
questions are addressed in the discussion that follows.
Suppose that a number of samples of a rock are obtained for shear testing. Each sample contains a through-going
bedding plane that is cemented; in other words, a tensile force would have to be applied to the two halves of the
specimen in order to separate them. The bedding plane is absolutely planar, having no surface irregularities or
undulations. As illustrated in Figure 1.1, in a shear test each specimen is subjected to a stress σn normal to the
bedding plane, and the shear stress τ, required to cause a displacement is measured. The shear stress will increase
rapidly until the peak strength is reached. This corresponds to the sum of the strength of the cementing material
bonding the two halves of the bedding plane together and the frictional resistance of the matching surfaces. As the
displacement continues, the shear stress will fall to some residual value that will then remain constant, even for large
shear displacements. Plotting the peak and residual shear strengths for different normal stresses results in the two
lines illustrated in Figure 1.1. For planar discontinuity surfaces the experimental points will generally fall along straight
lines. The peak strength line has a slope of Ø and an intercept of c on the shear strength axis. The residual strength
line has a slope of Ør.
The relationship between the peak shear strength τp and the normal stress σn can be represented by the:
Mohr-Coulomb equation: τ = c + σn tan Ø
Where: c is the cohesive strength of the cemented surface and Ø is the angle of friction.
σn is the normal force

18 |
Figure 1.1: Shear testing of discontinuities
In the case of the residual strength, the cohesion c has dropped to zero and the relationship between Ør and Øn can
be represented by: τr = σn tan Ør
where Ør is the residual angle of friction.
This example has been discussed in order to illustrate the physical meaning of the term cohesion, a soil mechanics
term, which has been adopted by the rock mechanics community. In shear tests on soils, the stress levels are
generally an order of magnitude lower than those involved in rock testing and the cohesive strength of a soil is a result
of the adhesion of the soil particles. In rock mechanics, true cohesion occurs when cemented surfaces are sheared.
However, in many practical applications, the term cohesion is used for convenience and it refers to a mathematical
quantity related to surface roughness, as discussed in a later section. Cohesion is simply the intercept on the τ axis at
zero normal stress.
The basic friction angle Øb is a quantity that is fundamental to the understanding of the shear strength of discontinuity
surfaces. This is approximately equal to the residual friction angle Ør but testing sawn or ground rock surfaces
generally measure it.
These tests, which can be carried out on surfaces as small as 50 mm x 50 mm, will produce a straight-line plot defined
by the equation: τr = σn tan Øb

19 |
Figure 1.2: A typical shear-testing machine
A typical shear testing machine, which can be used to determine the basic friction angle Øb is illustrated in Figure 1.2.
This is a very simple machine and the use of a mechanical lever arm ensures that the normal load on the specimen
remains constant throughout the test. This is an important practical consideration since it is difficult to maintain a
constant normal load in hydraulically or pneumatically controlled systems and this makes it difficult to interpret test
data. Note that it is important that, in setting up the specimen, great care has to be taken to ensure that the shear
surface is aligned accurately in order to avoid the need for an additional angle correction. Most shear strength
determinations today are carried out by determining the basic friction angle, as described above, and then making
corrections for surface roughness as discussed in the following sections of this chapter. In the past there was more
emphasis on testing full-scale discontinuity surfaces, either in the laboratory or in the field. There are a significant
number of papers in the literature of the 1960s and 1970s describing large and elaborate in situ shear tests, many of
which were carried out to determine the shear strength of weak layers in dam foundations. However, the high cost of
these tests together with the difficulty of interpreting the results has resulted in a decline in the use of these large-scale
tests and they are seldom seen today.
It makes both economical and practical sense to carry out a number of small scale laboratory shear tests, using
equipment such as that illustrated in Figures 1.2 a, to determine the basic friction angle. The roughness component
that is then added to this basic friction angle to give the effective friction angle is a number, which is site specific and
scale dependent and is best, obtained by visual estimates in the field. Practical techniques for making these roughness
angle estimates are described on the following pages.
Shear strength of rough surfaces
A natural discontinuity surface in hard rock is never as smooth as a sawn or ground surface of the type used for
determining the basic friction angle. The undulations and asperities on a natural joint surface have a significant
influence on its shear behavior. Generally, this surface roughness increases the shear strength of the surface, and this
strength increase is extremely important in terms of the stability of excavations in rock. Patton (1966) demonstrated
this influence by means of an experiment in which he carried out shear tests on 'saw-tooth' specimens such as the one
illustrated in Figure 1.3. Shear displacement in these specimens occurs as a result of the surfaces moving up the
inclined faces, causing dilation (an increase in volume) of the specimen.

20 |
The shear strength of Patton's saw-tooth specimens can be represented by:
τr = σn tan (Øb + i)
where: Øb is the basic friction angle of the surface and i is the roughness angle of the saw-tooth face.
Figure 1.3: Patton’s experiment on the shear strength of saw-tooth specimens.
Barton’s estimate of shear strength
This equation is valid at low normal stresses where shear displacement is due to sliding along the inclined surfaces. At
higher normal stresses, the strength of the intact material will be exceeded and the teeth will tend to break off, resulting
in a shear strength behavior, which is more closely related to the intact material strength than to the frictional
characteristics of the surfaces.
While Patton’s approach has the merit of being very simple, it does not reflect the reality that changes in shear strength
with increasing normal stress is gradual rather than abrupt. Barton et al studied the behavior of natural rock joints and
have proposed that equation (4.4) can be re-written as:
JCS
τ = σn tan (Øb + JRC 10 log tan( /σn ))
The [ ] presents the ‘friction angle’ of the Mohr-Coulomb

JRC= Joint Roughness Coefficient: provides an angular measure of the geometrical roughness of discontinuity surface
from 0 (smooth) to 20 (rough).
JCS is the joint wall compressive strength.
σn =UCS of surrounding rock, adjacent to discontinuity OR also known by Barton as Joint wall compressive strength or
JCS, Sigd=UCS if discontinuity is unweathered. Else, estimate Sigd
Sign = normal stress
Øb = basic friction angle
Why JRC in brackets? A high JRC will increase argument of tan, i.e. the higher the roughness, the higher the strength.
Why Sigd? You have to break / shear through asperities thus the higher the shear force if the Sigd is higher
Why Sigd/Sign?: Sign clamps joint . But if Sign large, it breaks the rock on the joint. Thus inversely proportional to Tau.
The more Sigd increases the higher Tau.
Caution:
If Sign >>> UCS, Tau >>>predicted by Barton model. Probably due to confining effect of the stress distribution around
discontinuity and creating an increase in the strength of the asperities.

21 |
Field estimates of JRC
The joint roughness coefficient JRC is a number that can be estimated by comparing the appearance of a discontinuity
surface with standard profiles published by Barton and others. One of the most useful of these profile sets was
published by Barton and Choubey (1977) and is reproduced in Figure 1.4. The appearance of the discontinuity surface
is compared visually with the profiles shown and the JRC value corresponding to the profile which most closely
matches that of the discontinuity surface is chosen. In the case of small-scale laboratory specimens, the scale of the
surface roughness will be approximately the same as that of the profiles illustrated. However, in the field the length of
the surface of interest may be several meters or even tens of meters and the JRC value must be estimated for the full-
scale surface.
Figure 1.4: Roughness profiles and corresponding JRC values (After Barton and Choubey 1977)

22 |
Figure 1.5: Alternative method for estimating JRC from measurements of surface roughness from a
straight edge (Barton 1982).
Shear strength of filled discontinuities
The discussion presented in the previous sections has dealt with the shear strength of discontinuities in which rock wall
contact occurs over the entire length of the surface under consideration. This shear strength can be reduced drastically
when part or the entire surface is not in intimate contact, but covered by soft filling material such as clay gouge.

23 |
For planar surfaces, such as bedding planes in sedimentary rock, a thin clay coating will result in a significant shear
strength reduction. For a rough or undulating joint, the filling thickness has to be greater than the amplitude of the
undulations before the shear strength is reduced to that of the filling material.
A comprehensive review of the shear strength of filled discontinuities was prepared by Barton (1974) and a summary
of the shear strengths of typical discontinuity fillings, based on Barton's review, is given in Table A.
Where a significant thickness of clay or gouge fillings occurs in rock masses and where the shear strength of the filled
discontinuities is likely to play an important role in the stability of the rock mass, it is strongly recommended that
samples of the filling be sent to a soil mechanics laboratory for testing.
Influence of water pressure
When water pressure is present in a rock mass, the surfaces of the discontinuities are forced apart and the normal
stress σn is reduced. Under steady state conditions, where there is sufficient time for the water pressures in the rock
mass to reach equilibrium, the reduced normal stress is defined by σn' = (σn - u), where u is the water pressure. The
reduced normal stress σn' is usually called the effective normal stress, and it can be used in place of the normal stress
term σn in all of the equations presented in previous sections of this chapter.
Table 4.1: Shear strength of filled discontinuities and filling materials (After Barton 1974) Influence of water
pressure

24 |
Instantaneous cohesion and friction
Due to the historical development of the subject of rock mechanics, many of the analyses, used to calculate factors of
safety against sliding, are expressed in terms of the Mohr-Coulomb cohesion (c) and friction angle (Ø. Since the 1970s
it has been recognized that the relationship between shear strength and normal stress is more accurately represented
by a non-linear relationship such as that proposed by Barton (1973). However, because this relationship is not
expressed in terms of c and Ø, it is necessary to devise some means for estimating the equivalent cohesive strengths
and angles of friction from relationships such as those proposed by Barton. Figure 1.6 gives definitions of the
instantaneous cohesion c i and the instantaneous friction angle Øi for a normal stress of σn. These quantities are given
by the intercept and the inclination, respectively, of the tangent to the non-linear relationship between shear strength
and normal stress. These quantities may be used for stability analyses in which the Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion is
applied, provided that the normal stress σn is reasonably close to the value used to define the tangent point. In a
typical practical application, a spreadsheet program can be used to solve Equations and to calculate the instantaneous
cohesion and friction values for a range of normal stress values
Figure 1.6: Definition of instantaneous cohesion ci and instantaneous friction angle Øi for a non-linear failure
criterion.
ROCK MASS CLASSIFICATION

(also refer to lecture presentation of Day 3))
Introduction
During the feasibility and preliminary design stages of a project, when very little detailed information on the rock mass
and its stress and hydrologic characteristics is available, the use of a rock mass classification scheme can be of
considerable benefit. At its simplest, this may involve using the classification scheme as a checklist to ensure that all
relevant information has been considered. At the other end of the spectrum, one or more rock mass classification
schemes can be used to build up a picture of the composition and characteristics of a rock mass to provide initial
estimates of support requirements, and to provide estimates of the strength and deformation properties of the rock
mass.
It is important to understand that the use of a rock mass classification scheme does not (and cannot) replace some of
the more elaborate design procedures. However, the use of these design procedures requires access to relatively
detailed information on in situ stresses, rock mass properties and planned excavation sequence, none of which may be
available at an early stage in the project. As this information becomes available, the use of the rock mass classification
schemes should be updated and used in conjunction with site-specific analyses.

25 |
Engineering rock mass classification
Rock mass classification schemes have been developing for over 100 years since Ritter (1879) attempted to formalize
an empirical approach to tunnel design, in particular for determining support requirements. While the classification
schemes are appropriate for their original application, especially if used within the bounds of the case histories from
which they were developed, considerable caution must be exercised in applying rock mass classifications to other rock
engineering problems.
Summaries of some important classification systems are presented in this chapter, and although every attempt has
been made to present all of the pertinent data from the original texts, there are numerous notes and comments which
cannot be included. The interested reader should make every effort to read the cited references for a full appreciation
of the use, applicability and limitations of each system. Most of the multi-parameter classification schemes (Wickham
et al (1972) Bieniawski (1973, 1989) and Barton et al (1974)) were developed from civil engineering case histories in
which all of the components of the engineering geological character of the rock mass were included. In underground
hard rock mining, however, especially at deep levels, rock mass weathering and the influence of water usually is 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
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, it is interesting to examine the rock mass descriptions included in his original paper, because he draws
attention to those characteristics that dominate rock mass behavior, particularly in situations where gravity constitutes
the dominant driving force. 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) are:
a. Intact rock contains 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.
b. Stratified rock consists 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.
c. Moderately jointed rock contains 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.
d. Blocky and seamy rock consists of 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.
e. 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 re-cementation has taken place, crushed rock below the water table exhibits the
properties of water-bearing sand.
f. 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.
g. 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.

26 |
Classifications involving stand-up time
Lauffer (1958) proposed that the stand-up time for an unsupported span is related to the quality of the rock mass in
which the span is excavated. In a tunnel, the unsupported span is defined as the span of the tunnel or the distance
between the face and the nearest support, if this is greater than the tunnel span. Lauffer's original classification has
since been modified by a number of authors, notably Pacher et al (1974), and now forms part of the general tunneling
approach known as the New Austrian Tunnelling Method.
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. For example, a small pilot tunnel may be successfully
constructed with minimal support, while a larger span tunnel in the same rock mass may not be stable without the
immediate installation of substantial support.
The New Austrian Tunnelling Method includes a number of techniques for safe tunneling in rock conditions in which
the stand-up time is limited before failure occurs. These techniques include the use of smaller headings and benching
or the use of multiple drifts to form a reinforced ring inside which the bulk of the tunnel can be excavated. These
techniques are applicable in soft rocks such as shale’s, phyllites and mudstones in which the squeezing and swelling
problems, described by Terzaghi (see previous section), are likely to occur.
The techniques are also applicable when tunneling 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.
On the other hand, 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
100mm (4 inches) in the total length of core. The core should be at least NW size (54.7mm or 2.15 meters 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 summarized in Figure 1.7.

27 |
Figure 1.7: Procedure for measurement and calculation of RQD (After Deere, 1989).
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 J v
Where J v is the sum of the number of joints per unit length for all joint (discontinuity) sets known as the volumetric
joint count.
RQD is a directionally dependent parameter and its value may change significantly, depending upon the borehole
orientation. The use of the volumetric joint count can be quite useful in reducing this directional dependence.
RQD is intended to represent the rock mass quality in situ. When using diamond drill core, care must be taken to
ensure that fractures, which have been caused by handling or the drilling process, are identified and ignored when
determining the value of RQD.
When using Palmström's relationship for exposure mapping, blast induced fractures should not be included when
estimating J v.

28 |
Geomechanical Classification
Bieniawski (1976) published the details of a rock mass classification called the Geomechanics Classification or the
Rock Mass Rating (RMR) system. Over the years, this system has been successively refined as more case records
have been examined and the reader should be aware that Bieniawski has made significant changes in the ratings
assigned to different parameters. The discussion, which follows, is based upon the 1989 version of the classification
(Bieniawski, 1989). Both this version and the 1976 version will be used in Chapter 8, which deals with estimating the
strength of rock masses. 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.
In applying this classification system, the rock mass is divided into a number of structural regions and each region are
classified separately. The boundaries of the structural regions usually coincide with a major structural feature such as a
fault or with a change in rock type. In some cases, significant changes in discontinuity spacing or characteristics, within
the same rock type, may necessitate the division of the rock mass into a number of small structural regions.
The Rock Mass Rating system is presented in Table B, giving the ratings for each of the six parameters listed above.
These ratings are summed to give a value of RMR. The following example illustrates the use of these tables to arrive
at an RMR value.
A tunnel is to be driven through slightly weathered granite with a dominant joint set dipping at 60 degrees against the
direction of the drive. Index testing and logging of diamond drilled core give typical Point-load strength index values of
8 MPa and average RQD values of 70%. The slightly rough and slightly weathered joints with a separation of < 1 mm,
are spaced at 300 mm. Tunneling conditions are anticipated to be wet.
The RMR value is determined as follows:
Table Item Value Rating

4.4: A.1 Point load index 8 MPa 12
4.4: A.2 RQD 70% 13
4.4: A.3 Spacing of discontinuities 300 mm 10
4.4: E.4 Condition of discontinuities Note 1 22
4.4: A.5 Groundwater Wet 7
4.4: B Adjustment for joint orientation Note 2 -5
Total 59
Note 1: For slightly rough and altered discontinuity surfaces with a separation of < 1 mm, Table B. A.4 gives a rating
of 25. When more detailed information is available, Table B. E can be used to obtain a more refined rating.
Hence, in this case, the rating is the sum of: 4 (1-3 m discontinuity length), 4 (separation 0.1-1.0 mm), 3
(slightly rough), 6 (no infilling) and 5 (slightly weathered) = 22.
Note 2: Table B. F gives a description of ‘Fair’ for the conditions assumed where the tunnel is to be driven against
the dip of a set of joints dipping at 60°. Using this description for ‘Tunnels and Mines’ in Table B. B gives an
adjustment rating of -5.
Bieniawski (1989) published a set of guidelines for the selection of support in tunnels in rock for which the value of
RMR has been determined. These guidelines are reproduced in Table C. Note that these guidelines have been

29 |
published for a 10m span horseshoe shaped tunnel, constructed using drill and blast methods, in a rock mass
subjected to a vertical stress < 25 MPa (equivalent to a depth below surface of <900 m).
For the case considered earlier, with RMR = 59, Table C suggests that a tunnel could be excavated by top heading
and bench, with a 1.5 to 3m advance in the top heading.
Support should be installed after each blast and the support should be placed at a maximum distance of 10m from the
face. Systematic rock bolting, using 4 m long 20mm diameter fully grouted bolts spaced at 1.5 to 2m in the crown and
walls, is recommended. Wire mesh, with 50 to 100mm of shotcrete for the crown and 30mm of shotcrete for the walls,
is recommended.
The value of RMR of 59 indicates that the rock mass is on the boundary between the ‘Fair rock’ and ‘Good rock’
categories. In the initial stages of design and construction, it is advisable to utilize the support suggested for fair rock. If
the construction is progressing well with no stability problems, and the support is performing very well, then it should
be possible to gradually reduce the support requirements to those indicated for a good rock mass.
In addition, if the excavation is required to be stable for a short amount of time, then it is advisable to try the less
expensive and extensive support suggested for good rock. However, if the rock mass surrounding the excavation is
expected to undergo large mining induced stress changes, then more substantial support appropriate for fair rock
should be installed. This example indicates that a great deal of judgment is needed in the application of rock mass
classification to support design.
It should be noted that Table C 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
Bieniawski's Rock Mass Rating (RMR) system was originally based upon case histories drawn from civil engineering.
Consequently, the mining industry tended to regard the classification as somewhat conservative and several
modifications have been proposed in order to make the classification more relevant to mining applications. A
comprehensive summary of these modifications was compiled by Bieniawski (1989). 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.
A set of support recommendations is associated with the resulting MRMR value. In using Laubscher's MRMR system it
should be borne in mind that many of the case histories upon which it is based are derived from caving operations.
Originally, block caving in asbestos mines in Africa formed the basis for the modifications but, subsequently, other
case histories from around the world have been added to the database.

30 |
Table B: Rock Mass Rating System (After Bieniawski 1989)
A. CLASSIFICATION PARAMETERS AND THEIR RATING

Parameter Range of values
1 Strengt Point-load > 10MPa 4 - 10MPa 2 - 4MPa 1 - 2MPa For this low range UCS
h of strength test is preferred (MPa)
intact index
rock UCS < 250MPa 100 - 50 - 10MPa 25 - 50MPa 5 - 25 1-5 <1
material 250MPa
Rating 15 12 7 4 2 1 0
2 Drill core quality RQD 90% - 100% 75% - 90 50% - 75% 25% - 50% < 25%
Rating 20 17 13 8 3
3 Spacing of > 2m 0.6 - 2m 200 - 600mm 60 - 200mm < 60mm
discontinuities
Rating 20 15 10 8 5
4 Conditions of Very rough Slightly rough Slightly rough Slickensides Soft gouge > 5mm thick
discontinuities (see surfaces surfaces surfaces surfaces or or
E) Not Separation Separation Gouge < 5mm Separation > 5mm
continuous <1mm <1mm Highly thick or Continuous
No separation Slightly weathered Separation 1 –
Un- weathered walls 5mm
weathered walls Continuous
wall rock
Rating 30 25 20 10 0
5 Ground Inflow per None < 10 10 - 25 25 - 125 > 125
water 10m
(Joint 0 < 0.1 0.1 - 0.2 0.2 - 0.5 > 0.5
water
press)
(Major
principal
σ)
General Completely Damp Wet Dripping Flowing
conditions dry
Rating 15 10 7 4 0
B. RATING ADJUSTMENT FOR DISCONTINUITY ORIENTATIONS (see f)
Strike and dip Very Favourable Fair Unfavourable Very favourable
orientation favourable
Ratings Tunnels 0 -2 -5 - 10 - 12
Foundation 0 -2 -7 - 15 - 25
s
Slopes 0 -5 - 25 - 50
C. ROCK MASS CLASSES DETERMINED FROM TOTAL RATINGS
Rating 100  81 80  61 60  41 40  21 < 21
Class number I II III IV V
Description Very good Good rock Fair rock Poor rock Very poor rock
rock
D. MEANING OF ROCK CLASSES
Class number I II III IV V
Average standard 20 yrs for 15m 1 year for 1 week for 10hrs for 2.5m 30min for 1m span
number span 10m span 5m span span
Cohesion of rock mass > 400 300 - 400 200 - 300 100 - 200 < 100
(kPa)
Friction angle of rock > 45 35 - 45 25 - 35 15 - 25 < 15
mass
31 |
E. GUIDELINES FOR CLASSIFICATION OF DISCONTINUITY conditions

Discontinuity length < 1m 1 - 3m 3 - 10m 10 - 20m > 20m
(persistence) 6 4 2 1 0
Rating
Separation (aperture) None < 0.1mm 0.1 - 1.0mm 1 - 5mm > 5mm
6 5 4 1 0
Roughness Very rough Rough Slightly rough Smooth Slickensides
Rating 6 5 3 1 0
Infilling (gouge) None Hard filling < Hard filling > Soft filling > Soft filling > 5mm
Rating 6 5mm 5mm 4mm 0
4 2 2
Weathering Unweathered Slightly Moderately Highly Decomposed
Ratings 6 weathered weathered weathered 0
5 3 1
F. EFFECT OF DISCONTINUITY STRIKE AND DIP ORIENTATION IN TUNNELING
Strike perpendicular to tunnel axis Strike parallel to tunnel axis
Drive with dip – Dip 45º - 90º Drive with dip – Dip 20º - 45º Dip 20º - 90º Dip 20º - 45º
Very favorable Favorable Very favorable fair
Drive against dip- dip 45º - Drive against dip – 20º - 45º Dip 0 - 20 irrespective of strike
90º
Fair Unfavorable Fair
* Some conditions are mutually exclusive. For example, if infilling is present, the roughness of the surface
will be overshadowed by the influence of the gouge. In such cases use A4 directly
** Modified after Wicham et al (1972)
Table C: Guidelines for excavation and support of 10m span rock tunnels in accordance with the RMR
system (after Bieniawski 1989)
Rock mass Excavation Rock bolts Shot Crete Steel sets

class (20 mm diameter,
fully grouted)
I – very Full face,
good rock. 3m advance. Generally no support required expect spot bolting
RMR: 81 -
100
II – Good Full face, Locally, bolts in crown 50mm in crown None.
rock 1 - 1.5m advance. 3m long, spaced 2.5m where required.
RMR: 61 - Complete support 20m with occasional wire
80 from face. mesh.
III – Fair Top heading and bench Systematically bolts 50 - 100mm in None.
rock RMR: 1.5 - 3m advance in top 4m long, spaced 1.5 - crown and
41 - 60 heading. Commence 2m in crown and walls 30mm in sides.
support after each with wire mesh in
blast. Complete crown.
support 10m from face.
IV - Poor Top heading and bench Systematic bolts 4 - 100 - 150mm in Light to medium
rock 1.0 - 1.5m advance in 5m long spaced 1 - crown and ribs spaced 1.5m
RMR: 21 - top heading. Install 1.5m in crown and 100mm in where required.
40 support concurrently walls with wire mesh. sides.
with excavation, 10m
from face.
V - Very Multiple drifts 0.5 - Systematically bolts 5 - 150 - 200mm in Medium to heavy
poor rock 1.5m advance in top 6m long spaced 1 - crown. 150mm ribs spaced 0.75m
RMR: < 20 heading. Install support 1.5m in crown and in sides, and with steel lagging
concurrently with walls with wire mesh. 50mm on face. and forepoling if

32 |
excavation. Shot Crete Bolt invert. required close

as soon as possible invert.
after blasting.
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. This system was developed for block caving operations in the USA. 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. Support recommendations are presented for isolated or
development drifts as well as for the final support of intersections and drifts.
Rock Tunneling Quality Index, Q
On the basis of an evaluation of a large number of case histories of underground excavations, Barton et al (1974) of
the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute proposed a tunneling Quality Index (Q) for the determination of rock mass
characteristics and tunnel support requirements.
The numerical value of the index Q varies on a logarithmic scale from 0.001 to a maximum of 1,000 and is defined by:
Q = RQD x J r x J w
Jn Ja SRF
Where:
RQD is the Rock Quality Designation
J n is the joint set number
J r is the joint roughness number
J a is the joint alteration number
J w is the joint water reduction factor
SRF is the stress reduction factor
In explaining the meaning of the parameters used to determine the value of Q, Barton et al (1974) offer the following
comments:
The first quotient (RQD/J n), representing the structure of the rock mass, is a crude measure of the block or particle
size, with the two extreme values (200/0.5 and 10/20) differing by a factor of 400. If the quotient is interpreted in units
of centimeters, the extreme 'particle sizes' of 200 to 0.5 cm are seen to be crude but fairly realistic approximations.
Probably the largest blocks should be several times this size and the smallest fragment less than half the size. (Clay
particles are of course excluded). The second quotient (J r /J a) represents the roughness and frictional characteristics
of the joint walls or filling materials. This quotient is weighted in favour of rough, unaltered joints in direct contact. It is
to be expected that such surfaces will be close to peak strength, that they will dilate strongly when sheared, and they
will therefore be especially favourable to tunnel stability.
When rock joints have thin clay mineral coatings and fillings, the strength is reduced significantly. Nevertheless, rock
wall contact after small shear displacements have occurred may be a very important factor for preserving the
excavation from ultimate failure.
Where no rock wall contact exists, the conditions are extremely unfavorable to tunnel stability. The 'friction angles'
(given in Table D) are a little below the residual strength values for most clays, and are possibly down-graded by the
fact that these clay bands or fillings may tend to consolidate during shear, at least if normal consolidation or if softening
and swelling has occurred. The swelling pressure of montmorillonite may also be a factor here. The third quotient (J w
/SRF) consists of two stress parameters. SRF is a measure of: 1) loosening load in the case of an excavation through
shear zones and clay bearing rock, 2) rock stress in competent rock, and 3) squeezing loads in plastic incompetent
rocks. It can be regarded as a total stress parameter.

33 |
The parameter J w 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. Water may, in addition, cause softening and possible out-wash in the case of
clay-filled joints. It has proved impossible to combine these two parameters in terms of inter-block effective stress,
because paradoxically a high value of effective normal stress may sometimes signify less stable conditions than a low
value, despite the higher shear strength. The quotient (J w /SRF) is a complicated empirical factor describing the
'active stress'.
It appears that the rock tunneling quality Q can now be considered to be a function of only three parameters, which are
crude measures of:
1. Block size (RQD/J n)

2. Inter-block shear strength (J r / J a)
3. Active stress (J w /SRF)
Undoubtedly, there are several other parameters, which could be added to improve the accuracy of the classification
system. One of these would be the joint orientation. Although many case records include the necessary information on
structural orientation in relation to excavation axis, it was not found to be the important general parameter that might be
expected.
Part of the reason for this may be that the orientations of many types of excavations can be adjusted to avoid the
maximum effect of unfavorably oriented major joints. However, this choice is not available in the case of tunnels, and
more than half the case records were in this category. The parameters J n, J r and J a appear to play a more important
role than orientation, because the number of joint sets determines the degree of freedom for block movement (if any),
and the frictional and dilatational characteristics can vary more than the down-dip gravitational component of
unfavorably oriented joints. If joint orientations had been included the classification would have been less general, and
its essential simplicity lost.
Table D gives the classification of individual parameters used to obtain the Tunneling Quality Index Q for a rock mass.
The use of this table is illustrated in the following example:
A 15m span crusher chamber for an underground mine is to be excavated in a Norite at a depth of 2,100m below
surface. The rock mass contains two sets of joints controlling stability. These joints are undulating, rough and Un-
weathered with very minor surface staining. RQD values range from 85% to 95% and laboratory tests on core samples
of intact rock give an average uniaxial compressive strength of 170MPa. The principal stress directions are
approximately vertical and horizontal and the magnitude of the horizontal principal stress is approximately 1.5 times
that of the vertical principal stress. The rock mass is locally damp but there is no evidence of flowing water.
The numerical value of RQD is used directly in the calculation of Q and, for this rock mass, an average value of 90 will
be used. Table D.2 shows that, for two joint sets, the joint set number, J n = 4. For rough or irregular joints which are
undulating, Table D.3 gives a joint roughness number of J r = 3. Table D.4 gives the joint alteration number, J a = 1.0,
for unaltered joint walls with surface staining only. Table D.5 shows that, for an excavation with minor inflow, the joint
water reduction factor, J w = 1.0. For a depth below surface of 2,100 m the overburden stress will be approximately
57MPa and, in this case, the major principal stress σ1 = 85MPa. Since the uniaxial compressive strength of the norite
is approximately 170MPa, this gives a ratio of σc / σ1= 2. Table D.6 shows that, for competent rock with rock stress
problems, this value of σc / σ1 can be expected to produce heavy rock burst conditions and that the value of SRF
should lie between 10 and 20. A value of SRF = 15 will be assumed for this calculation. Using these values gives:
Q= 90 x 3 x 104.5
4 1 15

34 |
In relating the value of the index Q to the stability and support requirements of underground excavations, Barton et al
(1974) defined an additional parameter, which they called the Equivalent Dimension, D e, of the excavation. This
dimension is obtained by dividing the span, diameter or wall height of the excavation by a quantity called the
Excavation Support Ratio, ESR. Hence:
De = Excavation span, diameter or height (m)

Excavation Support Ratio ESR
The value of ESR is related to the intended use of the excavation and to the degree of security, which is demanded of
the support system, installed to maintain the stability of the excavation. Barton et al (1974) suggest the following
values:
Excavation category ESR

A Temporary mine openings. 3-5
B Permanent mine openings, water tunnels for hydro power (excluding high pressure 1.6
penstocks), pilot tunnels, drifts and headings for large excavations.
C Storage rooms, water treatment plants, minor road and railway tunnels, surge chambers, 1.3
access tunnels.
D Power stations, major road and railway tunnels, civil defense chambers, portal 1.0
intersections.
E Underground nuclear power stations, railway stations, sports and public facilities, factories. 0.8
The crusher station discussed above 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,
D e = 15/1.6 = 9.4.
The equivalent dimension, De, plotted against the value of Q, is used to define a number of support categories in a
chart published in the original paper by Barton et al (1974). This chart has recently been updated by Grimstad and
Barton (1993) to reflect the increasing use of steel fiber reinforced shotcrete in underground excavation support.
Because of the mild to heavy rock burst conditions, which are anticipated, it may be prudent to destress the rock in the
walls of this crusher chamber. This is achieved by using relatively heavy production blasting to excavate the chamber
and omitting the smooth blasting usually used to trim the final walls of an excavation such as an underground
powerhouse at shallower depth. Caution is recommended in the use of destress blasting and, for critical applications, it
may be advisable to seek the advice of a blasting specialist before embarking on this course of action. Loset (1992)
suggests that, for rocks with 4 < Q < 30, blasting damage will result in the creation of new ‘joints’ with a consequent
local reduction in the value of Q for the rock surrounding the excavation. He suggests that this can be accounted for by
reducing the RQD value for the blast-damaged zone.
Assuming that the RQD value for the destressed rock around the crusher chamber drops to 50 %, the resulting value
of Q = 2.9. The value of Q, for an equivalent dimension, D e of 9.4, places the excavation just inside category (5) which
requires rockbolts, at approximately 2m spacing, and a 50mm thick layer of steel fibre reinforced shotcrete. Barton et al
(1980) provide additional information on rockbolt length, maximum unsupported spans and roof support pressures to
supplement the support recommendations published in the original 1974 paper.
The length L of rockbolts can be estimated from the excavation width B and the ESR:
L = 2 + 0.15B
ESR

35 |
0.4
The maximum unsupported span can be estimated from: Maximum span (unsupported) = 2 ESR Q
Based upon analyses of case records, Grimstad and Barton (1993) suggest that the relationship between the value of
Q and the permanent roof support pressure P roof is estimated from:
P roof = 2√Jn Q ⅓
3Jr
Table D Classification of parameters used in the Tunneling Quality Index Q (after Barton et al 1974)
DESCRIPTION VALUE NOTES

1. ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION
A. Very poor RQD 1. Where RQD is reported or measured as < 10
B. Poor 0 – 25 (including 0), a nominal value of 10 is used to
C. Fair 25 – 50 evaluate Q.
D. Good 50 – 75
E. Excellent 75 – 90 2. RQD intervals of 5, i.e. 100, 95, 90 etc. are
90 – 100 sufficiently accurate.
2. JOINT SET NUMBER Jn

A. Massive, no or few joints 0.5 – 1.0
B. One joint set 2
C. One joint set plus random 3
D. Two joint sets 4
E. Two joint sets plus random 6
F. Three joint sets 9 1. For intersections use (3.0 x Jn)
G. Three joint sets plus random 12
H. Four or more joint sets, random, heavily 15 2. For portals use (2.0 x Jn)
jointed, ‘sugar cube’, etc.
J. Crushed rock, earth like 20
3. JOINT ROUGHNESS NUMBER Jr

a. Rockwall contact
b. Rockwall contact before 10cm shear
A. Discontinuous joints 4
B. Rough and irregular, undulating 3
C. Smooth undulating 2
D. Slickensided undulating 1.5 1. Add 1.0 if the mean spacing of the relevant
E. Rough or irregular, planar 1.5 joint set is greater than 3m.
F. Smooth, planar 1.0
G. Slickensided, planar 0.5 2. Jr = 0.5 can be used for planar, slickensided
c. No rockwall contact when sheared joints having lineations, provided that the
H. Zones containing clay minerals thick 1.0 lineations are oriented for minimum strength.
enough to prevent rockwall contact (nominal)
J. Sandy, gravely or crushed zone thick 1.0
enough to prevent rockwall contact (nominal)
4. JOINT ALTERATION NUMBER Ja Φr degrees (approx.)

a. Rockwall contact
A. Tightly healed, hard, non-softening, 0.75 1. Values of Φr, the residual
impermeable filling friction
B. Unaltered joint walls, surface staining 1.0 angle, are intended as an
only 2.0 25 – 35 approximate guide to the
C. Slightly altered joint walls, non-softening 25 – 30 mineralogical properties of the
mineral coatings, sandy particles, clay- alteration products, if present.
free disintegrated rock, etc. 3.0
D. Silty-, or sandy-clay coatings, small 20 – 25
clay-fraction (non-softening) 4.0
36 |
E. Softening or low-friction clay mineral 8 – 16

coatings, i.e. kaolinite, mica. Also
chlorite, talc, gypsum and graphite etc.,
and small quantities of swelling clays.
(Discontinuous coatings, 1 – 2mm or 4.0
less) 6.0 25 – 30
b. .Rockwall contact before 10cm shear 16 – 24
F. Sandy particles, clay-free, disintegrating 8.0
rock etc. 12 - 16
G. Strongly over-consolidated, non-
softening clay minerals fillings
(continuous < 5mm thick)
H. Medium or low over-consolidation,
softening clay mineral fillings
(continuous < 5mm thick)
2
5. JOINT WATER REDUCTION Jw Approx. water pressure (kgf/cm )
A. Dry excavation or minor inflow i.e. < 1.0 < 1.0
5ℓ/m locally 0.66 1.0 – 2.5
B. Medium inflow or pressure, occasional
outwash of joint fillings 0.5 2.5 – 10.0 1. Factors C to F are crude
C. Large inflow or high pressure in estimates;
competent rock with unfilled joints 0.33 increase Jw if drainage
D. Large inflow or high pressure 0.2 – 0.1 installed.
E. Exceptionally high inflow or pressure at 2.5 – 10.0
blasting, decaying with time 0.1 – 0.05 > 10 2. Special problems caused by
F. Exceptionally high inflow or pressure ice
formation are not considered.
> 10
6. STRESS REDUCTION FACTOR SRF

a. Weakness zones intersecting
excavation, which may cause
loosening of rock mass when tunnel
is excavated 10.0 1. Reduce these values of SRF by 25 –
A. Multiple occurrences of weakness 50% but only if the relevant shear
zones containing clay or chemically zones influence do not intersect the
disintegrated rock, very loose 5.0 excavation
surrounding rock (any depth)
B. Single weakness zones containing clay,
or chemically disintegrated rock 2.5
(excavation depth
< 50m)
C. Single weakness zones containing clay, 7.5
or chemically disintegrated rock
(excavation depth 5.0
> 50m)
D. Multiple shear zones in competent rock 2.5
(clay free), loose surrounding rock (any
depth) 5.0
E. Single shear zone in competent rock
(clay free)
(depth of excavation < 50m)
F. Single shear zone in competent rock
(clay free)
(depth of excavation > 50m)
G Loose open joints, heavily jointed or
‘sugar cube’, (any depth)
37 |
b. Competent rock, rock

stress problems σc / σ1 σt / σ1 SRF
H. Low stress, near surface > 200 > 13 2.5 2. For strongly an isotropic virgin stress
J. Medium stress 200 – 13 – 0.66 1.0 field (if measured): when 5 < σ1 / σ3
K. High stress, very tight 10 0.66 – 0.5 – 2 < 10, reduce σc to 0.8σc and σt to
structure 10 – 5 0.33 0.8σt. When σ1 / σ3 > 10, reduce σc
(usually favourable to 5 - 10 and σt to 0.6σc, where
stability, may 5 – 2.5 0.33 – σc = unconfined compressive
L. Mild rockburst (massive rock) 0.16 strength, and
σt = tensile strength (point load) and
σ1 and σ3 are the major and minor
10 – principal stresses.
< 2.5 20
M. Heavy rockburst (massive < 0.16 3. Few case records available where
rock) depth of crown below surface is less
than span width.
c. Squeezing rock, plastic flow of incompetent rock SRF Suggest SRF increase from 2.5 to 5
under influence of high rock pressure for such cases (see H).
N. Mild squeezing rock pressure 5 – 10
O. Heavy squeezing rock pressure 10 -
d. Swelling rock, chemical swelling activity 20
depending on presence of water
P. Mild swelling rock pressure 5 – 10
R. Heavy swelling rock pressure 10 -
15
ADDITIONAL NOTES ON THE USE OF THESE TABLES
When making estimates of the rock mass Quality (Q), the following guidelines should be followed in addition
to the notes listed in the tables:
1. When borehole core is unavailable, RQD can be estimated from the number of joints per unit volume, in
which the number of joints per metre for each joint set are added. A simple relationship can be used to
convert this number to RQD for the case of clay free rock masses: RQD = 115 – 3.3 Jv (approx.), where Jv
3
= total number of joints per m (0 < RQD < 100 for 35 > Jv > 4.5).
2. The parameter Jn representing the number of joint sets will often be affected by foliation, schistosity, slaty
cleavage or bedding etc. If strongly developed, these parallel ‘joints’ should obviously be counted as a
complete joint set. However, if there are few ‘joints’ visible, or if only occasional breaks in the core are due
to these features, then it will be more appropriate to count them as ‘random’ joints when evaluating Jn.
3. The parameters Jr and Ja (representing shear strength) should be relevant to the weakest significant joint
set or clay filled discontinuity in the given zone. However, if the joint set or discontinuity with the minimum
value of Jr / Ja is favourably oriented for stability, then a second, less favourable oriented joint set or
discontinuity may sometimes be more significant, and its higher value of Jr / Ja should be used when
evaluating Q. The value of Jr / Ja should in fact relate to the surface most likely to allow failure to initiate.
4. When a rock mass contains clay, the factor SRF appropriate to loosening loads should be evaluated. In
such cases the strength of the intact rock is of little interest. However, when jointing is minimal and clay is
completely absent, the strength of the intact rock may become the weakest link, and the stability will then
depend on the ratio rock-stress/rock-strength. A strongly an isotropic stress field is unfavourable for
stability and is roughly accounted for as in note 2 in the table for stress reduction factor evaluation.
5. The compressive and tensile strengths (σc and σt) of the intact rock should be evaluated in the saturated
condition if this is appropriate to the present and future in situ conditions. A very conservative estimate of
the strength should be made for those rocks that deteriorate when exposed to moist or saturated
conditions.

38 |
Exc Very poor Very Exl.

exception Extremel Poor Fai Goo goo good Exc
ally poor y poor r d d .
goo
100 2.3m 2.5m d 20
1.7m 2.1m
50 1.5m
10
1.3m
Bolt length in m for ESR = 1

1.2m 7
Span or height in m
20 1.0m
5
(9) (8) (7) (6) (5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

ESR
10 4.0m 3
150mm 90mm 50mm

5 120mm 40mm 3.0m 2.4
250mm
2.0m 1.5
2 1.5m
1
1.3m
1.0m
0.001 0.004 – 0.01 0.04 0.1 0.4 1 4 10 40 100 400 1000
RQD Jr Jw
Rock mass quality Q = Jn x Ja x SRF
REINFORCEMENT CATEGORIES
Bolt spacing in shotcreted area Bolt spacing in un-shotcreted area

1. Unsupported 5. Fiber reinforced shotcrete, 50 – 90mm, and bolting
2. Spot bolting 6. Fiber reinforced shotcrete, 90 – 120mm, and bolting
3. Systematic bolting 7. Fiber reinforced shotcrete, 120 – 150mm, and bolting
4. Systematic bolting with 40 – 100mm 8. Fiber reinforced shotcrete, > 150mm, with reinforced ribs
and bolting of shotcrete and bolting
9. Cast concrete lining
Figure 1.8: Estimated Support Categories Based On the Tunneling Quality Index Q
Using rock mass classification systems
The two most widely used rock mass classifications are Bieniawski's RMR (1976, 1989) and Barton et al's Q (1974).
Both methods incorporate geological, geometric and design/engineering parameters in arriving at a quantitative value
of their rock mass quality. The similarities between RMR and Q stem from the use of identical, or very similar,
parameters in calculating the final rock mass quality rating. The differences between the systems lie in the different
weightings given to similar parameters and in the use of distinct parameters in one or the other scheme RMR uses
compressive strength directly while Q only considers strength as it relates to in situ stress in competent rock. Both
schemes deal with the geology and geometry of the rock mass, but in slightly different ways.

39 |
Both consider groundwater, and both include some component of rock material strength. Some estimate of orientation
can be incorporated into Q using a guideline presented by Barton et al (1974): ‘the parameters J r and J a should
relate to the surface most likely to allow failure to initiate.’ The greatest difference between the two systems is the lack
of a stress parameter in the RMR system.
Jointed Sandstone
Jw = 1.0 SRF + 1.0

Typical Q = 50 x 13 x 1 = 8.3
9 1 1
Approx range 30 – 80 x 15 x 1 = (1.7 – 8.0)

6-9 1-3 1
Figure 1.9: Histograms showing variations in RQD, J n, J r and J a for a dry jointed sandstone under 'medium'
stress conditions, reproduced from field notes prepared by Dr. N. Barton
40 |
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 characterize 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. If rating values alone had
been recorded during mapping, it would be almost impossible to carry out verification studies.
In many cases, it is appropriate to give a range of values to each parameter in a rock mass classification and to
evaluate the significance of the final result. An example of this approach is given in Figure 1.9, 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 D.6.K) and hence J w = 1.0 and SRF = 1.0. Histograms showing the variations in
RQD, J n, J r and J a, 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.
A further example of this approach is given in a paper by Barton et al (1992) concerned with the design of a 62m span
underground sports hall in jointed gneiss. Histograms of all the input parameters for the Q system are presented and
analyzed in order to determine the weighted average value of Q.
Carter (1992) has adopted a similar approach, but extended his analysis to include the derivation of a probability
distribution function and the calculation of a probability of failure in a discussion on the stability of surface crown pillars
in abandoned metal mines. Throughout this chapter it has been suggested that the user of a rock mass classification
scheme should check that the latest version is being used. An exception is the use of Bieniawski’s RMR classification
for rock mass strength estimates (discussed in Chapter 8) where the 1976 version as well as the 1989 version is used.
It is also worth repeating that the use of two rock mass classification schemes is advisable.
CSIR Classification of Jointed Rock Masses
From the preceding discussion it will have become clear that no single simple index is adequate as an indicator of the
complex behaviour of the rock mass surrounding an underground excavation. Consequently, some combination of
factors such as RQD and the influence of clay filling and weathering appear to be necessary. One such classification
system has been proposed by Bieniawski of the South African Council for Scientific and Industrial Researched (CSIR).
This classification will be discussed in detail since it is one of the two classifications that the authors would recommend
for general use in the preliminary design of underground excavations.
TABLE-E: INFLUENCE OF DISCONTINUITY INFILLING UPON THE BEHAVIOUR OF TUNNELS

Dominant material in Potential behaviour of gouge material
gouge At face Later
Swelling clay Free swelling sloughing. Swelling Swelling pressure and squeeze against
pressure and squeeze on shield. support or lining, free swell with down –
fall or wash in if lining inadequate.
Inactive clay Slaking and sloughing caused by Squeeze on supports of lining where
squeeze. Heavy squeeze under unprotected, a slaking and sloughing
extreme conditions. due to environmental changes
Chlorite, talc, graphite Ravelling Heavy loads may develop due to low
or strength, in particular when wet.
serpentine.
Crushed rock Ravelling or running. Stand-up time Loosening loads on lining, running and
fragments of sand-like may be extremely short. ravelling if unconfined.
gouge.
Porous or flaky calcite, Favourable conditions. May dissolve, leading to instability of
gypsum. rock mass.
Bieniawski suggested that a classification for jointed rock masses should:
1. Divide the rock mass into groups of similar behaviour;

2. Provide a good basis for understanding the characteristics of the rock mass;
41 |
3. Facilitate the planning and the design of structures in rock by yielding quantitative data required for the solution
of real engineering problems and provide a common basis for effective communication among all persons
concerned with a geomechanics problem.
These Aims Should Be Fulfilled By Ensuring That The Adopted Classification Is:
1. Simple and meaningful in terms; and

2. Based on measurable parameters, which can be determined quickly and cheaply in the field.
In order to satisfy these requirements, Bieniawski originally proposed that his Geomechanics classification should
incorporate the following parameters:
1. Rock Quality Designation (RQD)

2. State of weathering,
3. Uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock
4. Spacing of joints and bedding
5. Strike and dip orientations
6. Separations of joints
7. Continuity of joints, and
8. Ground water inflow.
After some experience had been gained in the practical application Bieniawski modified his classification system by
eliminating the state of weathering as a separate parameter since is effect is accounted for by the uniaxial compressive
strength, and by including the separation and continuity of joints in a new parameter, the condition of joints.
In addition, the strike and dip orientations of joints were removed from the list of basic classification parameters and
their effects allowed for by a rating adjustment made after the basic parameters had been considered.
The five basic classification parameters then become:
1. Strength of Intact Rock Material
Bieniawski uses the classification of the uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock proposed by Deere and
10
Miller and reproduced in Table 3. Alternatively, for all but very low strength rocks the point load index may be
used as a measure of intact rock material strength.
2. Rock Quality Designation
Deere’s RQD is used as a measure of drill core quality.
3. Spacing of Joints
In this context, the term joint is used to mean all discontinuities, which may be joints, faults, bedding planes and
13
other surfaces of weakness. Once again, Bieniwski uses a classification proposed by deere and reproduced
here in Table G.

42 |
4. Condition of Joints
This parameter accounts for the separation or aperture of joints, their continuity, the surface roughness, the wall
condition (hard or soft), and the presence of infilling materials in the joints.
5. Ground Water Conditions
An attempt is made to account for the influence of ground water flow on the stability of underground excavations
in terms of the observed rate of flow into the excavation, the ratio of joint water pressure to major principal stress
or by some general qualitative observation of groundwater conditions.
The way in which these parameters have been incorporated into the CSIR Geomechanics Classification for
jointed rock masses is shown in Part A of Table H. Bieniawski recognized that each parameter does not
necessarily contribute equally to the rock mass. For example an RQD of 90 and a uniaxial compressive strength
of intact rock material of 200MPa would suggest that the rock mass is of excellent quality, but heavily inflow of
water into the same rock mass could change this assessment dramatically. Bieniawski therefore applied a
series of importance ratings to his parameters following the concept used by Wickham, Tiedemann and Skinner.
This overall rating must be adjusted for joint orientation by applying the corrections given in part B of Table H.
An explanation of the descriptive terms used for this purpose is given in Table I. Part C of Table H shows the
class and description given to rock masses with various total ratings. The given to rock masses with various
total ratings. The interpretation of these ratings in terms of stand-up times for underground excavations and rock
mass strength parameters is given in part D of Table H.
TABLE F – DEERE AND MILLER’S CLASSIFICATION OF INTACT ROCK STRENGTH
Description Uniaxial compressive strength Examples of rock types

Kgf/cm² MPa
Very low strength 10 - 250 1 - 25 Chalk, rock salt.
Low strength 250 - 500 25 - 50 Coal, siltstone, schist
Medium strength 500 - 1000 50 - 100 Sandstone, slate, shale
High strength 1000 - 2000 100 - 200 Marble, granite, gneiss
Very high strength > 2000 > 200 Quartzite, Dolerite, Gabbro, Basalt.
TABLE G – DEERE’S CLASSIFICATION FOR JOINT SPACING
Description Spacing of joints Rock mass grading

Very wide > 3m Solid
Wide 1m to 3m Massive
Moderately close 0.3m to 1m Blocky/seamy
Close 50mm to 300mm Fractured
Very close < 50mm Crushed and shattered

43 |
Figure 1.10: Relationship between the stand-up time of an unsupported underground excavation span and
26
the CSIR Geomechanics Classification proposed by Bieniawski .
TABLE H– CSIR GEOMECHANICS CLASSIFICATION OF JOINTED ROCK MASSES
PARAMETER RANGE OF VALUES

1. Strength of Point load >8MPa 4-8MPa 2-4MPa 1-2 MPa For this law range-UCS
intact rock strength testing is preferred.
material index (MPa)
UCS >200MPa 100-200 50-100 25-50 10- 3-10 1-3
MPa MPa MPa 25
Rating 15 12 7 4 2 1 0
2. Drill core quality RQD 90%-100% 75%-90% 50%-75% 25%- <25%
50%
Rating 20 17 13 8 3
3. Spacing of joints >3m 1-3m 0.3-1m 50- <50mm
300mm
Rating 30 25 20 10 5

44 |
4. Conditions of joints Very rough Slightly Slightly Slickens Soft gouge 5mm thick
surfaces. rough rough ide or joints open >5mm
Not surfaces. surfaces surfaces continuous joints.
continuous Separation Separatio or
no <1mm n gouge
separation hard joint <1mm soft <5mm
. wall rock. wall joint thick or
Hard joint wall rock. joints
wall rock. open
1-5mm
continuo
us
joints.
Rating 25 20 12 6 0
5. Ground Inflow per None <25 25-125 >125 liters/min
water 10m tunnel liters/min liters/
length min
Ratio= Or_________________ Or______ Or____ Or________________
joint water
pressure
major 0 0.0-0.2 0.2-0.5 >0.5
principle Or ________________ Or______ Or____ Or________________
stress
General
conditions Completely dry Moist only Water Severe water problems
(interstitial under
water) moderat
e
pressure
Rating 10 7 0
B. RATING ADJUSTMENT FOR JOINT ORIENTATION
Strike and Dip orientations Very Favourable Fair Unfavourable Very un-
of joints favourable favourable
Ratings Tunnels 0 -2 -5 10 -12
Foundations 0 -2 -7 15 -25
Slopes 0 -5 -25 50 -60
C. ROCK MASS CLASSES DETERMINED FROM TOTAL RATINGS
Rating 100-81 80-61 60-41 40-21 <20

Class No. I II III I V
Description Very good rock Good rock Fair rock Poor rock Very poor rock
D. MEANING OF ROCK MASS CLASSES
Class No. I II III IV V

Average stand- 10 years for 5m 6 months for 1 week for 3m 5 hours for 10min for 0.5m
up time span 4m span span 1.5m span span
Cohesion of the >300kPa 200-300kPa 150-200kPa 100-150kPa <100kPa
rock mass
Friction angle of >45º 40º-45º 35º-40º 30º-35º <30º
the rock mass
TABLE I – THE EFFECT OF JOINT STRIKE AND DIP ORIENTATION IN TUNNELING

45 |
Strike perpendicular to tunnel axis Dip 0º-20º

Drive with dip Drive against dip Strike parallel to tunnel axis irrespective
Dip 45º-90º Dip 20º-45º Dip 45º-90º Dip 20º-45º Dip 45º-90º Dip 20º-45º of strike
Very Favorable Fair Unfavorable Very Fair Unfavorable
favorable favorable
Bieniawski has related his rock mass rating (or total rating score for the rock mass) to the stand-up time of an active
unsupported span as originally proposed by Luffer.
The application of the CSIR Geomechanics Classification to the choice of underground support systems will not be
dealt with here but will discussed in a later chapter dealing with rock support.
Example Using CSIR Geomechanics Classifications
Consider the example of a granite rock mass in which a tunnel is to be driven. The classification has been carried out
as follows:
Classification Parameter Value or Description Rating

1 Strength of intact material 150 MPa 12
2 RQD 70% 13
3 Joint spacing 0,5m 20
4 Condition of joints Slightly rough surfaces separation <1mm 20
Hard joint wall rock
5 Ground water Water under moderate pressure 4
69
TOTAL
The tunnel has been orientated such that the dominant joint set strikes perpendicular to the tunnel axis with a dip of
30° against the drive direction. From Table I, this situation is described as unfavourable for which a rating adjustment
of – 10 is obtained from Table HB. Thus the final rock mass rating becomes 59 which places the rock mass at the
upper end of Class 111 with a description of fair.
Figure 1.10 gives the stand-up time of an unsupported 3 metre tunnel in this rock mass as approximately
1 month.
Typical of these classifications are those published by Bieniawski (1973-1974) and by Barton, Lien and Lunde (1974).
These classifications include information on the strength of the intact rock material, the spacing, number and surface
properties of the structural discontinuities as well as allowances for the influence of subsurface groundwater, in situ
stresses and the orientation and inclination of dominant discontinuities. A chart, published by Barton (1989), which can
be used for selecting different types of support for underground excavations on the basis of the rock mass
classification published by Barton, Lien and Lunde (1974).
These rock mass classification systems have proved to be very useful practical engineering tools, not only because
they provide a starting point for the design of tunnel support but also because they force users to examine the
properties of the rock mass in a very systematic manner. The engineering judgments, which can be made, as a result
of the familiarity and understanding gained from this systematic study are probable as useful as any of the calculations
associated with the classification systems.
Discussion on rock mass classification system
Of the several rock mass classification systems described in this chapter, the CSIR system proposed by Bieniawski
and the NGI system proposed by Barton, Lien and Lunde are of particular interest because they include sufficient
information to provide a realistic assessment of the factors which influence the stability of an underground excavation.
Bieniawski classification appears to lay slightly greater emphasis on the orientation and inclination of the structural
features in the rock mass while taking no account of the rock stress. The NGI classification does not include a joint

46 |
orientation term but the properties of the most unfavourable joint sets are considered in the assessment of the joint
roughness and the joint alteration numbers, both of which represent the shear strength of the rock mass.
Both classification systems suggest that the influence of structural orientation and inclination is less significant than
one would normally tend to assume and that a different action between favourable and unfavourable is adequate for
most practical purposes.
While this may be acceptable for the majority of situations likely to be encountered in the field, there are a few cases in
materials such as slate where the structural features are so strongly developed that they will tend to dominate the
behaviour of the rock mass.

47 |
In other situations, large blocks may be isolated by a small number of individual discontinuities and become unstable
when the excavation is created. In such cases, the classification systems discussed in this chapter may not be
adequate and special consideration may have to be given to the relationship between the geometry of the rock mass
and that of the excavation
The authors have used both the CSIR and the NGI systems in the field and have found both to be simple to use and of
considerable assistance in making difficult practical decisions. In most cases, both classifications are used and both
the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) and the Tunnelling Quality (Q) are used in deciding upon the solution to the problem. It
has been found that the equation RMR = 9 Log eQ + 44 proposed by Bieniawski adequately describe the relationship
between the two systems.
When dealing with problems involving extremely weak ground which result in squeezing, swelling or flowing conditions
(see Terzaghi’s classification in Table 1, it has been found that the CSIR classification is difficult to apply. This is
hardly surprising given that the systems were originally developed for shallow tunnels in hard jointed rock. Hence,
when working in extremely weak ground, the authors recommended the use of the NGI systems.
In discussing the CSIR and Ngi classification systems, the authors have concentrated upon the basic rock mass
25 26
classification and on the indication given by this classification of whether support is required or not. Bieniawski and
Barton, Lein, lunde went on to apply these classifications to the choice of specific support systems.
An adit is to be driven into the granite oriented such that the dominant joint set strikes roughly perpendicular to the adit
axis and dips at 35° against the drive direction. From Table J, this situation is described as unfavourable.
Table J The effect of joint strike and dip in tunnelling (After Bieniawski 1984)
Strike perpendicular to tunnel axis Strike parallel to tunnel axis

Drive with dip Drive against dip Dip 0°- 20°
Dip Dip Dip Dip Dip Dip irrespective
45°- 90° 20°- 45° 45°- 90° 20°- 45° 45°- 90° 20°- 45° of strike
Very Favourable Fair Unfavourable Very Fair Fair
favourable unfavourable
Parameter Value or description Rating

1 Strength of intact rock material 150 MPa 12
2 RQD 70 13
3 Joint spacing 0,5m 10
4 Condition of joints Slightly rough surfaces separation <1mm 25
slightly weathered joint wall rock
5 Ground water Water dripping 4
Total RMR 64
Thus the final RMR is reduced to 54, which places the rock mass in Class III with a description of fair.


Strata Control Preparation Classes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strata Control Preparation Classes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strata Control Preparation Classes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1|

STRATA CONTROL PREPARATION CLASSES

BASIC PRINCIPLES OF ROCK ENGINEERING

Rock Mechanics for underground mining: Brady and Brown

Submit corrections in writing to: info@ohms.co.za

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

1. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF ROCK ENGINEERING

1.1. Terms, definitions and basic quantities:

Mass: Is the amount of matter in a body.

Density: Mass per unit volume.

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Deformation: As a result of stresses acting on a body the body will deform

K – Ratio: The ratio of horizontal to vertical stress.

Cohesion: Shear resistance at zero normal stress.

Rock mass: Rock as it occurs in situ, including its discontinuities.

RQD = Core recovered 100mm or longer x 100

Calculate areas: Square: L²

Total area of pillar (Ap): (L x W) = m²

Volume of pillar: Area of pillar x Mining height (m³)

Volume of reef extracted: Area of boards x Mining height (m³)

Average Pillar Stress (APS): q

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

To calculate effective pillar width on an irregular pillar e.g rectangular: W eff = 4A

Factor of safety: Strength (PS)

Calculate volume of the following cylinders:

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

free rock surface.

1.2. Intact Rock Strength

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

The stress - strain behavior of brittle rock in uni-axial compression.

The effects of confinement on rock strength.

110 MPa residual strength

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Weaknesses of this criterion

a) Confinement exhibits an often clearly visible downward curvature on a graph.

m & s are constants (depending on rock properties)

 Only sigma1 and sigma3 is considered and not the sigma2

Other strength criteria

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Shear strength of discontinuities

Mohr-Coulomb equation: τ = c + σn tan Ø

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Figure 1.1: Shear testing of discontinuities

where Ør is the residual angle of friction.

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Figure 1.2: A typical shear-testing machine

Shear strength of rough surfaces

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Figure 1.3: Patton’s experiment on the shear strength of saw-tooth specimens.

Barton’s estimate of shear strength

The [ ] presents the ‘friction angle’ of the Mohr-Coulomb

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Field estimates of JRC

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Shear strength of filled discontinuities

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Influence of water pressure

Intellectual property of Open House Management Solutions (Pty) Ltd