Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

CHAPTER 6 ROCK MASS PROPERTIES AND CLASSIFICATIONS

Rock mass property is governed by the properties of intact rock materials and of the discontinuities in the rock. The behaviour if rock mass is also influenced by the conditions the rock mass is subjected to, primarily the in situ stress and groundwater. The quality of a rock mass quality can be quantified by means of rock mass classifications. This Chapter addresses rock mass properties and rock mass classifications.

6.1

Rock Mass Properties and Quality

6.1.1 Properties Governing Rock Mass Behaviour Rock mass is a matrix consisting of rock material and rock discontinuities. As discussed early, rock discontinuity that distributed extensively in a rock mass is predominantly joints. Faults, bedding planes and dyke intrusions are localised features and therefore are dealt individually. Properties of rock mass therefore are governed by the parameters of rock joints and rock material, as well as boundary conditions, as listed in Table 6.1.1a. Table 6.1.1a Prime parameters governing rock mass property Material Parameters Compressive strength Modulus of elasticity Boundary Conditions Groundwater pressure and flow In situ stress

Joint Parameters Number of joint sets Orientation Spacing Aperture Surface roughness Weathering and alteration

The behaviour of rock changes from continuous elastic of intact rock materials to discontinues running of highly fractured rock masses. The existence of rock joints and other discontinuities plays important role in governing the behaviour and properties of the rock mass, as illustrated in Figure 6.1.1a. Chapter 4 has covered the properties of intact rock materials, and Chapter 5 has dealt with rocks contains 1 or 2 localised joints with emphasis on the properties of joints. When a rock mass contains several joints, the rock mass can be treated a jointed rock mass, and sometimes also termed a Hoek-Brown rock mass, that can be described by the Hoek-Brown criterion (discussed later).

6.1.2 Classification by Rock Load Factor (Terzaghi 1946) Based in extensive experiences in steel arch supported rail tunnels in the Alps, Terzaghi (1946) classified rock mass by mean of Rock Load Factor. The rock mass is classified

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

into 9 classes from hard and intact rock to blocky, and to squeezing rock. The concept used in this classification system is to estimate the rock load to be carried by the steel arches installed to support a tunnel, as illustrated in Figure 6.1.2a. The classification is presented by Table 6.1.2a.

Figure 6.1.2a

Terzaghis rock load concept.

For obtaining the support pressure (p) from the rock load factor (Hp), Terzagh suggested the equation below, p = Hp H where is the unit weight of the rock mass, H is the tunnel depth or thickness of the overburden. Attempts have been made to link Rock Load Factor classification to RQD. As suggested by Deere (1970), Class I is corresponding to RQD 95-100%, Class II to RQD 90-99%, Class III to RQD 85-95%, and Class IV to RQD 75-85%. Singh and Goel (1999) gave the following comments to the Rock Load Factor classification: (a) It provides reasonable support pressure estimates for small tunnels with diameter up to 6 metres. (b) It gives over-estimates for large tunnels with diameter above 6 metres. (c) The estimated support pressure has a wide range for squeezing and swelling rock conditions for a meaningful application.

6.1.3 Classification by Active Span and Stand-Up Time (Stini 1950, Lauffer 1958) The concept of active span and stand-up time is illustrated in Figure 6.1.3a and Figure 6.1.3b. Active span is in fact the largest dimension of the unsupported tunnel section. Stand-up time is the length of time which an excavated opening with a given active span can stand without any mean of support or reinforcement. Rock classes from A to G are assigned according to the stand-up time for a given active span. Use of active span and stand-up time will be further discussed in later sections.

Figure 6.1.3a

Definition of active span.

Figure 6.1.3b Relationship between active span and stand-up time and rock mass classes. Class A is very good and Class G is very poor.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

Table 6.1.2a
Rock Class

Rock class and rock load factor classification by Terzaghi for steel arch supported tunnels
Definition Hard and intact rock contains no joints and fractures. After excavation the rock may have popping and spalling at excavated face. Hard rock consists of thick strata and layers. Interface between strata is cemented. Popping and spalling at excavated face is common. Massive rock contains widely spaced joints and fractures. Block size is large. Joints are interlocked. Vertical walls do not require support. Spalling may occur. Rock contains moderately spaced joints. Rock is not chemically weathered and altered. Joints are not well interlocked and have small apertures. Vertical walls do not require support. Spalling may occur. Rock is not chemically weathered, and contains closely spaced joints. Joints have large apertures and appear separated. Vertical walls need support. Rock is not chemically weathered, and highly fractured with small fragments. The fragments are loose and not interlocked. Excavation face in this material needs considerable support. Rock slowly advances into the tunnel without perceptible increase in volume. Moderate depth is considered as 150 ~ 1000 m. Rock slowly advances into the tunnel without perceptible increase in volume. Great depth is considered as more than 1000 m. Rock Load Factor Hp (feet) (B and Ht in feet) 0 Remark Light lining required only if spalling or popping occurs. Light support for protection against spalling. Load may change between layers. Light support for protection against spalling.

I.

Hard and intact

II. Hard stratified and schistose III. Massive, moderately jointed IV. Moderately blocky and seamy V. Very blocky and seamy VI. Completely crushed but chemically intact VII. Squeezing rock at moderate depth VIII. Squeezing rock at great depth IX. Swelling rock

0 to 0.5 B

0 to 0.25 B

0.25 B to 0.35 (B + Ht)

No side pressure.

(0.35 to 1.1) (B + Ht)

Little or no side pressure. Considerable side pressure. Softening effects by water at tunnel base. Use circular ribs or support rib lower end. Heavy side pressure. Invert struts required. Circular ribs recommended.

1.1 (B + Ht)

(1.1 to 2.1) (B + Ht) (2.1 to 4.5) (B + Ht)

Circular ribs required. In extreme cases Rock volume expands (and advances into the tunnel) due to swelling up to 250 feet, irrespective use yielding support. of clay minerals in the rock at the presence of moisture. of B and Ht Notes: The tunnel is assumed to be below groundwater table. For tunnel above water tunnel, Hp for Classes IV to VI reduces 50%. The tunnel is assumed excavated by blasting. For tunnel boring machine and roadheader excavated tunnel, Hp for Classes II to VI reduces 20-25%.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

6.1.4 Rock Quality Designation (RQD) (Deere 1964) Rock quality designation (RQD) was introduced in 1960s, as an attempt to quantify rock mass quality. Table 6.1.2a reproduces the proposed expression of rock mass quality classification according to RQD. As discussed earlier, RQD only represents the degree of fracturing of the rock mass. It does not account for the strength of the rock or mechanical and other geometrical properties of the joints. Therefore, RQD partially reflecting the rock mass quality.

Table 6.1.2a RQD < 25 25 50 50 75 75 90 99 100

Rock mass quality classification according to RQD Rock Mass Quality Very poor Poor Fair Good Excellent

RQD has been widely accepted as a measure of fracturing degree of the rock mass. his parameter has been used in the rock mass classification systems, including the RMR and the Q systems.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

6.2

Rock Mass Rating RMR System

6.2.1 Concept of RMR System (1973, 1989) The rock mass rating (RMR) system is a rock mass quality classification developed by South African Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), close associated with excavation for the mining industry (Bieniawski 1973). Originally, this geomechanics classification system incorporated eight parameters. The RMR system in use now incorporates five basic parameters below. (a) Strength of intact rock material: Uniaxial compressive strength is preferred. rock of moderate to high strength, point load index is acceptable. RQD: RQD is used as described before. Spacing of joints: Average spacing of all rock discontinuities is used. Condition of joints: Condition includes joint aperture, persistence, roughness, joint surface weathering and alteration, and presence of infilling. Groundwater conditions: It is to account for groundwater inflow in excavation stability. For

(b) (c) (d)

(e)

Table 6.2.1a is the RMR classification updated in 1989. Part A of the table shows the RMR classification with the above 5 parameters. Individual rate for each parameter is obtained from the property of each parameter. The weight of each parameter has already considered in the rating, for example, maximum rating for joint condition is 30 while for rock strength is 15. The overall basic RMR rate is the sum of individual rates. Influence of joint orientation on the stability of excavation is considered in Part B of the same table. Explanation of the descriptive terms used is given table Part C. With adjustment made to account for joint orientation, a final RMR rating is obtained, it can be also expresses in rock mass class, as shown in Table 6.2.1b. The table also gives the meaning of rock mass classes in terms of stand-up time, equivalent rock mass cohesion and friction angle. RMR was applied to correlate with excavated active span and stand-up time, as shown in Figure 6.2.1a. This correlation allow engineer to estimate the stand-up time for a given span and a given rock mass.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

Table 6.2.1a

Rock mass classification RMR system

(a) Five basic rock mass classification parameters and their ratings 1. Strength of intact Point load strength index (MPa) > 10 4 10 24 12 rock material Uniaxial compressive strength (MPa) > 250 100 250 50 100 25 50 5 25 Rating 15 12 7 4 2 2. RQD (%) 90 100 75 90 50 75 25 50 Rating 20 17 13 8 3. Joint spacing (m) >2 0.6 2 0.2 0.6 0.06 0.2 Rating 20 15 10 8 continuous, slickensided 4. Condition of joints not continuous, very rough slightly rough surfaces, slightly rough surfaces,
surfaces, unweathered, no separation slightly weathered, separation <1 mm highly weathered, separation <1 mm

15 1 < 25 3 < 0.06 5

<1 0

continuous joints, soft surfaces, or gouge <5 mm gouge >5 mm thick, or separation >5 mm thick, or separation 15 mm

5.

Rating Groundwater

30 25 inflow per 10 m tunnel length (l /min), or joint water pressure/major in situ stress, or general conditions at excavation surface

20 none 0 completely dry 15 < 10 0 0.1 damp 10

Rating (b) Rating adjustment for joint orientations Strike and dip orientation of joints very favourable Rating tunnels 0 foundations 0 slopes 0

10 10 25 0.1 0.2 wet 7

25 125 0.2 0.5 dripping 4

0 > 125 > 0.5 flowing 0

favourable 2 2 5

fair 5 7 25

unfavourable 10 15 50

very unfavourable 12 25 60

(c) Effects of joint orientation in tunnelling Strike perpendicular to tunnel axis Drive with dip Drive against dip Dip 45 90 Dip 20 45 Dip 45 90 Dip 20 45 very favourable favourable fair unfavourable

Strike parallel to tunnel axis Dip 45 90 very unfavourable Dip 20 45 fair

Dip 0 20 irrespective of strike fair

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

Table 6.2.1b

Rock mass classes determined from total ratings and meaning 81 100 A very good rock 10 year for 15 m span > 400 > 45 61 80 B good rock 6 months for 8 m span 300 400 35 45 41 60 C fair rock 1 week for 5 m span 200 300 25 35 21 40 D poor rock 10 hours for 2.5 m span 100 200 15 25 < 20 E very poor rock 30 minutes for 0.5 m span < 100 < 15

RMR Ratings Rock mass class Description Average stand-up time Rock mass cohesion (KPa) Rock mass friction angle

Figure 6.2.1a

Stand-up time and RMR quality

6.2.2 Examples of using RMR System (a) A granite rock mass containing 3 joint sets, average RQD is 88%, average joint spacing is 0.24 m, joint surfaces are generally stepped and rough, tightly closed and unweathered with occasional stains observed, the excavation surface is wet but not dripping, average rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 160 MPa, the tunnel is excavated to 150 m below the ground where no abnormal high in situ stress is expected. Selection of RMR parameters and calculation of RMR are shown below:
Rock material strength RQD (%) Joint spacing (m) Condition of joints Groundwater 160 MPa 88% 0.24 m very rough, unweathered, no separation wet Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating RMR 12 17 10 30 7 76

The calculated basic RMR is 76. It falls in rock class B which indicates the rock mass is of good quality.

(b) A sandstone rock mass, fractured by 2 joint sets plus random fractures, average RQD is 70%, average joint spacing is 0.11 m, joint surfaces are slightly rough, highly weathered with stains and weathered surface but no clay found on surface, joints are generally in contact with apertures generally less than 1 mm, average rock material

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

uniaxial compressive strength is 85 MPa, the tunnel is to be excavated at 80 m below ground level and the groundwater table is 10 m below the ground surface. Here, groundwater parameter is not directly given, but given in terms of groundwater pressure of 70 m water head and overburden pressure of 80 m ground. Since there is no indication of in situ stress ratio, overburden stress is taken as the major in situ stress as an approximation. Joint water pressure = groundwater pressure = 70 m w In situ stress = Overburden pressure = 80 m Joint water pressure / In situ stress = (70 1)/(80 2.7) = 0.32 Selection of RMR parameters and calculation of RMR are shown below:
Rock material strength RQD (%) Joint spacing (m) Condition of joints Groundwater 85 MPa 70% 0.11 m slightly rough, highly weathered, separation < 1mm water pressure/stress = 0.32 Rating Rating Rating Rating Rating RMR 7 13 8 20 4 52

The calculated basic RMR is 52. It falls in rock class C which indicates the rock mass is of fair quality.

(c) A highly fractured siltstone rock mass, found to have 2 joint sets and many random fractures, average RQD is 41%, joints appears continuous observed in tunnel, joint surfaces are slickensided and undulating, and are highly weathered, joint are separated by about 3-5 mm, filled with clay, average rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 65 MPa, inflow per 10 m tunnel length is observed at approximately 50 litre/minute, with considerable outwash of joint fillings. The tunnel is at 220 m below ground. In the above information, joint spacing is not provided. However, RQD is given and from the relationship between RQD and joint frequency, it is possible to calculate average joint spacing, with the equation below, RQD = 100 e
0.1

(0.1 +1)

Joint frequency is estimated to be 20, which gives average joint spacing 0.05 m Selection of RMR parameters and calculation of RMR are shown below:
Rock material strength RQD (%) 65 MPa 41% Rating Rating 7 8

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications Joint spacing (m) Condition of joints Groundwater 0.05 m continuous, slickensided, separation 1-5mm inflow = 50 l/min Rating Rating Rating RMR 5 10 4 34

The calculated basic RMR is 34. It falls in rock class D which indicates the rock mass is of poor quality. Judgement often is needed to interpret the information given in the geological and hydrogeological investigation reports and in the borehole logs to match the descriptive terms in the RMR table. Closest match and approximation is to be used to determine each of the RMR parameter rating.

6.2.3 Extension of RMR Slope Mass Rating (SMR) The slope mass rating (SMR) is an extension of the RMR system applied to rock slope engineering. SMR value is obtained by adjust RMR value with orientation and excavation adjustments for slopes, i.e., SMR = RMR + (F1F2F3) + F4 where F1 = (1 - sin A)2 and A = angle between the strikes of the slope and the joint = |j - s|. F2 = (tan j)2 B = joint dip angle = j. For topping, F2 = 1.0 Value of F1, F2 and F3 are given in Table 6.2.3a. Table 6.2.3b gives the classification category of rock mass slope. Details on rock slope analysis and engineering including excavation methods and support and stabilisation will be covered in a later chapter dealing slope engineering.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

10

Table 6.2.3a

Adjustment rating of F1, F2, F3 and F4 for joints

Very favourable >30 >30 0.15 <20 0.15 1.00 Favourable 30~20 30~20 0.40 20~30 0.40 1.00 Fair 20~10 20~10 0.70 30~35 0.70 1.00 Very Unfavourable unfavourable 10~5 10~5 0.85 35~45 0.85 1.00 <5 <5 1.00 >45 1.00 1.00

Joint Orientation P |j - s| T |(j - s) - 180| F1 (for P & T) P |j| F2 (for P) F2 (for T)

P j - s >10 10~0 0 0~-10 <-10 T j + s <110 110~120 >120 --F3 (for P & T) 0 -6 -25 -50 -60 Method Natural slope Presplitting Smooth blasting Blasting/Ripping Deficient blasting F4 +15 +10 +8 0 -8

Table 6.2.3a
SMR 81~100 61~80 41~60 21~40 0~20 I II III IV V

Classification of Rock Slope according to SMT

Description Very good Good Fair Poor Very Poor Stability Failure Support None Spot Systematic Important / Corrective Re-excavation Completely stable None Stable Some blocks Some joints or Partially stable many wedges Palnar or large Unstable wedges Completely Large wedges or unstable circular failure

Class

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

11

6.3

Rock Tunnel Quality Q-System

6.3.1 Concept of the Q-System The Q-system was developed as a rock tunnelling quality index by the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI) (Barton et al 1974). The system was based on evaluation of a large number of case histories of underground excavation stability, and is an index for the determination of the tunnelling quality of a rock mass. The numerical value of this index Q is defined by: Q= RQD Jn Jr Ja Jw SRF

RQD is the Rock Quality Designation measuring the fracturing degree. Jn is the joint set number accounting for the number of joint sets. Jr is the joint roughness number accounting for the joint surface roughness. Ja is the joint alteration number indicating the degree of weathering, alteration and filling. Jw is the joint water reduction factor accounting for the problem from groundwater pressure, and SRF is the stress reduction factor indicating the influence of in situ stress. Q value is considered as a function of only three parameters which are crude measures of: (a) Block size: RQD / Jn (b) Inter-block shear strength Jr / Ja (c) Active stress Jw / SRF Parameters and rating of the Q system is given in Table 6.3.1a. The classification system gives a Q value which indicates the rock mass quality, shown in Table 6.3.1b. Q value is applied to estimate the support measure for a tunnel of a given dimension and usage, as shown in Figure 6.3.1a. Equivalent dimension is used in the figure and ESR is given in Table 6.3.1c. Equivalent dimension, De = Excavation span, diameter or height (m) Excavation Support Ratio (ESR)

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

12

Table 6.3.1a

Rock mass classification Q system

1. Rock Quality Designation RQD A Very Poor 0 25 B Poor 25 50 C Fair 50 75 D Good 75 90 E Excellent 90 100 Note: (i) Where RQD is reported or measured as 10 (including 0), a nominal value of 10 is used to evaluate Q. (ii) RQD interval of 5, i.e., 100, 95, 90, etc., are sufficiently accurate. 2. Joint Set Number A Massive, no or few joints B One joint set C One joint set plus random joints D Two joint set E Two joint set plus random joints F Three joint set G Three joint set plus random joints H Four or more joint sets, heavily jointed J Crushed rock, earthlike Note: (i) For intersections, use (3.0 Jn). (ii) For portals, use (2.0 Jn). Jn 0.5 1 2 3 4 6 9 12 15 20

3. Joint Roughness Number Jr (a) Rock-wall contact, and (b) Rock wall contact before 10 cm shear A Discontinuous joints 4 B Rough or irregular, undulating 3 C Smooth, undulating 2 D Slickensided, undulating 1.5 E Rough or irregular, planar 1.5 F Smooth, planar 1.0 G Slickensided, planar 0.5 Note: (i) Descriptions refer to small and intermediate scale features, in that order. (c) No rock-wall contact when sheared H Zone containing clay minerals thick enough to prevent rock-wall contact 1.0 J Sandy, gravelly or crushed zone thick enough to prevent rock-wall contact 1.0 Note: (ii) Add 1.0 if the mean spacing of the relevant joint set 3 m. (iii) Jr = 0.5 can be used for planar slickensided joints having lineations, provided the lineations are oriented for minimum strength. 4. Joint Alteration Number (a) Rock-wall contact (no mineral fillings, only coatings) A Tight healed, hard, non-softening, impermeable filling, i.e., quartz or epidote B Unaltered joint walls, surface staining only C Slightly altered joint walls. Non-softening mineral coating, sandy particles, clay-free disintegrated rock, etc. D Silty- or sandy-clay coatings, small clay fraction (nonsoftening) E Softening or low friction mineral coatings, i.e., kaolinite or mica. Also chlorite, talc, gypsum, graphite, etc., and small r approx. 25 35 25 30 20 25 8 16 Ja 0.75 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications quantities of swelling clays (b) F G Rock wall contact before 10 cm shear (thin mineral fillings) Sandy particles, clay-free disintegrated rock, etc. Strongly over-consolidated non-softening clay mineral fillings (continuous, but < 5 mm thickness) H Medium or low over-consolidated softening clay mineral fillings (continuous, but < 5 mm thickness) J Swelling-clay fillings, i.e., montmorillonite (continuous, but < 5 mm thickness). Value of Ja depends on percent of swelling clay size particles, and access to water, etc. (c) No rock-wall contact when sheared (thick mineral fillings) K, L, Zones or bands of disintegrated or crushed rock and clay M (see G, H, J for description of clay condition) N Zones or bands of silty- or sandy-clay, small clay fraction (non-softening) O, P, Thick, continuous zones or bands of clay (see G, H, J for R clay condition description) 5. A

13

25 30 16 24 12 16 6 12

4.0 6.0 8.0 8 12

6 24 6 24

6, 8, or 8 12 5 10, 13, or 13 20

Joint Water Reduction Factor Water pressure Jw Dry excavation or minor inflow, i.e., < 5 l/min < 1 (kg/cm2) 1.0 locally B Medium inflow or pressure, occasional outwash of 1 2.5 0.66 joint fillings C Large inflow or high pressure in competent rock 2.5 10 0.5 with unfilled joints D Large inflow or high pressure, considerable outwash 2.5 10 0.33 of joint fillings E Exceptionally high inflow or water pressure at > 10 0.2 0.1 blasting, decaying with time F Exceptionally high inflow or water pressure > 10 (kg/cm2) 0.1 0.05 continuing without noticeable decay Note: (i) Factors C to F are crude estimates. Increase Jw if drainage measures are installed. (ii) Special problems caused by ice formation are not considered. 6. Stress Reduction Factor SRF (a) Weakness zones intersecting excavation, which may cause loosening of rock mass when tunnel is excavated A Multiple occurrences of weakness zones containing clay or chemically 10 disintegrated rock, very loose surrounding rock (any depth) B Single weakness zone containing clay or chemically disintegrated rock 5 (depth of excavation 50 m) C Single weakness zone containing clay or chemically disintegrated rock 2.5 (depth of excavation > 50 m) D Multiple shear zones in competent rock (clay-free) (depth of excavation 7.5 50 m) E Single shear zone in competent rock (clay-free) (depth of excavation 50 5 m) F Single shear zone in competent rock (clay-free) (depth of excavation > 50 2.5 m) G Loose, open joint, heavily jointed (any depth) 5 Note: (i) Reduce SRF value by 25-50% if the relevant shear zones only influence but not intersect the excavation.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

14

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

15

(b) H J K

Competent rock, rock stress problems Low stress, near surface, open joints Medium stress, favourable stress condition

c / 1 > 200 200 10

10 5 0.5 2 High stress, very tight structure. Usually favourable to stability, may be unfavourable to wall stability L Moderate slabbing after > 1 hour in massive rock 53 0.5 - 0.65 5 50 M Slabbing and rock burst after a few minutes in 32 0.65 1 50 200 massive rock N Heavy rock burst (strain-burst) and immediate <2 >1 200 400 dynamic deformation in massive rock Note: (ii) For strongly anisotropic virgin stress field (if measured): when 5 1 / 3 10, reduce c to 0.75 c; when 1 / 3 > 10, reduce c to 0.5 c; where c is unconfined compressive strength, 1 and 3 are major and minor principal stresses, and is maximum tangential stress (estimated from elastic theory). (iii) Few cases records available where depth of crown below surface is less than span width. Suggest SRF increase from 2.5 to 5 for such cases (see H). (c) Squeezing rock: plastic flow in incompetent rock under the / c SRF influence of high rock pressure O Mild squeezing rock pressure 15 5 10 P Heavy squeezing rock pressure 5 10 20 Note: (vi) Cases of squeezing rock may occur for depth H > 350 Q1/3. Rock mass compressive strength can be estimated from Q = 7 Q1/3 (MPa), where = rock density in g/cm3. (d) Swelling rock: chemical swelling activity depending on presence of water SRF R Mile swelling rock pressure 5 10 S Heavy swell rock pressure 10 15 Note: Jr and Ja classification is applied to the joint set or discontinuity that is least favourable for stability both from the point of view of orientation and shear resistance.

/ c < 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.3 0.4

SRF 2.5 1

Table 6.3.1b

Rock mass quality rating according to Q values Class A A A B C D E F G Rock mass quality Exceptionally Good Extremely Good Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor Extremely Poor Exceptionally Poor

Q-value 400 ~ 1000 100 ~ 400 40 ~ 100 10 ~ 40 4 ~ 10 1~4 0.1 ~ 1 0.01 ~ 0.1 0.001 ~ 0.01

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

16

Figure 6.3.1a

Support design based on Q value

Table 6.3.1c

Excavation Support Ratio (ESR) for various tunnel categories Excavation Category ESR 35 1.6 1.3 1.0 0.8

A B C D E

Temporary mine openings. Permanent mine openings, water tunnels for hydro-electric projects, pilot tunnels, drifts and headings for large excavations. Storage rooms, water treatment plants, minor road and railway tunnels, surge chambers and access tunnels in hydro-electric project. Underground power station caverns, major road and railway tunnels, civil defense chamber, tunnel portals and intersections. Underground nuclear power stations, railway stations, sports and public facilities, underground factories.

6.3.2 Examples of Using the Q-System (a) A granite rock mass containing 3 joint sets, average RQD is 88%, average joint spacing is 0.24 m, joint surfaces are generally stepped and rough, tightly closed and unweathered with occasional stains observed, the excavation surface is wet but not dripping, average rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 160 MPa, the tunnel is excavated to 150 m below the ground where no abnormal high in situ stress is expected. Selection of Q parameters and calculation of Q-value are shown below:
RQD Joint set number Joint roughness number Joint alteration number Joint water factor Stress reduction factor Q 88% 3 sets rough stepped (undulating) unaltered, some stains wet only (dry excavation or minor inflow) c/1 = 160/(1500.027) = 39.5 (88/9) (3/1) (1/1) RQD Jn Jr Ja Jw SRF 88 9 3 1 1 1 44

The calculated Q-value is 29, and the rock mass is classified as good quality.

(b) A sandstone rock mass, fractured by 2 joint sets plus random fractures, average RQD is 70%, average joint spacing is 0.11 m, joint surfaces are slightly rough, highly weathered with stains and weathered surface but no clay found on surface, joints are

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

17

generally in contact with apertures generally less than 1 mm, average rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 85 MPa, the tunnel is to be excavated at 80 m below ground level and the groundwater table is 10 m below the ground surface. Selection of Q parameters and calculation of Q-value are shown below:
RQD Joint set number Joint roughness number Joint alteration number Joint water factor Stress reduction factor Q 70% 2 sets plus random slightly rough (rough planar) highly weathered only stain, (altered nonsoftening mineral coating) 70 m water head = 7 kg/cm2 = 7 bars c/1 = 85/(800.027) = 39.3 (70/6) (1.5/2) (0.5/1) RQD Jn Jr Ja Jw SRF 70 6 1.5 2 0.5 1 4.4

The calculated Q-value is 4.4, and the rock mass is classified as fair quality.

(c) A highly fractured siltstone rock mass, found to have 2 joint sets and many random fractures, average RQD is 41%, joints appears continuous observed in tunnel, joint surfaces are slickensided and undulating, and are highly weathered, joint are separated by about 3-5 mm, filled with clay, average rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 65 MPa, inflow per 10 m tunnel length is observed at approximately 50 litre/minute, with considerable outwash of joint fillings. The tunnel is at 220 m below ground. Selection of Q parameters and calculation of Q-value are shown below:
RQD Joint set number Joint roughness number Joint alteration number Joint water factor Stress reduction factor Q 41% 2 sets plus random slickensided and undulating highly weathered filled with 3-5 mm clay large inflow with considerable outwash c/1 = 65/(2200.027) = 11 (41/6) (1.5/4) (0.33/1) RQD Jn Jr Ja Jw SRF 41 6 1.5 4 0.33 1 0.85

The calculated Q-value is 0.85, and the rock mass is classified as very poor quality. Again, judgement is frequently needed to interpret the descriptions given in the geological and hydrogeological investigation reports and in the borehole logs to match the descriptive terms in the Q table. Closest match and approximation is to be used to determine each of the Q parameter rating.

6.3.3 Extension of Q-System QTBM for Mechanised Tunnelling

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

18

Q-system was extended to a new QTBM system for predicting penetration rate (PR) and advance rate (AR) for tunnelling using tunnel boring machine (TBM) in 1999 (Barton 1999). The method is based on the Q-system and average cutter force in relations to the appropriate rock mass strength. Orientation of joint structure is accounted for, together with the rock material strength. The abrasive or nonabrasive nature of the rock is incorporated via the cutter life index (CLI). Rock stress level is also considered. The new parameter QTBM is to estimate TBM performance during tunnelling. The components of the QTBM are as follows: QTBM = RQD0 Jr Jn Ja q Jw 209 m 20 SRF F10 CLI 20 5

where RQD0= RQD (%) measured in the tunnelling direction, Jn, Jr, Ja, Jw, and SRF ratings are the same parameters in the original Q-system, m is the rock mass strength (MPa) estimated from a complicated equation including the Q-value measured in the tunnel direction, F is the average cutter load (ton) through the same zone, CLI is the cutter life index, q is the quartz content (%) in rock mineralogy, and is the induced biaxial stress (MPa) on tunnel face in the same zone. The constants 20 in the m term, 20 in the CLI term and 5 in the term are normalising constants. The experiences on the application of QTBM varies between projects. Example of using the QTBM is given in Figure 6.2.3a. It appears that the correlation between QTBM and Advanced Rate is not consistent and varies with a large margin. Rock mass classification systems, including RMR and Q, when developed, were intended to classify rock mass quality to arrive a suitable support design. The systems were not meant for the design of excavation methodology. In general, with increasing of rock mass quality, penetration decreases. However, very poor rock mass does not facilitate penetration. Parameters in those rock mass classifications were related to support design, they were not selected to describe rock mass boreability. Although QTBM has added a number of parameters to reflect cutting force and wear, the emphasis is obviously not be justified. The original rock mass classifications are independent of TBM characteristics, while penetration however is a result of interaction between rock mass properties and TBM machine parameters (Zhao 2006).

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

19

6.4

Geological Strength Index GSI System and Others

6.4.1 GSI System The Geological Strength Index (GSI) was introduced by Hoek in 1994. It was aimed to estimate the reduction in rock mass strength for different geological conditions. This system is presented in Tables 6.4.1a. The system gives a GSI value estimated from rock mass structure and rock discontinuity surface condition. The direct application of GSI value is to estimate the parameters in the Hoek-Brown strength criterion for rock masses. Although it was not aimed at to be a rock mass classification, the GSI value does in fact reflect the rock mass quality. GSI system has been modified and updated in the recent years, mainly to cover more complex geological features, such as sheared zones. The use of GSI requires careful examination and understanding of engineering geological features of the rock mass. Rock mass structure given in the chart is general description and there ma ybe many cases that does not directly match the description. In general, the following equivalent between rock mass structural descriptions of blocky to the block size description is suggested below. However, simple block size description does not include geological structural features, such as folds and shear zones. GSI Description Blocky Very block Blocky/Folded/Faulted Crushed ISRM Designation Medium to large blocks Small to medium blocks Very small to small blocks Crushed rock Jv, joints/m3 < 10 10 30 > 30 > 60 RQD, % 90 ~ 100 60 ~ 90 30 ~ 60 < 30

GSI does not include the parameter of rock strength, as GSI was initiated to be a tool to estimate rock mass strength with the Hoek-Brown strength criterion. In the HoekBrown criterion, rock material uniaxial strength is used as a base parameter to estimate rock mass uniaxial strength as well as triaxial strengths of rock material and rock mass. The use of GSI to estimate rock mass strength is given later in the section dealing with rock mass strength. GSI system dis not suggest a direct correlation between rock mass quality and GSI value. However, it is suggested that GSI can be related to RMR by GSI = RMR 5, for reasobale good quality rock mass. An approximate classification of rock mass quality and GSI is therefore suggested in Table 6.4.1b, base on the correlation between RMR and GSI.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

20

Table 6.4.1a

Geological Strength Index (GSI)

VERY GOOD very rough, fresh, unweathered Joint surfaces POOR Slickensided, highly weathered surfaces with compact coating or fillings or angular fragments.
30

GEOLOGICAL STRENGTH INDEX (GSI) JOINT SURFACE CONDITION According to rock mass structure and discontinuity surface conditions observed on the rock mass at site, select the appropriate box in this chart. Estimate the average value of the GSI from the contours.

ROCK MASS STRUCTURE BLOCKY very well interlocked undisturbed rock mass consisting of cubical blocks formed by three orthogonal joint sets VERY BLOCKY interlocked, partially disturbed rock mass with multi-faced angular blocks formed by for or more joint sets. BLOCKY/FOLDED folded and faulted with many intersecting discontinuties forming angular blocks. CRUSHED poorly interlocked, heavily broken rock mass with a mixture of angular and rounded blocks.

Decreasing of Surface Quality

80

Decreasing Interlocking of Rock Blocks

70

60

50

40

20

Table 6.4.1b

Rock mass classes determined from GSI 76 95 Very good 56 75 Good 36 55 Fair 21 35 Poor < 20 Very poor

GSI Value Rock Mass Quality

VERY POOR Slickensided, highly weathered, surfaces with soft clay coating or filling
10

GOOD rough, slightly weathered, stained joint surfaces

FAIR Smooth, moderately weathered, and altered surfaces

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

21

6.4.2 Examples of Using the GSI System Examples of estimating GSI is given below, with the same rock masses used previously to estimate RMR and Q. (a) Granite rock mass containing 3 joint sets, average RQD is 88%, average joint spacing is 0.24 m, joint surfaces are generally stepped and rough, tightly closed and unweathered with occasional stains observed, the excavation surface is wet but not dripping, average rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 160 MPa, the tunnel is excavated to 150 m below the ground where no abnormal high in situ stress is expected. Refer to the GSI chart, Rock Mass Structure for the above granite is blocky, and Joint Surface Condition is very good. Therefore GSI is 755. The rock mass is classified as good to very good quality. (b) A sandstone rock mass, fractured by 2 joint sets plus random fractures, average RQD is 70%, average joint spacing is 0.11 m, joint surfaces are slightly rough, highly weathered with stains and weathered surface but no clay found on surface, joints are generally in contact with apertures generally less than 1 mm, average rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 85 MPa, the tunnel is to be excavated at 80 m below ground level and the groundwater table is 10 m below the ground surface. Refer to the GSI chart, Rock Mass Structure for the above sandstone is very blocky, and Joint Surface Condition is fair to poor. Therefore GSI is 405. The rock mass is classified as fair quality.

(c) A highly fractured siltstone rock mass, found to have 2 joint sets and many random fractures, average RQD is 41%, joints appears continuous observed in tunnel, joint surfaces are slickensided and undulating, and are highly weathered, joint are separated by about 3-5 mm, filled with clay, average rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 65 MPa, inflow per 10 m tunnel length is observed at approximately 50 litre/minute, with considerable outwash of joint fillings. The tunnel is at 220 m below ground. Refer to the GSI chart, Rock Mass Structure for the above siltstone is blocky/folded/faulted, and Joint Surface Condition is very poor. Therefore GSI is 205. The rock mass is classified as very poor to poor quality. It is advised that while selecting an average value of GSI, it is perhaps better to select a range of the GSI value for that rock mass. Summary of RMR, Q and GSI from the above three examples are given below, RMR 76 52 34 Quality G F P Q 29 4.4 0.85 Quality G F VP GSI 75 40 20 Quality G F VP

(a) Granite rock mass (b) Sandstone rock mass (c) Siltstone rock mass

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

22

6.4.3 Correlation and Comparison between Q, RMR and GSI Correlation between Q and RMR are found to be, RMR = 9 lnQ + A A varies between 26 and 62, and average of A is 44. comparison and correlation between RMR and Q. Figure 6.4.3a shows the

Figure 6.4.3a

Correlation between RMR and Q values.

Several other correlation equations have been proposed, including RMR = 13.5 logQ + 43. They are all in the general form of semi-log equation. For generally competent rock masses with GSI > 25, the value of GSI can be related to Rock Mass Rating RMR value as, GSI = RMR 5 RMR is the basic RMR value by setting the Groundwater rating at 15 (dry), and without adjustment for joint orientation. For very poor quality rock masses, the value of RMR is very difficult to estimate and the correlation between RMR and GSI is no longer reliable. Consequently, RMR classification should not be used for estimating the GSI values for poor quality rock masses. It should be noted that each classification uses a set of parameters that are different from other classifications. For that reason, estimate the value of one classification from another is not advisable.

6.4.3 Other Classification Systems Several other classification approaches have been proposed. In section, a few will be briefly discussed due to their unique application in certain aspect. (a) Rock Mass Number, N Rock Mass Number (N) is the rock mass quality Q value when SRF is set at 1 (i.e., normal condition, stress reduction is not considered). N can be computed as, N = (RQD/Jn) (Jr/Ja) (Jw)

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

23

This system is used because the difficult in obtaining SRF in the Q-system. It has been noticed that SRF in the Q-system is not sensitive in rock engineering design. the value assign to SRF cover too great range. For example, SRF = 1 for c/1 = 10~200, i.e., for a rock with c = 50 MPa, in situ stresses of 0.25 to 5 MPa yield the same SRF value. The importance of in situ stress on the stability of underground excavation is insufficiently represented in the Q-system. Another application of N number is to the rock squeezing condition. Squeezing has been noted in the Q-system but is not sufficiently dealt, due to the special behaviour and nature of the squeezing ground. The use of N in squeezing rock mass classification will be presented in a later section in this chapter.

(b) Rock Mass Index, RMi Rock Mass Index is proposed as an index characterising rock mass strength as a construction material. It is calculated by the following equation, RMi = c Jp where c is the uniaxial compressive strength of the intact rock material, and Jp is the jointing parameter accounting for 4 joint characteristics, namely, joint density (or block size), joint roughness, joint alteration and joint size. Jp is in fact a reduction factor representing the effects of jointing on the strength of rock mass. Jp = 1 for a intact rock, Jp = 0 for a crushed rock masses.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

24

6.5

Rock Mass Strength and Rock Mass Quality

6.5.1 Strength of Rock Mass As discussed earlier, strength and deformation properties of a rock mass are much governed by the existence of joints. In another word, the mechanical properties of a rock mass is also related to the quality of the rock mass. In general, a rock mass of good quality (strong rock, few joints and good joint surface quality) will have a higher strength and high deformation modulus than that of a poor rock mass.

6.5.2 Hoek-Brown Strength Criterion of Rock Mass Hoek and Brown criterion discussed in Chapter 4 is not only for rock materials. It is also applicable to rock masses (Figure 6.5.2a). The Hoek-Brown criterion for rock mass is described by the following equation: 1 = 3 + ( mb 3 ci ci ci or 1 = 3 + (mb 3 ci + s ci2)a + s)a

Figure 6.5.2a

Applicability of Hoek-Brown criterion for rock material and rock masses.

The equation above is the generalised Hoek-Brown criterion of rock mass. The HoekBrown criterion for intact rock material is a special form of the generalised equation when s =1 and a = 0.5. For intact rock, mb becomes mi, i.e., 1 = 3 + ( mi 3 + 1)0.5 ci ci ci Note in the Hoek-Brown criterion, ci is consistently referred to the uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock material in the Hoek-Brown criterion for rock material and for rock mass. In the generalised Hoek-Brown criterion, 1 is the strength of the rock mass at a confining pressure 3. ci is the uniaxial strength of the intact rock in the rock mass. Parameter a is generally equal to 0.5. Constants mb and s are parameters that changes with rock type and rock mass quality. Table 6.5.2a gives an earlier suggestion of mb and s values.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

25

Table 6.5.2a

Relation between rock mass quality and Hoek.Brown constants

Carbonate rocks with well developed crystal cleavage (dolomite, limestone, marble) Lithified argillaceous rocks (mudstone, siltstone, shale, slate) (normal to cleavage) Arenaceous rocks with strong crystals and poorly developed crystal cleavage (sandstone, quartzite) mi = 15.0 s = 1.0 Fine grained polyminerallic igneous crystalline rocks (andesite, dolerite, basalt, rhyolite) mi = 17.0 s = 1.0 Coarse grained polyminerallic igneous and metamorphic crystalline rocks (gabbro, gneiss, granit, diorite) mi = 25.0 s = 1.0

Hoek-Brown Failure Criterion 1/c = 3/c + (mb 3/c + s)0.5

Intact rock material Laboratory size specimens free from joints RMR = 100 ,Q = 500 Very good quality rock mass Tightly interlocking undisturbed rock with unweathered joints spaced at 3 m RMR = 85, Q = 100 Good quality rock mass Fresh to slightly weathered rock, slightly disturbed with joints spaced at 1 to 3 m RMR = 65, Q = 10 Fair quality rock mass Several sets of moderately weathered joints spaced at 0.3 to 1 m RMR = 44, Q = 1.0 Poor quality rock mass Numerous weathered joints spaced at 30 to 500 mm with some gouge clean waste rock RMR = 23, Q = 0.1 Very poor quality rock mass Numerous heavily weathered joints spaced at <30 mm with gouge waste with fines RMR = 3, Q = 0.01

mi = 7.0 s = 1.0

mi = 10.0 s = 1.0

mb = 3.5 s = 0.1

mb = 5.0 s = 0.1

mb = 7.5 s = 0.1

mb = 8.5 s = 0.1

mb = 12.5 s = 0.1

mb = 0.7 s = 0.004

mb = 1.0 s = 0.004

mb = 1.5 s = 0.004

mb = 1.7 s = 0.004

mb = 2.5 s = 0.004

mb = 0.14 s = 0.0001

mb = 0.20 s = 0.0001

mb = 0.30 s = 0.0001

mb = 0.34 s = 0.0001

mb = 0.50 s = 0.0001

mb = 0.04 s = 0.00001

mb = 0.05 s = 0.00001

mb = 0.08 s = 0.00001

mb = 0.09 s = 0.00001

mb = 0.13 s = 0.00001

mb = 0.007 s=0

mb = 0.01 s=0

mb = 0.015 s=0

mb = 0.017 s=0

mb = 0.025 s=0

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

26

Development and application of the Hoek-Brown criterion lead to better definition of the parameters mb and s. Table 6.5.2b presents the latest definition of mi values for the intact rock materials, according to different rocks.

Table 6.5.2b
Rock Type Intrusive Igneous Extrusive Volcanic Sedimentary Clastic

Values of constant mi for intact rock in Hoek-Brown criterion

Granite 323 Granodiorite 293 Rhyolite (165) Rock Name and mi Values Diorite 255 Gabbro 273 Dolerite (165) Norite 225 Basalt (165) Andesite 255 Diabase (165) Agglomerate Tuff (135) (193) Sandstone 174 Siltstone 72 Marls (72) Peridotite (255) Porphyries (205)

Carbonate Chemical Organic Foliated Slightly Foliated Non Foliated

Conglomerate (418) Breccia (416) Crystalline limestone (123)

Mudstone 42 Shale (62) Dolomite (93) Chalk 72 Slate 74

Metamorphic

Gneiss 285

Sparitic limestone Micritic limestone (102) (92) Gypsum 82 Anhydrite 122 Coal (812) Schist 123 Phyllites (73)

Migmatite (293) Amphibolite 266 Quartzite 203 Meta-sandstone (19 3) Hornfels (194) Marble 93

The values in the above table are suggestive. As seen from the table, variation of mi value for each rock can be as great as 18. If triaxial tests have been conducted, the value of mi should be calculated from the test results. Once the Geological Strength Index has been estimated, the parameters which describe the rock mass strength characteristics, are calculated as follows, mb = mi exp ( GSI 100 ) 28

For GSI > 25, i.e. rock masses of good to reasonable quality, the original Hoek-Brown criterion is applicable with, s = exp ( and a = 0.5 GSI 100 ) 9

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

27

For GSI < 25, i.e. rock masses of very poor quality, s = 0, and a in the Hoek-Brown criterion is no longer equal to 0.5. Value of a can be estimated from GSI by the following equation, a = 0.65 GSI 200

Uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass is the value of 1 when 3 is zero. From the Hoek-Brown criterion, when 3 = 0, it gives the uniaxial compressive strength as, 1 = sa ci Clearly, for rock masses of very poor quality, the uniaxial compressive strength of the rock masses equal to zero. Example of using the Hoek-Brown equation to determine rock mass strength is given below by the same three examples used for determining the rock mass qualities RMR, Q and GSI. Calculation in the example uses average values only, although in practice, range of values should be used to give upper and lower bounds. (a) Granite rock mass, with material uniaxial strength 150 MPa, mean GSI 75. From the mi table, mi given for granite is approximately 32. mb = mi exp[(GSI 100)/28] = 13.1 s = exp[(GSI 100)/9] = 0.062 GSI > 25, a = 0.5 The Hoek-Brown equation for the granite rock mass is, 1 = 3 + (mb 3 ci + s ci2)a 1 = 3 + (1956 3 + 1395)0.5 Uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass is, when 3 = 0, cm = 13950.5 = 37.3 MPa

(b) Sandstone rock mass, with material uniaxial strength 85 MPa, mean GSI 40. From the mi table, mi given for sandstone is approximately 17. mb = mi exp[(GSI 100)/28] = 1.99

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

28

s = exp[(GSI 100)/9] = 0.0013 GSI > 25, a = 0.5 Similarly the uniaxial compressive strength is, cm = 3 + (169 3 + 9.4)0.5 = 9.40.5 = 3.1 MPa

(c) Siltstone rock mass, with material uniaxial strength 65 MPa, mean GSI 20. From the mi table, mi given for siltstone is approximately 7. mb = mi exp[(GSI 100)/28] = 0.40 s = exp[(GSI 100)/9] = 0.00014 GSI < 25, a = 0.65 (GSI/200) = 0.65 (20/200) = 0.55 Similarly the uniaxial compressive strength is, cm = 3 + (26 3 + 0.59)0.55 = 0.590.55 = 0.75 MPa

6.5.4 Correlations between Rock Mass Quality and Mechanical Properties Correlations between rock mass strength and rock mass quality are reflected in Table 6.5.2a and the Hoek-Brown criterion relating GSI. The better rock mass quality gives high rock mass strength. When the rock mass is solid and massive with few joints, the rock mass strength is close to the strength of intact rock material. When the rock mass is very poor, i.e., RMR < 23, Q < 0.1, or GSI < 25, the rock mass has very low uniaxial compressive strength close to zero. Attempts have also been made to correlated deformation modulus of the rock mass with rock mass quality. In situ rock mass modulus (Em) can be estimated from the Q and the RMR systems, in the equations below, Em = 25 logQ, Em = 10 (Q c/100)1/3 Em = 10(15 logQ+40)/40 Em = 2 RMR 100, for RMR > 50 for Q > 1

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

29

Em = 10(RMR10)/40

for 20 < RMR < 85

The above Em-RMR equations are generally for competent rock mass with RMR greater than 20. For poor rocks, the equation below has been proposed, Em = ( ci 0.5 (GSI/40 0.25) ) 10 100

For rock mass with ci < 100 MPa. The equation is obtained by substituting GSI for RMR in the original Em-RMR equation. The Em-GSI equation indicates that modulus Em is reduced progressively as the value of ci falls below 100. This reduction is based upon the reasoning that the deformation of better quality rock masses is controlled by the discontinuities while, for poorer quality rock masses, the deformation of the intact rock pieces contributes to the overall deformation process.

6.5.4 Relationship between Hoek-Brown and Mohr-Coulomb Criteria There is no direct correlation between the linear Mohr-Coulomb Criterion and the nonlinear Hoek-Brown Criterion defined by the two equations. Often, the input for a design software or numerical modelling required for rock masses are in terms of MohrCoulomb parameters c and . Attempts have been made by Hoek and Brown to estimate c and from the Hoek-Brown equation. At the same time, they caution the user that is a major problem to obtain c and from the Hoek-Brown equation. If a series tests have been conducted on the rock mass, obviously test results should be used directly to obtain parameters c and , using for example, plotting the Mohr circle and fitting with the best strength envelope, where c and can be readily calculated Common problems were there is no or limited test results on rock mass. The suggested approach to obtain rock mass Mohr-Coulomb parameters c and is by generate a series 13 results by the Hoek-Brown equation. Then plotting the Mohr circle using the generated 13 data and fitting with the best linear envelope, where c and can be readily calculated. Care must be taken when deciding the best linear line in fitting the Mohr circles. It depends on the stress region of the engineering application. For a tunnel problem, if the depth and stress range is known, the line should be fitting best for the Mohr circles in that stress region. For a slope problem, the stress region may vary from 0 to some level of stress, and the fitting a line at low stress level (where the curvature is the greatest for the non-linear Hoek-Brown strength envelope) is very sensitive to the stress level. Also, pore pressure needs to be considered as this affects the effective stress level.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

30

6.6

Squeezing Behaviour of Rock Mass

6.6.1 Squeezing Phenomenon ISRM (Barla 1995) defines that squeezing of rock is the time dependent large deformation, which occurs around a tunnel and other underground openings, and is essentially associated with creep caused by exceeding shear strength. Deformation may terminate during construction or may continue over a long time period. The degree of squeezing often is classified to mild, moderate and high, by the conditions below, (i) Mild squeezing: closure 1-3% of tunnel diameter; (ii) Moderate squeezing: closure 3-5% of tunnel diameter; (iii) High squeezing: closure > 5% of tunnel diameter. Behaviour of rock squeezing is typically represented by rock mass squeezes plastically into the tunnel and the phenomenon is time dependent. Rate of squeezing depends on the degree of over-stress. Usually the rate is high at initial stage, say, several centimetres of tunnel closure per day for the first 1-2 weeks of excavation. Closure rate reduces with time. Squeezing may continue for years in exceptional cases. Squeezing may occur at shallow depths in weak and poor rock masses such as mudstone and shale. Rock masses of competent rock of poor rock mass quality at great depth (under high cover) may also suffer from squeezing.

6.6.2 Squeezing Estimation by Rock Mass Classification Based on case studies, squeezing may be identified from rock class classification Q-value and overburden thickness (H). As shown in Figure 6.6.2a, the division between squeezing and non-squeezing condition is by a line H = 350 Q1/3, where H is in metres. Above the line, i.e., H > 350 Q1/3, squeezing condition may occur. Below the line, i.e., H < 350 Q1/3, the ground is of generally non-squeezing condition.

Figure 6.6.2a Predicting squeezing ground using Q-value

Another approach predicting squeezing is by using the Rock Mass Number (N). As discussed in the previous section, N is the Q-value when SRF is set to be 1. The parameter allow one to separate in situ stress effects from rock mass quality. In situ stress, which is the external cause of squeezing is dealt separated by considering the overburden depth. From Figure 6.6.2b, the line separating non-squeezing from squeezing condition is, H = (275 N1/3) B0.1 Where H is the tunnel depth or overburden in metres and B is the tunnel span or diameter in metres.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

31

Squeezing ground condition is presented by H > (275 N1/3) B0.1. It is also possible to characterise the degree of squeezing base on the same figure. Mild squeezing occurs when (275 N1/3) B0.1 < H < (450 N1/3) B0.1 Moderate squeezing occurs when (450 N1/3) B0.1 < H < (630 N1/3) B0.1 High squeezing occurs when H > (630 N1/3) B0.1. Theoretically, squeezing conditions around a tunnel opening can occur when, > Strength = cm + Px A/2 where is the tangential stress at the tunnel opening, cm is the uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass, Px is the in situ stress in the tunnel axis direction, and A is a rock parameter proportion to friction. Squeezing may not occur in hard rocks with high values of parameter A. The above equation can be written in the form below for a circular tunnel under hydrostatic in situ stress field, with overburden stress P, P=H, 2 P > cm + P A/2 ISRM classifies squeezing rock mass and ground condition in Table 6.6.2a. Table 6.6.2a Suggested predictions of squeezing conditions / cm (ISRM) < 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 > 4.0 cm / H (Barla) > 1.0 0.4 1.0 0.2 0.4 < 0.2 cm / insitu (Hoek) > 0.35 0.2 0.35 0.15 0.2 < 0.15

Degree of Squeezing Non squeezing Mild squeezing Moderate squeezing High squeezing

The prediction equations for squeezing require the measurements of in situ stress and rock mass strength. Overburden stress can be estimated from the overburden depth and rock unit weight. Uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass can be estimated from the Hoek-Brown criterion with rock mass quality assessment (e.g., GSI). Studies carried out by Hoek (2000) indicate that squeezing can in fact start at rock mass strength / in situ stress ratio of 0.3. A prediction curve was proposed by Hoek and reproduced in Figure 6.6.2c, relating tunnel closure to rock mass strength/in situ stress ratio. The prediction curve was compared with tunnel squeezing case histories.

Figure 6.6.2c

Squeezing prediction curve and comparison with case histories.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

32

6.7

Laboratory and Field Characterisation of Rock Mass

6.7.1 Descriptions of Rock Mass and Matrix

6.7.2 Rock Mass Strength

6.7.3 Rock Mass Deformation Modulus

6.7.4 Groundwater Flow and Permeability

6.7.5 In Situ Stress

6.5.2a

6.1.2a

6.1.3a

6.1.3b

6.2.1a

6.3.1a

6.4.3a

6.5.2a

6.6.2a

6.6.2b

Case Histories Strength values considered reliable Strength values estimated

6.6.2c