Systems Systems x Rock Mass Rating (RMR) System Rock Mass Rating (RMR) System x The RMR system was developed in 1973 in South Africa by one of the pioneers of rock mass classification, Prof. Z.T. Bienawski. The advantage of his system is that only a few basic parameters relating to the geometry and mechanical conditions of the rock mass are used. In the case of the RMR system, these are: a) The uniaxial compressive strength of the intact rock; b) Rock quality designation (RQD); c) Discontinuity spacing; d) Condition of discontinuity surfaces; e) Groundwater conditions; f) Orientation of discontinuities relative to the engineered structure. RMR System RMR System x The first grouping (Section A) includes the first five classification parameters. Since the various parameters are not equally important for the overall classification of a rock mass, importance ratings are allocated to the different value ranges of the parameters, a higher ranking indicating better rock mass conditions. RMR System RMR System x parameter rating charts are sometimes used to help with borderline cases and also to remove the impression that abrupt changes occur between categories. RMR System RMR System x In the second grouping (Section B), there are ratings for discontinuity characteristics. Sections C and D reflect the adverse nature discontinuity angles may have with respect to excavation direction and different engineering applications. RMR System RMR System x In Sections E and F, the rock mass classes are given with a description of the rock mass conditions, and with estimates of tunnel stand-up time and maximum stable rock span, and the Mohr-Coulomb strength parameters (c and ) for the rock mass. RMR System RMR System x example adj ustments to the RMR f or mining applications. Q Q- -System System x The Q-system of rock mass classification was developed in 1974 in Norway by Prof. N. Barton. The system was proposed on the basis of an analysis of 212 tunnel case histories from Scandinavia. In a similar way to the RMR system, the Q-rating is developed by assigning values to six parameters: 1) Rock quality designation (RQD); 2) Number of discontinuity sets; 3) Roughness of the most unfavourable discontinuity; 4) Degree of alteration or filling along the weakest discontinuity; 5) Water inflow; and; 6) Stress condition. Q Q- -System System x the motivation of presenting the Q- value in this f orm is to provide some method of interpretation f or the 3 constituent quotients. Q Q- -System System x The first quotient is related to the rock mass geometry. Here the Q-value increases with increasing RQD and decreasing number of discontinuity sets. Since RQD generally increases with decreasing number of discontinuity sets, the numerator and denominator of the quotient mutually reinforce one another. Q Q- - System System x The second quotient relates to inter-block shear strength with high values of this quotient representing better mechanical quality of the rock mass. Q Q- -System System x The third quotient is an environment factor incorporating water pressures and flows, the presence of shear zones, squeezing and swelling rocks and the in situ stress state. The quotient increases with decreasing water pressure and favourable in situ stress ratios. Applications of Classification Systems Applications of Classification Systems x Both of the classification systems described were developed for estimating the support necessary for tunnels excavated for civil engineering schemes.For example, the database for the RMR has involved over 351 case histories throughout its development. Applications of Classification Systems Applications of Classification Systems x 38 dif f erent support categories have been suggested by the authors of the Q- system based on the relationship between the index Q and the equivalent dimension of the excavation. Applications of Classification Systems Applications of Classification Systems x corresponding support guidelines f or Q- system suport categories 13- 16 (Q- Range 10 to 40 or good rock). Classification Systems and Rock Properties Classification Systems and Rock Properties x Since the rock mass properties, e.g. deformability and strength, are also functions of the intact rock and discontinuity properties, it follows that we may be able to use classification values to estimate the modulus and strength of rock masses. Empirical relations are available for both the RMR and Q-systems. Some examples include: E MASS = 2 x RMR 100 GPa (f or RMR>50) E MASS = 10 (RMR 10)/40 GPa (f or the entire RMR range) 10 log 10 Q < E MASS < 40 log 10 Q, with E MEAN = 25 log 10 Q SMR System SMR System x Attempts have been made to extend the classification system to rock slopes. Naturally, the six parameters utilized in the RMR system are relevant to slope stability, but the classification value needs to be adjusted for different engineering circumstances. This involved the consideration of the following factors: 1) F 1 associated with discontinuities striking parallel to the slope; 2) F 2 related to the discontinuity dip for planar failure; 3) F 3 concerning the slope angle compared to the discontinuity dip angle; and 4) F 4 relating to the method of excavation. Where: RMR SLOPE = RMR BASIC + (F 1 x F 2 x F 3 ) + F 4 SMR System SMR System x the SMR rating system. I n the same way, extensions to the RMR and Q- classif ication systems have also been made to estimate rippability, dredgeability, excavatability, and cavability.