Classification of rock mass:

RQD, RMR & Q systems

Rock mass classification systems are used for various

engineering design and stability analysis. These are based on
empirical relations between rock mass parameters.

Classification of rocks based on geological aspects are subjective:

igneous, sediment & metamorphic.

Rocks are also classified based on properties. This is to help in

understanding their characteristics as construction materials &
components of engineering structures thus, helping in design &
construction work.

For design & construction, objective classification (numerical

values) is more appropriate – classification of rock based on
prevailing weakness planes, number of joint set, & engineering
properties like strength, weathering grade & permeability.

1
Rock Quality Designation, RQD:
The most basic engineering classification introduced by
Deere (1964), is an index of assessing rock quality
quantitatively.

It is more sensitive index of the core quality than the core

recovery ((length of core/length of core barrel) × 100 %)

The RQD is a modified per cent core recovery which

incorporates only sound pieces of rock core that are 100
mm or greater in length along core axis.

RQD = {(Σ Xi) / (total length of core, L)} x 100%.

Xi = core length ≥ 100 mm
L = length of core recovered (1.5m if barrel is full)

Core samples obtained from rock drilling

2
Core sample obtained rock drilling

Wash boring machine

3
Wash boring machine

Wash boring machine

4
Method of obtaining RQD:

(1) Direct method:

CORE SAMPLES OF IN SITU ROCK MASS: ISRM recommends

a core size of at least NX size (54.7 mm dia.) drilled with double-
tube core barrel using diamond coring bit.

Artificial (not natural) fractures or joints (that occurs during

drilling) can be identified by close fitting (matched joint surface) of
cores and fresh (unstained) surfaces.

All the artificial joints are ignored while counting the core length
for RQD.

A slower drilling rate will also give a better RQD

5
 Correlation between RQD and Rock Mass Quality

RQD is perhaps the most commonly used method to

characterise the degree of jointing in borehole cores,
although this parameter also may implicitly include other
rock mass features like weathering and ‘core loss’.

(2) Indirect method:

SEISMIC PROPERTIES OF ROCK: The seismic survey

method makes use of the variations of elastic properties of
the rock strata that affect the velocity of the seismic waves
travelling through them, thus providing useful information
about the subsurface materials (e.g. cavities, dense rock,
jointed rock).

6
(2) Indirect method:

The following information of the rock masses can be

inferred from seismic data:

(a) Location & configuration of bed rock and geological

structures in the subsurface.

(b) The effect of discontinuities in rock masses may be

estimated by comparing the in situ compressional wave
velocity with sonic velocity of intact drill core obtained from
the same rock mass.

[Since in situ rock are fractured and jointed hence,

compressional wave velocity is lower compared to intact
core]

Based on seismic data of in situ rock mass and intact rock

sample, RQD can be estimated:

RQD (%) ≈ Velocity ratio

≈ (VF / VL)2 × 100

Where VF is in situ compressional wave velocity (obtained

from seismic refraction method in the field), and VL is
compressional wave velocity in intact rock core (obtained
from ultrasonic velocity test in laboratory).

7
Sonic velocity test on core sample (non-destructive
test) to give VL of rock sample in laboratory

8
(3) Indirect method:

VOLUMETRIC JOINT COUNT OF IN SITU ROCK MASS:

Where cores are not available, RQD may be estimated
from number of joints (discontinuities) per unit volume Jv.

A simple relationship which may used to convert Jv into

RQD for clay-free rock masses is:

RQD = 115 − 3.3 Jv

Where Jv represents the total number of joints per cubic

meter or the volumetric joint count.

(3) Indirect method:

Jv has been described by Palmstrom (1986) as a measure

for the number of joints within a unit volume of rock mass
defined by:

Where Si is the average joint spacing in metres for the ith joint
set and J is total number of joint sets except the random joint
set.

9
Joints and joint sets in rock – Joint spacing is the horizontal distances
between each joint in a set and measured along a horizontal line

Take 1 m3 of a rock mass,

with 2 joint sets, J1 & J2
Avg. spacing, S1 = 0.2
Avg. spacing, S2 = 0.3

Jv = ∑Ji=1 (1 / Si)
Jv = (1/0.2) + (1/0.3)
Jv = 5 + 3.3
Jv = 8.3

RQD = 115 − 3.3 Jv

RQD = 115 − 3.3 × 8.3
RQD = 88 %

10
 Joint sets in rock

Take 1 m3 of rock mass with three joint sets, J1, J2 and

J3 (major joint set only). Measure the spacing between
each joint (in a given set) along a horizontal line

11
 Joint spacing for set J1:
135, 225, 300 & 260 mm.
Average spacing, S1 =
230 mm

Joint spacing for set J2 :

350 & 450 mm. Average
spacing, S2 = 400 mm.

Joint spacing for set J3:

250, 270, 280 mm.
Average spacing, S3 =
267 mm

Joint spacings J1: 135, 225, 300 & 260 mm.

Average spacing, S1 = 230 mm = 0.23 m

Joint spacings J2 : 350 & 450 mm.

Average spacing, S2 = 400 mm = 0.4 m.

Joint spacing J3: 250, 270, 280 mm.

Average spacing, S3 = 267 mm = 0.267 m

(Note: unit for average joint spacing is in meter)

Jv = 1/0.23 + 1/0.4 + 1/0.267

= 10.60 m

RQD (%) = 115 – 3.3 × Jv

= 115 – 34.98
= 80 %

12
 Classification of Volumetric Joint Count, Jv
(Palmstrom 1996)

Compared to direct method (RQD using core sample),

VOLUMETRIC JOINT COUNT gives an indication on
discontinuities orientation (dip & strike).

During drilling and transportation of cores, orientation of

discontinuities is lost (rotation and movement of core samples),
unless directional drilling is used (very expensive & usually used
in petroleum exploration).

13
Limitations of RQD

The 0.1m value for abrupt unbroken rock boundary
and the RQD value are sensitive to the orientation of
joint sets with respect to the orientation of the
borehole

The RQD value is influenced by drilling equipment,
drilling operators and core handling. Especially, RQD
values of weak rocks can be considerably reduced
due to inexperienced operators or poor-drilling
equipment.

A slower drilling
rate will also give
a better RQD

Some frequently asked question:

Which rock mass is easier to excavate, a rock

with a higher or lower RQD?

Which rock mass is more suitable as a foundation

for a structure, rock with RQD = 90% or RQD =
30% ?

Which Jv will display massive rock mass, Jv = 0.2

or Jv = 20?

How can we differentiate between natural

fractures and those induced by drilling?

14
Rock quality designation, RQD:

Though the RQD is a simple and inexpensive

index, when considered alone it is not
sufficient to provide an adequate description
of a rock mass because it disregards joint
orientation, joint condition, type of joint filling
and stress condition.

Rock Mass Rating, RMR

More complex than RQD.

The system includes 6 parameters:

- uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock
material, UCS
- Rock quality designation, RQD
- Joint or discontinuity spacing
- Conditions of discontinuity (infilling, persistence)
- Conditions of groundwater
- Orientation of discontinuity (strike & dip angle).

Also called geomechanics classification, based on the work of

Bieniawski (1973)

15
The rating of 6 parameters of the RMR are given in Table
1 to 6.

For eliminating doubts due to subjective judgments, the

rating for different parameters should be given a range in
preference to a single value.

(1) Uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock

material (qc)
The strength of the intact rock material should be obtained
from rock cores, the ratings based on uniaxial
compressive strength (preferred) & point-load strength as
shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Strength of intact rock material (Bieniawski, 1979)

16
(2) Rock Quality Designation (RQD)
RQD should be determined as previously discussed and
rating are given in Table 2.

Table 2: Rock Quality Designation RQD (Bieniawski, 1979)

(3) Spacing of discontinuities

The term discontinuity includes joints, beddings or foliations,
shear zones, minor faults, or other weakness planes. The linear
distance between two adjacent discontinuities should be
measured for all sets of discontinuities & the rating should be
obtained from Table 3 for the most critical discontinuity.

17
(4) Condition of discontinuity
This parameter includes roughness of discontinuity surfaces,
their separation (aperture or opening), length or continuity,
weathering of the discontinuity surfaces, and infilling (gouge)
material. The details of rating are given in Table 4.

Table 4: Condition of discontinuities (Bieniawski, 1979)

18
(5) Ground water condition
In the case of tunnel, the rate of inflow of ground water in litres
per minute per 10 m length of the tunnel should be determined,
or general condition can be described as completely dry, damp,
wet dripping & flowing.

If actual water pressure data is available, these should be stated

& expressed in terms of the ratio of the seepage pressure to the
major principal stress.

The ratings as per the water condition are given in Table 5.

Table 5: Ground water condition (Bieniawski, 1979)

19
Rating of the above 5 parameters (Table 1 to Table 5) are
added to obtain what is called the basic rock mass rating-
RMRbasic

(6) Orientation of discontinuities

Orientation of discontinuities means the DIP and STRIKE of
discontinuities (weakness planes).

The dip angle is the angle between the horizontal and the
discontinuity plane taken in a direction in which the plane
dips.

The value of the dip and strike should be recorded as shown

in Table 6, the orientation of tunnel axis or slope face or
foundation alignment should also be recorded.

Table 6: Orientation of discontinuities

20
(6) Orientation of discontinuities
The influence of the strike & dip of the discontinuities is
considered with respect to the direction of tunnel drive or
slope face orientation or foundation alignment.

To facilitate a decision whether the strike & dip are

favourable or not, reference should be made to Table 7 &
Table 8 which provide a quantitative assessment of critical
joint orientation effect with respect to tunnels & dams
foundation respectively.

Once the ratings for the effect of the critical discontinuity

are known, as shown in Table 9 an arithmetic sum of the
joint adjustment rating in and the RMRbasic is obtained.
This number is called the final rock mass rating RMR.

Table 7: Assessment of joint orientation effect on tunnels

(dips are apparent dips along tunnel axis) (Bieniawski, 1989)

21
Table 8: Assessment of joint orientation effect on stability of
dam foundation (Bieniawski, 1989)

Table 9: Adjustment for joint orientation (Bieniawski, 1979)

22
Estimation of RMR:

The rock mass rating is an algebraic sum of ratings for all

the parameters in Table 1 to 5 & Table 9, after the
adjustments for orientation of discontinuities given in Table
7 and 8.

The sum of ratings for 4 parameters in Table 2 to Table 5

is called Rock Condition Rating (RCR) which discounts
the effect of strength (σc) of intact rock material &
orientation of joints.

Heavy blasting creates new fractures, hence it is

suggested that 10 points should be added to get RMR for
undisturbed rock masses (e.g. excavation by TBM & road
headers), and 3 to 5 points may be added depending
upon the quality of the controlled blasting.

Example:

A tunnel is to be driven through slightly weathered

granite with a dominant joint set dipping at 60°
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 < 1mm, are
spaced at 300 mm. Tunnelling conditions are
anticipated to be wet

23
24
 Answer:

Estimation of RMR:
On the basis of RMR values for a given engineering structure,
the rock mass is classified in 5 classes (see Table 10) as:
Group I: Very good RMR 100 – 81
Group II: Good RMR 80 – 61
Group III: Fair RMR 60 – 41
Group IV: Poor RMR 40 – 21
Group V: Very poor RMR < 20.

Separate RMR should be obtained for tunnels of different

orientations after taking into account the orientation of tunnel
axis with respect to the critical joint set (Table 6).

In terms of quality & mass strength, group I rock is more

suitable for excavation of tunnel compared to groups with lower
RMR, the tunnel also requires less support.

25
Table 10: Design parameters & engineering properties of rock
mass (Bieniawski, 1979)

Separate RMR should be obtained for tunnels of different

orientations after taking into account the orientation of
tunnel axis with respect to the critical joint sets (Table 6).

RMR can be used for estimating many useful parameters

such as the unsupported span, the stand-up time (bridging
action period) & the support pressure for an underground
opening.

It can also be used for selecting a method of excavation &

permanent support system for underground excavation in
rock (Bieniawski, 1976).

Deformation modulus & allowable bearing pressure may

also be estimated.

26
Application of RMR:

(1) Average stand-up time for arched roof:

The stand-up time depends upon effective span of the opening

which is defined as the width of the opening or the distance
between the tunnel face and the last support, whichever is smaller.
For arched openings the stand-up time would be significantly
higher than that for a flat roof.

Controlled blasting will further increase the stand-up time as

damage to the rock mass is decreased.

It is important not to delay supporting of the roof in the case of rock

with high stand-up time, as this may lead to deterioration in the
rock which ultimately reduces the stand-up time.

Relationship between RMR rating, stand-up time &

Unsuppoted span (Bieniawski, 1989)

27
(2) Estimation of support pressure:

The estimation of support pressure for openings with flat roof is

given as (Unal, 1983):

Pv = {(100 − RMR) / 100} × γ × B

Pv : support pressure
γ : rock density
B : tunnel width

(2) Estimation of support pressure:

For rock tunnel with arched roof the estimation of short-

term support pressure is given as (Goel & Jethwa, 1991):

Pv = {(0.75 × B0.1 × H0.5 − RMR) / (2 × RMR)} MPa

Pv : short-term roof support pressure (MPa)

H : depth of tunnel in m (> 50 m)
B : span of opening in m
(Method of excavation by conventional blasting method)
Comprehensive guidelines

28
(2) Estimation of support pressure:

Bieniawski (1989) provides a comprehensive guidelines

for selection of tunnel stabilisation methods. This is
applicable to tunnels excavated with conventional drill &
blast method.

These guidelines depend upon factors like depth below

surface (in situ overburden stress) tunnel size & shape &
method of excavation. The stabilisation measures are the
permanent and not temporary (or primary) support.

Table 11: RMR guide for excavation & stabilisation methods in

rock tunnel

29
(3) Modulus of deformation:

Nicholson & Bieniawski (1990) developed an empirical

expression for modulus reduction factor (MRF). This factor is
calculated in order to derive modulus of deformation for a rock
mass using its RMR and Young’s modulus of its core sample:

MRF = Ed / Er = 0.0028 RMR2 + 0.9 × exp(RMR/22.82)

Where:Ed is deformation modulus of rock mass

Er is deformation modulus of intact rock material

(3) Modulus of deformation:

Mitri et al. (1994) used the following equation to derive the
modulus of deformation of rock masses:

MRF = Ed / Er = 0.5 { 1 − cos ( π × (RMR / 100) }

Where: Ed is deformation modulus of rock mass

Er is deformation modulus of intact rock material

30
 (3) Modulus of deformation:

Hoek & Brown (1997) suggested the modulus of deformation of

rock masses:

Ed = {√ (qc) / 10} × {10 (RMR − 10)/40 } GPa, qc ≤ 100Mpa

Where: qc is average uniaxial crushing strength of intact rock

material in MPa.

The modulus of deformation of poor rock masses with water

sensitive minerals decrease significantly after saturation and
with time after excavation.

(4) Allowable bearing pressure:

Foundation on weak, heterogeneous and highly undulating

surfaces of sub-surface rock mass may pose serious
problem of differential settlement. The design of foundation
depends on the subsurface strata and its bearing capacity

Where the foundation rests directly on bedrocks (e.g. spun

pile & end-bearing pile), the bearing pressure can be
obtained from available classification tables.

Pressure acting on a rock bed due to building foundation

should not be more than the safe bearing capacity of rock
foundation system taking into account the effect of
eccentricity.

31
It is often useful to estimate the safe bearing pressure (SBP)
for preliminary design on the basis of the classification
approach (e.g. RMR).

Orientation of joints plays a dominant role in stress

distribution below strip footing due to low shear modulus of
bedrocks. Bearing capacity of rocks will be drastically low for
near vertical joints that strike parallel to the footing length as
pressure bulb extends deep into the strata – see Figure.

Shear zone and clay gouge, if present below foundation

level, need to be treated to improve bearing capacity &
reduce differential settlement.

32