1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength 1.1.

3 Rock joints and rock mass strength

• Describe the occurrence of rock joints on your mine, number of sets and their Explain the occurrence of rock joints on your mine, number of sets and their
orientations orientation:
• Explain how the following factors affect the strength of rock joints -
• Joints are naturally occurring planar geological discontinuities along which, no
infilling type, infilling thickness, roughness, friction angle, water pressure.
visible displacement occurs.
• Explain in principle the shear box test for determining joint strength
• They commonly have some infilling material, which defines their cohesion and
• Explain the implications of rock joints on rock mass strength friction properties.
• Explain how joints may affect excavation stability
• Joints usually occur in sets, a set being defined as a group of joints with common
• Use the equation of Barton and Choubey to calculate the strength of a joint orientation.
• Explain the significance of each parameter in the Barton and Choubey equation for • Two, three or four joint sets usually occur in a rock mass with one of the sets
joint shear strength predominant in intensity in a specific area.
• Apply the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) and the Q-system to classify rock masses. • Sets of joints developed in response to major tectonic events and thus their
• Apply the RMR system together with the Hoek-Brown criterion to determine the occurrence can be expected over large areas.
strength of a rock mass
• Always state the average dip and dip direction of all the joint sets on your mine.
• Describe the joint roughness, alteration and water bearing nature.

1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength 1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength
Explain how the following factors affect the strength of rock joints, infilling type,
infilling thickness, roughness, friction angle and water pressure: 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 • The shear strength can be reduced drastically when part or all of the surface is not
some stronger material such as quartz or calcite in veins or healed joints. in intimate contact, but covered by soft filling material such as clay gouge.

• The presence of such materials will influence the strength of the joints or • For planar surfaces, such as bedding planes in sedimentary rock, a thin clay coating
discontinuities as it influences the shear behavior. will result in a significant shear strength reduction.

• The influence the infilling has on the strength of the discontinuities will depend on • For a rough or undulating joint, the filling thickness has to be greater than the
the type of the infilling. Clayish or soft material will decrease the shear strength amplitude of the undulations before the shear strength is reduced to that of the
and stiffness of the discontinuities, while strong material can increase the strength. filling material.

• The thickness of the infilling will also influence the shear and strength behavior of
the discontinuity.
 1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength 1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength
Explain how the following factors affect the strength of rock joints, infilling type, Explain how the following factors affect the strength of rock joints, infilling type,
infilling thickness, roughness, friction angle and water pressure: infilling thickness, roughness, friction angle and water pressure:

• Joint roughness: The undulations and asperities on a natural joint surface have a • The greater the friction angle the higher the shear strength. (Indicates how difficult
significant influence on its shear behavior. For a planar surface with no texture or or easy it will be for shear displacement to occur.)
asperities, the shear strength is determined by the basic friction angle of the joint
surface. The strength would be lower than rough surface. • The greater the cohesion the higher the shear strength.

• The greater the water pressure the lower the shear strength (Incompressible-
Reduces normal stress, reduces confinement, lubricates).

Normal Stress
Clamping force

1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength 1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength
Explain in principle the shear box test for determining joint shear strength.

• A typical shear testing machine is used to determine the basic friction angle and
shear strength of materials.
• In principle, this is a direct shear test to determine the failure strength on a surface
that has been set.
• 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.
 1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength 1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength
Explain in principle the shear box test for determining joint shear strength. Explain in the implications of rock joints on rock mass strength.

• Joints create weakness/failure planes, ejection surfaces, sliding surfaces and key blocks within
the rock mass.
• Joints generally have lower strength compared to the surrounding rock mass.
• The existence of joints within a rock mass alters the behavior of the rock.
• The mechanical properties and the performance of the rock are affected.
• The stress distributions and concentrations around excavations may be affected by the
presence of joints.
• Jointed rock masses comprise interlocking angular particles or blocks of hard brittle material
separated by discontinuity surfaces which may or may not be coated with weaker materials.
• The strength of such rock masses depends on the strength of the intact pieces and on their
freedom of movement which, in turn, depends on the number, orientation, spacing and shear
strength of the discontinuities.
• In general, the presence of joints lowers the rock mass rating and rock strength.
• For jointed rock masses a realistic evaluation of shear strength presents formidable theoretical
and experimental problems.

1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength 1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength
Explain how joints may affect excavation stability.

• Joints are a source of weakness (e.g., large displacements and rotations may occur across
them), consequently; they may lead to crucial instability problems.
• Inclined joints create potentially unstable wedges with low cohesion, which are difficult to
identify and support.
• The joints influence on the stress distribution and deformation close to the excavated tunnel.
• Combinations of these joint planes may define blocks or wedges, which may be unstable.
 1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength 1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength
Barton Choubey Calculation Barton Choubey Calculation

Used to calculate Shear Strength of joints:

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
Where:
• τ is the Shear Strength of the joint
• σn is the normal stress acting on the joint
• JRC is the joint roughness coefficient and
• JCS is the joint wall compressive strength
• Φr is the residual friction angle Barton and Choubey suggest that Φr can be estimated from

where
• r is the Schmidt rebound number for wet and weathered fracture surfaces and
• R is the Schmidt rebound number on dry unweathered sawn surfaces.
• (Alternatively use Φb if that is supplied in exam)

1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength 1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength
The joint roughness coefficient (JRC) Barton Choubey Calculation

JCS
Suggested methods for estimating the joint wall compressive strength were published by the ISRM (1978).
The use of the Schmidt rebound hammer for estimating joint wall compressive strength was proposed by
Deere and Miller (1966).
 1.1.3 Rock joints and rock mass strength 1.1.3 Rock Mass Ratings
Apply the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) and Q-System to classify rock masses.
Joint wall compressive strength (JCS) ROCK MASS RATING (RMR) Also called the Geomechanics Classification
The rock mass rating (RMR) is a geomechanical classification system for rocks, developed by
Bieniawski between 1972 and 1973.

Utilizes the following six rock mass parameters:

1. Uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock material.
2. Rock quality designation (RQD).
3. Spacing of discontinuities.
4. Condition of discontinuities, given as
4a) Length, persistence
4b) Separation
4c) Smoothness
4d) Infilling
4e) Alteration / weathering
5. Groundwater conditions.
6. Orientation of discontinuities.

Each of the six parameters is assigned a value corresponding to the characteristics of the rock.
These values are derived from field surveys and laboratory tests. The sum of the six parameters is
the "RMR value", which lies between 0 and 100

1.1.3 Rock Mass Ratings 1.1.3 Rock Mass Ratings

ROCK MASS RATING (RMR)
The details for calculating RMR are provided by a series of tables for RMR
determination.
A rock mass rating system provides a method of incorporating some of the complex
mechanics of actual rocks into engineering design.
Moreover, the system was the first to enable estimation of rock mass properties, such
as the modulus of deformation, in addition to providing tunnel support guidelines and
the stand-up time of underground excavations.
 1.1.3 Rock Mass Ratings 1.1.3 Rock Mass Ratings
ROCK MASS RATING (RMR) EXAMPLE ROCK MASS RATING (RMR) EXAMPLE ANSWER

Parameter Description Value

Strength PLT 8MPa 12

RQD 70% 13

Spacing of discontinuities 300mm 10

Condition of discontinuities Length (1-3m) 4

Separation (0.1-1.0mm) 4

Roughness (Slightly rough) 3

Infilling (None) 6

Weathering (Slight) 5

Ground water Wet 7

Orientation Adjustment Fair in mining tunnel -5

RMR 59

1.1.3 Rock Mass Ratings

 1.1.3 Rock Mass Ratings 1.1.3 Modified (Mining) Rock Mass Rating MRMR
Apply the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) and Q-System to classify rock masses.
ROCK MASS RATING (RMR) COMMENTS
The modified rock mass rating (MRMR) is a modified version of the RMR system, developed by
• The lump ratings for each parameter make it difficult for less experienced personnel to Laubscher in 1977.
determine the RMR accurately.
This system takes into account the same parameters as the Geomechanics system, but combines
• There are also subjective parameters like roughness and weathering which may pose difficulty the groundwater and joint condition, resulting in four parameters:
in rating assignment.
• Various rock mass rating systems consider different parameters. Always use at least two rock MRMR = RMR x adjustment factors
mass ratings.
Utilizes the following four rock mass parameters:
1. UCS
2. RQD
3. Joint Spacing
4. Joint condition and ground water

The mining rock mass rating MRMR value is obtained by summing the four parameter ratings.
The sum of the four parameters is the “MRMR value", which lies between 0 and 100

1.1.3 Modified (Mining) Rock Mass Rating MRMR

 1.1.3 Modified (Mining) Rock Mass Rating MRMR
EXAMPLE.

1.1.3 Modified (Mining) Rock Mass Rating MRMR

EXAMPLE ANSWER.

Parameter Description Value

RQD 95% 14
UCS 200MPa 20
Joint Spacing 25 x 0.75 x 0.7 x 0.68 9
Joint Condition (Dry) 40 x 0.75 x 0.9 x 1 x 1 27
MRMR 14 + 20 + 9 + 27 70
Parameter Description
Joint Spacing J1 = 1m; J2 = 0.5m; J3 = 0.25m
Jv 1/1 + 1/0.5 + 1/0.25 = 7
RQD 115-3.3Jv = 93% (Closest 5% thus RQD = 95%) REMEMBER THE ADJUSTMENTS!
1.1.3 Modified (Mining) Rock Mass Rating MRMR 1.1.3 Modified (Mining) Rock Mass Rating MRMR

1.1.3 Modified (Mining) Rock Mass Rating MRMR 1.1.3 Q Rating

EXAMPLE ANSWER.
• The Q-System was developed at the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute in 1974 by Barton [Link].
• It is also called the Tunneling Quality Index (Q).
• It is used for the determination of rock mass characteristics and tunnel support requirements.

Parameter Description Value The Q System is defined by:

MRMR Calculated 70
The classification is based on three (unitless) aspects:
Joint Orientation 2/4 Faces 0.9
• rock block size (RQD/Jn)
Weathering Slight in 4 years 0.96 • joint shear strength ( Jr /Ja)
Blasting Good Conventional 0.94 • confining stress (Jw/SRF)
Where:
Stress Favorable 1.1
RQD is the rock quality designation
AMRMR 70 X 0.9 X 0.96 X 0.94 X 1.1 62.5 Jn is the joint set number
Jr is the joint roughness number
Ja is the joint alteration number
Jw is the joint water reduction factor
SRF is the stress reduction factor.

The numerical value of the Q Index varies on a logarithmic scale from 0.001 to 1000
 1.1.3 Q Rating
• EXAMPLE
 RQD
1.1.3 Q Rating
RQD is defined as the ratio of the cumulative length of sticks of NX size (54mm Diameter) core more than 100mm in EXAMPLE ANSWERS.
length in a drill run to the total length of the drill run.

RQD can be estimated from inspection of exposed rock surfaces by determining the number of unhealed joint planes
per m3 of rock. This may be done by counting the relevant number of joint planes (excluding blast fractures) which
cross a 2 to 3m length of tape held against the excavated wall. The number of joint planes divided by the relevant Parameter Description Value
sample length gives the number of joints per metre. This process is then to be repeated for 2 additional directions.
The sum of these three values gives Jv, the number of joints per m3, and hence RQD from the equation : RQD 95% 95

RQD = 115 — 3.3 Jv Jn 3 joint sets 9

Jr Rough, Planar 1.5
Notes:
•Where RQD is reported or measured as less than 10, a nominal value of 10 is used to evaluate Q. Ja <1.0mm, Unaltered, Staining only 1.0
•RQD intervals of 5, giving 100, 95, 90 … 10 are sufficiently accurate.
Jw Dry <10 1.0
Total length of core  100mm x 100 SRF Medium Stress, UCS 200MPa / 6MPa @ (200mbs) = 33 1.0
RQD% =
Length of core run
Q Value (95/9) x (1.5/1.0) x (1.0/1.0) 15.8
Parameter Description
Joint Spacing J1 = 1m; J2 = 0.5m; J3 = 0.25m
Jv 1/1 + 1/0.5 + 1/0.25 = 7
RQD 115-3.3Jv = 93% (Closest 5% thus RQD = 95%)

1.1.3 Q Rating 1.1.3 Q Rating

EXAMPLE ANSWERS.

Equivalent RMR (Bieniawsky)

RMR = 9lnQ + 44
RMR = 9 (ln15.8) + 44 = 69

Equivalent RMR (Barton)

RMR = 15logQ + 50
RMR = 15 (log15.8)+50 = 68
 1.1.3 Q Rating
Equivalent Dimension De
This value is obtained by dividing the span of the excavation by a quantity called the: 8m wide tunnel
1.6
Excavation Support Ratio
=5

The ESR is related to the intended use of the excavation and the degree of security
required

1.1.3 Rock Mass Rating Uses

The lengths indicated are based on an ESR of 1, and thus

conversion is conducted (Lengthnew=Length(ESR)0.5) to
reflect the true required length
(2.5x1.6) x 0.5 = 2m
End of Day 1