Page 96 - Rock Mechanics For Underground Mining

ROCK MASS STRUCTURE AND CHARACTERISATION

problem, it can lead to disastrous results. It is particularly important to recognise
that the classification schemes give reliable results only for the rock masses and
circumtancesforwhichtheguide-linesfortheirapplicationwereoriginallydeveloped.
It is for this reason that considerable success has been achieved in using the approach
to interpolate experience within one mine or a group of closely related mines, as
described by Laubscher (1977), for example.
Hoek and Brown (1980), Goodman (1993) and Brown (2003), among others, have
reviewed the considerable number of rock mass classification schemes that have been
developed for a variety of purposes. Two of these schemes, the NGI tunnelling quality
index (Q) developed by Barton et al. (1974) and the CSIR goemechanics or Rock
Mass Rating (RMR) scheme developed by Bieniawski (1973, 1976), are currently
widely used in civil engineering and in mining practice. Bieniawski’s RMR scheme
has been modified by Laubscher (1977, 1990), particularly for use in cave mining
applications. Because of their widespread use in mining practice, the basic RMR and
Q systems will be outlined here. The more recent GSI system introduced by Hoek
(1994) and developed further by Marinos and Hoek (2000) will also be discussed.

3.7.2 Bieniawski’s geomechanics classification
Bieniawski (1973, 1976) developed his scheme using data obtained mainly from civil
engineering excavations in sedimentary rocks in South Africa. Bieniawski’s scheme
uses five classification parameters.
1 Strength of the intact rock material. The uniaxial compressive strength of the
intact rock may be measured on cores as described in section 4.3.2. Alternatively,
for all but very low-strength rocks, the point load index (section 4.3.9) may be
used.
2 Rock Quality Designation (RQD) as described in section 3.3.
3 Spacing of joints. In this context, the term joints is used to describe all disconti-
nuities.
4 Condition of joints. This parameter accounts for the separation or aperture of
discontinuities, their continuity or persistence, their surface roughness, the wall
condition (hard or soft) and the nature of any in-filling materials present.
5 Groundwater conditions. An attempt is made to account for the influence of
groundwater pressure or flow on the stability of underground excavations in terms
of the observed rate of flow into the excavation, the ratio of joint water pressure
to major principal stress, or by a general qualitative observation of groundwater
conditions.

The way in which these parameters are incorporated into Bieniawski’s geo-
mechanics classification for jointed rock masses is shown in Part (a) of Table 3.5.
For various ranges of each parameter, a rating value is assigned. The allocation of
these rating values allows for the fact that all parameters do not necessarily contribute
equally to the behaviour of the rock mass. The overall Rock Mass Rating (RMR) is
obtained by adding the values of the ratings determined for the individual parame-
ters. This RMR value may be adjusted for the influence of discontinuity orientation
by applying the corrections given in Part (b) of Table 3.5. The terms used for this
purpose are explained in Table 3.6. (When falling or sliding of blocks of rock from
the roof or walls of an excavation is a possibility, this approach should not be relied
upon. A wedge analysis of the type described in Chapter 9 should be used.) Part (c) of
78