Tunnel Assistant

Quick Reference Guide

Copyright 2004, Stergios TZAMOS

Stergios TZAMOS
Hiou 53
152 31 Halandri, ATHENS, Greece.

Rock mass classification

Q - assistant flow chart

INPUT
Name, Description =STR
Width, Height, Depth = Float, 2
K 0, UnitWeight = Float,2
INPUT
Strength = Float,1

- type of opening
- dimensions
- intact rock strength
-maximum principal stress
- rock mass strength
- in situ stress

ESR = Float,1

c
1

Estimation of in situ stress

cm

= v + k0 h
v = Depth
= unit weight of overburden

- depends on purpose of opening

INPUT

Rock mass properties input

RQD, Jn = Integer

- Rock Quality Designation RQD

- Discontinuities (Joints) J

INPUT

Joint roughness estimation

Jr = Float,1

- Joint roughness number J

INPUT

Joint alteration estimation

Ja = Float,2

- Joint alteration number J

INPUT

Water flow estimation

Jw = Float,3

- Ground water inflow number J

Stress Reduction Factor

(SRF) estimation

INPUT
SRF = Float,1

- Strength - stress conditions

Q value estimation
- estimation of Q from seismic P-wave
velocity

Q, Q' = Float,3

- from loboratory tests

- from field observations

Equivalent Span Ratio (ESR)

input

INPUT

OUTPUT

Estimation of intact rock

strength

General data input

RQD estimation
- Direct (dril core)
- Seismic method
- Volumetric Joint Count

Stress Reduction Factor

(SRF) estimation
- Weakness zones
- competent rock, rock stress problems
- squeezzing confitions
- swelling conditions

Q value estimation
- estimation of Q, Q', N
- corellations with other classifications

Pressure on support
estimation
- estimation of pressure acting on
support

Pressure on support
estimation
- Barton recommendations
- Bhasin, Grimstad recommendations
- Singh recommendations

Recommended Support
Measures
- Q system support recommendations

Rock mass classification

RMR - assistant flow chart

INPUT
Name, Description =STR
Width, Height, Depth = Float, 2
K 0, UnitWeight = Float,2

- type of opening
- dimensions
-maximum principal stress
- in situ stress

INPUT

Estimation of intact rock

strength

Strength = Float,1

- from laboratory tests

- from field observations

INPUT
RQD = Integer

Estimation of in situ stress

General data input

Rock Quality Designation

- Rock Quality Designation (RQD)
Rating

INPUT

Discontinuities

Spacing = Integer
Conditions = Array[5]

- Discontinuity Spacing Rating

-Conditions of discontinuities Rating

INPUT

Water flow estimation

Water = Array[5]

- Ground water inflow Rating

INPUT

Orientation of Discontinuities

Strike, Dip = Integer

- Strike and dip orientation Rating

OUTPUT

RMR value estimation

RMR Basic, Dry, Adjusted =

Integer

- estimation of Basic, Dry, Adjusted RMR

- corellations with other classifications (Q system, GSI)

= v + k0 h
v = Depth
= unit weight of overburden

RQD estimation
- Direct (dril core)
- Seismic method
- Volumetric Joint Count

Pressure on support
estimation
- Unal recommendations
- Goel, Jethwa recommendations
- Singh recommendations

Geotechnical Parameters estimation

- estimation of pressure acting on support
- estimation of rock mass deformation modulus

Design Parameters

Estimation
of rock mass
deformation modulus
- Bieniawski recommendations
- Serafeim and Pereira
recommendations
- Hoek and Brown recommendations

- Support recommendations
- Design Parameters (Stand up time, cohesion, phi
angle, Scm)

Rock mass classification

GSI - assistant flow chart

General data input

INPUT

- type of opening
- dimensions
-maximum principal stress
- in situ stress

Name, Description =STR

Width, Height, Depth = Float, 2
K 0, UnitWeight = Float,2

INPUT

GSI = Integer

Constant m
- automatic from regession analysis

Field estimates
- Point load test
- Qualitative descriptive estimate from
rock mass observation

- regression analysis of laboratory data

INPUT

- from field observations

Laboratory tests

mi = Integer

= v + k0 h
v = Depth
= unit weight of overburden

Estimation of intact rock strength

- from laboratory tests

Strength = Float,1

INPUT

Estimation of in situ stress

i estimation

Constant m
- estimation using table

estimation

GSI estimation
- GSI value selection using table

Paramaters of the Hoek and Brown

Criterion
- m b , s, a
- k, , cohesion
- S cm , E, Poisson v

Pressure on Support Estimation

- estimation of pressure acting on support
- Rock - Support interaction

Geotechnical Parameters
- Hoek recommendations

Pressure on support
estimation
- Hoek recommendations

AI Assistant
Tunnel Support estimation using Artificial Intelligence

INPUT
Tunnel Width,ESR = Float,1
LoqQ = Float, 2

INPUT
Ground characteristics

INPUT
Tunnel Width,ESR = Float,1
LoqQ = Float, 2

INPUT
Tunnel Width,ESR = Float,1
LoqQ = Float, 2

Stat Assistant
Support estimation using
statistical equations.

Expert Assistant
Estimation of ground
conditions and required
support

Fuzzy Assistant
Support estimation using
fuzzy logic

Neural Assistant
Support estimation using
Neural Networks

Estimation of support
from equations derived
from multiple regression
analysis

Estimation of ground
conditions and required
support according to
empirical
recommendations of
Singh, Hoek, Lunardi.

Estimation of support
from inference using
fuzzy rules

Estimation of support
using a neural network
trained after a database of
past cases

Design Assistant
Preliminary Tunnel Design Evaluation

INPUT
Tunnel Width,Depth = Float,1

INPUT
Stress anisotropy, Unit Weight of
rock mass

INPUT
Intact rock strength, GSI, Q index,
QN.

Data Collection
Gather relevant data.
Section information

Stress - Strength
Stress estimation
Intact rock strength estimation

Rock Mass Strength

Rock mass strength
estimation from GSI and Q
systems

Squeeze
Squeeze estimation according
to many authors

INPUT
User's information

Estimation of Stress
around opening.
Estimation of intact rock
strength.

Estimation of the rock

mass strength.

Estimation of amount of
squeeze according to
Hoek, Barla, ISRM, Goel,
Sakurai.

Stability Assesment
Estimation of instability
ploblems.

Recommendations
Design actions to minimize
potential problems.

Recommendations by E.
Hoek.

Design Considerations used in Tunnel Assistant

Support Weight
Support Measures
No Support
Spot Bolting
Systematic Bolting
Bolts + Shotcrete 5cm
Bolts + Shotcrete 10cm
Bolts + Shotcrete 15cm
Bolts + Shotcrete 20cm
Bolts + Shotcrete 25cm + Light Steel Sets
Bolts + Shotcrete 25cm + Heavy Steel Sets
Cast Concrete Arches

Code
NS
SB
B
B S1
B S2
B S3
B S4
B S5
RRS1
B S5
RRS2
CCA

Weight
0
1
2
6
10
14
18
24
30
36

Light bolts 16mm

Light bolts 19mm
Medium bolts 25mm
Heavy bolts 34mm
Shotcrete 5 cm 1day old
Shotcrete 5 cm 28 days
old
Shotcrete 10 cm 28 days
old
Shotcrete 15 cm 28 days
old
Shotcrete 20 cm 28 days
old
Shotcrete 25 cm 28 days
old
Concrete 30 cm 28 days
old
Concrete 50 cm 28 days
old
Light Steel Sets 612
Medium Steel Sets 823
Heavy Steel Sets 12W65

12m
Support Weight

Span

Coef. 14Strength

10m

Strength (Ma)

Strength Coef .
9.5

Span

Strength Coef .
11.5

8m

Strength (Ma)

Span

Strength (Ma)

Code

6m
Coef. 7Strength

Support measures

Span

Strength (Ma)

Maximum allowed pressure on support

Circular opening, isotropic (hydrostatic) stress conditions, Weight = Strength Coefficient

0.11
0.18
0.27
0.34
0.23

0.8
1.3
1.9
2.4
1.6

0.06
0.1
0.15
0.19
0.17

0.6
1.0
1.4
1.8
1.6

0.04
0.06
0.1
0.12
0.14

0.5
0.7
1.2
1.4
1.6

0.03
0.04
0.07
0.09
0.12

0.4
0.6
1.0
1.3
1.7

S1

0.58

4.1

0.43

4.1

0.35

4.0

0.29

4.1

S2

1.16

8.1

0.86

8.2

0.7

8.1

0.58

8.1

S3

1.74

12.2

1.29

12.3

1.05

12.1

0.87

12.2

12

S4

2.32

16.2

1.72

16.3

1.4

16.1

1.16

16.2

16

S5

2.9

20.3

2.15

20.4

1.75

20.1

1.45

20.3

20

S6

3.33

23.3

2.53

24.0

2.04

23.5

1.71

23.9

24

CCA
RRS1

5.1
0.18
0.37

35.7
1.3
2.6

3.8
0.12
0.25
0.89

36.1
1.1
2.4
8.5

3.1
0.08
0.17
0.66

35.6
0.9
2.0
7.6

2.6
0.06
0.13
0.51

36.1
0.8
1.8
7.1

36
2

SB

RRS2

1
2

Bolts are anchored and ungrouted. Bolt length = 1/3 of tunnel span, spacing = 1/2 of bolt length.

Support weight according to ONORM B2203

Coefficient rf of support measures
Support element
Swellex and expansion
SN mortar
Self Drilling
Fully grouted
Mortar prestressed
1 layer
2 layers
On floor

Bolts

Wire mesh
Steel sets
Shotcrete
Forepoling

(theoretical quantity)
Deformation slots
Ungrouted
Grouted
Self Drilling
Fully grouted
Spilling bolts
-

Coefficient
(rf)
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
1
1,5
1
2
15
4
0,7
1
1,5
2
3
2,5
4

Unit of
measurement
m
m
m
m
m
m2
m2
m2
m
m2
m
m
m
m
m
m
m2
m2

Support Factor (Weight) : SF = Sum(sq * rf) / ar

sq = area (or length) of influence of every support element,
ar = area of tunnel section under consideration.

RMR

System

Pressure on support
Author

Pressure on support
Pv (Pa)

Restrictions

Unal 1983

1 RMR
W ( kN)
100

Flat roof

Goel, Jethwa
1991
Goel et al.
1995b

0,75W 0 ,1 h 0 , 5 RMR
1000
20 RMR

Steel sets

2,32 -0,035 RMR + 0.001h + 0.03 (W/2)

No squeeze

fn = 1,35 light squeezing

fn = 1,1 light medium
squeezing
fn = 0,7 medium squeezing
fn = 0.6 heavy squeezing
fn = 1,1 extreme squeezing

Goel et al.
1995b
5
6
7

Barton et al.
1974
Barton et al.
1974
Singh 1992

Goel et al.
1995b

1, 8 h 0 , 4 W / 2 0 ,1

f n
10
12

RMR1, 2

No squeeze

200 0 ,33
Q
Jr
200 0 , 5 0 , 33
Jn Q
3J r
200
5Q 0 ,33 F
Jr

F = 1 + (h 320) / 800 >= 1

0 ,1
0,12h 0,1 W / 2 Qw0,33 0,038 1000

9
Goel et al.
1995b

10
11

Bhasin &
Grimstad
1996
Barton 2002

1000 f n / 30 10

0,6

W / 2

50Qw0 , 33

0 ,1

Jn > 9
No squeeze
Short term pressure
Steel sets
No squeeze
No squeeze
fn = 1,35 light squeezing
fn = 1,1 light medium
squeezing
fn = 0,7 medium squeezing
fn = 0.6 heavy squeezing
fn = 1,1 extreme squeezing

40W
Q 0, 33
Jr

Q<4

100 Q -0,33 or
1000 / d (GPa)

Jr=2

Correlations between Rock Mass Classification Systems

Author

Equation

Bieniawski 1989
Barton 1995
Rutledge & Preston 1978
Moreno 1980
Abad et al. 1984
Goel et al. 1995b
Hoek - Brown

RMR = 9 logQ + 44
RMR = 15 logQ + 50
RMR = 5,9 logQ + 43
RMR = 5,4 logQ + 55,2
RMR = 10,5 logQ + 41,8
RMRw = 8 logQw + 30
GSI = RMRd89 5
GSI = RMRd76

Correlation
Coefficient R2
77%
81%
55%
55%
92%

Rock Mass Strength

RMR (Bieniawski 1989) :

c = 5 RMR (kPa) = 0.5 RMR + 5

c and from RMR:

RMR
Class
Cohesio c (kPa)
Friction Angle (0)

100 - 81
I
> 400
> 45

80 - 61
II
300 - 400
35 - 45

60 - 41
III
200 - 300
25 - 35

40 - 21
IV
100 - 200
15 - 25

< 21
V
< 100
< 15

Q System (Barton 2002):

FC friction coefficient:
Jr

J w
Ja

FC tan 1
CC cohesion coefficient:

RQD 1

J n SRF

c CC

ci
MPa

100

10

Rock Mass Strength

Author

Rock mass strength cm.

Singh 1993

0,7 * * Q1/3

Goel 1994

0,55 * * Q1/3 / W0,1

Restrictions

Jw=1 (dry), Q<10

and ci >2 Pa

Bhasin, Grimstad 1996

(ci / 100) * 0,7 * * Q1/3

Hoek 2000

ci * 0,022 * exp0,038*GSI

Hoek 2002

(0.0034mi0.8)ci * {1,029 + 0.025 exp(-0.1mi),}GSI

ci>100 MPa and Q > 10

RMR or GSI

System

Rock Mass Deformation Modulus

Author

RMR > 50,

ci > 100 MPa
RMR <60

Bieniawski, 1978

Ed = 2 RMR-100

Serafim & Pereira,

1983
Hoek et al., 2002

Ed = 10(RMR-10)/40

Restrictions

RMi

Deformation Modulus Ed (GPa)

6
7
8
9
10
11

Nicholson &
Bieniawski, 1990
Verman, 1993

Mitri et al., 1994

Barton et al., 1980
Barton, 2002
Palmstrom, Singh,
2002
Palmstrom, Singh,
2002

GSI 10

D ci 40

Ed 1
10
2 100

Ed = Er (0,0028RMR2 +
0,9expRMR/22,82) / 100
Ed = 0,3 ha 10(RMR-20)/38

ci < 100 MPa

h > 50 m,
a = 0.16 strong
rock,
a = 0.35 weak
rock

Ed = 0,5 Er (1-cos( RMR / 100))

Ed = 25 logQ
Ed = 10 Q c1/3
Ed = 10(15logQ-40)/40
Ed = 8 Q0.4

RMR > 50
Q>1

Ed = 5.6 RMi0.375
Ed = 7 RMi0.4

RMi >0.1
1<RMi<30

Q<1
1<Q<30

11

Squeeze
Singh et al 1992
overburden h

< 350 *Q1/3 = h

No squeeze

->

> 350 *Q1/3 = h

Squeeze

Goel et al. 1995 (Span = W, i/W = Overall deformation of walls % )

h1 < 23,4 and
h1<1000W0,1
and W < 2Q0,4
No Support

h1 > 23,4
h2 < 275
No
squeeze

275 < h2 < 450

and
Jr/Ja < 0,5
Light Squeezing
(i/W = 1-3%)

450 < h2 < 630

and
Jr/Ja < 0,5
Medium
Squeezing
(i/W = 3-5%)

h2 > 630
and
Jr/Ja < 0,25
Heavy Squeezing
(i/W > 5%)

Bhasin Grimstad 1996

Q >1, Jn < 3
/cm > 1
0,5</cm < 1
Heavy Rock
Rock Burst
Burst

Q<1
/cm < 1
No Squeeze

Q<1
1 < /cm < 5
/cm > 5
Light Medium
Heavy
Squeezing
Squeezing
(i/W = 1-5%)
(i/W > 5%)

Hoek, Marinos, 2000 Hoek, 2001

i/W

< 1%
No
Squeeze

1 - 2,5%
Light
Squeezing

2,5% - 5%
Medium
Squeezing

5% - 10%
Heavy
Squeezing

> 10 %
Extreme
Squeezing

ISRM, Barla 1995

cm / ( h)
/ cm

>1
<1
No Squeeze

0,4 - 1
1-2
Light
Squeezing

0,2 0,4
2-4
Medium
Squeezing

< 0,2
>4
Heavy
Squeezing

Chern et al. 1998

i/W

< 1,073 * cm 0,318

No Squeeze

> 1,073 * cm 0,318

Squeeze

Barton 2002
i
0,1
(%)
W
Q

i
i
1 v
1 h
(%)
, on roof , (%)
, on walls
W
Q cm
H
Q cm

12

References
[1] Barton N.R., Lien R. and Lunde J. (1974) "Engineering classification of rock
masses for the design of tunnel support", Rock Mechanics, Vol 6, No 4, pp 189239.
[2] Barton, N. Grimstad E., 1994. Rock mass conditions dictate choice between NMT
and NATM. Tunnells and Tunelling, October 1994.
[3] Barton, N. 2002 Some new Q-value correlations to assist in site characterisation
and tunnel design. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences.
[4] Bhasin R., Grimstad E. 1996. The use of stress strength relationships in the
assessment of tunnel stability. Tunnelling and Underground space Technology, Vol
11, No 1, pp 93-98, 1996.
[5] Bieniawski Z.T. (1989). Engineering rock mass classification, p251, Wiley, N.Y.
[6] Goel R.K 1994 Correlations for predicting support pressures and closures in
tunnels. PhD Thesis, University of Minnesota USA.
[7] Goel R.K., Jethwa J. L., Paithankar A. G. 1995 Indian Experiences with Q and
RMR Systems. Tunnelling and Underground space Technology, Vol 10, No 1, pp
97- 109. 1995.
[8] Grimstad E., Barton N., 1993. Updating of the Q-System for NMT. Proceedings
of the International Symposium on Sprayed Concrete Modern use of wet- mix
sprayed concrete for underground support. Fagernes, 1993 (Eds Kompen, Opshal
and Berg. Norwegian Concrete Association, Oslo)
[9] Hoek E. and Brown E.T. (1980). Underground excavations in Rock, p.527.
London, I.M.M.
[10]
Hoek E, Kaiser PK, Bawden WF (1995) Support of underground
excavations in hard rock. Balkema, Rotterdam
[11]
Hoek E, Brown ET (1998) Practical estimates of rock mass strength. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 34 : 11651186
[12]
Hoek E, (1999) A discussion on acceptability criteria for temporary
support and final linings of large span transportation tunnels in poor rock
:
.
[13]
Hoek E. ,Marinos P., Benissi M. 1998 Applicability of the geological
strength index (GSI) classification for very weak and sheared rock masses. The
case of the Athens Schist Formation. Bull. Eng. Geol. Env. 57 : pp 151 160.
[14]
Hoek E. ,Marinos P., 2000. Predicting Squeeze. Tunnels and Tunnelling
International, December 2000.
[15]
Hoek E., 2001 Big tunnels in bad rock, Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, No. 9, Septenber 2001.

13

[16]
Hoek E., Carranza-Torres C., Corkum B., 2002. Hoek-Brown failure
criterion 2002 Edition.
[17]
Palmstorm A. 1995a Characterizing Rock Masses by the RMi for Use in
Practical Rock Engineering, Part 1: The development of the Rock Mass Index
(RMi) Tunnelling and Underground space Technology, Vol 11, No 2, pp 175-188
1996.
[18]
Palmstorm A. 1996b Characterizing Rock Masses by the RMi for Use in
Practical Rock Engineering, Part 2: Some practical applications of the Rock Mass
Index (RMi) Tunnelling and Underground space Technology, Vol 11, No 3, pp
287-303 1996.
[19]
Palmstorm A., Singh R. 2001 The deformation modulus of rock masses
comparisons between in situ tests and indirect estimates. Tunnelling and
Underground space Technology, Vol 16, (2001) pp 115 - 131.
[20]
Singh B., Jethwa J.L., Dube A.K., Singh B. 1992 Correlation between
observed support pressure and rock mass quality. Tunnelling and Underground
space Technology, Vol 7, No 1 (1992) pp 59 - 74.
[21]
Singh B., Viladkar M, Samadhiya N., Mehrota V. 1997 Rock mass
parameters mobilised in tunnels. Tunnelling and Underground space Technology,
Vol 12, No 1 (1997) pp 47 - 54.
[22]
Singh B., Goel R.K., Jethwa J.L., Dube A.K. 1997 Support pressure
assessment in arched underground openings through poor rock masses.
Engineering Geology 48 (1997) pp. 59 81.
[23]
Verman M, Singh R, Jethwa J.L., Viladkar M.N. 1997 Estimation of
mobilised cohesion around underground openings. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics & Mining Sciences Vol. 37, No. 5, pp. 851 858. 1997.

14