Module 4: Rock Mass Classification: 4.6 Tunnelling Quality Index (Q)
Module 4: Rock Mass Classification: 4.6 Tunnelling Quality Index (Q)
Module 4: Rock Mass Classification: 4.6 Tunnelling Quality Index (Q)
LECTURE 12
4.6 TUNNELLING QUALITY INDEX (Q)
Barton, Lien and Lunde (1974) at the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute (NGI) originally
proposed the Q-system of rock mass classification on the basis of more than 200 case
histories of tunnels and caverns mostly in the Scandinavian countries.
Rock Tunnelling Quality Index, Q (or Norwegian Q system), Barton et al., (1974) is given
by RQD Jr Jw
Q=
Jn Ja SRF
The first quotient (RQD/J n ), representing the structure of the rock mass, is a crude measure of
the block or particle size. The second quotient (J r /J a ) represents the roughness and frictional
characteristics of the joint walls or filling materials. This quotient is weighted in favour of
rough, unaltered joints in direct contact. It is expected that such surfaces will be close to peak
strength, and will dilate strongly when sheared making it favourable to tunnel stability.
104
Module 4: Rock Mass Classification
When rock joints have thin clay mineral coatings and fillings, the strength is reduced
significantly. Also, rock wall contact after small shear displacements may be a very important
factor for preserving the excavation from ultimate failure.
Where no rock wall contact exists, the conditions are extremely unfavourable to tunnel
stability. The 'friction angles' are a little below the residual strength values for most clays, and
are possibly down-graded by the fact that these clay bands or fillings may tend to consolidate
during shear, at least if normal consolidation or if softening and swelling has occurred. The
swelling pressure of montmorillonite may also be a factor here.
The third quotient (J w /SRF) consists of two stress parameters. SRF is a measure of: 1)
loosening load in the case of an excavation through shear zones and clay bearing rock, 2)
rock stress in competent rock, and 3) squeezing loads in plastic incompetent rocks. It can be
regarded as a total stress parameter. The parameter J w is a measure of water pressure, which
has an adverse effect on the shear strength of joints due to a reduction in effective normal
stress. Water may, in addition, cause softening and possible outwash in the case of clay-filled
joints.
Table 4.12 Classification of individual parameters used in the Tunnelling Quality Index
(Q)
Description Value
1.Rock quality designation RQD
2.Very poor 0-25
3.Poor 25-50
4.Fair 50-75
5.Good 75-90
6.Excellent 90-100
105
Module 4: Rock Mass Classification
Notes: 1. Add 1.0 if the mean spacing of relevant joint set is greater than 3m.
106
Module 4: Rock Mass Classification
2. Jr = 0.5 can be used for planar, slickensided joints having lineations, provided that the
lineations are oriented for minimum strength.
107
Module 4: Rock Mass Classification
108
Module 4: Rock Mass Classification
pressure
M. mild squeezing rock pressure 5-10
N. heavy squeezing rock pressure 10-20
d. swelling rock, chemical swelling activity depending on presence of water
O. Mild swelling rock pressure 5-10
P. Heavy swelling rock pressure 10-15
Notes
1. Reduces these value of SRF by 25%-50% but only if the relevant shear zones
influences do not intersect the excavation
4. Few cases records available when depth of crown below surface is less than span
width. Suggest SRF increases from 2.5 to 5 for such cases (see H)
When making estimates of the rock mass quality (Q), the following guidelines should be
followed in the addition to the notes listed in the tables:
1. When borehole core is unavailable, RQD can be estimated from the number of joints
as per unit volume, in which the numbers of joints per metre of each joint set are
added. a simple relationship can be used to convert this number to RQD for the case
of clay free rock masses: RQD = 115-3.3J v (approx).where J v =total no of joints per
unit m3(0<RQD for 35>Jv>4.5)
109
Module 4: Rock Mass Classification
2. The parameter Jn representing the number of joints sets will often be affected by
foliation, schistosity, slaty cleavage or bedding etc. if strongly developed, these
parallel joints should obliviously be counted as complete joint set. However ,if there
are few joints visible or if only occasional breaks in the core are due to these features,
then it will be more appropriate to count them as random joints when evaluating Jm.
4. When the rock mass contains clay, the factor SRF appropriate loosening loads should
be evaluated .in such cases the strength of the intact rock is of little interest. however
when jointing is minimal and clay is completely absent, the strength of the intact rock
may become the weakest link, and the stability will depend on the ratio rock
stress/rock strength. a strongly anisotropic stress field is favourable for the stability
and is roughly accounted for as in note 2 in the table for the stress reduction factor
evaluation
5. The compressive and tensile strength ( c and t ) of the intact rock should be evaluated
in the saturated condition if this is appropriate and the present and future in situ
condition. A very conservative estimate of the strength should be made for those
rocks that deteriorate when exposed to moist or saturated condition.
110