Structural geological methods in the geotechnical practice – rock mass rating. Advantages and problems of the rating methods

This paper presents a review of the most common geotechnical rock rating methods. The directional properties of the rock’s anisotropies are exemplified, by a case of resolution of stresses in folded and foliated metamorphic rocks. In such rocks, depending on the geometry of the folds, the ambient stress field can generate varying shear potential along the foliation planes in different parts of the excavation. The commonly used rating schemes, with accent on the geological feasibility of the classifications, are discussed – Protodiakonov’s rock scale, Terzaghi’s grading for construction of tunnels, then the rock quality designation of Deere, the Bieniawski’s rock mass rating (RMR), the Hoek, and Brown’s GSI and the Barton’s Q-system. It is emphasized that in spite of its broad use, the RQD is distorting the statistical weight of the joint groups as some steeply dipping joints may be completely neglected. It is recognized that the RMR is the simplest to use but underestimates the directional properties of the rock anisotropies, which require better definition and has no provision for lithologically varying rock packages, although it has the advantage of using the uniaxial compressive strength, which other systems do not employ. The Hoek and Brown’s criterion went too far with complex empirical relationships, which rely on extensive laboratory testing, so it is no more field criterion. Besides, its geological descriptive powers are rather poor and now, new form of GSI classification is offered for nearly every lithological type. Barton’s Q-system, being best suited to case studies of actual underground constructions, suffers from the fact that is centered nearly exclusively on joints, which may be justified in Norway, where mainly magmatic and high grade metamorphic rocks are present but should be applied cautiously in areas, where sedimentary, volcanic and strongly foliated rocks are exposed. In general, for all the discussed geomechanical classification systems (RMR, GSI, Q) the rule is valid, that they work better in an isotropic, strong but jointed rock masses and do not work well in week layered and foliated rocks.