Rock mass parameters

A. Rock Strength (version 3.1) Sh. Arshadnejad, 2013

A. Rock Strength is a spreadsheet program for calculating of rock mass and rock dicontinuities parameters by the lastest experimental formulas, graphs and tables from many experiences.

Application of this programe is very easy. There are some active celles which you can type your values.Their color are orange. Out put data celles are in light yellow and final data are in light green after calculations.

LegendActive cellesCalculated cellesOut put cellesAverage values

A. Rock Strength is a spreadsheet program for calculating of rock mass and rock dicontinuities parameters

Application of this programe is very easy. There are some active celles which you can type your values.Their color are orange. Out put data celles are in light yellow and final data are in light green after calculations.

Project name:Pataveh - Dehdasht Road Sh. Arshadnejad, 2013

Client: By: Date: Page: 1Road Ministry of IRAN A. B. 20/7/1392Location Checked: Revision: Project No.:

Tunnel No. 2 km 41+900 C. D. 2 T-02-10GSI Rock : Conglomarate

Hoek, Marinos and Benissi, 1998

Spacing of J1 (m) = 1Spacing of J2 (m) = 0.5Spacing of J3 (m) = 0.7

113275

5.431687750.33

Cai, 2004

RQD = 86(Palmstrom, 2009)

A. Rock Strength (Version 3.1)

Jw =Js =JA =

β =Nr =Jv =

Vb (cm³) =Jc =

Project name: A. Rock Strength (Version 3.1)Pataveh - Dehdasht Road Sh. Arshadnejad, 2013

Client: By: Date:Page: 2Road Ministry of IRAN A. B. 20/7/1392

Location Checked: Revision: Project No.:Tunnel No. 2 km 41+900 C. D. 2 T-02-10

(Palmstrom, 1982 & 1996)

27Shape factor for rock blocks

(Palmstrom, 2009)

β =


Client: By: Date:Page: 3

Road Ministry of IRAN A. B. 20/7/1392Location Checked: Revision: Project No.:

Tunnel No. 2 km 41+900 C. D. 2 T-02-10

323275

5.431687752.00

Russo, 2009

JR =JL =JA =

β =Nr =Jv =

Vb (cm³) =Jc =

JA: JL:

JR:


Client: By: Date:Page: 4

Road Ministry of IRAN A. B. 20/7/1392Location Checked: Revision: Project No.:

Tunnel No. 2 km 41+900 C. D. 2 T-02-10

Sonmez & Ulusay, 2002

Jv = 5.43 Rr = 6SR = 50 2

4SCR = 12

Rw = Rf =




Condition of Discontinuities Hoek, et al., 2013Length : 6 RQD = 80 40

Apreture : 4 filling (Gouge) : 2 18 27Roughness : 3 Weathering : 3

RQD/2 =Jc89 = 1.5 Jc89 =

Hoek, et al., 2013

Sh. Arshadnejad, 2013

Page: 1

Project No.:T-02-10

(Version 3.1)

A. Rock Strength (Version 3.1)Sh. Arshadnejad, 2013

Page: 2

Project No.:T-02-10


Page: 3

Project No.:

T-02-10


Page: 4

Project No.:

T-02-10


Page: 5

Project No.:

T-02-10

Hoek, et al., 2013




Longitudinal section of the Type L Schmidt hammer for field-testing of rock strength

27 2.75 of Data & Curve

40Formula's No. from the sheet "Formula (Page: 14)"↓1- 90.50 (MPa)2- 97.66 (MPa)3- 39.38 (MPa)4- 377.64 (MPa)5- 131.85 (MPa)6- 104.23 (MPa)7- 117.43 (MPa)8- 74.82 (MPa)

Selected Value: Average without Maximum and minimum values.

Max = 377.64 (MPa)min = 39.38 (MPa)

Ave.: 102.75 (MPa)

γ = (kN/m³) → in the Sheet

ρ = (t/m³)R =

σci =

σci =

σci =

σci =

σci =

σci =σci =σci =

σci =

12345678

90.5097.6639.38

377.64

131.85104.23117.43

74.82

Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS) of intact rock by Schmidt Hammer's test

Number of Formula

UCS (MPa)


Page: 6

Project No.:T-02-10




Rock mass Strength's Parameters:

(Cai, et al., 2007) (Russo, G., et al., 1998) (Ribacchi, R., 2000)

GSI = 32 GSI = 32 30 (MPa)20.841 11.52 6.0 (MPa)

8 8 80.6207 0.6207 0.62070.4735 OK 0.3394 OK 0.4034 OK

0.000403 0.000403 0.0004030.000151 OK 0.000054 OK 0.000016 OK

0.520 0.5200.541 OK 0.577 OK

27 0.372 (For soft rocks) Dilation Parameter (Hoek-Brown)

D = 0.1 0.0 (Degree) Dilation Angle (Mohr-Coulomb)

30.00 → Uniaxial Compressive Strength of intact Rock (Laboratory)

--- → Uniaxial Compressive Strength of intact Rock (Schmidt hammer)

MR = 400 Is there Schmidt hammer's test? No12000 (MPa) Is there any data from Laboratories tests? no10000 *(MPa) Is there any data from borehole? yes

Young's modulus of intact rock 1846.2 (MPa) oek, Carranza-Torres and Corkum, 20021494.3 (MPa) (Simplified) Hoek and Diederichs, 2006

(Palmstrom, 2009) 970.2 (MPa) Hoek and Diederichs, 2006RQD = --- 2364.7 (MPa) Sonmez, Gokceoglu, Ulusay, 2004RQD = 50 * 1700.4 (MPa) Carvalho, 2004

-0.165 1800.0 (MPa) AASHTO, 20020.52 (MPa) 1710.2 (MPa) : Average without min & Max values0.019 (MPa) Deformation modulus

300 (m) → Depth of Tunnel or Height of Slope2.89 (MPa) Tunnel: yes

'3 max = 5.315 (MPa) Slope: no0.17720.6215 (MPa) → Cohesion of Rock mass *- Data from Laboratory's test or Log

24.9 (Degree)→ Internal Friction Angle of Rock m **- Data from field measurement

Constants of Hoek-Brown criterionUniaxial Compressive Strength of Rock massTensile Strength of Rock mass Power value for H-B criterion equationConstant of intact rock (Type of Rock) Power value for H-B equation (Residual)

σci =GSIr = GSIr = (σc )r =

mi = mi = mi = mb = mb = mb = mr = mr = mr =

S = S = S = Sr = Sr = Sr =

a = a = ar = ar =

γ = (kN/m³) δ =δ =

σci = *(MPa)σci = **(MPa)

= Ei /σciEi =Ei =

Em =Em =Em =Em =Em =

αE = Em =σ cm = Em =σ tm =

H =σ' cm =

σ3n =c =φ =

σ cm :σ tm : a :

mi : ar :

GSIr eGSIGSI 0134.0. circ 2.0)( GSIGSI r 36.0

Constant of rock mass Constant of H-B criterion (rock mass)Constant of rock mass (Residual condition) Constant of H-B cri. rock mass (Residual)




Hoek & Brown CriterionGSI = 32 20.8

30.00 6.080.6207 0.47350.000403 0.0001510.520 0.54112000 1710.20.372 (-) Dilation Parameter

D = 0.1270.52 (MPa)

0.019 (MPa)

Mohr & Coulomb Criterion0.6215 (MPa)24.9 (Degree)

0.0 (Degree)Dilation AngleTunnel Depth = 300 (m)

mb : S : mr : Sr :

GSIr =σci = (σc )r =mi = mb = mr =

S = Sr = a = ar = Ei = Em =δ =

γ = (kN/m³)σ cm =σ tm =

c =φ =δ =

-2 -1 0 1 2 3 40

2

4

6

8

10

12

Peak StrengthResidual Strength

σ3 (MPa)

σ1 (

MPa)

0 1 2 3 4 5 60

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Peak Strength

σ (MPa)

ב (MPa)




Shear strength of rock discontinuities

2721 On dry and unweathered rock joint surface L = 0.5 (m)15 On wet and weathered rock joint surf Amplitude = 10 (mm)25 no

19.29 : Calculated

24 : Lab Datah = 300 (m)

35 (m)

JRC = 9 →→→→→→→

Is there Schmidt hammer's test? No--- (MPa)30 (MPa)

JCS = 19.43 (MPa)

5E-05 (MPa)19.43 (MPa)

1E-08 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 -2.116 -64.71 0.0000 0.00003 0.0294 0.0810 0.0516 0.790 38.31 0.0472 0.006515 0.1472 0.4050 0.2579 0.627 32.07 0.1886 0.027030 0.2943 0.8100 0.5157 0.563 29.38 0.3409 0.050645 0.3434 1.2150 0.8717 0.517 27.35 0.5324 0.081760 0.3434 1.6200 1.2767 0.485 25.87 0.7349 0.1160 Joint strength's parameters135 0.3434 3.6450 3.3017 0.408 22.17 1.6255 0.2798

γ = (kN/m³)R =r =

ɸb = Is there any laboratory's data for ɸr?

ɸr =

ɸr =

hw =

JCSo = JCSo =

σn (min) = σn (Max) =

Definition of instantaneous cohesion Ci & instantaneous friction angle ɸi for a nonlinear failure criterion

h (m) u (MPa) σn(MPa) σ'n(MPa) ɸi τ (MPa) Ci (MPa)

φi (Deg.) Ci (MPa)

150 0.3434 4.0500 3.7067 0.398 21.73 1.7887 0.3117 21.73 0.3117165 0.3434 4.4550 4.1117 0.390 21.32 1.9484 0.3435240 0.3434 6.4800 6.1367 0.359 19.77 2.7053 0.5000300 0.3434 8.1000 7.7567 0.342 18.86 3.2724 0.6233




Shear strength of filled discontinuities and filling materials (Barton, 1974)Rock type Descriptions Peak strength Residual strength

ɸ ɸrBasalt Clayey basaltic breccia, wide variation 0.24 42

from clay to basalt contentBentonite seam in chalk 0.015 7.5

Bentonite Thin layers 0.09-0.12 12 17Triaxial tests 0.06-0.1 9 13

Bentonite Shale Triaxial tests 0-0.27 8.5-29Direct shear tests 0.03 8.5

Clays Over-consolidated, slips, joints and minor 0-0.18 12-18.5 0-0.003 10.5-16Clay shale Triaxial tests 0.06 32

Stratification surfaces 0 19-25Coal measure rocks Clay mylonite seams, 10 to 25 mm 0.012 16 0 11-11.5Dolomite 0.04 5 0.02 17Diorite, granodioritClay gouge (2% clay, PI = 17%) 0 26.5and porphyry

Clay filled faults 0-0.1 24-45Granite Sandy loam fault filling 0.05 40

Tectonic shear zone, schistose and brokengranites, disintegrated rock and gouge 0.24 42

Greywacke 1-2 mm clay in bedding planes 0 216 mm clay layer 0 13

Limestone 10-20 mm clay fillings 0.1 13-14<1 mm clay filling 0.05-0.2 17-21

Limestone, marl Interbedded lignite layers 0.08 38and lignites Lignite/marl contact 0.1 10Limestone Marlaceous joints, 20 mm thick 0 25 0 15-24Lignite Layer between lignite and clay 0.014-0.3 15-17.5Montmorillonite 80 mm seams of bentonite 0.36 14 0.08 11

c (MPa) cr (MPa)

Altered shale bed, ± 150 mm thick

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

1; Average Value in half of Height;

1.7887

σ'n (MPa)

τ (M

Pa)

Bentonite clay (montmorillonite) clay in chalk 0.016-0.2 7.5-11.5Schists, quartzites 100-15 mm thick clay filling 0.03-0.08 32& siliceous schists stratification with thin clay 0.61-0.74 41

stratification with thick clay 0.38 31Slates Finely laminated and altered 0.05 33Quartz/kaolin/ Remoulded triaxial tests 0.042-0.9 36-38pyrolusite


Page: 7

Project No.:T-02-10

-1.294

2364.7970.22456892


Page: 8

Project No.:T-02-10

peak res peak resHoek & Brown Criterion s3 s1 s3 s1 a sn T a sn T

-1.5 #NUM! -1.5 #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM!(MPa) -1.3 #NUM! -1.3 #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM!

-1 #NUM! -1 #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM!-0.8 #NUM! -0.8 #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM!-0.5 #NUM! -0.5 #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM!-0.2 #NUM! -0.2 #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM!

(MPa) -0.1 #NUM! -0.1 #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM!Dilation Parameter -0.05 #NUM! -0.05 #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM! #NUM!

0 0.5171 0 0.0513 14.786 0.0328 0.126 15.481 0.0031 0.01230.05 1.051 0.05 0.356 8.4841 0.1555 0.3074 4.1905 0.109 0.12070.1 1.4266 0.1 0.5409 6.7681 0.2708 0.4443 3.3415 0.2015 0.18560.2 2.0195 0.2 0.8383 5.3067 0.4885 0.6646 2.7112 0.372 0.28320.4 2.9474 0.4 1.3265 4.1549 0.8942 1.0073 2.2479 0.6853 0.4277

Mohr & Coulomb Criterion 0.75 4.2412 0.75 2.0505 3.3572 1.5513 1.4681 1.9363 1.1929 0.61631 5.0407 1 2.5191 3.0591 1.9955 1.7411 1.8208 1.5386 0.7267

1.3 5.9201 1.3 3.0506 2.8191 2.5097 2.0312 1.7279 1.9417 0.84351.6 6.739 1.6 3.5585 2.6486 3.0085 2.2923 1.6618 2.3358 0.94852 7.7635 2 4.2097 2.4827 3.6549 2.6075 1.5975 2.8507 1.0752

2.2 8.2533 2.2 4.5266 2.4169 3.9716 2.7541 1.572 3.1046 1.13422.5 8.9654 2.5 4.9931 2.3332 4.4397 2.9629 1.5394 3.4818 1.21812.8 9.6545 2.8 5.4507 2.263 4.9007 3.1601 1.5121 3.8552 1.29753 10.103 3 5.7515 2.2221 5.2044 3.2861 1.4962 4.1023 1.3483


Page: 9

Project No.:T-02-10

-3E-10 2E-100.0472 0.05160.1886 0.25790.3409 0.51570.5324 0.8717

Joint strength's parameters 0.7349 1.27671.6255 3.3017

τ (MPa) σ'n(MPa)

Ci (MPa)

0.3117 1.78871.9484 4.11172.7053 6.13673.2724 7.7567


Page: 10

Project No.:T-02-10

Residual strengthɸr

8.510.5-16

19-2511-11.5

17

2113

15-24

11



Location: Checked: Revision: Project No.:Tunnel No. 2 km 41+900 C. D. 2 T-02-10

Hoek, 2006

mi Value




Hoek and Diederichs, 2006

MR Value


Page: 11

Project No.:T-02-10


Page: 12

Project No.:T-02-10

Hoek and Diederichs, 2006


Client: By: Date:Road Ministry of IRAN A. B. 20/7/1392

Location: Checked: Revision:Tunnel No. 2 km 41+900 C. D. 2

Disturbance factor D

Hoek, Carranza-Torres and Corkum, 2002


Page: 13

Project No.:T-02-10




Ei(psi × 10^6)

AASHTO, 2002

Ei = 3 (psi × 10^6)= 20685

AASHTO, 2002

AASHTO, 2002

σci (psi × 1000)Ei

psi × 0.006895 = MPaProject name: A. Rock Strength (Version 3.1)

Pataveh - Dehdasht Road Sh. Arshadnejad, 2013Client: By: Date:

Page: 15Road Ministry of IRAN A. B. 20/7/1392Location Checked: Revision: Project No.:

Tunnel No. 2 km 41+900 C. D. 2 T-02-10

AASHTO, 2002

10000 (psi)= 69.0 (MPa)

σci =

σci

σci


Page: 14

Project No.:T-02-10

(psi × 10^6)(MPa)


Page: 15

Project No.:T-02-10




Gercek, 2007


Page: 16

Project No.:T-02-10




Formulas

(Cai, et al., 2007) (Russo, G., et al., 1998) (Ribacchi, R., 2000)

Hoek, Carranza-Torres and Corkum, 2002 Sonmez, Gokceoglu, Ulusay, 2004

Carvalho, 2004

(Palmstrom, 2009)

RQD = 110 - 4.5 Jv (Jv = 2.2 - 24.5)

Arshadnejad, et al., 2006

Hoek and Diederichs, 2006 AASHTO, 2002

Em = αE × Ei

br mm 65.0

Ssr 04.0)28100exp(

rir

GSImm

)(615.0 32015

eearGSI

r

)9100exp(

rr

GSIs

GSIr eGSIGSI 0134.0. GSIGSI r 36.0

circ 2.0)(




Uniaxial Comressive strength from Schmidt hammer's test

1 : Rock cores (Diameter of 55 mm) obtained from28 region.

2 : Rock cores (Diameter of 55 mm) obtained from20 region.

3 : Rock cores obtained from 10 region.

4 : NX sized rock cores of sandstone.

5 : NX sized rock cores of carbonates.

6 : Rock cores obtained from 33 region.

7 : Sandstone, Siltstone, Limestone and Anhydrite.

8

: Uniaxial Compressive strength of intact rock (MPa)R : Rebound numberρ : Rock density (t/m^3) γ : Unit Weight (kN/m^3)

Ref.: (Kahraman, 2001) & (Katz, et al., 2000)

Joint Strength:

(Barton & Bandis, 1982)

(Hoek, 2007)

(Hoek, 2007)


Page: 17

Project No.:T-02-10

(Ribacchi, R., 2000)

Sonmez, Gokceoglu, Ulusay, 2004

(Palmstrom, 2009)

RQD = 110 - 4.5 Jv (Jv = 2.2 - 24.5)

Arshadnejad, et al., 2006

AASHTO, 2002

br mm 65.0

Ssr 04.0

circ 2.0)(


Page: 18

Project No.:T-02-10

: Rock cores (Diameter of 55 mm) obtained from

: Rock cores (Diameter of 55 mm) obtained from

: Rock cores obtained from 10 region.

: NX sized rock cores of sandstone.

: NX sized rock cores of carbonates.

: Rock cores obtained from 33 region.

: Sandstone, Siltstone, Limestone and Anhydrite.




References1- Arshadnejad, Sh., Poshtvan, H., Parsaee, H., 2006. Determination of optimum pillar size by empirical and

numerical methods based on ground reaction curve – case study, Soltan abad’s underground salt mine,In: 7th Tunneling Conference in Iran, Sharif University, pp: 849–865.

2- Barton, N.R. 1974. A review of the shear strength of filled discontinuities in rock, Norwegian Geotech. Inst. Publ. No. 105. Oslo: Norwegian Geotech. Inst.

3- Barton, N.R. and Bandis, S.C. 1982. Effects of block size on the the shear behaviour of jointed rock. 23rd U.S. symp. on rock mechanics, Berkeley, 739-760.

4- Cai, M., Kaiser, P.K., Uno, H., Tasaka, Y., Minami, M., 2004, Estimation of rock mass strengthand deformation modulus of jointed hard rock masses using the GSI system, Int. J. Rock Mech.Min. Sci. vol. 41 (1), pp: 3–19.

5- Cai, M., Kaiser, P.K., 2006, Visualization of rock mass classification systems, Geotech Geolog Eng,vol. 24 (4), pp: 1089–102.

6- Cai, M., Kaiser, P.K., Tasaka, Y., Minami, M., 2007, Determination of residual strength parameters of jointed rock masses using the GSI system, Int. J. of Rock Mech. & Mining Sci., vol. 44, pp: 247–265.

7- Carvalho, J., 2004, Estimation of rock mass modulus. Personal communication.8- Gercek, H., 2007, Poisson's ratio values for rocks, Intnl. J. Rock Mech. & Mining Sciences, 44, pp: 1-13.9- Hoek, E., Brown, E.T., 1997, Practical estimates or rock mass strength. Intnl. J. Rock Mech. &

Mining Sci. & Geomechanics Abstracts. 34(8), pp: 1165-1186.10- Hoek, E., Marinos, P. and 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. Engg. Geol. Env. 57(2), pp: 151-160.

11- Hoek, E., 1999, Support for very weak rock associated with faults and shear zones, Distinguishedlecture for the opening of the International Symposium on Rock Support and ReinforcementPractice in Mining, Kalgoorlie, Australia, pp: 1-20.

12- Hoek, E., Carranza-Torres, C. and Corkum, B. (2002) Hoek-Brown criterion –2002 edition. Proc. NARMS-TAC Conference, Toronto, 2002, vol. 1, pp: 267-273.

13- Hoek, E., Diederichs, M.S., 2006, Empirical estimation of rock mass modulus, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 43, pp: 203–215.

14- Hoek, E., 2006, Practical rock Engineering, Evert Hoek Consulting Engineer Inc.15- Hoek, E., Carter, T.G., Diederichs, M.S., 2013, Quantification of the Geological Strength Index chart,

47th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium, ARMA, American Rock Mechanics Association,San Francisco, USA, Paper No. 13-672, pp: 1-8.

16- Kahraman, S., 2001, Evaluation of simple methods for assessing the uniaxial compressive strength of rock,International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, Vol. 38, pp: 981-994

17- Katz, O., Reches, Z., Roegiers, J-C., 2000, Evaluation of Mechanical Rock Properties using a Schmidt Hammer,International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, Vol. 37, pp: 723-728.

18- Palmstrom, A., 1982, The volumetric jiont count- A useful and simple measure of the degree of jointing,

19- Palmstrom, A., 1996, Rmi- A system for characterising rock mass strength for use in rock engineering,

20- Palmstrom, A., 2005, Mearsurementof and correlation between block size and RQD, Journal of Tunneling and underground space technology, pp: 362-377.

21- Palmstrom, A., 2009, Combining the RMR, Q and RMi classification systems, www.rockmass.net, 25p.22- Ribacchi, R., 2000, Mechanical tests on pervasively jointed rock material: insight into rock mass

behaviour, Rock Mech Rock Eng, vol. 33 (4), pp: 243–66.23- Russo, G., Kalamaras, G.S., Grasso, P., 1998, A discussion on the concepts of geomechanical classes

behavior categories and technical classes for an underground project. Gallerie e GrandiOpere Sotterranee, p 54.

24- Russo, G., 2009, A new rational method for calculating the GSI, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 24, pp: 103-111.

25- Singh, B., Goel, R. K., 1999, Rock mass classification a practical approach in civil engineering, Elsevier, 267 p.26- Sonmez, H, Ulusay R., 2002, A discussion on the Hoek-Brown failure criterion and suggested

modifications to the criterion verified by slope stability case studies, Yerbilimleri, Vol. 26, pp: 77-99.27- Sonmez, H., Gokceoglu, C., Ulusay, R., 2004, Indirect determination of the modulus of deformation of

rock masses based on the GSI system, Int J Rock Mech Min Sci. vol. 1, pp: 849–57.

Ivth Int. Congress IAEG, New Delhi, pp: V221-V228.

J. Rock Mech. & Tunnelling Tech., India, vol. 1, No. 2, pp: 69-108.


Page: 19

Project No.:T-02-10

Arshadnejad, Sh., Poshtvan, H., Parsaee, H., 2006. Determination of optimum pillar size by empirical andnumerical methods based on ground reaction curve – case study, Soltan abad’s underground salt mine,

Barton, N.R. 1974. A review of the shear strength of filled discontinuities in rock, Norwegian Geotech. Inst.

Barton, N.R. and Bandis, S.C. 1982. Effects of block size on the the shear behaviour of jointed rock. 23rd U.S.

Cai, M., Kaiser, P.K., Uno, H., Tasaka, Y., Minami, M., 2004, Estimation of rock mass strengthand deformation modulus of jointed hard rock masses using the GSI system, Int. J. Rock Mech.

Cai, M., Kaiser, P.K., 2006, Visualization of rock mass classification systems, Geotech Geolog Eng,

Cai, M., Kaiser, P.K., Tasaka, Y., Minami, M., 2007, Determination of residual strength parameters of jointed rock masses using the GSI system, Int. J. of Rock Mech. & Mining Sci., vol. 44, pp: 247–265.

Gercek, H., 2007, Poisson's ratio values for rocks, Intnl. J. Rock Mech. & Mining Sciences, 44, pp: 1-13.Hoek, E., Brown, E.T., 1997, Practical estimates or rock mass strength. Intnl. J. Rock Mech. &

Hoek, E., Marinos, P. and 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.

Hoek, E., 1999, Support for very weak rock associated with faults and shear zones, Distinguishedlecture for the opening of the International Symposium on Rock Support and Reinforcement

Hoek, E., Carranza-Torres, C. and Corkum, B. (2002) Hoek-Brown criterion –2002 edition. Proc.

Hoek, E., Diederichs, M.S., 2006, Empirical estimation of rock mass modulus, International

Hoek, E., Carter, T.G., Diederichs, M.S., 2013, Quantification of the Geological Strength Index chart,47th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium, ARMA, American Rock Mechanics Association,

Kahraman, S., 2001, Evaluation of simple methods for assessing the uniaxial compressive strength of rock,

Katz, O., Reches, Z., Roegiers, J-C., 2000, Evaluation of Mechanical Rock Properties using a Schmidt Hammer,

Palmstrom, A., 1982, The volumetric jiont count- A useful and simple measure of the degree of jointing,

Palmstrom, A., 1996, Rmi- A system for characterising rock mass strength for use in rock engineering,

Palmstrom, A., 2005, Mearsurementof and correlation between block size and RQD, Journal of Tunneling

Palmstrom, A., 2009, Combining the RMR, Q and RMi classification systems, www.rockmass.net, 25p.Ribacchi, R., 2000, Mechanical tests on pervasively jointed rock material: insight into rock mass

Russo, G., Kalamaras, G.S., Grasso, P., 1998, A discussion on the concepts of geomechanical classesbehavior categories and technical classes for an underground project. Gallerie e Grandi

Russo, G., 2009, A new rational method for calculating the GSI, Tunnelling and Underground Space

Singh, B., Goel, R. K., 1999, Rock mass classification a practical approach in civil engineering, Elsevier, 267 p.Sonmez, H, Ulusay R., 2002, A discussion on the Hoek-Brown failure criterion and suggested modifications to the criterion verified by slope stability case studies, Yerbilimleri, Vol. 26, pp: 77-99.Sonmez, H., Gokceoglu, C., Ulusay, R., 2004, Indirect determination of the modulus of deformation of

Documents

Rock mass parameters