Assessment of rock mass stability for selection of proper roadway supports (in Polish)

2018 ◽  
pp. 51-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. A. Zhirnov ◽  
◽  
S. U. Abdrakhmanov ◽  
Yu. N. Shaposhnik ◽  
A. I. Konurin ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 2065 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonguk Kim ◽  
Hafeezur Rehman ◽  
Wahid Ali ◽  
Abdul Muntaqim Naji ◽  
Hankyu Yoo

In extensively used empirical rock-mass classification systems, the rock-mass rating (RMR) and tunneling quality index (Q) system, rock-mass quality, and tunnel span are used for the selection of rock bolt length and spacing and shotcrete thickness. In both systems, the rock bolt spacing and shotcrete thickness selection are based on the same principle, which is used for the back-calculation of the rock-mass quality. For back-calculation, there is no criterion for the selection of rock-bolt-spacing-based rock-mass quality weightage and shotcrete thickness along with tunnel-span-based rock-mass quality weightage. To determine this weightage effect during the back-calculation, five weightage cases are selected, explained through example, and applied using published data. In the RMR system, the weightage effect is expressed in terms of the difference between the calculated and back-calculated rock-mass quality in the two versions of RMR. In the Q system, the weightage effect is presented in plots of stress reduction factor versus relative block size. The results show that the weightage effect during back-calculation not only depends on the difference in rock-bolt-spacing-based rock-mass quality and shotcrete along with tunnel-span-based rock-mass quality, but also on their corresponding values.


2002 ◽  
pp. 253-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kunifumi TAKEUCHI ◽  
Tomoyuki SHIMURA ◽  
Shinichi AKUTAGAWA ◽  
Shunsuke SAKURAI

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Xing ◽  
Pinnaduwa H.S.W. Kulatilake ◽  
Louis Sandbak

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sajjad Hussain ◽  
Zahid Ur Rehman ◽  
Noor Mohammad ◽  
Muhammad Tahir ◽  
Khan Shahzada ◽  
...  

The empirical and numerical design approaches are considered very important in the viable and efficient design of support systems, stability analysis for tunnel, and underground excavations. In the present research work, the rock mass rating (RMR) and tunneling quality index (Q-system) were used as empirical methods for characterization of rock mass based on real-time geological and site geotechnical data and physical and strength properties of rock samples collected from the alignment of tunnel. The rock mass along the tunnel axis was classified into three geotechnical units (GU-1, GU-2, and GU-3). The support systems for each geotechnical unit were designed. The 2D elastoplastic finite-element method (FEM) was used for the analysis of rock mass behavior, in situ and redistribution stresses, plastic thickness around the tunnel, and performance of the design supports for the selection of optimum support system among RMR and Q supports for each geotechnical unit of tunnel. Based on results, Q support systems were found more effective for GU-1 and GU-2 as compared to RMR support systems and RMR support systems for GU-3 as compared to Q support systems.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document