Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
DOI 10.1007/s00603-013-0462-z
ORIGINAL PAPER
Received: 9 March 2013 / Accepted: 22 July 2013 / Published online: 4 September 2013
Springer-Verlag Wien 2013
Japan and those estimated from some empirical relationships developed by other investigators, and the outcomes of
these studies are presented and discussed.
Keywords Rock Mass Quality Rating
Geomechanical properties Rock mass classifications
Degradation degree Groundwater absorption
condition Groundwater seepage condition
Discontinuity condition Discontinuity spacing
Discontinuity set number RMR Q-value
1 Introduction
Over the last seven decades, a large number of engineering
rock mass classifications have been proposed. However, it
is very likely that rock mass classifications might have
been used by engineers of rock mechanics in much earlier
times when the construction of man-made antique underground excavations in Bazda (SE Turkey) and Qurna
(Egypt) underground quarries, underground or semiunderground cities in Cappadocia (i.e., Agll, Derinkuyu,
Zelve, Ihlara, etc., Central Anatolia, Turkey) and Bezeklik
Buddha Caves in East Turkistan, and Pharaoh tombs (i.e.,
Amenophis III, Ramses II, Seti I, King V) in Luxor of
Egypt are considered. For example, one can easily notice
how the pioneers of rock mechanics recognized the differences among the responses of shale, fractured soft and
hard limestones, and massive soft limestone in the shortterm and long-term as rock mass when siting the underground tombs (Fig. 1). Unfortunately, there is no accessible document about the rock classifications of the pioneers
of rock mechanics about 3,0004,000 years ago, except for
the historical remains in various countries around the
world.
123
1256
. Aydan et al.
O
123
1257
bonding of particles of rocks and producing clayey materials. As the intact rock is one of the most important
parameters influencing the mechanical response of rock
masses, weathering and/or the negative action of hydrothermal alteration may be accounted as the degradation
degree (DD) of intact rock. Groundwater is also an
important parameter affecting the mechanical response of
rock masses. There are also cases where some rocks may
absorb groundwater electrically or chemically, resulting in
the drastic reduction of material properties and/or swelling.
The rock mass quality rating system proposed herein
incorporates important parameters of the available quantitative modern rock classifications. This rock mass quality
rating system is expected to provide a better assessment of
the physical state of rock masses. In the following subsections, first, the basic concepts involving each parameter
and their ratings on the basis of knowledge gained in rock
mechanics and rock engineering so far are explained.
2.1 Degradation Degree (DD) and Its Rating
123
1258
. Aydan et al.
O
123
1259
Term
Description
Fresh
Stained
Some minerals may undergo oxidation or chemical reaction, causing some dark
brownish marks on the rock surface
Slight
degradation
Moderate
degradation
Less than half of the rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to a soil. Fresh
or discolored rock is present either as a continuous framework or as corestones
Heavy
degradation
More than half of the rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to a soil. Fresh
or discolored rock is present either as a discontinuous framework or as corestones
Decomposed
All rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to soil. The original mass
structure is still largely intact
Degradation
degree (DD)
Fresh
Stained
Slight
degradation
Moderate
degradation
Heavy
degradation
Decomposed
Rating (RDD)
15
12
123
. Aydan et al.
O
1260
Fig. 4 Views of discontinuous states of rock masses: a solid or massive, b one set plus random, c two sets plus random, d three sets plus random,
e four sets plus random, f crushed/shattered
Table 3 Ratings for discontinuity set number
Discontinuity set number
(DSN)
None (solid/
massive)
Crushed/
shattered
Rating (RDSN)
20
16
12
123
1261
None or
DS C24 m
Rating (RDS)
20
24 [ DS C 6 m
6 m [ DS C 1.2 m
RQD=100
16
12
1.2 m [ DS C 0.3 m
0.3 m [ DS C 0.07 m
0.07 m [ DS
100 [ RQD C 75
75 [ RQD C 35
35 [ RQD
1-0
123
. Aydan et al.
O
1262
Table 5 Ratings for discontinuity conditions
Discontinuity
condition (DC)
None
Healed or
intermittent
Rough
Relatively
smooth and tight
Rating (RDC)
30
26
22
15
10
discontinuity spacing greater than 1 m. However, by considering that RQD is a commonly used parameter, particularly in borehole cores, it is also included in Table 4 as an
alternative parameter to discontinuity spacing, depending
on the choice of the users.
Fig. 8 Examples of discontinuity conditions: a none, b healed or intermittent, c rough, d relatively smooth and tight, e slickensided with thin
infill or separation (t \ 10 mm), f thick fill or separation (t [ 10 mm)
123
1263
Table 6 Ratings for sub-parameters of discontinuity conditions, excluding none and healed or intermittent classes
Aperture or
separation
0.10.25 mm
0.250.5 mm
0.52.5 mm
2.510 mm
[10 mm
Rating (RDCA)a
10
Infilling
None
Surface
staining
only
Thin coating
\1 mm
Thin filling
1 \ t \ 10 mm
Thick filling
6 [ t [ 10 mm
Rating (RDCI)a
10
Very rough
Rough
Smooth
undulating
Smooth planar
Slickensided
Shear band/zone
10
10
10
10
Roughness
Descriptive
Profile no. in
Fig. 9
Rating (RDCR)a
a
123
. Aydan et al.
O
1264
Table 7 Ratings for groundwater seepage conditions
Groundwater seepage condition (GWSC)
Dry
Damp
Wet
Dripping
Flowing
Gushing
Rating (RGWSC)
Nonabsorptive
Capillarity or electrically
absorptive
Slightly
absorptive
Moderately
absorptive
Highly
absorptive
Extremely
absorptive
Rating (RGWAC)
10
Fig. 10 Examples of groundwater conditions: a dry, b damp, c wet, d dripping, e flowing, f gushing
123
1265
Fig. 11 Examples of absorption conditions: a non-absorptive, b capillarity absorptive, c slightly absorptive, d moderately absorptive, e highly
absorptive, f extremely absorptive
Table 9 Descriptions for
seepage condition (GWSC)
observed on rock mass outcrops
(surfaces) (arranged from the
ISRM 2007)
Water
condition
Dry (none)
The rock mass is solid, having low porosity, and excavation is dry
Damp
Wet
Dripping
Occasional drops of water occur from the rock mass surface mainly through
discontinuities, but no continuous flow is present
The continuous flow of water though discontinuities of the rock mass occurs and/or filling
materials are washed out and considerable water flow along washout channels
Flowing
Gushing
Description
Groundwater gushes into the excavation space with an extreme amount of groundwater and
it may not be easily handled by grouting techniques
Water condition
Description
Non-absorptive
The rock itself is not attracted to groundwater and groundwater remains in pores and
fracture spaces as free water
Capillarity
absorptive
Slightly
absorptive
Some decomposed clayey particles in rock may absorb water and its percentage is not
more than 1 % of the total volume
Moderately
absorptive
Highly absorptive
The rock easily absorbs water when it is saturated and may undergo volumetric
changes upon wetting and drying. However, volume changes do not result in the
fracturing of rock, although its geomechanical properties may drastically decrease
Extremely
absorptive
The rock rapidly absorbs water when it is exposed to saturation and disintegrates
during the absorption process
123
. Aydan et al.
O
1266
Table 11 Classification
parameters and their ratings for
rock mass quality rating
(RMQR)
Slight
Moderate
Heavy
degradation
degradation
degradation
12
1-0
None
(solid or
massive)
One set
plus
random
Two sets
plus random
Crushed or
shattered
Rating (RDSN)
20
16
12
1-0
Discontinuity
spacing (DS)
None or
DS 24 m
24 >DS 6
m
6 m>DS
1.2 m
1.2 m > DS
0.3 m
0.3
m>DS0.07 m
0.07 m > DS
75 > RQD
35
35 > RQD
1-0
Slickensided
with thin infill
Thick fill or
Degradation
degree (DD)
Fresh
Rating (RDD)
15
Discontinuity
set number
(DSN)
or RQD
Rating (RDS)
Discontinuity
condition (DC)
Decomposed
Stained
100
20
16
Healed or
intermittent
None
12
Relatively
smooth and tight
Rough
separation
or separation
(t > 10 mm)
(t < 5 mm)
Rating (RDC)
30
26
22
15
Aperture or separation
Rating (RDCA)
Infilling
0.1
0.25 m
m
0.25
0.5 mm
0.5
2.5 mm
2.5
10 mm
>10 mm
Thin
filling
Thick
filling
None
Surfac
e
stainin
g only
1<t<1
0 mm
6 > t >1
0 mm
Thin
coating
<1 mm
Very
thick
filling or
shear
zone
t > 60 mm
Rating (RDCI)
Descripti
ve
Roughness
Profile
No. in
Fig. 9
Rating (RDCR)
Groundwater
seepage
condition
(GWSC)
None or
very
tight,
<0.1 mm
1-0
Very
rough
Rough
Smooth
undulati
ng
Smooth
planar
Slickensided
Shear
band/zone
10
1-0
10
1-0
Dry
Damp
Wet
Dripping
Flowing
Gushing
Nonabsorptive
Capillarity or
electrically
absorptive
Slightly
absorptive
Moderately
absorptive
Highly
absorptive
Extremely absorptive
1-0
Rating (RGWSC)
Groundwater
absorption
condition
(GWAC)
123
Rating (RGWAC)
1267
II
III
IV
VI
Description of
rock mass
Solid or rock
material
Very good
Good
Fair or medium
Poor or weak
Very poor or
very weak
RMQR
100 C RMQR [ 95
95 C RMQR [ 80
80 C RMQR [ 60
60 C RMQR [ 40
40 C RMQR [ 20
20 C RMQR
RMR 100
or
Q 100:06RMQR3
123
. Aydan et al.
O
1268
Table 13 Direct relations between rock mass classification and properties of rock mass
Property
Deformation modulus, Em
Empirical relation
Proposed by
Bieniawski (1978)
Em 10RMR10=40 (GPa)
Em e4:4070:081RMR (GPa)
Em 0:0097RMR3:54 (MPa)
Em 25 log Q (GPa)
p
GSI10=40
rci
Em 1 D2
10010
Palmstrom (1996)
Em 0:1RMR=10
p
Em 73 10RMR44=21 (GPa)
1=3
Barton (1995)
Em 10Q (GPa)
r 1=3
ci
Em 10 Q 100
(GPa)
p
rci
GSI10=40
Em 10
100 (GPa)
Barton (2002)
Hoek and Brown (1997)
Friction angle, /m ()
Cohesion, cm (MPa)
Poissons ratio, mm
rcm 0:0016RMR2:5
r 1=3
ci
rcm 5c Q 100
/m 20 0:5RMR
/m 20r0:25
cm
Jw
1 Jr
/m tan
Ja 1
Barton(2002)
Barton (2002)
/m
cm r2cm 1sin
cos /m
rci
1
cm RQD
Jn SRF 100
mm 0:251 ercm =4
RMR
mm 0:5 0:2 RMR0:2100RMR
Em deformation modulus of rock mass, Ei Youngs modulus of intact rock, RMR rock mass rating, Q rock mass quality, GSI Geological Strength
Index, D disturbance factor, rci uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock, rcm uniaxial compressive strength of rock mass, RQD Rock Quality
Designation, RMi Rock Mass Index, WD weathering degree; /m friction angle of rock mass, cm cohesion of rock mass, vm Poissons ratio of rock
mass, Jn joint set rating, Jr joint roughness rating, Jw joint water rating, Ja joint alteration rating, SRF stress reduction factor, c rock density (t/m3)
rock mass by those of intact rock and rock mass classification indexes, as listed in Table 14.
Aydan and Dalgc (1998) proposed an empirical relation
between RMR and rock mass strength in terms of the
strength of intact rock. This relation was extended to other
geomechanical properties of rock mass by Aydan and
Kawamoto (2000). Recently, Aydan et al. (2012) and Aydan and Ulusay (2013) provided relations for six different
mechanical properties of rock mass using the relation
proposed by Aydan and Kawamoto (2000). In this study,
RMR is replaced by RMQR, and it is given in the following
form for any mechanical properties of rock mass in terms
of those of intact rock:
123
a a0 a0 a100
RMQR
RMQR b100 RMQR
1269
Table 14 Empirical relations between rock mass classification and normalized properties of rock mass
Property
Relation
Proposed by
Deformation modulus, Em
Em
Ei
Em
Ei
Em
Ei
Em
Ei
Em
Ei
Em
Ei
rcm
rci
rcm
rci
RMR
RMRb100RMR
10:5D
0:02 1e6015DGSI=11
12 1 cos p RMR
100
0:0186RQD1:91
10
RMR100=36
e
p
s s eRMR100=9
RMR100=24
rcm
RMR
RMR6100RMR rci
rcm
rci
GSI100
93D
1
GSI=15
1
e20=3
26 e
Cohesion, cm
RMR
cm RMR6100RMR
ci
Friction angle, /m
/m
/i
RMR
0:3 0:7 RMRb100RMR
Poissons ratio, mm
mm
mi
RMR
2:5 1:5 RMR100RMR
rtm
rti
RMR
RMR6100RMR
Tokashiki (2011)
s, a rock mass constants, ci cohesion of intact rock, /i friction angle of intact rock, mi Poissons ratio of intact rock
a0
a100
Deformation modulus
0.0
1.0
Poissons ratio
2.5
1.0
1.0
0.0
1.0
Tensile strength
0.0
1.0
Cohesion
0.0
1.0
Friction angle
0.3
1.0
1.0
123
. Aydan et al.
O
1270
Fig. 13 Illustration of in situ testing techniques in Japan [translated and arranged from Hibino (2007)]
Fig. 14 Views of in situ experiments on rock mass in Minami Daitojima fishing port, Japan: a plate loading test, b rock shear test (Tokashiki and
Aydan 2012)
Fig. 15 Comparison of
experimental data for:
a deformation modulus and
b Poissons ratio of rock mass
with the empirical relation
(Eq. 5) together with the values
of the parameters given in
Table 15
123
1271
Fig. 16 Comparison of
experimental data for: a uniaxial
compressive and b tensile
strengths of rock masses with
empirical relations (Eq. 5)
together with the values of the
parameters given in Table 15
123
. Aydan et al.
O
1272
where:
RMQR
ci ;
RMQR
6100 RMQR
RMQR
/m 0:3 0:7
/i
100
cm
123
cmo
8
ebm rn rn tan /m1
s cm1 1 1
cm1
where:
RMQR
c1 ;
RMQR 6 100 RMQR
RMQR
co ;
cmo
RMQR 6 100 RMQR
RMQR
bm 0:3 0:7
bi
RMQR 100 RMQR
cm1
1273
6 Conclusions
123
. Aydan et al.
O
1274
consists of five important parameters to assess the condition of rock mass. The RMQR is used for the evaluation
of engineering properties of rock masses utilizing the
unified empirical relation proposed by Aydan and
Kawamoto (2000) when it is considered to an be equivalent continuum body. Various mechanical properties of
rock mass evaluated through the unified formula have
been compared with actual measurements on rock masses
in various sites in Japan. The engineering properties
involve not only the uniaxial compressive strength and
deformation modulus of rock mass, but also Poissons
ratio, tensile strength, cohesion and friction angle, which
are of paramount importance for the design of rock
engineering structures. Furthermore, the authors strongly
suggest that the relations for normalized properties
should be used for evaluating the properties of rock mass
using properties of intact rock and its rock mass rating.
The comparison of the empirical unified formula together
with the values of constants were found to be quite
consistent with the experimental results for data compiled
from various major rock engineering projects in Japan.
Although some scattering of the measured data exists, the
values of parameters suggested for different geomechanical properties of rock masses are found to be
appropriate and can be used with some confidence. When
a representative value of RMQR is determined for a given
site, the geomechanical properties of rock mass can be
obtained using Eq. (5) together with the values of constants given in Table 15 and the values of intact rock for
a desired property. Furthermore, the procedure proposed
by Aydan et al. (2012) for evaluating the experimental
results from in situ shear tests is adopted in this study and
it was found that the estimations are consistent with
the actual measurements. The comparisons between
the experimental results and estimations indicate that the
proposed relations are quite promising. Therefore, the
empirical relations used in this study should be quite
useful tools for engineers involved in engineering projects in rock masses.
Acknowledgments The authors sincerely thank Prof. Hasan Gercek
of Bulent Ecevit University (Turkey) for reading the draft and making
many valuable suggestions for the improvement of this manuscript.
The authors also sincerely acknowledge Emeritus Prof. T. Kawamoto
of Nagoya University for providing the reports on the results of many
in situ tests on rock mass properties, as well as his participation in the
evaluation of properties of rock masses in large projects in Japan and
his advice. Furthermore, the members of the Sub-committee for Insitu Testing and Monitoring of Rock Mechanics Committee of the
Japan Society of Civil Engineers are gratefully acknowledged for
their hectic discussions on the generally non-accessible results of
experiments of in situ tests of rock masses in the meetings of the subcommittee. The authors also acknowledge the two anonymous
reviewers for their critical reviews and constructive comments that
lead to significant improvements to the article.
123
References
Agricola G (1556) De re metallica. Translated from the first Latin
edition of 1556 by H.C. Hoover and L.H. Hoover, 1950. Dover
Publications, Inc., New York
(2000) The relation between rock mass classifiAkagi T, Aydan O
cation indices and rock mass properties, Section 5. In: A
guideline for testing methods of deformability and shear strength
of in situ rock massescommentary and application to design of
structures. Rock Mechanics Committee of Japan Society of Civil
Engineers (JSCE-RMC) (in Japanese)
(1995) The stress state of the Earth and the Earths crust due
Aydan O
to gravitational pull. In: Proceedings of the 35th US rock
mechanics symposium, Lake Tahoe, USA, June 1995,
pp 237243
, Dalgc S (1998) Prediction of deformation behaviour of
Aydan O
3-lanes Bolu tunnels through squeezing rocks of North Anatolian
Fault Zone (NAFZ). In: Proceedings of the regional symposium
on sedimentary rock engineering, Taipei, Taiwan, November
1998, pp 228233
, Kawamoto T (1990) Discontinuities and their effect on rock
Aydan O
mass. In: Proceedings of the international conference on rock
joints, Loen, Norway, June 1990. ISRM, pp 149155
, Kawamoto T (2000) Assessing mechanical properties of
Aydan O
rock masses through RMR rock classification system. In:
Proceedings of the GeoEng 2000 symposium, Sydney, Australia,
November 2000. Paper no. OA0926 (on CD)
, Kawamoto T (2001) The stability assessment of a large
Aydan O
underground opening at great depth. In: Proceedings of the 17th
international mining congress and exhibition of Turkey (IMCET
2001), Ankara, Turkey, June 2001, vol 1, pp 277288
, Shimizu Y (1995) Surface morphology characteristics of
Aydan O
rock discontinuities with particular reference to their genesis.
Fractogr Geol Soc Spec Publ 92:1126
, Ulusay R (2003) Geotechnical and geoenvironmental
Aydan O
characteristics of man-made underground structures in Cappadocia, Turkey. Eng Geol 69:245272
, Ulusay R (2013) Geomechanical evaluation of Derinkuyu
Aydan O
Antique Underground City and its implications in geoengineering. Rock Mech Rock Eng 46(4):731754. doi:10.1007/s00603012-0301-7
, Akagi T, Kawamoto T (1993) The squeezing potential of
Aydan O
rocks around tunnels; theory and prediction. Rock Mech Rock
Eng 26(2):137163
, Akagi T, Kawamoto T (1996) The squeezing potential of
Aydan O
rock around tunnels: theory and prediction with examples taken
from Japan. Rock Mech Rock Eng 29(3):125143
, Ulusay R, Kawamoto T (1997) Assessment of rock mass
Aydan O
strength for underground excavations. In: Proceedings of the
36th US rock mechanics symposium, New York, June/July 1997,
pp 777786
, Dalgc S, Kawamoto T (2000) Prediction of squeezing
Aydan O
potential of rocks in tunnelling through a combination of an
analytical method and rock mass classifications. Italian Geotech
J 34(1):4144
, Tokashiki N, Genis M (2012) Some considerations on yield
Aydan O
(failure) criteria in rock mechanics. In: Proceedings of the 46th
US rock mechanics/geomechanics symposium, Chicago, Illinois,
June 2012. ARMA 12-640 (on CD)
Barton N (1976) The shear strength of rock and rock joints. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 13:255279
Barton N (1995) The influence of joint properties in modelling jointed
rock masses. In: Proceedings of the 8th international congress on
rock mechanics, Tokyo, Japan, September 1995, pp 10231032
1275
(eds) Suggested methods prepared by the ISRM Commission on
Testing Methods. Compilation arranged by the ISRM Turkish
National Group, Ankara, Turkey
Jasarevic I, Kovacevic MS (1996) Analyzing applicability of existing
classification for hard carbonate rock in Mediterranean area. In:
Proceedings of EUROCK96, Turin, Italy, September 1996,
pp 811818
Kalamaras GS, Bieniawski ZT (1995) A rock strength concept for
coal seams incorporating the effect of time. In: Proceedings of
the 8th ISRM congress, Tokyo, Japan, September 1995, vol 1,
pp 295302
Karakul H, Ulusay R (2013) Empirical correlations for predicting
strength properties of rocks from P-wave velocity under different
degrees of saturation. Rock Mech Rock Eng 46(5):981999
Kayabasi A, Gokceoglu C, Ercanoglu M (2003) Estimating the
deformation modulus of rock masses: a comparative study. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 40(1):5563
Kendorski FF, Cummings RA, Bieniawski ZT, Skinner EH (1983) A
rock mass classification scheme for the planning of caving mine
drift supports. In: Proceedings of the rapid excavation and
tunneling conference, Chicago, Illinois, June 1983. AIME, New
York, pp 193223
Kikuchi K, Saito K (1975) A proposed method for the classifications
of rock grades in connection with bearing resistance of
foundation rock. In: Proceedings of the 9th Japan symposium
on rock mechanics, Tokyo, Japan, pp 6670 (in Japanese)
Kikuchi K, Saito K, Kusonoki KI (1982) Geotechnically integrated
evaluation on the stability of dam foundation rocks. In:
Proceedings of the 14th international congress on large dams,
Rio de Janerio, Brazil, May 1982, pp 4974
Mitri HS, Edrissi R, Henning J (1994) Finite element modeling of
cable bolted slopes in hard rock ground mines. In: Proceedings
of the SME annual meeting, Albuquerque, New Mexico,
February 1994, pp 94116
Nicholson GA, Bieniawski ZT (1990) A nonlinear deformation
modulus based on rock mass classification. Int J Min Geol Eng
8:181202
Nosei M (1962) On the in situ experiments of rock mass at the site of
Kurobe IV Dam. In: Proceedings of the first rock mechanics
symposium of Japan, Tokyo, paper no. 11 (in Japanese)
Palmstrom A (1996) RMia system for characterizing rock mass
strength for use in rock engineering. J Rock Mech Tunn Technol
1(2):69108
Priest SD (1985) Hemispherical projection methods in rock mechanics. George Allen and Unwin, London
Priest SD, Hudson JA (1981) Estimation of discontinuity spacing and
trace length using scanline surveys. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
Geomech Abstr 18:183197
Serafim JL, Pereira JP (1983) Considerations of the geomechanics
classification of Bieniawski. In: Proceedings of the international
symposium on engineering geology and underground construction, Lisbon, Portugal, LNEC, vol 1 (I), pp 3344
Stini J (1950) Tunnelbaugeologie. Springer, Vienna
Tanaka M (1964) Introduction to engineering geology for civil
engineers. Sankaido, Tokyo (in Japanese)
Tanimoto C, Yoshikawa T, Hojo A (1989) Rapid excavation of a
headrace tunnel and loosening in rock mass in Shin-Aimoto
power station project. J Soc Mater Sci Japan 38(426):241247
(in Japanese)
Terzaghi K (1946) Rock defects and loads on tunnel support. In:
Proctor RV, White T (eds) Rock tunneling with steel supports.
Commercial Shearing & Stamping Co., Youngstown, pp 4364
Terzaghi RD (1965) Sources of error in joint surveys. Geotechnique
15:287304
Tokashiki N (2011) Study on the engineering properties of Ryukyu
limestone and the evaluation of the stability of its rock mass and
123
1276
masonry structures. PhD thesis, Waseda University (in Japanese
with English abstract)
(2010) The stability assessment of overhangTokashiki N, Aydan O
ing Ryukyu limestone cliffs with an emphasis on the evaluation
of tensile strength of rock mass. J Geotech Eng JSCE
66(2):397406
(2011a) A comparative study on the analytical
Tokashiki N, Aydan O
and numerical stability assessment methods for rock cliffs in
Ryukyu Islands. In: Proceedings of the 13th international
conference of the International Association for Computer
Methods and Advances in Geomechanics (IACMAG), Melbourne, Australia, May 2011, pp 663668
(2011b) Application of rock mass classificaTokashiki N, Aydan O
tion systems to Ryukyu limestone and the evaluation of their
mechanical properties. In: Proceedings of the 40th symposium
on rock mechanics, Tokyo, Japan, January 2011, pp 387392 (in
Japanese)
(2012) Estimation of rockmass properties of
Tokashiki N, Aydan O
Ryukyu limestone. In: Proceedings of the 7th Asian rock
mechanics symposium, Seoul, Korea, October 2012, pp 725734
(1998) A study on merits and de-merits of
Ulusay R, Aydan O
excavation by TBM by considering Takisato Tunnel in Japan as
an example. Jeoloji Muhendisligi (Geol Eng) 51:5161 (in
Turkish)
123
. Aydan et al.
O
nal E (1996) Modified rock mass classification: M-RMR system.
U
Milestones in rock engineering. The Bieniawski Jubilee Collection, Balkema, pp 203223
zkan I, Ulusay R (1992) Characterization of weak, stratified
nal E, O
U
and clay-bearing rock masses. In: Hudson JA (ed) ISRM
symposium: EUROCK92 rock characterization, Chester, UK,
September 1992. British Geotechnical Society, London,
pp 330335
Van Heerden WL (1975) In situ complete stressstrain characteristics
of large coal specimens. J S Afr Min Metall 75:207217
Wickham GE, Tiedemann HR, Skinner EH (1972) Support determinations based on geologic predictions. In: Proceedings of 1st
rapid excavation tunnelling conference. AIME, New York,
pp 4364
Wickham GE, Tiedemann HR, Skinner EH (1974) Ground support
prediction modelRSR concept. In: Proceedings of 2nd rapid
excavation tunneling conference. AIME, New York, pp 691707
Yoshinaka R, Sakurai S, Kikuchi K (1989) Rock mass classification
and its application. Japanese Civil Engineering Organization,
Tokyo, pp 2031
Zhang L, Einstein HH (2004) Using RQD to estimate the deformation
modulus of rock masses. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 41:337341