Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

ARMR, a new classification system for the rating of anisotropic rock masses

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The engineering behavior of rock masses is strongly dependent on anisotropy, which is present at different scales, from the microscale in the intact rock due to the alignment of rock crystals (inherent anisotropy) to the macroscale in rock masses with anisotropic rock structure, characterized by distinct bedding or schistosity planes. This paper presents a new rock mass classification system, Anisotropic Rock Mass Rating (ARMR), specifically developed for the classification of anisotropic rock masses. ARMR considers the following rating parameters: (a) anisotropy strength index, RC; (b) uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock; (c) degree of structure anisotropy; (d) corrected rock quality designation (RQD); (e) condition of anisotropy surfaces; and (f) groundwater conditions. Its use is illustrated and explained by application to specific case studies in anisotropic rock masses, and the advantages and limitations of the classification system are outlined. The strength of anisotropic rock masses is determined using the modified Hoek–Brown criterion (Saroglou and Tsiambaos, Int J Rock Mech Mining Sci 45:223–234, 2008), which is extended to rock masses with the use of ARMR.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aydan Ö, Ulusay R, Tokashiki N (2014) A new rock mass quality rating system: rock mass quality rating (RMQR) and its application to the estimation of geomechanical characteristics of rock masses. Rock Mech Rock Eng 47(4):1255–1276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bar N, Johnson TM, Weekes G (2016) Using directional shear stress models to predict slope stability in highly anisotropic rock masses. In: Ulusay R, Aydan O, Gerçek H, Hindistan MA, Tuncay E (eds) Proceedings of the 2016 ISRM international symposium. Rock mechanics and rock engineering: from the past to the future, Cappadocia, Turkey, August 2016, pp 595–600

  • Barton N, Quadros E (2015) Anisotropy is everywhere, to see, to measure, and to model. Rock Mech Rock Eng 48:1323–1339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-014-0632-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton N, Lien R, Lunde J (1974) Engineering classification of rock masses for the design of tunnel support. Rock Mech 6(4):189–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bewick RP, Kaiser PK (2009) Influence of rock mass anisotropy on tunnel stability. In: Diederichs M, Grasselli G (eds) ROCKENG09: proceedings of the 3rd CANUS rock mechanics symposium, Toronto, Canada, May 2009

  • Bieniawski ZT (1973) Engineering classification of jointed rock masses. Trans S Afr Inst Civ Engrs 15:335–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Bieniawski ZT (1989) Engineering rock mass classifications. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonini M, Barla G (2012) The Saint Martin La Porte access adit (Lyon–Turin Base tunnel) revisited. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 30:38–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai M, Kaiser P (2006) Visualization of rock mass classification systems. Geotech Geol Eng 24:1089–1102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen YF, Wei K, Liu W, Hu SH, Hu R, Zhou CB (2016) Experimental characterization and micromechanical modelling of anisotropic slates. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49:3541–3557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-016-1009-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donath FA (1961) Experimental study of shear failure in anisotropic rocks. Geol Soc Am Bull 72:985–990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Brown ET (1997) Practical estimates of rock mass strength. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 34(8):1165–1186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Karzulovic A (2000) Rock mass properties for surface mines. In: Hustralid WA, McCarter MK, van Zyl DJA (eds) Slope stability in surface mining. Society for Mining, Metallurgical and Exploration (SME), Littleton, Colorado, pp 59–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Kaiser PK, Bawden WF (1995) Support of underground excavations in hard rock. AA Balkema, Rotterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Marinos P, 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 Eng Geol Environ 57(2):151–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Carranza-Torres C, Corkum B (2002) The Hoek–Brown failure criterion—2002 edition. In: Proceedings of the 5th North American rock mechanics symposium and 17th Tunnelling Association of Canada Conference: NARMS-TAC, Toronto, Canada, pp 267–271

  • Hoek E, Carter TG, Diederichs MS (2013) Quantification of the Geological Strength Index chart. In: Proceedings of the 47th US rock mechanics/geomechanics symposium, San Francisco, California, June 2013, paper ARMA 13-672

  • International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM) (2007) The complete ISRM suggested methods for rock characterization, testing and monitoring: 1974–2006. In: Ulusay R, Hudson JA (eds) Suggested methods prepared by the ISRM commission on testing methods. Compilation arranged by the ISRM Turkish National Group, Ankara

    Google Scholar 

  • Ismael MA, Imam HF, El-Shayeb Y (2014) A simplified approach to directly consider intact rock anisotropy in Hoek–Brown failure criterion. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 6(5):486–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger JC (1960) Shear failure of anisotropic rocks. Geol Mag 97:65–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakubec J, Laubscher DH (2000) The MRMR rock mass rating classification system in mining practice. In: Proceedings of MassMin 2000, Brisbane, Australia, October/November 2000, pp 413–421

  • Laubscher DH (1990) A geomechanics classification system for the rating of rock mass in mine design. J S Afr Inst Min Metall 90:257–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowson AR, Bieniawski ZT (2013) Critical assessment of RMR-based tunnel design practices: a practical engineer’s approach. In: Proceedings of the rapid excavation & tunneling conference (RETC 2013) Washington, DC, June 2013.. Society of Mining Engineers, pp 180–198

  • Marinos P, Hoek E (2000) GSI—a geologically friendly tool for rock mass strength estimation. In: Proceedings of the GeoEng2000 conference, Melbourne, Australia, November 2000

  • Marinos V, Marinos P, Hoek E (2005) The geological strength index: applications and limitations. Bull Eng Geol Environ 64(1):55–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marinos PG, Marinos V, Hoek E (2007) The Geological Strength Index (GSI): a characterization tool for assessing engineering properties for rock masses. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on rock mass classification in underground mining. DHHS (NIOSH) publication no. 2007-128

  • Martin CD, Kaiser PK, McCreath DR (1999) Hoek–Brown parameters for predicting the depth of brittle failure around tunnels. Can Geotech J 36:136–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin CD, Giger S, Lanyon GW (2016) Behaviour of weak shales in underground environments. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49:673–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Standards Compilation Group of People’s Republic of China (1994) GB 50218-94. Standard for engineering classification of rock masses. China Planning Press, Beijing, China, pp 1–22 (in Chinese)

  • Osgoui RR, Ulusay R, Unal E (2010) An assistant tool for the Geological Strength Index to better characterize poor and very poor rock masses. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 47:690–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmstrøm A (1982) The volumetric joint count—a useful and simple measure of the degree of jointing. In: Proceedings of the 4th international congress of the International Association of Engineering Geology (IAEG), New Delhi, India, December 1982, pp V.221–V.228

  • Palmstrøm A (1996) Characterizing rock masses by the RMi for use in practical rock engineering. Tunnel Undergr Space Technol 11(2):175–186 (part 1); 11(3):287–303 (part 2)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmstrom A, Broch E (2006) Use and misuse of rock mass classification systems with particular reference to the Q-system. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 21:575–593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papavasiliou S, Nomikos PP, Sofianos AI (2010) Tunnel overstressing due to the anisotropic rock structure. In: Proceedings of the 6th Asian rock mechanics symposium, New Delhi, India, October 2010, paper no. ARMS6-2010-081

  • Ramamurthy T (1993) Strength and modulus responses of anisotropic rocks. In: Hudson JA (ed) Comprehensive rock engineering, vol 1. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 313–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Rettighieri M, Triclot J, Mathieu E, Barla G, Panet M (2008) Difficulties associated with high convergences during excavation of the Saint Martin La Porte access adit. In: Building underground for the future: proceedings of the AFTES international congress, Monaco, Monte Carlo, October 2008. AFTES, Limonest, France, pp 395–403

  • Saroglou H (2007) Geological parameters affecting the geotechnical properties of intact rock. The effect of anisotropy. PhD thesis, National Technical University of Athens, 480 pp

  • Saroglou H (2013) Engineering behaviour of anisotropic and heterogeneous layered rocks. In: Proceedings of the IAEG conference “Global view of engineering geology and the environment”, Beijing, China, September 2013, pp 721–731

  • Saroglou H, Tsiambaos G (2007) Classification of anisotropic rocks. In: Proceedings of the 11th International congress of rock mechanics, Lisbon, Portugal, July 2007, vol 1, pp 191–196

  • Saroglou H, Tsiambaos G (2008) A modified Hoek–Brown failure criterion for anisotropic intact rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 45:223–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert W, Mendez JMD (2017) Influence of foliation orientation on tunnel behavior. Proc Eng 191:880–885

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh B, Göel RK (1999) Rock mass classification. A practical approach in civil engineering. Elsevier, the Netherlands

  • Sonmez H, Ulusay R (1999) Modifications to the geological strength index (GSI) and their applicability to stability of slopes. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 36:743–760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Truzman EIM (2009) Metamorphic rock mass characterization using the Geological Strength Index (GSI). In: Paper presented at the 43rd US rock mechanics symposium and 4th US–Canada rock mechanics symposium, Asheville, North Carolina, June/July 2009, 2009/1/1

  • Vutukuri VS, Hossaini SMF, Foroughi MH (1995) A study of the effect of roughness and inclination of weakness planes on the strength properties of rock and coal. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on the mechanics of jointed and faulted rock, Vienna, Austria, April 1995. Balkema, pp 151–155

  • Wickham, G.E., Tiedemann, H. R. and Skinner, E. H. (1972). Support determination based on geologic predictions, In: Lane, K.S.a.G., L. A., ed., North American Rapid Excavation and Tunneling Conference: Chicago, New York: Society of Mining Engineers of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers, p. 43–64

Download references

Acknowledgements

Dr. Saroglou acknowledges Prof. Qi and the Institute of Geology and Geophysics at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, where he was invited as a Visiting Professor under the President’s International Fellowship Initiative (PIFI). The assistance of Mr. N. Bar, Civil Engineer at Gecko Geotechnics Pty Ltd. and Mr. A. Maldonado, MPh Eng at UWA, Mining School, Mr. A. Stavrou, Engineering Geologist and Mr. S. Pollak, Civil Engineer from Arup Group are acknowledged for providing data.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geotechnical Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece

    Charalampos Saroglou

  2. Key Laboratory of Engineering Geomechanics, Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

    Charalampos Saroglou, Shengwen Qi & Songfeng Guo

  3. Shaoxing University, Shaoxing, Zhejiang Province, China

    Faquan Wu

Authors
  1. Charalampos Saroglou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shengwen Qi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Songfeng Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Faquan Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charalampos Saroglou.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saroglou, C., Qi, S., Guo, S. et al. ARMR, a new classification system for the rating of anisotropic rock masses. Bull Eng Geol Environ 78, 3611–3626 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-018-1369-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-018-1369-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation