Mining Operations Division

Mineral House, 100 Plain St

EAST PERTH WA 6004
Phone: (09) 9222-3092
Email: mod@dme.wa.gov.au
http://www.dme.wa.gov.au

THE “Q-SYSTEM” GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN METHOD

WAS UPDATED IN 1994

INTRODUCTION

Following a number of underground rock failure events, the Department of Minerals

and Energy (Department) has become aware that, despite subsequent changes, the
original version of the “Q-system” published by Barton, Lien and Lunde (1974)1 is still
widely referred to in the mining industry. The Department is aware that a number of
recognised text books published during the past five years also refer to the original
document by Barton, Lien and Lunde (1974).

The “Q-system” is a rock support and reinforcement design method that is based on the
rock mass quality number also referred to as the Q-value. The determination of the Q,
the rock mass quality number, is described in the paper by Barton, Lien and Lunde
(1974). This safety bulletin assumes that the reader is reasonably familiar with the “Q-
system” and its application. Further details can be found in the papers referenced.

The Department is aware of the following publications that describe the changes that
have been made to the “Q-system”:

• Grimstad, E and Barton, N (1993). Updating of the Q-system for NMT, in

Proceedings of the International Symposium on Sprayed Concrete, 46-66.
Norwegian Concrete Association, Oslo.

• Barton, N and Grimstad, E (1994). The Q-System following twenty years of

application in NMT support selection, in Felsbau 12(6):428-436.

• Barton, N (1996). Investigation, design and support of major road tunnels in jointed
rock using NMT principles, in Proceedings IX Australian Tunnelling Conference,
145-159. Australian Underground Construction and Tunnelling Association,
Sydney.

The acronym “NMT” in these documents refers to the “Norwegian Method of

Tunnelling”.
Department of Minerals and Energy - Mining Operations Division Page 2 of 4

CHANGES TO THE “Q-SYSTEM”

The main changes described in these papers relate to the “stress reduction factor” (SRF)
and the “excavation support ratio” (ESR) and the numerical values associated with these
terms. The SRF and ESR values are used in the determination of the Q-value and the
estimation of rock support and reinforcement requirements. The paper by Barton and
Grimstad (1994) is used as the basis for the following summary of the changes.

STRESS REDUCTION FACTOR (SRF)

In situations where “competent rock, rock stress problems” exist the values associated
with the SRF term have been significantly increased.

6(b) Competent rock, rock stress problems σc/σ1 σθ/σc SRF

L Moderate slabbing after > 1 hour in massive 5-3 0.5-0.65 5-50
rock
M Slabbing and rock burst after a few minutes in 3-2 0.65-1 50-200
massive rock
N Heavy rock burst (strain-burst) and immediate <2 >1 200-400
dynamic deformations in massive rock

The new SRF values have been increased considerably from the original values, in
some cases by a factor of 20 and an extra category has been added.

EXCAVATION SUPPORT RATIO (ESR)

Following is a comparison of the original and updated ESR values:

“Summary of recommended ESR values (update) for selecting safety level”

Type of Excavation Original Updated

ESR1 ESR

A Temporary mine openings, etc ca. 3-5? ca. 2-5

B Permanent mine openings, water tunnels for hydropower 1.6 1.6-2.0

(excluding high pressure penstocks), pilot tunnels, drifts
and headings for large openings, surge chambers

C Storage caverns, water treatment plants, minor road and rail 1.3 1.2-1.3
railway tunnels, access tunnel

“The ‘Q System’Geotechnical Design Method was Updated in 1994” 17 May 1999

Department of Minerals and Energy - Mining Operations Division Page 3 of 4

(cont.)

Type of Excavation Original Updated

ESR1 ESR

D Power stations, major road and railway tunnels, civil 1.0 0.9-1.1
defence chambers, portals, intersections

E Underground nuclear power stations, railway stations, ca 0.8? 0.5-0.8

sports and public facilities, factories, major gas pipeline
tunnels

The updated ESR values now incorporate a range of values in each category (A to E)
and the ESR for temporary mine openings now ranges from 2 to 5. The following
quotation from Barton and Grimstad (1994) is provided for a brief explanation of some
updated ESR terms:

“Note that ESR (for modifying the span) is a user’s method of modifying the level of
safety required. A headrace tunnel to a distant power house can tolerate occasional falls
of stones (use ESR ≈1.6-2.0), likewise, a non-entry mining stope (use ESR ≈2-5).”
(Emphasis added.)

IMPLICATIONS OF THE CHANGES

In view of the above changes to the “Q-system” that were made in 1994 it is
recommended that all mining companies review any rock support and reinforcement
designs that were based, directly or indirectly, on the original “Q-system”.

COMPARISON OF THE ORIGINAL AND UPDATED “Q-SYSTEM”

The following example of the use of the “Q-system” is provided to demonstrate how the
changes to the “Q-system” may effect the predicted rock support and reinforcement
requirements.

An ore drive 4 m high by 4 m wide is to be developed in a rock mass where the major
principal stress (σ1) has been estimated to be approximately 50 MPa. The rock mass is
a strong competent jointed sequence of rocks with an average uniaxial compressive
strength (σc) of approximately 200 MPa determined with standard laboratory testing
procedures using drill core samples. Table 1 summarises the “Q-system” parameters
and their numerical values as used in this example.

“The ‘Q System’Geotechnical Design Method was Updated in 1994” 17 May 1999

Department of Minerals and Energy - Mining Operations Division Page 4 of 4

Table 1. Example of the original and updated versions of the “Q-system”

Parameter Description of parameters Barton, Lien and Barton and Grimstad (1994)
Lunde (1974)
RQD Fair rock mass quality. 70 70
(Drill core RQD ≈70%)
Jn Three joint sets 9 9
Jr Smooth, undulating. 2 2
Ja Unaltered joint walls, 1 1
surface staining only.
Jw Dry excavations or minor 1 1
inflow, ie < 5 l/min.
SRF Moderate slabbing after > 1 7 27.5
hour in massive rock.
(σc/σ1 = 200/50 = 4)
Q Rock mass quality number 70 x 2 x 1 70 x 2 x 1
Q = RQD x Jr x Jw 9x1x7 9 x 1 x 27.5
Jn x Ja x SRF Q = 2.22 Q = 0.57
ESR Ore drive (accessed by the 3 1.9
mine workforce during (Temporary mine (Entry mining situation, hence
mining operations) opening) use ESR < or = 2)

Span Drive back span (m) 4 4

Span For use with design charts. 4 4
ESR 3 1.9
= 1.33 = 2.11
Design chart, See Figure 5 of See Figure 3 of Barton and
etc used Barton, Lien and Grimstad (1994) and equation
Lunde (1974). 7 of Barton, Lien and Lunde
(1974).
Rock support Determined by reference to No support Reinforcement category 4:
and design charts and other required. Systematic bolting 1.6 m x
reinforcement relevant information. 1.6 m spacing, bolt length
requirements 2.3 m and unreinforced
shotcrete 4-10 cm thick.

The significant difference in the rock support and reinforcement requirements

predicted by the original and the updated “Q-system” are clearly demonstrated in
the above example.

It will be appreciated that these calculations should be performed for a range of typical
“Q-system” parameters that are likely to be encountered in practice. It may also be
necessary to investigate the possible failure modes as well as the size and shape of
blocks that may potentially be formed by the intersection of planes of weakness. This
will provide a better appreciation of the likely variation in the rock support and
reinforcement that may be required.

1
Barton, N, Lien, R and Lunde, J (1974). Engineering classification of rock masses for design of tunnel
support, in Rock Mechanics 6(4):189-236
14 4 4 24 4 4 8

zma723ia.doc

“The ‘Q System’Geotechnical Design Method was Updated in 1994” 17 May 1999