International Journal of Civil

Engineering (IJCE)
ISSN(P): 2278-9987; ISSN(E): 2278-9995
Vol. 2, Issue 5, Nov 2013, 9-16
IASET

BLASTABILITY INDEX ON POOR QUALITY ROCK MASS

M. CHATZIANGELOU1 & B. CHRISTARAS2
1

Department of Civil Infrastructure Engineering, School of Technological Applications of Thessaloniki, Greece

2

Department of Geology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

ABSTRACT
The present paper proposes a new combined classification system connecting the quality and blastability of poor
and friable rock mass, heavily broken with mixture of angular and rounded rock pieces. The proposed methodology and
research that result in the Blastability Quality System (BQS) are described, and three useful diagrams of the above new
system aroused from our estimations. The proposed BQS is an easily and widely used tool as it is a quickly calculator for
blasting and rock mass quality. Taking into account our research calculations and the parameters of BQS, we came to some
conclusions for the relation of the blast ability index magnitude with the space and orientation of discontinuities.

KEYWORDS: Blastability, Blasting, Classification System, Rock Mass

INTRODUCTION
The property, which is referred as blastability of a rock mass, determines how easy is to explore a rock mass
under specified blast design, explosive characteristics and specified legislative constraints depending on the site specifics.
Two different rock masses, when are subjected to identical blast geometry and energy input from explosives, produce quite
different degrees of fragmentation (Ajoy & Akhilesh, 2012). This is because they have different resistance to
fragmentation by blasting (Blanco & Kumar, 2012).Rock mass comprises of several different rock types and is affected by
different stages of alteration in varying stress conditions. Blast ability appears to be a kind of intrinsic property, like the
hardness of a rock and, apart from the possibility of blast fragmentation from previous blasting events, it is uncontrollable.
Many rock mass quality classification systems (RQD, Q, RMR, GSI) have been developed for drilling and
excavation ability estimation. The present paper is trying to create a new system, connecting the quality and blastability of
rockmass, which can be, easily, used as an in situquick method, for tunnel excavation, in order to estimate quickly the
explosive results, in addition to drilling and excavation methods.
The rock mass, used in this study, is poor and friable, shared with lack of blockiness due to the close spacing of
weak schistosity or sheer planes and disintegrated with poorly interlocked, heavily broken rock mass with mixture of
angular and rounded rock pieces. Although the quality is very poor, a light blast may be needed as the small rock pieces are
tightly connected.

ALREADY KNOWN APPROACH; BLASTABILITY INDEX CONCERNING ROCK MASS

CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS
The factors, which influence the blasting results, fall into two groups. The first group refers to the intact rock
properties, which include strength, hardness, elasticity, deformability, density of rock, etc. These properties depend on rock
texture, internal bonds, composition and distribution of minerals forming the rock (Zhang et al., 2011). The second group
refers

to

the

discontinuity

structure

that

involves

orientation,

spacing

and

extent

of

discontinuities

(Singh & Sinha, 2012). The discontinuity structure has been created by a range of long-term geological processes.

10

M. Chatziangelou & B. Christaras

The coefficient of the Blast ability Index (BI) is a quantitative measure of the blastability of a rock mass. It is
more advantageous, the coefficient BI to be determined before blasting, in order to help with the blast design of an
excavation operation. Without any realistic chance, in the short term of a practical analytical solution of defining the value
of a BI, for a given rock mass as a function of material properties, the development of a comprehensive assessment system
for quantifying the blastability of rock masses is appear to have great potential(Latham and Lu, 1999).
Blastability index (BI) is used for the description of ease of blasting and it is also related to power factor. When
the BI is lower to 8, the ease of blasting is described as very difficult. When the BI range is between 8 and 13, the ease of
blasting is described as difficult. When the BI range is between 13 and 20, the ease of blasting is described as
moderate. When the BI range is between 20 and 40, the ease of blasting is described as easy. When the BI is higher
than 40, the ease of blasting is described as very easy. The above parameters are closely related to excavation cost which
is depended on the explosion, vibration, alteration, powder creation etc. (Kaushik & Phalguni, 2003).
In our study, BI is preferred to be calculated based on the following formula (Lilly, 1986), based on rock mass
description, joint density and orientation, specific gravity and hardness:
BI = 0.5 x (RMD+JPS+JPO+SGI+H)
Where,
BI = Blastability Index
RMD (Rock mass Description)

JPS (Joint Plan Spacing)

JPO (Joint Plane Orientation)

SGI = Specific Gravity Influence

10, for Powdery/Friable rockmass

20, for Blocky rockmass

50, for Totally Massive rockmass

10, for Closely Spacing (<0.1m)

20, for Intermediate (0.1-1.0m)

50, for Widely Spacing (>1.0m)

10, for Horizontal

20, for Dip out of the Face

30, for Strike Normal to Face

40, for Dip into Face

25 x Specific Gravity of rock (t/m3) 50

H = Hardness in Mho Scale (1-10)

Considering that blastability index is based on rock mass description, joint density and orientation, evokes the
same parameters that the Rock Mass Rating System - RMR (Bieniawski, 1989) is also based on.
Also, the above classification can be described by the Geological Strength Index GSI (Hoek, 1994).

NEW APPROACH CONNECTING BLASTABILITY AND QUALITY ABILITY

The lower part of the GSI diagram, which refers to i) laminated and sheared rock mass, with lack of blockiness
due to the close spacing of weak schistosity or sheer planes and ii) disintegrated rock mass, with poorly interlocked,

11

Blastability Index on Poor Quality Rock Mass

heavily broken rock with mixture of angular and rounded rock pieces, isdivided into eight parts (Figure 1); A -for GSI
about 0-12, B for GSI about 12-23, C for GSI about 22-23, D for GSI 7-17, E for GSI about 18-28, F for GSI

STRUCTURE

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

90

INTACT OF MASSIVE intact rock specimens of

massive in situ rock with
few
widely
spaced
discontinuities

VERY POOR
Slickenside, highly weathered surfaces with soft
clay coatings or fillings

POOR
Slickensided, highly weathered surfaces with
compact coatings of rillings or angular fragments

FAIR
Smooth, moderately weathered and altered surfaces

GOOD
Rough, slightly weathered, iron stained surfaces

VERY GOOD
Very rough, fresh unweathered surfaces

GEOLOGICAL
STRENGTH
INDEX
FOR
JOINTED ROCKS (Hoek and Marinos, 2000)
From the lithology, structure and surface
conditions of the discontinuities, estimate the
average value of GSI. Do not try to be too
precise. Quoting a range from 33 to 37 is more
realistic than stating that GSI=35. Note that the
table does not apply to structurally controlled
failures.Where weak planar structural planes
are present in an unfavourable orientation with
respect to the excavation face, these will
dominate the rock mass behaviour. The shear
strength of surfaces in rocks that are prone to
deterioration as a result of changes in moisture
content will be reduces if water is present.When
working with rocks in the fair to very poor
categories, a shift to the right may be made for
wet conditions. Water pressure is dealt with by
effective stress analysis.

SURFACE CONDITIONS

about 16-36, G for GSI 35-43, H - for GSI 42-50.

N/A

N/A

VERY BLOCKY - interlocked,

partially disturbed mass with
multi-faceted angular blocks
formed by 4 or more joint
sets

BLOCKY / DISTURBED /
SEAMY- folded with angular
blocks formed by many
intersecting
discontinuity
sets. Persistence of bedding
planes or schistosity

DISINTEGRATED - poorly
interlocked, heavily broken
rock mass with mixture of
angular and rounded rock
pieces

DECREASING INTERLOCKING OF ROCK PIECES

80
BLOCKY - well interlocked
undisturbed
rock
mass
consisting of cubical blocks
formed by three intersecting
discontinuity sets

70
60

50

40

30

20

D
10

LAMINATED / SHEARED Lack of blockiness due to

close spacing of
weak
schistosity of shear planes

N/A

N/A

Figure 1: Eight Parts Division of GSI Diagram

Taking into account the blast ability parameters, the BI is calculated for every possible combination of the above
parameters, which refers to powdery/friable rock mass. That means RMD is equal to 10 (powdery / friable rock mass). JPS
is used equal to 10 for closely spacing, 20 for intermediate spacing and 50 for widely spacing. JPO is used equal to 10 for
horizontal discontinuities, 20 for inclined discontinuities, where the excavation drives against dip direction, 30 for inclined
discontinuities with strike parallel to face, 40 for inclined discontinuities, where the excavation drives with dip direction.
SGI is calculated using specific gravity of rocks from 1 t/m3 to 3 t/m3.Mohs hardness scale (H) is estimated using the
average price of Mohs hardness scale of the minerals which compose the rock mass. For every possible RMR combination,
new combinations are calculated in addition to GSI range. Subsequently, we group the above estimations and we come to
the conclusion of specified RMR range on GSI parts, taking into account rock mass hardness, discontinuity spacing and
orientation. Also, the range of Blastability Index is calculated. Three useful diagrams of composite rock mass quality
systems (GSI and RMR) and blastability index (BI) result from the above estimations (Figure 2-4).

BLASTABILITY QUALITY SYSTEM (BQS)

The above new BQ System (Figure 2-4) connects the rock mass classification systems RMR and GSI, structural
data, hardness of rock mass, and blastability index. Initially, the discontinuities spacing is characterized; for close spaced
discontinuities, with spacing lower than 0,1m, figure 2 is used. For intermediate spaced discontinuities, with spacing
between 0,1m and 1m, figure 3 is used. For widely spaced discontinuities, with spacing higher than 1m, figure 4 is used.

12

M. Chatziangelou & B. Christaras

Looking the lower part of the figures 2, 3, and 4, there is a combined Geological Strength Index diagram with
RMR areas for every rock mass classification according to BI.
So, having completed the above classification, inputting the spacing and the orientation of discontinuities
combined with rock mass hardness, the Blastability Index (BI) range can easily be determined. At the final stage we can
input structure and surface conditions in order to estimate Geological Strength Index (GSI) and Rock Mass Rating (RMR).
This is a very useful approach as it includes the most useful characteristics of rock mass, which are easily
estimated and used in situ; looking a rock mass picture can easily characterize discontinuities spacing and orientation.
Also, we can estimate rock mass hardness using a Schmidt Hammer.
In addition to BQS easily and wide use, it is a quickly calculator for BI and rock mass quality, which make our
choice of excavation, blast and support measures quicker.

EXAMPLES OF USING BQ SYSTEM

The excavations, during the construction of Asprovalta-Strymonas part of Egnatia Highwayin Northern Greece,
were very difficult because of rock mass quality. Rock mass was consisted of weathered and cracked gneiss with
pegmatitic veins, or cracked marbles. There was no cohesion between rock mass pieces, so as they formed potential sliding
wedges. When the face area of disintegrated wedges had been uncovered, the sliding was happened suddenly
(Christaras et al, 2001). So, although the use of blasting was needed, the explosion had to be very careful, so as no accident
may happen. Looking at the rock mass example on figure 5, rock mass has close spaced discontinuities. Using the figure 2,
the orientation of discontinuities may be determined. Looking again figure 5, strike is parallel to tunnel axis. At next stage,
rock mass hardness needs to be also determined. So, as the rock mass is very weathered, it is extremely soft to medium
hard. Looking the figure 2, the BI is estimated14-41 and blasting is characterized as moderate to easy. That means, a small
amount of explosives could be used in order to help rock mass pieces to move, helping the excavation. could be used in
order to help rock mass pieces to move, helping the excavation.

CLOSE SPACED DISCONTINUITIES

Strike perpendicular to tunnel axis
Gradient discontinuities

STRUCTURE

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

50

40

(6)

50

VERY POOR

(4)

POOR

FAIR

(3)

(5)

(1)

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

RMR: 0-20

40

VERY GOOD

VERY POOR

(4)

POOR

(3)

FAIR

(2)

(5)

(1)

= 4-37

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

RMR: 0-20
20

40

VERY GOOD

VERY POOR

(4)

POOR

FAIR

(2)

GOOD

(3)

(5)

(1)

VERY GOOD

(5)
(4)

VERY POOR

FAIR

POOR

(3)

(2)

GOOD

= 19-47

50

RMR: 0-20
20

Excavation drives against dip

direction

Excavation drives with dip

direction

= 17-42

(1)

VERY GOOD

GEOLOGICAL
STRENGTH
INDEX
(GSI)

SURFACE CONDITIONS

= 14-41

Horizontal and gradient

discontinuities

(2)

Hard and very hard rockmass

(MOHS 8-10)

GOOD

Extremely soft to medium hard

rockmass (MOHS 0-7)

GOOD

Strike parallel to tunnel axis

50

RMR: 0-20
20

40

20

DISINTEGRATED

RMR: 41-60

RMR: 41-60

30

N/A

30

RMR: 21-40

RMR: 21-40

10

10

10

(7)

LAMINATED /
SHEARED

RMR: 41-60

30

RMR: 21-40

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

RMR: 0-20
(1)

RMR: 0-20
(5)

Very rough, fresh unweathered surfaces

N/A

RMR: 41-60

(6)

(3)

N/A

RMR: 0-20

Slickenside, highly weathered surfaces with soft clay coatings or fillings

Poorly interlocked, heavily broken rock mass with mixture of angular and rounded rock pieces

Smooth, moderately weathered and altered surfaces

(4)

Slickensided, highly weathered surfaces with compact coatings of rillings or angular fragments

(7)

Lack of blockiness due to close spacing of weak schistosity of shear planes

Figure 2: BQS for Close Spaced Discontinuities

RMR: 21-40
10

N/A

(2)

Rough, slightly weathered, iron stained surfaces

30

RMR: 0-20

13

Blastability Index on Poor Quality Rock Mass

INTERMEDIATE SPACED DISCONTINUITIES

Gradient discontinuities

STRUCTURE

RMR: 21-40

(6)

RMR: 0-20
20

RMR: 21-40

40

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

50

RMR: 0-20
20

RMR: 21-40

VERY POOR

(4)

FAIR

POOR

(2)

GOOD

(3)

(5)

(1)

(5)

VERY POOR

(4)

FAIR

POOR

(3)

(2)

GOOD

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

50

RMR: 0-20
40

= 19-44

(1)

VERY GOOD

VERY POOR

(4)

FAIR

POOR

(2)

GOOD

(3)

(5)

(1)

VERY GOOD

(5)

VERY POOR

(4)

POOR

(3)

(2)

GOOD

= 24-52

50
40

From extremely soft to soft

rock mass (MOHS 0-4)

= 17-47

(1)

(5)

VERY GOOD

VERY POOR

(4)

FAIR

POOR

(3)

(2)

GOOD

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

50

RMR: 0-20
20

Strike parallel to tunnel axis

Strike perpendicular to tunnel
axis when excavation drives
with dip direction

Hard and very hard rockmass

(MOHS 8-10)

= 14-46

(1)

VERY GOOD

(5)

VERY POOR

(4)

POOR

(3)

FAIR

GOOD

(2)

VERY GOOD

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

50
40

Extremely soft (when strike is

perpendicular to tunnel axis)
to medium hard rockmass
(MOHS 0-7)

= 11-37

(1)

SURFACE CONDITIONS

= 9-34

GEOLOGICAL
STRENGTH
INDEX
(GSI)

Strike parallel to tunnel axis and strike

perpendicular to tunnel axis when
excavation drives against dip direction

Medium hard to very hard

rockmass (MOHS 5-10)

FAIR

Extremely soft to soft rockmass

(MOHS 0-4)

VERY GOOD

Horizontal discontinuities

50
40

20

40

20

RMR: 21-40

20

DISINTEGRATED

RMR: 41-60

30

RMR: 41-60

RMR: 41-60

30

30

30

RMR: 41-60

30

30

RMR: 41-60

RMR: 21-40

RMR: 61-80

10

10

10

RMR: 41-60

10

(7)

10

10

RMR: 21-40

LAMINATED /
SHEARED

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

RMR: 0-20

N/A

N/A

(5)

Very rough, fresh unweathered surfaces

N/A

RMR: 0-20

RMR: 0-20

(1)

N/A

N/A

N/A

RMR: 0-20

N/A

RMR: 0-20

RMR: 0-20

Slickenside, highly weathered surfaces with soft clay coatings or fillings

(2)

Rough, slightly weathered, iron stained surfaces

(6)

(3)

Poorly interlocked, heavily broken rock mass with mixture of angular and rounded rock pieces

Smooth, moderately weathered and altered surfaces

(4)

(7)

Slickensided, highly weathered surfaces with compact coatings of rillings or angular fragments

Lack of blockiness due to close spacing of weak schistosity of shear planes

Figure 3: BQS for Intermediate Spaced Discontinuities

WIDELY SPACED DISCONTINUITIES

STRUCTURE

RMR: 41-60

20

RMR: 21-40
30

Very rough, fresh unweathered surfaces

(2)
Rough, slightly weathered, iron stained surfaces
(3)
Smooth, moderately weathered and altered surfaces
(4)
lickensided, highly weathered surfaces with compact coatings of
rillings or angular fragments

10

N/A

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

RMR: 61-80

30

10

RMR: 21-40

RMR: 61-80

RMR: 21-40
RMR: 0-20

RMR: 21-40

N/A

RMR: 41-60
RMR: 0-20

N/A

(5)
VERY POOR

(3)

FAIR

(4)
POOR

(1)
VERY GOOD

(2)
GOOD

= 32-62
(5)
VERY POOR

FAIR

(4)
POOR

(3)

(2)
GOOD

(5)
VERY POOR
(1)
VERY GOOD

(4)
POOR

(3)

FAIR

(2)
GOOD

(5)
VERY POOR
(1)
VERY GOOD

FAIR

(4)
POOR

Strike perpendicular to
Strike parallel to
tunnel axis when
excavation drives with tunnel axis
dip direction

= 42-67

50

RMR: 61-80

RMR: 41-60
RMR: 21-40

30

50
40

20

RMR: 41-60

RMR: 61-80

10

10

N/A

(3)

= 32-57

(2)
GOOD

(5)
VERY POOR
(1)
VERY GOOD

FAIR

(4)
POOR

= 27-52

40

RMR: 61-80
10

N/A

Strike perpendicular to
tunnel axis when
excavation drives
against dip direction

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

20
30

RMR: 41-6010

Horizontal
discontinuities

50
40

20

30

N/A N/A

(3)

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

50

40

20

(2)
GOOD

(4)
POOR

(5)
VERY POOR
(1)
VERY GOOD

(3)

FAIR

(2)
GOOD

(4)
POOR

(3)
FAIR

(2)
GOOD

(4)
POOR

30

= 41-66

50
40

N/A N/A
RMR: 0-20

= 31-61

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

20

RMR: 41-60

Hard and very hard rock mass(MOHS 8-10)

Strike parallel or
Strike perpendicular to
perpendicular to tunnel tunnel axis when
axis when excavation excavation drives with
drives against dip
dip direction
direction

50

40
RMR: 61-80

RMR: 41-60
N/A

(5)
VERY POOR
(1)
VERY GOOD

(2)
GOOD
(3)
FAIR

(1)
VERY GOOD

(5)
VERY POOR

(4)
POOR

(3)
FAIR

GOOD

= 26-51

50

RMR: 0-20
(1)

= 34-59

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

40

10

N/A

Horizontal
discontinuities

50

RMR: 61-80

RMR: 61-80

Strike parallel to
excavation axis

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

RMR: 21-40 20
30

(7)
LAMINATED N/A
SHEARED

(1)
VERY GOOD

(4)
POOR

(3)
FAIR

(5)
VERY POOR

(1)

(2)
GOOD

40

(2)

= 39-64

DECREASING SURFACE QUALITY

50
DIS (6)
INTE
GRATED

Strike
perpendicular to
excavation axis
when excavation
drives with dip
direction

= 24-54
VERY GOOD

GEOLOGICAL
STRENGTH
INDEX
(GSI)

SURFACE CONDITIONS

Horizontal
discontinuities and
strike perpendicular to
excavation axis when
excavation drives
against dip direction

Medium hard to hard rock mass(MOHS 5-8)

(5)
VERY POOR
(1)
VERY GOOD

Extremely soft to soft rock mass (MOHS 0-4)

N/A

N/A

RMR: 41-60

RMR: 41-60

N/A
RMR: 21-40

RMR: 61-80
RMR: 61-80

N/A

RMR: 21-40

40

20

30

10

N/A
RMR: 21-40

30

50
40

20

20
30

RMR: 41-60

10

N/A

10

N/A
RMR: 21-40

N/A
RMR: 21-40

:
R
M
R -80
61

(5) Slickenside, highly weathered surfaces with soft clay coatings or fillings
(6) Poorly interlocked, heavily broken rock mass with mixture of angular and rounded rock pieces
(7) Lack of blockiness due to close spacing of weak schistosity of shear planes

Figure 4: BQS for Widely Spaced Discontinuities

Figure 5: Weathered and Disintegrated Rock Mass Quality at Asprovalta Strymonas

Part of Egnatia Highway at Northern Greece
Furthermore, looking the lower part of the same figure, we combine the structure of rock mass, which is
disintegrated, with the surface conditions, which are poor, estimating an RMR from 0 to 20 (as rock mass is disintegrated
to blocky and not to laminated) and a GSI from 20 to 25. Taking into account the poor quality of rock mass, as it is

14

M. Chatziangelou & B. Christaras

described by RMR and GSI classification systems, the choose of rock mass locations, where the explosives were put,
needed to be very careful. They could be placed where rock mass were strengthen and hard, so as the forces of the
neighborhood locations remained on balance.

Figure 6: Chloritic Schist Rock Mass during Tunneling of Symbol Mountain at Strymonas-Kavalas
Part of Egnatia Highway at Northern Greece
Although the quality of the excavated rock mass, during the tunneling of Symbol Mountain at
Strymonas- Kavalas part of Egnatia Highway in Northern Greece, was characterized as medium - it was consisted by
gneiss, amphibolites, marbles and plutonic rocks - the chloritic schist formation, which was created because of gneiss and
plutonic rocks contact, generated unexpected failure conditions (Chatziangelou et al, 2010). Chloritic schist was a hard
rock mass that excavating machines could difficulty break it. So, blasting helped excavating works. But just when chloritic
schist came in touch with the air, the rock mass was very quickly weathered and loose material flowed from the walls and
the face of excavation. So, explorers needed to be very careful using light explosion. According to the rock mass example
on figure 6, rock mass had intermediate spaced discontinuities. Using the figure 3, the orientation of discontinuities may be
determined. Looking again figure 6, there are also horizontal discontinuities. Subsequently, rock mass hardness needs to be
also determined. So, as the rock mass is quickly weathered and loosed, its hardness characterizes as extremely soft to soft.
Looking the figure 3, the BI is estimated 9-34 and blasting is characterized as very difficult. That means, although high
explosives are effective for chloritic schist braking, the pattern of explosives need to be chosen for every location, so as
collapses of the roof and sliding from walls to be avoided. Furthermore, looking the lower part of the same figure, we
combine the structure of rock mass, which is laminated and sheared, with the surface conditions, which are very poor,
because of slickensided discontinuities with highly weathered surfaces with soft clay (chlorite) coatings, estimating an
RMR from 0 to 20 (as rock mass is sheared and no way disintegrated) and a GSI from 5 to 10. Taking into account the
above characterizations, the puncture of excavations outline was chosen, to control the pressures of blasting result.

BLASTABILITY INDEX VERSUS TO STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY

Taking into account the calculations of BI for every possible structural appearance of the rockmass, we can easily
result in a diagram which connects the structural description, the hardness of rockmass and BI (Figure 7), where rock mass
quality 1 refers to close spaced discontinuities, horizontal formations, and inclined formations, where the excavation drives
against dip direction. Rock mass quality 2 refers to intermediate spaced discontinuities and horizontal formations. Rock
mass quality 3 refers to close spaced discontinuities and gradient formations, where excavation drives with dip direction.
Rock mass quality 4 refers to intermediate spaced discontinuities and gradient formations. Rock mass quality 5 refers to

Blastability Index on Poor Quality Rock Mass

15

widely spaced discontinuities, horizontal formations, and soft gradient rock mass, where excavation drives against dip
direction. Rock mass quality 6 refers to widely spaced discontinuities and gradient formations (except soft gradient rock
mass where excavation drives against dip direction).

Figure 7: Rock Mass Quality versus to Blastability Index

Looking at the above diagram, we can easily conclude that

The wider the spacing of discontinuities is, the bigger the BI is.

BI is lower in horizontal formations than in gradient formations.

BI is higher where the excavation drives with dip direction than where it drives against dip direction.

CONCLUSIONS
A new Blastability Quality System (BQS) is already developed connecting rock mass quality, discontinuities
orientation, hardness and Blastability Index (BI). It is a wide useful system as it can be easily applied during the
excavations, helping engineers on quick estimations of rock mass quality and BI, in addition to excavation way, explores
and support measures.
BQS is a tool which (at the present) can be used for poor and friable rock mass, shared with lack of blockiness due
to close spacing of weak schistosity or sheer planes and disintegrated with poorly interlocked, heavily broken with mixture
of angular and rounded rock pieces. Taking into account the calculations of BI for every possible structural appearance of
the rock mass, we conclude that the wider the spacing of discontinuities is, the bigger the blast ability index is. Also, the
blastability index is lower in horizontal formations than in gradient formations. Finally, BI is higher where the excavation
drives with dip direction than where it drives against it.

REFERENCES
1.

AjoyGh. & Akhilesh J. 2012. Blasting in Mining New Trends. Taylor & Francis, CRC Press. 150p.

2.

Bieniawski, Z.T. 1989. Engineering rock mass classifications. New York: Wiley

3.

Blanco Jose Sanchidrian & Kumar Singh Ashok. 2012. Measurement and analysis of blast fragmentation. Taylor
& Francis, CRC Press. 162p.

4.

Chatziangelou, M. Thomopoulos, Ach., Christaras, B. 2010. Excavation data and failure investigation along
tunnel of Symbol Mountain, Bulletin of the Geological Society of Greece 2010

16

M. Chatziangelou & B. Christaras

5.

Christaras B., Chatziangelou M., MalliaroudakisEm., MerkosS. 2001. Support capacity of wedges and RMR
classification along the Asprovalta tunnel of Egnatia Highway, in N. Greece. 9 th Congress of Engineering Geology
for Developing Countries, Durban.

6.

Hoek, E. 1994. Strength of rock and rock masses, ISRM News Journal, 2(2). 4-16.

7.

Kaushik D. and PhalguniSen, 2003. Consept of Blastability An Update, The Indian Mining & Engineering
Journal, Vol. 42, No.8&9, September, pp 24-31

8.

Latham J.-P. and Lu Ping. 1999. Development of a assessment system for the blastability of rock masses.
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 36, pp.41-55.

9.

Lilly P. 1986. An Empirical Method of Assessing Rockmassblastability, Large Open Pit Mine Conference,
Newman, Australia, October, pp89-92.

10. Singh P., Sinha Am.2012. Rock Fragmentation by blasting. Taylor & Francis, CRC Press. 872p
11. Zhang Wei, Zhang Dong Sheng, Peng Shao. 2011. New Technology of Efficient Blasting Rock for Large Section
Rock Roadway Drivage in Deep Shaft with Complicated Conditions. Applied Mechanics and Materials,
Vol. 94-96, pp1766-1770.