Rock mass classification systems have emerged as a powerful tool which can be used for assessing ground conditions and determining support requirements in underground mines. They should not be used as a substitute for complete engineering design, but rather as a supplement to observational methods and analytical study. In general, the use of rock mass classification is attractive, but each classification system has various deficiencies. Use of any particular system should be made only with knowledge of that systems limitations. It is desirable to employ a number of systems and design methods which will allow for comparison and lead to a better understanding of the rock mass condition.
The Rock Mass Quality system (Q-System), developed by the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, and the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) System, Bieniawski, were designed primarily for civil engineering structures. Laubscher et al (1978) further developed the RMR-system specifically for rock mechanics engineering in the mining industry. A method of stope design, which introduces a stability factor for the rock mass and compares this with hydraulic radius, was developed by Mathews et al (1981).
This paper reviews the above systems by applying them to stability assessment of crown pillars in two Australian metal mines and provides a critical analysis of the various approaches. In particular each system will be analysed to determine its suitability for use in crown pillar design. The most suitable system(s) will form the basis for future development in crown pillar stability analysis.