Adapted data collection in field utilizing RMR and the Q-system

Sammanfattning: The focus on slope stability has increased rapidly in Norway over the last years due to several unwanted landslides. In Norway, the most used method today to classify the rock mass and to determine the required reinforcement, is the Q-system. In addition to that the RMR method is also a commonly used method. However, since both the RMR and the Q-system is created to be used for underground constructions, their slope adaptations (Q-slope and SMR) has been developed. These adaptations will also be evaluated in this thesis. They will be used to examine if there is a correlation between the classification systems and the installed support on site. This thesis will only focus on slopes and not tunnels, as a limit to the scope investigated.  The joints properties at the investigated sites are taken both from engineering geologist reports and field mapping. The mapped joints will be analyzed in Dips to determine the major joint sets and by using the kinematic analysis tool determine what failure mechanisms these joint sets may create. These joint sets will be further evaluated through numerical analysis (with e.g. RocPlane, Swedge or RocTopple) dependent on their failure mechanism. The rock and joint data for calculation is gathered from three different sites, which are all part of the same project where the traffic capacity of the European route E18 through Porsgrunn, outside of Oslo, is increased. In both Blåfjell and Bjønnås the rock mass is larvikite, but in Grenland the rock mass investigated is sandstone. However, the sandstone in the Grenland has undergone contact metamorphosis, which changes the characteristics of the rock mass and creating a much stronger sandstone.  Generally, the rock mass investigated is classified to be of similar quality which gives them the same strength. Consequently, it is difficult to determine any kind of correlation between the sites. The results do not indicate the expected relationship that a stronger rock mass would need less reinforcement. In addition, it is also observed that the classification systems generally recommend more shotcrete that what is installed on site. When comparing the different classification systems, it can be seen that the Q-system generally categorize the rock mass in a lower category, indicating a weaker rock mass, compared to RMR and SMR. This then results in that the rock masses investigated is classified to be ranging from Poor to Good, dependent on the classification method.   Keywords: Rock mass classification, Q-slope, SMR, Slope stability.