Reliable assessment methods are required for designing initial support for tunnels in complex geological conditions. This study provides a thorough comparison of the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) and Rock Engineering System (RES) frameworks, examining a substantial dataset comprising 38 tunnels situated in various lithological and tectonic zones across Iran. While the RMR framework offers empirical simplicity, the RES framework provides a systems-based approach that quantifies parameter interdependencies. Analysis of field data, including shotcrete thickness and bolt density, revealed that the RES framework captures hydro-mechanical coupling more effectively, particularly in intermediate rock masses. To reconcile discrepancies between the two systems, we explored an integrated statistical formulation combining normalized RMR ratings with RES stability indices. This approach demonstrated a significantly higher correlation with field performance (R² ≈ 0.99) than the individual methods. The results emphasise the importance of integrating empirical and systems-based approaches to improve the reliability of predictions in tunnel support design and provide a solid foundation for engineering decisions in heterogeneous rock masses.
Type of Study:
Original Research |
Subject:
Engineering Geology Received: 2025/09/21 | Accepted: 2026/12/1 | Published: 2025/12/31