A critical appraisal of the deformation-based support design approach

Empirical approaches, numerical modelling, and analytical methods are employed in ground support design for rockburst conditions, but only analytical approaches attempt to quantify the safety margins of a design. The Canadian Rockburst Handbook approach is the most widely known analytical approach. Stacey (2016) identified a state of ‘design indeterminacy’, arguing that neither demand nor capacity can be determined with sufficient accuracy for conventional design processes. Since then, several important advancements were made with the development of the deformation-based support design approach. An independent appraisal of the DBSD approach is lacking. This paper provides an independent appraisal of the deformation-based support design method, summarising the approach, identifying implicit and explicit assumptions, highlighting uncertainties, and raising questions requiring resolution. The resolution of the identified issues is necessary to demonstrate that the deformation-based support design methodology – when applied as a design tool – satisfies the standards expected of a robust engineering approach.