Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
1
N
X
N
i1
y
i
y
i
2
v
u
u
t
2
VAF 1
vary
i
y
i
vary
i
100 3
where y
i
is the measured value, y
i
*
is the estimated value
and N is the number of samples. If the VAF is 100 and
RMSE is 0, the model proposed would be excellent. As can
be seen in Table 4, the VAF values in particular indicate
this is a realistic prediction model.
Conclusions
Indirect methods are widely used to estimate rock
strength parameters. However, empirical studies show
that water content and core size have an enormous impact
on the test results and thus should not be neglected. In
this study, the Is
50
, Vp and SHR have been compared
with the measured UCS of saturated limestone, sandstone
and cement mortar samples. The regression analysis
indicates there is a linear relationship between Is
(50)
, V
p,
SHR and UCS values.
Using all the point load values for the samples reported
in this article and others, the relationship between I
s(50)
and
uniaxial compressive strength is:
UCS 8:66 Is
50
10:85
:
For the samples tested in this study, the relationship
between SHR and UCS is
UCS 6:59 SHR 212:63 :
The correlation between UCS values and Vp is not as
good, but was established as
UCS 56:71 Vp 192:93:
From this study, the lithological properties of the rock
have a greater inuence on the relationship between UCS
and Is
50
values than the core diameter. Not surprisingly, the
two strengths for the cement mortar samples are very
similar for all the core diameter sizes while there is a
signicant variation with the natural samples.
It is important to note that the validity of the proposed
equations is limited by the data range and sample types
which were used to derive the equations. They should
therefore be only used with saturated rocks with similar
lithological characteristics to those reported here.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0
P
r
e
d
i
c
t
e
d
U
C
S
(
M
P
a
)
Model 1
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
P
r
e
d
i
c
t
e
d
U
C
S
(
M
P
a
)
Model 2
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
P
r
e
d
i
c
t
e
d
U
C
S
(
M
P
a
)
Model 3
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
P
r
e
d
i
c
t
e
d
U
C
S
(
M
P
a
)
Model 4
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
UCS (MPa)
P
r
e
d
i
c
t
e
d
U
C
S
(
M
P
a
)
Model 5
20 40 60 80 100 120
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Fig. 10 Predicted UCS versus actual UCS graphs for 5 models
Estimation of UCS from quicker/simpler tests 497
1 3
References
Al Jassar SH, Hawkins AB (1979) Geotechnical properties of the
Carboniferous Limestone of the Bristol areathe inuence of
petrography and chemistry. In: 4th ISRM Conference, Mont-
reaux, vol 1, pp 314
ASTM (1984) American Society for testing and materials. Standard
test method for unconned compressive strength of intact rock
core specimens. Soil and Rock, Building Stones: Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, vol 4.08, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Bieniawski ZT (1975) Point load test in geotechnical practice. Eng
Geol 1:111
Broch EM, Franklin JA (1972) The point load strength test. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 9:669697
DAndrea DV, Fischer RL, Fogelson DE (1965) Prediction of
compressive strength from other rock properties. US Bureau of
Mines Report of Investigations 6702
Entwisle DC, Hobbs PRN, Jones LD, Gunn D, Raines MG (2005) The
relation between effective porosity, uniaxial compressive
strength and sonic velocity of intact Borrowdale Volcanic Group
core samples from Sellaeld. Geotechn Geol Eng 23:793809
Forster IR (1983) The inuence of core sample geometry on the axial
point load test. Int Rock Mech Min Sci 20:291295
Ghosh DK, Srivastava M (1991) Point-load strength: an index for
classication of rock material. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 44:27
33
Goktan RM (1988) Theoretical and practical analysis of rock
rippability. PhD Thesis, Istanbul Technical University
Hassani FP, Scoble MJ, Whittacker BN (1980) Application of the
point load index test to strength determination of rock and
proposals for a new size correction chart. In: Proc 21st US Symp.
Rock Mech., Rolla, pp 543553
Hawkins AB (1998) Aspects of rock strength. Bull Eng Geol Env
57:1730
Hawkins AB, Olver JAG (1986) Point load tests: correlation factor
and contractual use. An example from the Corallian at
Weymouth In: Hawkins AB (ed) Site Investigation Practice:
Assessing BS 5930, Geological Society, London, pp 269271
Hoek E, Brown ET (1980) Underground excavations in rock. Inst Min
Metal, London
ISRM (1981) Rock characterization, testing and monitoring, ISRM
suggested methods. Pergamon, Oxford, 211 p
Kahraman S (2001) Evaluation of simple methods for assessing the
uniaxial compressive strength of rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
38:981994
Katz O, Reches Z, Roegiers JC (2000) Evaluation of mechanical rock
properties using a Schmidt hammer. Tech Note Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 37:723728
Norbury DR (1986) The point load test. In: Hawkins AB (ed) Site
investigation practice: assessing BS 5930, Geological Society,
pp 325329
ORourke JE (1989) Rock index properties for geo-engineering in
underground development. Min Eng 41:106110
Palchik V, Hatzor YH (2004) The inuence of porosity on tensile and
compressive strength of porous chalks. Rock Mech Rock Eng
37(4):331341
Pells PJN (1975) The use of the point load test in predicting the
compressive strength of rock materials, Aust Geomech J G5, pp
5456
Romana M (1999) Correlation between uniaxial compressive and
point load (Franklin test) strengths for different rock classes. In:
9th ISRM Congress, 1999, vol 1, pp 673676, Paris
Sachpazis CI (1990) Correlating Schmidt hammer rebound number
with compressive strength and Youngs modulus of carbonate
rocks. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 42:7583
Singh RN, Hassani FP, Elkington PAS (1983) The application of
strength and deformation index testing to the stability assessment
of Coal Measures excavations. In: Proceedings of 24th US
symposium on rock mechanics, Texas A&M Univ, AEG, pp
599609
Thuro K, Plinninger RJ (2005) Scale effects in rock properties: Part 2.
Point load test and point load strength index. EUROCK Swets
and Zeitlinger, pp 175180, Lisse
Tsiambaos G, Sabatakakis N (2004) Considerations on strength of
intact sedimentary rocks. Eng Geol 72:261273
Wiesner E, Gillate SJ (1997) An evaluation of the relationship
between unconned compressive strength and point load
strength index. Bull Int Assoc Eng Geol 56:115118
Yasar E, Erdogan Y (2004) Estimation of rock physicomechanical
properties using hardness methods. Eng Geol 71:281288
498
_
I. C obanoglu and S. B. C elik
1 3