Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Investigation of Physical and Mechanical Properties of Selected Rock Types in Kogi State Using Hardness Tests
Investigation of Physical and Mechanical Properties of Selected Rock Types in Kogi State Using Hardness Tests
Investigation of Physical and Mechanical Properties of Selected Rock Types in Kogi State Using Hardness Tests
org
doi:10.14355/mwe.2015.04.004
InvestigationofPhysicalandMechanical
PropertiesofSelectedRockTypesinKogi
StateUsingHardnessTests
Anikoh,G.A.*1,Adesida,P.A.2,Afolabi,O.C.3
DepartmentofMineralsandPetroleumResourcesEngineeringTechnology,KogiStatePolytechnic,Lokoja,
Nigeria,2DepartmentofMiningEngineering,theFederalUniversityTechnology,Akure,OndoState,Nigeria,
3DepartmentofMineralsandPetroleumResourcesEngineeringTechnology,AuchiPolytechnic,Auchi,EdoState,
Nigeria
*1
*1
anikohgodwin@yahoo.com;2adeniyi_adesida@yahoo.com;3cosmas_afolabi@yahoo.com
Abstract
The research investigated the physicomechanical properties of selected granite and limestone in Kogi State, Nigeria. The
objectives of the research were achieved through samples collection and analyses. The rock samples were collected for the
determination of the physicomechanical properties and the hardness properties of the rocks in the laboratory. The results
obtainedrevealthatthemeandensitiesofselectedgraniteandlimestoneare2.61g/cm3and2.67g/cm3respectivelywhiletheir
respectiveporositiesare1.35%and2.79%.Therespectivemainuniaxialcompressivestrength,pointloadstrengthandtensile
strengthoftheselectedgraniteandlimestoneare168.92MPa,112.17MPa,6.83MPa,4.34MPa,10.24MPaand6.51MPa.The
determined properties were subjected to statistical analysis using SPSS of model IBM SPSS Statistics 21. The determined
physicomechanical properties are the dependent variables while the hardness properties are the independent variables. The
mathematical models were generated from the analysis. The generated models can be a useful tool in determining the
physicomechanicalpropertiesofthetestedrocks.
Keywords
PhysicomechanicalProperties;HardnessProperties;Density;Porosity;SPSS;MathematicalModel
Introduction
Rocks show a variety of physical and mechanical properties that may affect the use of rocks as a construction
material,theyarewidelyusedinstructuralandconstructionalworks,thephysicalandmechanicalpropertiesare
functions of mineralogical and textural characteristics of rock [1]. Those properties also may affect quarrying
operation,tunnellingminingslopestabilityandtheuseofrockasconstructionalmaterial[2].
Inaddition,experimentalanalysissuchastestsfortensilestrengthandcompressivestrengthoftherockcandictate
load or energy that can be absorbed before failure of rock mass [3]. Kahraman et al. [4] observed that the
physicomechanicalpropertiesinfluencingfragmentationofrocksincludeyoungmodulus,compressiveandtensile
strength.ErsoyandWaller[5]wereoftheviewthattexturesaremajorfactorsdeterminingthebehaviourofrock
prediction of performance. However, the strength of rocks does not only vary from rock to rock but also vary
withinthesamerocksandvariouslocalgeologicalconditions.Italsovarieswithseasonbecauseofmoistureeffect
on the mineral grains [6]. The strength of rock decreases with increase in water content due to reduction in the
coefficientofinternalfrictionoftherockparticles.Presenceofwaterinrockalsoincreasesthedeformabilityofthe
rockmass[7].
Faisaletal.[8]saidthatmanystudieshadbeencarriedouttocorrelatetheengineeringpropertiesofrockwithits
physical index properties. He explained further that Griffith [9] established the relationship between unconfined
compressivestrengthofdifferentrocktypes(sedimentary,igneous,andmetamorphicrocks)withtheirrespective
shore scleroscope hardness. Wuerker [10] also did similar work of correlating the uniaxial compressive strength
withshorescleroscopehardnessusingsimplelinearequation.DeereandMiller[11]alsocarriedoutanextensive
study on large number of rock samples representing different types of rocks (basalt, diabase, dolomite, gneiss,
37
www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015
granite, limestone, marble, quartzite, rock salt, sandstone, schist, siltstone, and tuff) to develop an engineering
classificationsystemfortheintactrockandhediscoveredthatclassificationisstronglyaffectedbyrockmineralogy,
texture,andanisotropyotherresearchersthathaveestablishedrelationshipsbetweenrockpropertiesareAufmuth
[12],Singhetal.[13],ORourke[14],Sachpazis[15],TugrulandZarif[2],Katzetal.[16]amongothers.Thisresearch
work will establish the relationship between the hardness properties and physicomechanical properties of some
selectedrocksinKogiState,Nigeria.
GeologyofKogiState
Generally, Kogi State has two geological formations, Basement Complex and sedimentary basin. Approximately
halfofthestateiscoveredbycrystallinebasementcomplexwhiletheotherhalfiscoveredbycretaceoustorecent
sediments[17].Nigeriabasementandancienthardrockspredominantlyunderlinethewesternflankofthestate.
They are made of crystalline complex rocks (gneiss and migmatite) older Meta sediment Africa granites/older
granites)[18].Theeasternflankofthestateisonthealluvium(youngestandmostrecentsedimentaryrocks)and
other sedimentary rocks, which form part of cretaceous to recent sediments of Nigeria the crystalline complex
containseconomicsmineralssuchasIronOre,gemstone,quartz,feldsparandotherassociatedmineralwhilethe
pan Africagranite/ oldergranite contain cassiterite,tantalite, columbite, gemstone and other associatedminerals
[17].
FIGURE1:GEOLOGICALMAPOFKOGISTATESHOWINGTHESTUDYAREAS
Methods
DescriptionoftheStudy
ObajanaCementquarryislocatedat25kmfromKabbaJunctionroadofftheLokojaOkenehighway,Lokojaon
Latitude 0626511 and Longitude 0759816 and Gitto Construction Company is located opposite Bulleten
ConstructionCompanyFellele,LokojaonLatitude064417andLongitude074215bothinKogiState,Nigeria.
SampleCollectionandPreparation
ThesampleswerecollectedfromtwoselectedlocationswhichareObajanaCementquarryandGittoConstruction
38
JournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015www.mwejournal.org
Company both in Kogi State, Nigeria at different locations within the quarry faces using random sampling
technique.SamplesofgranitewerecollectedfromGittoquarrywhilelimestonesamplesweretakenfromObajana
cementquarry.Thesamplesforthedensity,porosityandpointloadtestswerepreparedinanirregularformand
thepreparationwascarriedoutintheRockMechanicslaboratoryattheFederalUniversityofTechnology,Akure
OndoState,Nigeria.ThepreparationsofthesesamplesfollowthestandardssuggestedbyISRM[19]andconform
toAmericanStandardforTestingMethod[20].
DeterminationofDensityofGraniteandLimestone
1)TestEquipmentandMaterials
The equipment used to determine the density of granite and limestone were; Measuring Cylinder, Oven
(24hours at 1050C +/5 0C), Desiccators, Caliper with accuracy of 0.1mm, Balance with accuracy of 0.01 g and
rangeof100gSamplecontainer(notcorrodible)withairtightlid;Sledgehammer.
2)TestMethod
The objective of the test is to measure the porosity of rock specimens of irregular form. The porosity is the
volume of pores in the rock expressed as a percentage of the total volume of the rock. The saturation and
Buoyancytechniqueforirregularrocksampleswereadoptedandtheproceduresfollowthestandardsuggested
byISRM[19]andconformtoASTM[20].Foursamplesofirregularformfromarepresentativesampleofrock
were prepared. The size of the specimens was made such that the following conditions were fulfilled: the
specimen mass should be at least 50 g of irregular form and the minimum specimen dimension should be at
leasttentimesthemaximumgrainsizeoftherock.
Thespecimenbulkvolume(V)wasdeterminedbymeasurementofthesaturatedsubmergedmass(Msub)and
thesaturatedmass(Msat)ofthesamplesforeachdimensionofthespecimen.Thespecimenissaturatedbywater
immersion in a vacuum of less than 800 Pa for a period of at least 1 hour, with periodic agitation to remove
trappedair.
Thespecimenisremovedfromthewaterandsurfacedriedusingamoistencloth,carebeingtakentoremove
onlysurfacewaterandtoensurethatnofragmentsarelost.Thespecimenislocatedinacontainertoavoidloss
of mass during subsequent sample handling. The mass of specimen plus container (B) is determined with an
accuracyof0.01g.Thespecimen(intheopencontainer)isdriedinanoventoconstantmass(generally24hours
isenough)atthetemperatureof105C.Afterclosureofthecontainerandcoolinginadesiccatorfor30minutes,
themass(C)ofthedrysamplewiththecontainer(andlid)isdeterminedwithanaccuracyof0.01g.
Thecontainerwiththelidiscleanedanddriedanditsmass(A)isdeterminedwithanaccuracyof0.01g.
Msat Msub
(1)
water
SaturatedsurfacedrymassMsat=BA(2)
Then,saturatedsurfacedrymass;Volume; V
SpecimenmassMs=CA(3)
PoreVolume, Vv
Msat Ms
(4)
Densityofwater ( w)
Porosity, n
Vv
100% (5)
V
HardnessTest
HardnesstestinvolvestheuseofSchmidtImpactHammeroftypeLforthehardnessdeterminationofinsiturock.
ThereboundvalueoftheSchmidtHammerisusedasanindexvaluefortheintactstrengthofrockmaterial,butit
is also used to give an indication of the compressive strength of rock material [19]. The major advantage of the
Schmidt hammer is that it is portable enough to be easily transported to and used in the field. The standard
methodfortheSchmidtHammertestasdescribedbyISRM[19]andASTM[20]wasfollowed.Themeasuredtest
valueswereorderedindescendingorder.Thelower50%ofthevalueswerediscardedandtheaverageobtainedof
39
www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015
theupper50%valuetoobtaintheSchmidtReboundHardness[19].
DeterminationofRockwellHardness
1)TestMethod
Theirregularsampleswereprepared.Eachofthesampleshasthicknessnotgreaterthan10mm.Theindentor
was fixed on the digital Rockwell hardness tester. The load selector was turned to 150 kg to attain Rockwell
classC.Therankandpinwasturnedtomakethesampleincontactwiththeindentorfortheprimaryloadtobe
applied. The secondary load was applied by the machine itself automatically and the result was displayed.
Multipleindentationsweretakenoneachsampleforaccuracypurpose.Theaveragevalueswerethenrecorded.
Thesameprocedureswerefollowedoneachofthesamples.
MohsHardness
Mohs scale is a list of 10 common minerals that increase in hardness as one ascends the list. The selected rock
sampleswerescratchedagainstthemineralsontheMohsscale.ThevalueofthemineralontheMohsscalethat
correspondtowheretherockandthemineraldidnotscratcheachotherwasrecordedastherelativehardnessof
eachoftheselectedrocksamples.
UnconfinedCompressiveStrength(UCS)
TheuniaxialcompressivestrengthwasdeterminedbyadoptingthemathematicalmodeldevelopedbyAkramand
Bakar [21] which relatedpoint load strength indexanduniaxialcompressivestrength foruncored rock samples
wasadopted.ThemodelisshowninEquation(7).
where isthefailureloadand
De2
(7)
istheequivalentdiameter.
De2
A4
(8)
A DH
whereDisthedistancebetweenloadcontactpointsinmmandHisthewidthofthespecimeninmm.
F
De
50
0.45
(9)
isthecorrectionfactor.
I s (50) FI s (10)
where I s ( 50 ) isthecorrectedpointloadstrengthindex.
TensileStrength
Rocks are complex material and thereis nosinglefactor to relateuniaxial compressive with tensile strength like
40
JournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015www.mwejournal.org
otherstrengthparameterssuchasshearstrengthetc.ISRM[22]relationshipbetweenthepointloadstrength(Is(50))
andtensilestrength(To)asshowninEquation(12)belowwasusedinestimatingthetensilestrength.
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
54.0
55.0
50.0
50.0
54.0
50.0
50.0
48.0
50.0
48.0
50.0
48.0
48.0
50.0
48.0
48.0
46.0
45.0
47.0
48.0
46.0
46.0
44.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
44.0
45.0
45.0
44.0
44.0
42.0
45.0
45.0
44.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
44.0
Upper50%Averaged
S/N
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
42.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
44.0
10
40.0
38.0
38.0
40.0
42.0
46.4
45.3
43.9
45.3
46.4
AVG
TABLE2:SCHMIDTREBOUNDHARDNESSOFUPPER50%AVERAGEDFORLIMESTONE
L1
L2
L3
L4
L5
46.0
45.0
45.0
46.0
44.0
44.0
43.0
42.0
42.0
43.0
42.0
42.0
40.0
40.0
43.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
42.0
38.0
40.0
38.0
38.0
42.0
38.0
40.0
38.0
38.0
42.0
34.0
40.0
36.0
36.0
40.0
34.0
38.0
36.0
36.0
40.0
34.0
38.0
35.0
36.0
40.0
10
34.0
35.0
35.0
33.0
38.0
38.4
40.1
38.5
38.5
41.4
Upper50%Averaged
S/N
3
4
5
6
7
8
AVG
TABLE3:ROCKWELLANDMOHRHARDNESSOFTHEGRANITESAMPLES
S/N
Rockwell
MohrHardness
87.9
6.5
92.9
7.0
86.2
6.8
89.0
7.5
89.0
6.5
AVG
89.0
6.9
41
www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015
TABLE4:ROCKWELLANDMOHRHARDNESSOFTHELIMESTONESAMPLES
S/N
Rockwell
MohrHardness
79.2
3.0
95.5
3.8
86.8
3.5
86.6
3.6
84.8
3.2
AVG
86.6
3.4
TABLE5:DENSITYOFGRANITE
S/N
Mass(g)
V1(cm3)
V2(cm3)
V(cm3)
(g/cm3)
27.0
300.0
310.0
10.0
2.70
38.0
300.0
315.0
15.0
2.53
26.0
300.0
310.0
10.0
2.60
31.0
300.0
312.0
12.0
2.58
29.0
300.0
311.0
11.0
2.63
Average
2.61
TABLE6:DENSITYOFLIMESTONE
S/N
Mass(g)
V1(cm3)
V2(cm3)
V(cm3)
(g/cm3)
50.0
300.0
319.0
19.0
2.63
33.0
300.0
312.0
12.0
2.75
54.0
300.0
321.0
21.0
2.57
62.0
300.0
323.0
23.0
2.70
54.0
300.0
320.0
20.0
2.70
Average
2.67
TABLE7:POROSITYOFGRANITE
S/N
Mass(g)
Ms
Md
Vv
(%)
27.0
35
34.90
0.10
8.0
1.25
38.0
43
42.95
0.05
5.0
1.00
26.0
32
31.92
0.08
6.0
1.33
31.0
37
36.93
0.07
6.0
1.17
29.0
33
32.92
0.08
4.0
2.00
Average
1.35
TABLE8:POROSITYOFLIMESTONE
S/N
Mass(g)
Ms
Md
Vv
(%)
50.0
60
59.78
0.22
10.0
2.20
33.0
44
43.67
0.33
11.0
3.00
54.0
62
61.80
0.20
8.0
2.50
62.0
69
68.80
0.20
7.0
2.90
54.0
64
63.67
0.33
10.0
3.30
Average
42
2.79
JournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015www.mwejournal.org
TABLE9:UNIAXIALCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTHOFTHEGRANITESAMPLES
S/N
Is(50)(MPa)
c(MPa)
*StrengthClassification
5.85
146.63
Veryhigh
8.06
197.00
Veryhigh
7.52
184.69
Veryhigh
5.95
148.91
Veryhigh
6.76
167.37
Veryhigh
168.92
Veryhigh
Average
TABLE10:UNIAXIALCOMPRESSIVESTRENGTHOFTHELIMESTONESAMPLES
S/N
Is(50)(MPa)
c(MPa)
*StrengthClassification
3.90
102.18
Veryhigh
2.68
74.38
Veryhigh
5.03
127.94
Veryhigh
4.80
122.70
Veryhigh
5.28
133.64
Veryhigh
112.17
Veryhigh
Average
*Bell[23]
TABLE11:POINTLOADINDEXOFTHEGRANITESAMPLES
S/N
D(mm)
H
(mm)
Failure
Load(N)
A
(mm2)
De2
(mm2)
Is(MPa)
Is(50)
(MPa)
*StrengthClassification
60.0
45.0
18.80
2700
3437.75
5.47
1.07
5.85
VeryHighStrength
70.0
38.0
25.51
2660
3386.82
7.53
1.07
8.06
VeryHighStrength
50.0
50.0
22.56
2500
3183.10
7.09
1.06
7.52
VeryHighStrength
45.0
62.0
19.56
2790
3552.34
5.51
1.08
5.95
VeryHighStrength
55.0
48.8
21.61
2684
3417.37
6.32
1.07
6.76
VeryHighStrength
6.83
VeryHighStrength
*BrochandFranklin[24]
TABLE12:POINTLOADINDEXOFTHELIMESTONESAMPLES
S/N
D(mm)
H(mm)
Failure
Load(N)
A(mm2)
De2(mm2)
Is(MPa)
Is(50)(Mpa)
*Strength
Classification
48.0
38.0
9.25
1824.0
2322.39
3.98
0.98
3.90
Veryhigh
52.0
44.0
7.51
2288.0
2913.17
2.58
1.04
2.68
Veryhigh
48.0
45.0
13.56
2160.0
2750.20
4.93
1.02
5.03
Veryhigh
50.0
55.0
15.54
2750.0
3501.41
4.44
1.08
4.80
Veryhigh
45.0
45.5
11.47
2047.5
2047.50
5.50
0.96
5.28
Veryhigh
4.34
Veryhigh
*BrochandFranklin[24]
TABLE13:TENSILESTRENGTHOFTHEGRANITESAMPLES
S/N
Is(50)(MPa)
To(MPa)
*StrengthClassification
5.85
8.78
VeryHigh
8.06
12.09
VeryHigh
7.52
11.28
VeryHigh
5.95
8.93
VeryHigh
6.76
10.14
VeryHigh
10.24
VeryHigh
*Bell[23]
43
www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015
TABLE14:TENSILESTRENGTHOFTHELIMESTONESAMPLES
S/N
Is(50)(MPa)
To(MPa)
*StrengthClassification
3.90
5.85
VeryHigh
2.68
4.02
VeryHigh
5.03
7.55
VeryHigh
4.80
7.20
VeryHigh
5.28
7.92
VeryHigh
6.51
VeryHigh
*Bell[23]
Tables15to24showtheresultsofmodelsdevelopedusingSPSSsoftware.
TABLE15:MODELCOMPUTATIONGRANITE(DENSITYISTHEDEPENDENTVARIABLE)
Model
Std.Error
Sig.
Constant
2.868
2.781
1.031
0.490
RW
0.006
0.017
0.384
0.767
SH
0.020
0.044
0.452
0.730
MH
0.085
0.109
0.784
0.577
TABLE16:MODELCOMPUTATIONFORLIMESTONE(DENSITYISTHEDEPENDENTVARIABLE)
Model
Std.Error
Sig.
Constant
1.132
1.771
0.639
0.638
RW
0.000
0.036
0.017
0.989
SH
0.031
0.061
0.515
0.697
MH
0.102
0.626
0.164
0.897
TABLE17:MODELCOMPUTATIONFORGRANITE(POROSITYISTHEDEPENDENTVARIABLE)
Model
Std.Error
Sig.
Constant
9.245
6.219
1.486
0.377
RW
0.121
0.038
3.212
0.192
SH
0.053
0.098
0.538
0.686
MH
0.372
0.243
1.531
0.368
TABLE18:MODELCOMPUTATIONFORLIMESTONE(POROSITYISTHEDEPENDENTVARIABLE)
Model
Std.Error
Sig.
Constant
12.626
1.681
7.511
0.084
RW
0.125
0.034
3.651
0.170
SH
0.438
0.058
7.559
0.084
MH
2.615
0.594
4.402
0.142
TABLE19:MODELCOMPUTATIONFORGRANITE(UCSISTHEDEPENDENTVARIABLE)
44
Model
Std.Error
Sig.
Constant
791.205
511.666
1.546
0.365
RW
8.251
3.096
2.665
0.229
SH
2.444
8.045
0.304
0.812
MH
16.717
19.981
0.837
0.556
JournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015www.mwejournal.org
TABLE20:MODELCOMPUTATIONFORLIMESTONE(UCSISTHEDEPENDENTVARIABLE)
Model
Std.Error
Sig.
Constant
151.372
426.733
0.355
0.783
RW
14.015
8.667
1.617
0.353
SH
19.462
14.715
1.323
0.412
MH
207.770
150.858
1.377
0.400
TABLE21:MODELCOMPUTATIONFORGRANITE(POINTLOADISTHEDEPENDENTVARIABLE)
Model
Std.Error
Sig.
Constant
35.299
22.452
1.572
0.361
RW
0.362
0.136
2.665
0.229
SH
0.107
0.353
0.304
0.812
MH
0.734
0.877
0.837
0.556
TABLE22:MODELCOMPUTATIONFORLIMESTONE(POINTLOADISTHEDEPENDENTVARIABLE)
Model
Std.Error
Sig.
Constant
7.221
18.722
0.386
0.766
RW
0.615
0.380
1.617
0.353
SH
0.854
0.646
1.322
0.412
MH
9.115
6.619
1.377
0.400
TABLE23:MODELCOMPUTATIONFORGRANITE(TENSILESTRENGTHISTHEDEPENDENTVARIABLE)
Model
Std.Error
Sig.
Constant
52.835
33.686
1.568
0.361
RW
0.541
0.204
2.653
0.229
SH
0.164
0.530
0.309
0.809
MH
1.095
1.315
0.832
0.558
TABLE24:MODELCOMPUTATIONFORLIMESTONE(TENSILESTRENGTHISTHEDEPENDENTVARIABLE)
Model
Std.Error
Sig.
Constant
10.808
28.158
0.384
0.767
RW
0.922
0.572
1.613
0.353
SH
1.280
0.971
1.318
0.413
MH
13.672
9.954
2.737
0.401
CorrelationbetweenthePhysicalandMechanicalPropertiesoftheSelectedRockTypes
Figure2showstheplotofdensityofGraniteagainstthestandardizedresidualvaluesandFigure3showstheplot
of density of limestone against the standardized residual values. Figures 4 and 5 show the plot of porosity of
graniteandlimestoneagainstthestandardizedresidualvaluesrespectively.Figures6and7showtheplotofUCS
of granite and limestone against the standardized residual values respectively. Figures 8 and 9 show the plot of
point load strength index of granite and limestone against the standardized residual values respectively and
Figures 10 and 11 show the plot of tensile strength of granite and limestone against the standardized residual
valuesrespectively.
45
www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015
FIGURE2:DENSITYOFGRANITEAGAINSTTHESTANDARDIZEDRESIDUALVALUES
FIGURE3:DENSITYOFLIMESTONEAGAINSTTHESTANDARDIZEDRESIDUALVALUES
FIGURE4:POROSITYOFGRANITEAGAINSTTHESTANDARDIZEDRESIDUALVALUES
FIGURE5:POROSITYOFLIMESTONEAGAINSTTHESTANDARDIZEDRESIDUALVALUES
46
JournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015www.mwejournal.org
FIGURE6:UCSOFGRANITEANDTHEHARDNESSVALUES
FIGURE7:UCSOFLIMESTONEANDTHEHARDNESSVALUES
FIGURE8:POINTLOADSTRENGTHINDEXOFGRANITEANDSTANDARDIZEDRESIDUALVALUES
FIGURE9:POINTLOADSTRENGTHINDEXOFLIMESTONEANDSTANDARDIZEDRESIDUALVALUES
47
www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015
FIGURE10:TENSILESTRENGTHINDEXOFGRANITEANDSTANDARDIZEDRESIDUALVALUES
FIGURE11:TENSILESTRENGTHINDEXOFLIMESTONEANDSTANDARDIZEDRESIDUALVALUES
Discussion
Table5andTable6showtheresultofdensityofgraniteandlimestonedeterminedfromlaboratorytest.Thevalue
ofdensityforthegraniterangesfrom2.53g/cm3to2.70g/cm3andthevalueofdensityoflimestonerangesfrom
2.57g/cm3to2.75g/cm3.Theresultofporosityofgraniteandlimestonedeterminedfromthelaboratoryisshownin
Table8andTable9,thevalueoftheporosityforthegraniterangesfrom1.00%to2.00%whilethatoflimestone
ranges from 2.20 % to 3.30 %. Limestone is more porous than granite as it is evidence from the result obtained.
Table10andTable11showtheresultofuniaxialcompressivestrengthofgraniteandlimestone,forthegranite,the
valuerangesfrom146.63MPato197.00MPawhilethatoflimestonerangesfrom102.18MPato133.64MPa.The
uniaxialcompressivestrengthofgraniteandthatoflimestonefallwiththerangeofaveryhighstrengthaccording
toBrochandFranklin[24].Table12andTable13showtheresultsofpointloadtestofgraniteandlimestone,the
valuerangesfrom5.85MPato8.06MPaforthegraniteandthatoflimestonerangesfrom2.68MPato5.28MPa.
Table14andTable15showtheresultsoftensilestrengthofgraniteandlimestone,thevaluerangesfrom8.78to
12.09 MPa for granite and that of limestone varies from 4.02 MPa to 7.92 MPa. The point load index values and
tensilestrengthofbothgraniteandlimestonefallwithintherangeofaveryhighstrengthaccordingtoBrochand
Franklin [24] classification. Tables 16 to 17 show the result of the models generated for the determination of the
physicomechanical properties of the selected rocks from the hardness properties using SPSS software. From the
tablesalltheinputvariablesaresignificantandtheretvaluesarefargreaterthan1.
CorrelationbetweenthePhysicalandMechanicalPropertiesoftheSelectedRockTypes
The determined physical and mechanical properties were also correlated using SPSS. Figure 2 shows the plot of
densityofgraniteagainsttheStandardizedresidualvalues.Thepositivelinearrelationshipexistsbetweenthem,
theequationofthelineispresentedinEquation13.
48
JournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015www.mwejournal.org
Thecoefficientofthecorrelation(R2)is0.577indicatingthatbothvariableareaveragelycorrelated.
Figure 3 shows the plot of density of limestone against the standardized residual values. Positive linear
relationshipexistsbetweenthem,theequationofthelineispresentedinEquation14.
49
www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015
There is an indication of negative linear relationship between the mechanical properties and the rock hardness.
Thecoefficientofcorrelation(R2)is0.762indicatingslightlystrongrelationshipbetweenthem.
Conclusions
Fromtheresultsoftheresearchthefollowingconclusionscanbedrawn:
(a)Thetwotestedrockshaveveryhighmechanicalpropertiesthatcanbeusedforengineeringapplication;and
(b) The model equations generated can be used in determining the density, porosity, uniaxial compressive
strength,pointloadandtensilestrengthsofboththegraniteandlimestone.
REFERENCES
[1]
Irfan, T. Y. Mineralogy, Fabric Properties and Classification of Weathered Granites in Hong Kong. Quarterly Journal of
EngineeringGeology,No.29,p.535.1996.
[2]
Tugrul, A. and Zarif, I. H. Correlation of Mineralogical and Textural Characterization with Engineering Properties of
SelectedGranitehttp:www.sciencedirect.com/scienceretrievedJanuary14,2008pp.303315.1999
[3]
Adebayo,B.andUmeh,E.C.InfluenceofsomeRockPropertiesonBlastingPerformance,J.Eng.AppliedSci,2(1)pp41
44.2007.
[4]
Kahraman,S.,Bilgin,N.andFeridunoghi,C.DominantRockPropertiesAffectingthePenetrationRateofPercussiveDrills.
Int.J.RockMechanicsMiningSci.(40)pp.711723.2003.
[5]
Ersoy,A.andWaller,M.D.TexturalCharacteristicsofRocks.Eng.Geol,(39)pp.123126.1995.
[6]
Ojo, O. and Brook, N. Effect of Moisture on some Mechanical Properties of Rock. Min. Sci. and Tech. (10), Elsevier. Sci.
Publisher,B.V.Amsterdam,pp.145156,1990.
[7]
Ojo,O.andOlaleyeB.M.ClassificationofOndoStateIntactRockforEngineeringPurposes.JournalofSci.Eng.andtech.,
(11)3,pp.57535759.2004.
[8]
Faisal,I.S.,Edward,J.C.,andOmar,H.A.:Estimationofrockengineeringpropertiesusinghardnesstests,Engineering
Geology,Vol.90,pp.138147.2007.
[9]
Griffith,J.H.PhysicalpropertiesoftypicalAmericanrocks.IowaEngineeringExperimentStationBulletinp.131.1937.
[10] Wuerker,R.Thestatusoftestingstrengthofrock.Trans.Min.Eng.AIME,pp.11081113.1953.
[11] Deere, D. U. and Miller, R. P. Engineering Classification and Index Properties for Intact Rock. Tech. Report. Air Force
WeaponsLab.,NewMexico,No.AFWLTR65116.1966.
[12] Aufmuth,R.E.ASystematicDeterminationofEngineeringCriteriaforRocks.Bull.Assoc.Eng.Geol.11,235245.1973.
[13] Singh,R.N.,Hassani,F.P.andElkington,P.A.S.Theapplicationofstrengthanddeformationindextestingtothestability
assessmentofcoalmeasuresexcavations.Proc.24thUSSymp.OnRockMech.,TexasA&MUniv.AEG,pp.599609,1983.
[14] ORourke,J.E.Rockindexpropertiesforgeoengineeringinundergrounddevelopment.Min.Eng.106110.1989
[15] Sachpazis,C.I.CorrelatingSchmidthardnesswithcompressivestrengthandYoungsmodulusofcarbonaterocks.Bull.
Int.Assoc.Eng.Geol.42,pp.7583,1990.
[16] Katz,O.,Reches,Z.,Roegiers,J.EvaluationofmechanicalrockpropertiesusingaSchmidthammer.Int.J.RockMech.Min.
Sci.37,723728.2000.
[17] MSMKS.MinistryofSolidMineralsKogiState,2000
[18] Rahaman, M. A. Recent Advance in the Study of Basement Complex of Nigeria. Oluyide, P.O., Mbonu, W.C. (Editors).
1998.
[19] ISRM.SuggestedMethodsforRockCharacterizationTestingandMonitoringISRMCommissiononTestingmethods,E.T.
BrownEdition.PergamonPressOxford211p.1981.
[20] ASTM.AnnualBookofASTMStandardConstructionSoilandRocks.ASTMPublication,Vol.04,No.08p.975.1994.
50
JournalofMiningWorldExpress(MWE)Volume4,2015www.mwejournal.org
[21] Akram,M.andBakar,M.Z.A.CorrelationbetweenUniaxialCompressiveStrengthandPointLoadIndexforSaltRange
Rocks.PakistanianJournalofEngineeringandAppliedScience,Vol.1.,2007.
[22] ISRM.SuggestedMethodsforDeterminingPointLoadStrength,Int.J.Rock,Mech.Min.Sci.andGeomech.Abstr.(22)pp
5360.1985.
[23] Bell,F.G.Engineeringinrockmasses,ButterworthHeinemann,JordanHill,Oxford,p.580.1992.
[24] Broch,E.andFranklin,J.A.ThePointLoadTest,Int.J.RockMech.Min.Sci.(9)pp.669697.1972.
51