Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Rock Properties
Rock Properties
com (2016)
Along the shear stage the behaviour of the rock sample can be summarized as follows:
Zone I setting deformation
Zone II elastic zone
Zone III new micro cracks
Zone IV propagation of the new micro cracks
Zone V macro cracks
Zone VI shear plane along the macro cracks
2
From the point B of the curve, the rate of radial deformation starts to increase with respect to the axial one
(Poisson ratio increases); this increase is originated since new micro fractures are developing in the area of the
sample subjected to higher stress levels. From this point we can observe an increasing of the sample volume.
Initial Poisson ratio starts from about 0.2 and increases up to the peak resistance, where the increase is very fast
and the final value exceeds the theoretical value of 0.5.
Between the points B and C the micro cracks start to develop but stabilize up to a characteristic size.
After the point C the cracks propagation continues up to the sides of the sample and a system of coalescent
cracks is developed, that will originate a continuous plane of shearing.
• confining pressure system 70 MPa capacity, connected to the automatic console Sercomp 7;
• on request, additional load frame 600 kN capacity, to be used as alternative to that of 3 MN, when testing
soft rocks under triaxial conditions
The control system, integrated with the two units, is particularly advanced: in order to carry out a multistage
triaxial tests, the axial force applied to the sample can be managed at constant rate of load or at constant rate
of displacement with a great precision both in loading and in unloading conditions. The whole control and
measurement process is managed via a single software, specially designed for this kind of tests.
3
In order to avoid that the definition of the approaching failure, for each applied pressure level, is carried out trough
a subjective evaluation by the operator, an automatic system has been set, where the tangent elastic modulus is
constantly monitored in real-time.
When the variation of the elastic modulus exceeds a threshold, defined by the operator according to the
characteristics of the rock under test, the system operates by reducing the axial load and applying the next
ramp of confining pressure to the next target value. Once this target level of pressure has been reached, the
system automatically resumes the application of the axial load at constant speed of displacement.
In addition to the evaluation of the failure envelope, the different test systems available allow for determining
other relevant parameters:
• tangent and secant Young’s modulus;
• Poisson’s ratio;
• volumetric compressibility.
and taking into account the significant values of the tensile strength t of most common rocks, the following
table has been generated, in order to give details about the maximum range of the compression machine required
to carry out Brazilian tests.
4
t D T/D
MPa mm kN kN kN kN
The test must be carried out at constant gradient of force or displacement, with a duration between 1 and 10 min.
5
Indirect tensile – capacity of the compression machines
5
Permeability tests on intact rock samples
From the results of the tests described above it is possible to define the failure envelope. Different solutions are available in
literature, both for intact rocks and for the rock mass. The solution proposed by Hoek & Brown (1980) for intact rock is
described here below:
Where:
Confining pressure
Peak resistance measured in triaxial tests for the specific confining pressure
Material constant
The permeability characteristics of intact rock samples can also be determined along the triaxial tests. In details
it is possible to evaluate the effect of the overburden pressure on the permeability values.
Porosity and permeability are two of the primary factors that control the movement and storage of fluids in rocks
and sediments. They are intrinsic characteristics of these geologic materials. The exploitation of natural resources,
such as groundwater and petroleum, is partly dependent on the properties of porosity and permeability of intact
rocks.
Here below an example, where a constant head water permeability test is carried out in automatic
mode, along a triaxial test with a rock sample inside an Hoek cell.
7
Hydraulic circuit designed for permeability test on rock sample
On the other hand, for the rock mass, it is not possible to extrapolate the results of laboratory
permeability tests to the real stuation in the field, where the presence of more or less regular fractures
is decisive for the hydraulic characterization.
This is the reason why for the caracterization of the rock mass, permeability tests are usually
performed in the field (i.e. pressure or packer tests).
8
Laboratory tests on joints
The term discontinuity or joint, is usually associated with weakness surfaces inside the rock mass, which is
subdivided by the discontinuities into defined units that are called unitary rock volumes. The joints may be of
different origin in relation to the genesis of the geological formations and tectonic events suffered.
As first approach, the characterization of the rock mass is provided by mapping the discontinuities. From their
spatial distribution depends the degree of fracturing of the entire rock mass, the possible formation of sliding
surfaces and the overall stability. Other specific factors are: the geometry, the roughness, the undulations and
the amplitude of the joints. The evaluation of these parameters is performed both on rock cores, taken from
surveys at the joints and discontinuities, both directly on the joint as it appears from the outcrops. Disregarding
the investigation of geometric characterization of the rock mass, the following notes will focus on the evidence
to evaluate the characteristics of deformability and strength of discontinuirties and joints.
The instrument that allows to measure the roughness of the joints is the so-called Barton’s Technical Profilograph
(Barton Comb). It is a portable instrument 30 cm in length, consisting of a splined bar inside which a hundred
of independent slates are positioned perpendicularly to it side by side, 10-15 cm long. Supporting the individual
slates to the surface of the joint under investigation, it is possible to reproduce the profile, which is subsequently
compared with a series of standard profiles, associated with a scale of values, JRC (joint roughness coefficient)
ranging from 1 to 20, starting from the smooth joint.
Roughness profile and corresponding JRC values Alternative method to evaluate JRC
Measurement of asperities
9
Tilt test
Another method for the assessment of roughness of a joint is represented by the tilt test, where the rock sample,
consisting of two pieces separated from the joint, is arranged on a horizontal plane, that is tilted at a constant
speed. The slope of the plane continue to increase, until the upper portion of the sample begins to slide with
respect to the lower one, bound to the test instrument. In this test the JRC index is calculated by measuring the
inclination angle obtained by the tilt test and the angle of residual strength, obtained from the direct shear test,
as described in next sections.
The strength of the walls is conventionally determined by the Schmidt Hammer (L model, 0.74 N x m impact
energy), which measures the rebound of a known mass, pushed against the surface of the joint. Such rebound
index is related to the compressive strength of the rock material of the joint itself.
In addition to the roughness of the joint it is necessary to know the magnitude and thickness of the asperities.
When the discontinuity is filled with material of different origin, the strength characteristics of the coupling can
be affected by the characteristics of the filling material. If the thickness of the material filling the joint is less
than the asperities, the strength of the joint will be generated almost exclusively by the roughness of the
asperities, and then directly related to the coefficient JRC. Otherwise the strength of the joint shall be assessed
with other testing methods, for example by the direct shear tests
10
Direct and residual shear test
This equipment has been designed to apply both a compression force normal to the joint and a shear force,
parallel to the joint. The rock specimen is placed within a proper rigid shear box and oriented so that the shear
force acts along the plane of the joint. The positioning of the specimen is made by using a quick-setting
cement mixture or epoxy resin, so as to ensure the rock core to be firmly gripped and rigidly inserted in the
mortar block within the shear box along the plane of discontinuity.
The next stages of application of the axial force and of the shearing action, as well as with traditional systems
consisting of hydraulic jacks controlled manually by the operator, can be carried out also with servo controlled
hydraulic automatic systems and managed by specific software, in the same way of the triaxial multistage
tests, described above. The tests can then be carried out either under load control or under displacement
control, allowing to determine both peak and residual resistance.
During the test, due to the roughness of the joint, dilatancy phenomena can occur, mainly caused by the
increase of the distance of the walls of the joint; which can lead to an increase of the normal force applied to
the surface of the joint. To avoid this inconvenience, if the machine operate in manual control, a floating
piston, sliding within a steel cylinder with minimum friction, is inserted in the hydraulic circuit of the axial jack.
This device allows to absorb the dilatancy and keep constant the normal force.
11
More advanced automatic solutions are available, where the same direct shear equipment is connected to servo
controlled hydraulic systems, to automatically maintain constant the axial force and perform the shear stage
either under horizontal displacement or force control. By this way the tests are performed much easily with much
accurate and reliable measurements and final results.
and field tests are considered. Here below the solution proposed by Barton (1976):
Where:
JRC and JCS should be corrected to be extrapolated from laboratory tests on joints
of small size to the joints in real scale (Barton & Bandis, 1982):
Ln -0.02JRC 0
JRCn = JRC0
L0
Ln -0.03JRC0 0
JCSn = JCS0
L0
Where:
12
REFERENCES
Barton, N. 1976. The shear strength of rock and rock joints. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr.
13, 1-24.
Barton, N., Løset, F., Lien, R. and Lunde, J. 1980. Application of the Q-system in design decisions. In
Subsurface space, (ed. M. Bergman) 2, 553-561. New York: Pergamon.
Barton, N.R. and Bandis, S.C. 1990. Review of predictive capabilites of JRC-JCS model in engineering
practice. In Rock joints, proc. int. symp. on rock joints, Loen, Norway, (eds N. Barton and O. Stephansson),
603-610. Rotterdam: Balkema.
Barton, N.R. and Choubey, V. 1977. The shear strength of rock joints in theory and practice. Rock Mech.
10(1-2), 1-54.
Bieniawski, Z.T. 1973. Engineering classification of jointed rock masses. Trans S. Afr. Inst. Civ. Engrs 15, 335-
344.
Bieniawski, Z.T. 1989. Engineering rock mass classifications. New York: Wiley.
Franklin, J.A. and Hoek, E. 1970. Developments in triaxial testing equipment. Rock Mech. 2, 223-228. Berlin:
Springer-Verlag.
Griffith, A.A. 1924. Theory of rupture. Proc. 1st congr. applied mechanics, Delft, 55-63. Delft: Technische
Bockhandel en Drukkerij.
Hoek Evert. Practical Rock Engineering
Hoek, E., and J.A. Franklin (1968). A simple triaxial cell for field and laboratory testing of rock. Trans. Inst.
Mining & Metallugy. Vol.77, pp A22-A26.
Hoek, E. and Brown, E.T. 1980b. Empirical strength criterion for rock masses. J. Geotech. Engng Div., ASCE
106(GT9), 1013-1035.
Hoek, E. and Brown, E.T. 1988. The Hoek-Brown failure criterion - a 1988 update. In Rock engineering for
underground excavations, proc. 15th Canadian rock mech. symp., (ed. J.C. Curran), 31-38. Toronto: Dept. Civ.
Engineering, University of Toronto.
International Society for Rock Mechanics Commission on Standardisation of Laboratory and Field Tests. 1978.
Suggested methods for the quantitative description of discontinuities in rock masses. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min.
Sci. & Geomech. Abstr. 15, 319-368.
Patton, F.D. 1966. Multiple modes of shear failure in rock. Proc. 1st congr. Int. Soc. Rock Mech., Lisbon 1,
509-513.
The ISRM Suggested Methods for Rock Characterization, Testing and Monitoring: 2007–2014. Springer
International Publishing Switzerland 2015
Laubscher, D.H. 1977. Geomechanics classification of jointed rock masses - mining applications. Trans. Instn
Min. Metall. 86, A1-8.
Wickham, G.E., Tiedemann, H.R. and Skinner, E.H. 1972. Support determination based on geologic
predictions. In Proc. North American rapid excav. tunneling conf., Chicago, (eds K.S. Lane and L.A. Garfield),
43-64. New York: Soc. Min. Engrs, Am. Inst. Min. Metall. Petrolm Engrs.
13