International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 36 (1999) 279±289

INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR ROCK MECHANICS

COMMISSION ON TESTING METHODS

DRAFT ISRM SUGGESTED METHOD FOR THE COMPLETE STRESS±STRAIN

CURVE FOR INTACT ROCK IN UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION

CONTENTS

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
2. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
3. Apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
4. Specimen preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
5. Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286
6. Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286
7. Reporting of results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
8. Additional interpretative comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288

Co-ordinators
C.E. Fairhurst (USA), J.A. Hudson (UK)

0148-9062/99/$ - see front matter # 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 4 8 - 9 0 6 2 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 0 6 - 6
 C.E. Fairhurst, J.A. Hudson / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 36 (1999) 279±289 281

Draft ISRM suggested method for the complete stress±strain

curve for intact rock in uniaxial compression

C.E. Fairhurst a, J.A. Hudson b

Accepted 15 January 1999

ISRM SUGGESTED METHODS (SMs): SECOND SERIES

A Second Series of Suggested Methods is being produced by the ISRM Commission on Testing Methods from 1998 onwards.
In this Second Series, for each SM two versions are published:

1. A Draft SM written by the Working Group Co-ordinator(s);

2. A Final SM also produced by the Working Group Co-ordinator but with amendments resulting from the Draft SM review by
the Working Group Members and other comments received after publication of the Draft SM.

A suite of the new Suggested Methods is currently being published in this Journal. These started with an Indentation
Hardness Index SM written by T. Szwedzicki and published in June 1998. Several more will be published in 1999.

Please send written comments on this SM to the

President of the ISRM Commission on Testing Methods:
Professor J A Hudson, 7 The Quadrangle,
Welwyn Garden City, Herts AL8 6SG, UK

1. Introduction region, through the onset of signi®cant cracking,

1.1 The subject of this suggested method is obtaining
the complete force-displacement curve for intact rock
in a laboratory test. The terms `force' and `load' are
synonymous in this context, as are the terms `displace-
ment' and `deformation'. Thus, a force-displacement
curve is the same as a load-deformation curve. When
the measured force is scaled by the original specimen
area and the measured displacement is scaled by the
original specimen length, a nominal stress±strain curve
can be plotted. The term `complete stress±strain curve'
refers to the displacement of the specimen ends from
initial loading, through the linear elastic prepeak
a
MTS Systems Corp., 14000 Technology Drive, Eden Prairie, MN,
USA.
b
T.H. Huxley School of Environment, Earth Sciences and
Engineering, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine,
London SW7 2BP, UK.
through the compressive strength (when the stress±
strain curve has zero gradient), into the postpeak fail-
ure locus, and through to the residual strength.
1.2 The complete force-displacement curve of an
intact rock specimen, whether tested in uniaxial com-
pression or in a con®ned state, is useful in understand-
ing the total process of specimen deformation,
cracking and eventual disintegration, and can provide
insight into potential in situ rock mass behavior. Until
1966, it was a paradox that rock specimens loaded in
the laboratory failed suddenly, but continuing rock
failure in situ often occurred gradually Ð even though
the rock had clearly been taken beyond the compres-
sive strength. The key to obtaining the complete
stress±strain curve for rock in the laboratory is under-
standing the role of the testing machine sti€ness.
1.3 The complete curve for rock has been obtained
since 1966 [1,2]. Initially, the experimental techniques
involved increasing the testing machine sti€ness. Since,
282 C.E. Fairhurst, J.A. Hudson / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 36 (1999) 279±289
Fig. 1. Classi®cation of class I and class II behavior of rock failure
in uniaxial compression [4].
1969, however, servo-controlled testing machines have
been used. During the initial development of the exper-
imental techniques, it became evident that obtaining
the complete force-displacement curve in uniaxial com-
pression for some rock types, e.g. high strength gran-
ites, becomes at best dicult and is sometimes
impossible without test optimization. Test optimization
includes appropriate load frame sti€ness, choice of
feedback signal and strain measurement transducers,
specimen preparation techniques, etc. [3]. For speci-
mens that exhibit brittle behavior when loaded in uni-
axial compression, even using conventional axial
strain-controlled testing methods is often not sucient
to control the rate of failure of the specimen after
peak strength. In this case, alternative control tech-
niques, such as circumferential strain control or com-
puted feed-back control, have been shown to greatly
improve the experimental procedure for obtaining the
complete force-displacement information.
1.4 A complete stress±strain curve for rock is shown
by the thick curve in Fig. 1. The prepeak portion is
the region OA. Wawersik [4] identi®ed two types of
curve in terms of the characteristic of the postpeak
region: either the curve monotonically increases in
strain or it does not. The former, the thick curve in
Fig. 1, is termed a class I curve; the latter, the thinner
curve in Fig. 1, is termed a class II curve. It is import-
ant to understand these two types of curve in order to
optimize the control of rock failure [3,5]. Cylindrical
specimens that exhibit class I behavior tend to be
somewhat ductile in nature when loaded axially;
whereas specimens that exhibit class II behavior tend
to respond in a brittle fashion to axial loading. A test
conducted in axial strain control is generally sucient
to obtain the complete force-displacement curve of
specimens exhibiting class I behavior. Alternative con-
trol techniques are necessary when testing specimens
that exhibit class II behavior because the curve does
not monotonically increase in strain, and the shaded
area ABDCA is the surplus energy which would be
supplied by a rigid machine with in®nite modulus,
AD, or a servo-controlled machine with axial strain
control, leading to uncontrolled failure.
1.5 The draft suggested method (SM) provided here
describes recommended testing and control procedures,
loading system hardware and specimen parameters for
conducting laboratory tests on intact cylindrical rock
specimens for which complete force-displacement data
are desired. This SM complements the earlier ISRM
SMs for determining the uniaxial compressive strength
and deformability of rock materials [6], and for deter-
mining the strength of rock materials in triaxial com-
pression [7]. It is hoped that the current SM, advising
on the complete force-displacement behavior of rock
specimens will allow comparison of data between ma-
terials, laboratories and researchers, and contribute to
a better understanding of rock failure.
2. Scope
2.1 The test methods described suggest methods for
obtaining pre- and postpeak force-displacement (or
stress-strain) data when testing rock specimens of
cylindrical geometry uniaxially loaded in compression
(see Fig. 1).
2.2 The SM is intended for the characterization of
intact rock. However, certain extremely brittle speci-
mens, even under the most favorable testing conditions
(e.g. sti€ testing frame, slow loading rate, circumferen-
tial strain feed-back, low length/diameter ratio), may
fail abruptly or even explosively when tested without
con®nement. It is suggested that these specimens may
not be conducive to postpeak testing in a uniaxial
mode, and should be tested in a con®ned state.
3. Apparatus
3.1 In the context of obtaining complete force-dis-
placement data for rock specimens, a number of hard-
ware elements can be optimized, as described below.
Loading system
3.2 When non-servo-controlled machines were used
in the 1960s to obtain the complete stress±strain curve
for rock, a high machine sti€ness was essential for
control. With a servo-controlled system, however, a
high machine sti€ness is not essential, but it does
allow a faster response time and hence is preferable
with brittle rocks. A servo-controlled hydraulic testing
machine should preferably be used to axially load the
specimen. Loading frames with sti€nesses greater than
 C.E. Fairhurst, J.A. Hudson / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 36 (1999) 279±289
Fig. 2. Example of servo-controlled, closed-loop testing system.
5 MN/mm are commonly available and are rec-
ommended. The sti€ness of the entire load train (i.e.
load frame, platens, spacers, load cell, etc.) should also
be maximized. Replacing an in-line load cell (which by
design is `soft') with a steel spacer, and measuring
axial load by an alternative method such as a di€eren-
tial pressure transducer, will increase load train sti€-
ness, but may compromise force readout accuracy,
especially at relatively low loads. Moving the loading
piston (or actuator) to the most retracted position
prior to testing also increases load train sti€ness by
reducing the hydraulic ¯uid `spring' under the piston.
The load frame capacity should exceed the estimate of
the strongest specimen to be tested. The calibrations of
the load frame transducers should be veri®ed at suit-
able time intervals and should comply with accepted
national requirements such as prescribed in either
ASTM methods E4: veri®cation of testing machines or
British standard 1610, grade A.
Hydraulics
3.3 A close-coupled hydraulic manifold (i.e.
mounted to or located as close as possible to the load-
ing piston) is recommended to minimize the response
283
time of hydraulic commands to the loading piston (see
Fig. 2).
3.4 The hydraulic manifold should be ®tted with in-
line accumulators (see Fig. 2). Accumulators provide
the hydraulic ¯ow required for fast, short duration,
movement of the piston, which is frequently necessary
to control the failure rate of brittle specimens.
3.5 A high-speed, high-frequency response servo-
valve should be used to reduce servovalve spool open-
ing time and improve system response time.
Spherically seated platen and specimen platen
3.6 A spherically seated upper loading platen should
be used, which reduces the e€ect of specimen non-par-
allelism on test results. The radius of the spherical pla-
ten should be equal to or greater than the specimen
radius, and the center point of the spherical seat
should coincide with the top surface of the specimen
even if an intermediate platen is used. The mating
spherical surfaces should not be lubricated, since the
spherical joint is intended only to accommodate initial
specimen alignment, and is not expected to move or
rotate during testing. (If necessary, a thin ®lm of min-
eral oil is acceptable to reduce corrosion). The radial
284 C.E. Fairhurst, J.A. Hudson / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 36 (1999) 279±289

Fig. 3. Example of simultaneous mounting of one circumferential and two axial extensometers.
 C.E. Fairhurst, J.A. Hudson / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 36 (1999) 279±289
center of the spherical surface should coincide with the
center of the top end of the specimen, to within 1 mm.
3.7 Specimen platens in the form of discs and having
a Rockwell hardness of not less than Rc 58 should be
placed at the specimen ends. The diameter of the pla-
tens shall be between D and D+2 mm, where D is the
diameter of the specimen. The thickness of the platens
shall be at least 15 mm or D/3 (whichever is greater).
Surfaces of the disc platens should be ground and
their ¯atness should be better than 0.005 mm.
3.8 The specimen, the platens and the spherical seat
shall be accurately centered with respect to one
another and to the loading machine. Etched circles on
the lower platen are recommended to facilitate speci-
men centering. Specimen platens with machined center-
ing grooves should not be used, because the grooves
can restrict lateral displacement of the specimen during
the test.
Control system
3.9 A closed-loop, servo-hydraulic, control system,
capable of operation in axial force, axial strain and
radial strain control should be used (see Fig. 2).
Control systems with high loop-closure rates (1 kHz or
greater, real-time) are recommended, as are control
systems that allow closed-loop control based on a
computed feedback signal [8,9].
Strain measurement transducers
3.10 Measurement of axial and circumferential or
diametrical displacement by means of direct contact
extensometers is recommended. Both axial and circum-
ferential strains shall be determined within an accuracy
of 1% of the reading and a precision of 0.2% of full
scale. The overall possible physical travel of the extens-
ometers should exceed the maximum expected speci-
men displacements. Two axial extensometers are
recommended and should be attached to the specimen
1808 apart, and contact the specimen at approximately
25 and 75% of the axial dimension (see Fig. 3). The
output of the two extensometers should be acquired
separately, but averaged for the test report. If axial
measurement is made between the upper and lower
platens, care should be taken to determine and correct
for any platen de¯ection. The circumferential or dia-
metrical extensometer should be located at the speci-
men mid-height. Pay particular attention to data
reduction for the circumferential transducer where the
transducer is measuring a change in chord length
rather than a direct change in circumference. Electrical
resistance strain gauges, linear variable di€erential
transformers (LVDTs), or other suitable measuring
devices can also be used to measure axial and lateral
285
specimen strain. The devices should be robust and
stable, with strain sensitivity of the order of 510ÿ6.
3.11 If electrical resistance strain gauges are used,
the length of the gauges over which axial and circum-
ferential strains are determined shall be at least ten
grain diameters (of the rock microstructure) in magni-
tude and the gauges should not encroach within D/2
of the specimen ends, where D is the diameter of the
specimen.
3.12 If LVDTs are used for measuring axial and lat-
eral displacement due to loading, these devices should
be accurate to within 0.002 mm in any 0.02 mm range
and within 0.005 mm in any 0.25 mm range. It may be
more dicult to control a complete force-displacement
test on a specimen that exhibits class II behavior using
conventional LVDTs, due to the inherent time delay
of LVDTs and alternating current conditioning elec-
tronics, which can have a detrimental e€ect on the
control loop closure rate. If diculty is experienced, it
is recommended that digital transducers be used. The
LVDTs should not encroach within D/2 of the speci-
men ends.
3.13 With some strain measurement transducers, it
may be useful to surround the specimen with a ¯exible
membrane in order to prevent spalling chips of rock
from interfering with the transducers. If such a mem-
brane is used, ensure that the membrane does not
over-constrain the lateral expansion of the specimen.
Also, e€ects of the membrane-specimen interface
should be considered.
Data acquisition
3.14 A personal computer system for acquiring and
storing data should be used. Data should be acquired
as frequently as once/second, or as a function of
change in force or change in axial or radial displace-
ment.
4. Specimen preparation
4.1 Test specimens shall be right circular cylinders
having a height-to-diameter ratio of between 2.0 and
3.0 and a diameter preferably of not less than approxi-
mately 50 mm. The diameter of the specimen shall be
at least 20 times the largest grain in the rock micro-
structure.
4.2 The ends of the specimen shall be ¯at to 20.01
mm and shall not depart from the perpendicular to the
longitudinal axis of the specimen by more than 0.001
rad (about 3.5 mm) or 0.05 in 50 mm.
4.3 The sides of the specimen shall be smooth and
straight to within 0.3 mm over the full length of the
specimen.
286 C.E. Fairhurst, J.A. Hudson / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 36 (1999) 279±289
4.4 The use of capping materials or end surface
treatments other than machining is not permitted.
4.5 The diameter of the test specimen shall be
measured to the nearest 0.1 mm by averaging two di-
ameters measured at right angles to each other close to
the top, the mid-height and the bottom of the speci-
men. The average diameter shall be used for calculat-
ing the cross-sectional area. The height of the
specimen shall be determined to the nearest 1.0 mm.
4.6 Specimens shall be stored for no longer than 30
days, and in such a way as to preserve, as much as
possible, the natural water content. The moisture con-
dition shall be reported in accordance with ISRM SM
for determination of the water content of a rock
sample [10].
4.7 The number of specimens tested under a speci-
®ed set of conditions should be sucient to adequately
represent the rock sample, and should be a function of
the intrinsic variability of the rock. A minimum of ®ve
specimens per set of testing conditions is rec-
ommended.
5. Procedure
5.1 Personnel conducting the tests should be su-
ciently trained in the use of servo-hydraulic testing sys-
tems, closed-loop control concepts and brittle rock
testing, so that testing is performed safely.
5.2 Attach the strain or displacement measurement
transducers to the specimen and install the assembly
onto the lower platen in the load frame.
5.3 Apply a small preload to the specimen in force
control. This helps `seat' the specimen to the loading
platens and the upper loading platen to the spherically
seated platen. When applying preload to the specimen,
the system should be in force control (i.e. using the
output of the axial force cell as feedback). Since rock
has a relatively high modulus, applying preload in
axial strain control is not recommended, because a
small amount of axial strain could correspond to an
axial force above the maximum load bearing capacity
of the specimen. Also, it should be noted that, if using
a di€erential pressure transducer in place of a load cell
for force measurement and control, applying small pre-
loads is dicult due to the piston friction at low loads.
Specimens that generally exhibit ductile behavior
(gentle, large strain failure behavior)
5.4 Switch the control mode to axial strain control,
and load the specimen at an axial strain rate of 0.001
mm/mm/s. until reaching approximately 70% of
expected peak force. At 70% of peak force, switch the
axial strain rate to 0.000001 mm/mm/s until the
applied force falls to 50% of peak force. Then switch
the axial strain rate to 0.001 mm/mm/s until a com-
plete force-displacement curve is obtained. The force-
displacement curve can be considered to be complete
in the testing context when the load carrying capacity
of the specimen declines to less than approximately
30±40% of peak load carrying capacity.
Specimens that generally exhibit brittle behavior
(severe, small strain failure behavior)
5.5 Switch the control mode to axial strain control,
and load the specimen at an axial strain rate of 0.001
mm/mm/s. until reaching approximately 70% of
expected peak force. At 70% of peak force, switch the
control mode to circumferential control, at a rate of
0.0001 mm/mm/s, until the applied force falls to 50%
of peak force. Then switch back to an axial strain rate
of 0.001 mm/mm/s until a complete force-displacement
curve is obtained. If the test is unsuccessful due to
abrupt specimen failure, alternative control modes may
be considered, such as a computed channel feedback
loop [8,9].
5.6 Force and axial and circumferential strains or
displacements shall be recorded at a frequency of 1
Hz.
6. Calculations
6.1 The force will be obtained from the built-in load
cell information. Axial strain and diametric strain may
be recorded directly from strain indicating equipment
or may be calculated from displacement readings
depending upon the type of instrumentation used.
6.2 The compressive stress, s, is calculated as,
s ˆ P=A0 ,
where, P is the compressive force on the specimen, and
A0 is the initial cross-sectional area, and in this test
procedure, compressive stresses and strains are con-
sidered positive.
6.3 Axial strain, ea, is calculated as
ea ˆ Dl=l0 ,
where Dl is the change in measured axial length (posi-
tive for a decrease in axial length) and l0 the axial
length of specimen prior to loading.
6.4 Diametric strain is determined either by measur-
ing the changes in specimen diameter or by measuring
the circumferential strain. In the case of measuring the
changes in diameter, the diametric strain, ed, is calcu-
lated as
ed ˆ Dd=d0 ,
where Dd is the change in diameter (negative for an
 C.E. Fairhurst, J.A. Hudson / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 36 (1999) 279±289
Fig. 4. Complete stress±strain curve for a rock specimen showing the prepeak Young's modulus, compressive strength and postpeak Young's
modulus.
increase in diameter) and d0 the diameter of the speci-
men prior to loading.
In the case of measuring the circumferential strain
ed, the circumference is C=pd, and so the change in
circumference is DC=pDd. The circumferential strain,
ec, is
ec ˆ DC=Co ˆ DC=pd0 ,
where Co is the original specimen circumference.
The circumferential strain, ec, is therefore equal to
the diametric strain, ed, because
ec ˆ DC=pd0 ˆ pDd=pd0 ˆ Dd=d0 ˆ ed :
6.5 The Young's modulus, E, of the rock is de®ned
as the ratio of the change in axial stress to the change
in axial strain Ð as caused by the axial strain.
Young's modulus is usually associated with the pre-
peak portion of the complete stress±strain curve, but it
can also be determined in the postpeak region. In the
prepeak and postpeak regions, the modulus may be
287
calculated using any one of several methods employed
in accepted engineering practice, as described below.
In the postpeak region, the specimen has to be
unloaded from any postpeak location, and then
reloaded to generate a further subsidiary complete
stress±strain curve (see Fig. 4). The Young's modulus
is then the positive slope of the ascending portion of
this new curve, and is not the slope of the original
stress±strain curve at the postpeak location (where the
slope is generally negative).
The most common methods of establishing the
Young's modulus value are as follows:
1. Tangent Young's modulus, Et, is measured at a
stress level which is some ®xed percentage of ulti-
mate strength. It is generally taken at a stress level
equal to 50% of the uniaxial compressive strength.
The compressive strength is the peak stress sus-
tained by the specimen.
2. Average Young's modulus, Eav, is determined from
288 C.E. Fairhurst, J.A. Hudson / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 36 (1999) 279±289
the average slopes of the more-or-less straight line
portion of the axial stress±axial strain curve.
3. Secant Young's modulus, Es, is usually measured
from zero stress to some ®xed percentage of the
compressive strength, generally at 50%.
Axial Young's modulus E is expressed in units of
stress, i.e. Pascal (Pa) but the most appropriate mul-
tiple unit is the gigapascal (GPa=109 Pa).
6.6 Poisson's ratio, n, is calculated as
n ˆ ÿ…slope of axial stress ÿ strain curve=slope of
diametric stress±strain curve†,
n ˆ ÿE=…slope of diametric curve†,
where the slope of the diametric curve is calculated in
the same manner for either of the three ways discussed
for Young's modulus above. Note that Poisson's ratio
in this equation has a positive value, since the slope of
the diametric curve is negative by the conventions used
in this procedure.
6.7 The volumetric strain, ev, for a given stress level,
is
ev ˆ ea ‡ 2ec :
7. Reporting of results
The testing report should include the following.
Rock sample information (note that the term
`sample' refers to the block of rock obtained in the
site investigation; the term `specimen' refers to the
speci®c piece of rock prepared and tested).
(a) A lithologic description of the rock, including
grain size.
(b) Orientation of the axis of loading with respect
to rock anisotropy, e.g. bedding planes, foliation.
(c) Source of the sample, including: geographic
location, depth and orientations, dates and
method of sampling, storage history and environ-
ment.
(d) Number of specimens obtained from a given
rock sample.
Specimen information (for each specimen tested)
(e) Specimen diameter and height.
(f) Water content and degree of saturation of the
specimen at the time of testing.
(g) Date of testing and test duration.
(h) Values of applied force, stress and strain as
tabulated results or as recorded on a chart.
(i) Prepeak Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio,
expressed to three signi®cant ®gures.
(j) A plot of the complete force-displacement
curve, indicating the location of the peak force.
(k) Mode of failure: axial splitting or shear
failure.
(l) Any other observation or available physical
data such as speci®c gravity, porosity and per-
meability, citing the method of determination for
each.
General information
(m) Number of specimens tested.
(n) Description of testing machine type.
(o) Method of determination of prepeak Young's
modulus and at what axial stress level or strain
level determined.
(p) Method of determination of postpeak
Young's modulus and at what axial stress level
or strain level determined.
(q) Average result (if appropriate) of prepeak
Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio, expressed
to three signi®cant ®gures for all specimens in
the sample.
Should it be necessary in some instances to test spe-
cimens that do not comply with the above speci®ca-
tions, these facts shall be noted in the test report.
8. Additional interpretative comments
8.1 It is helpful to have a good conceptual under-
standing of the complete stress±strain curve when con-
ducting the tests. This understanding should be based
on the control variable.
8.2 Axial force cannot be used as the control vari-
able to obtain the complete stress±strain curve. If the
axial force is programmed to linearly increase with
time, the inevitable result is uncontrolled failure at the
compressive strength when the machine attempts to
increase the force on the rock specimen Ð which can-
not sustain more force.
8.3 Axial displacement is the most widely used con-
trol variable. This means that axial displacement is the
independent (or control) variable and axial force is the
dependent (or response) variable. Note that when the
force and displacement are scaled to nominal stress
and strain as described in this Suggested Method, the
stress±strain curve is plotted with the independent
value on the x-axis and the dependent variable on the
y-axis, as is conventional in science.
8.4 If, however, the complete force-displacement
curve does not monotonically increase in axial displa-
cement (the class II curve in Fig. 1), then axial displa-
cement is not suitable as the control variable. Often
circumferential displacement has been used because
this does monotonically increase even if the axial dis-
placement does not. In this latter case, the circumfer-
 C.E. Fairhurst, J.A. Hudson / International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 36 (1999) 279±289
ential displacement is the independent (or control)
variable, and both the axial force and axial displace-
ment are dependent (or response) variables.
8.5 In fact, the choice of control variable is wide.
For example, the control variable could be the energy
being input to the specimen or the rate of acoustic
emission, and others are possible. We have concen-
trated here on the `conventional' methods of obtaining
the complete stress±strain curve.
8.6 There has been debate over the years concerning
the validity of the scaled force-displacement curve as a
true stress±strain curve. This relates to the stress being
determined through scaling the force by the original
area, rather than by a continuously reducing area as
the rock is progressively fractured. It has been
suggested that the true stress±strain curve is elastic-
plastic, i.e. an ascending portion followed by a con-
stant stress portion. This debate is beyond the scope of
the SM. However, the `engineering' complete stress±
strain curve as determined by the method described
here will always be useful because it represents the
structural collapse of a specimen of rock, and, apart
from size and scale e€ects, describes the potential
behavior of a similar block of rock in the ®eld.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to F.A. Bezat (USA) for
help provided during the preparation of this suggested
method draft.
289
References
[1] Cook NGW. The failure of rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
1965;2(4):389±404.
[2] Cook NGW, Hojem JPM. A rigid 50-ton compression and ten-
sion testing machine. S Afr Mech Eng 1966;16:89±92.
[3] Hudson JA, Crouch SL, Fairhurst C. Soft, sti€ and servo con-
trolled testing machines: a review with reference to rock failure.
Eng Geology 1972:155±87.
[4] Wawersik WR. Detailed analysis of rock failure in laboratory
compression tests. Ph.D. thesis, University of Minnesota, 1968.
p. 165.
[5] Hudson JA, Brown ET, Fairhurst C. Optimizing the control of
rock failure in servo-controlled laboratory tests. Rock Mech
1971;3:217±24.
[6] Brown ET. Suggested methods for determining the uniaxial
compressive strength and deformability of rock materials. In:
Brown ET, editor. Rock characterization, testing and monitor-
ing Ð ISRM suggested methods. Oxford: Pergamon Press,
1981. p. 113±6.
[7] Brown ET. Suggested methods for determining the strength of
rock materials in triaxial compression. In: Brown ET, editor.
Rock characterization, testing and monitoring Ð ISRM
suggested methods. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1981. p. 125±7.
[8] Okubo S, Nishimatsu Y. Uniaxial compression testing using a
linear combination of stress and strain as the control variable.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1985;22:323±30.
[9] Okubo S, Nishimatsu Y, He C. Technical note: loading rate
dependence of class II rock behavior in uniaxial and triaxial
compression tests: an application of a proposed new control
method. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr
1990;27:559±62.
[10] Brown ET. Suggested methods for determining water content,
porosity, density, absorption and related properties and swelling
and slake-durability index properties. In: Brown ET, editor.
Rock characterization, testing and monitoring Ð ISRM
suggested methods. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1981. p. 81±94.