Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
MEASURE ROCK
ABSTRACT
Point load testing is used to determine rock strength
indexes in geotechnical practice. The point load test apparatus
and procedure enables economical testing of core or lump rock
samples in either a field or laboratory setting. In order to
estimate uniaxial compressive strength, index-to-strength
conversion factors are used. These factors have been proposed
by various researchers and are dependent upon rock type. This
study involved the extensive load frame and point load testing
of coal measure rocks in six states. More than 10,000
individual test results, from 908 distinct rock units, were used
in the study. Rock lithologies were classified into general
categories and conversion factors were determined for each
category. This allows for intact rock strength data to be made
available through point load testing for numerical geotechnical
analysis and empirical rock mass classification systems such as
the Coal Mine Roof Rating (CMRR).
INTRODUCTION
(1)
(2)
CI 95% = 196
.
SD
n
(3)
Table 1. Published comparisons between the point load and uniaxial compressive strength tests for sedimentary rock.
Reference
Das, 1995
Location
Number of tests
Conversion
Factor
Western Canada,
bituminous coalfields
NG1
14.7
NG
NG
18
12.6
17.4
12.6
8
15
24
23.7
21-22
30
1,000
29
Rock Type
Siltstone
Sandstone/siltstone
Shale/mudstone
Sandstone
Shale
Dredge material
Dredge material
sandstone/limestone
Broch and Franklin, 1972 Various
Carter and Sneddon, 1977 Coal measure
O'Rourke, 1988
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
UK
Quartzite
65
23.4
Sedimentary rocks
Melbourne, Australia
NG
20
South Africa
Southern WV
South Africa
160
386
NG
23.9
20
14.1
Smith, 1997
Bieniawski, 1975
Sandstone
Rusnak, 1998
Coal measure
Jermy and Bell, 1991
Coal measure
1
NG=Not given in reference
Comments
lumps, fresh core, old core
2.
3.
Rock Type
Shale and Claystone
Silty or Sandy Shale
Sandstone
Ferm Series
100 - 200
300 - 400
500 - 700
WV, IL, KY, IN, CO, and OH. Most of the core was NX-size
with some 75-mm (3-in) diameter. A map showing the
distribution of the drilling is shown below (figure 2).
Siltstone
Sandstone
Location
N units
All states
Midwest
West Virginia
All states
Midwest
West Virginia
All states
Midwest
West Virginia
Midwest
All states
289
209
68
296
236
51
228
99
113
95
908
Limestone
All states
N - Number of tests.
UCS - Unconfined compressive strength (psi).
SD - Standard deviation (psi)
Is50 - Point Load Index.
N UCS
tests
1,541
1,072
389
1,557
1,275
226
1,591
586
833
450
5,139
Median
UCS
529
4,367
10,752
6,286
5,931
13,332
10,931
6,773
14,574
18,752
7,040
Median SD of
UCS
1,664
1,314
2,680
1,166
1,027
2,699
2,096
1,601
2,450
6,614
1,796
Count
20000
SILTSTONE
SANDSTONE
LIMESTONE
75
50
15000
25
10000
REGION
5000
Midw est
100
W.Va.
0
SHALE
SILTSTONE
SANDSTONE
LIMESTONE
ROCK TYPE
Count
Median
25 th %
Median SD
of Is50
94
73
149
77
69
146
87
77
87
241
92
100
75 th %
25000
1,719
1,246
431
1,518
1,258
224
1,459
546
832
407
5,103
Median
Is50
269
175
488
296
261
611
446
291
591
730
322
SHALE
35000
30000
N PLT tests
75
50
25
0.50
1.00
1.50
0.50
1.00
1.50
Is(50) (psi)
268
473
193
275
510
610
Molind
a&
Mark
420
515
476
313
646
600
WV, this
study
(5)
(4)
A C C UR A C Y O F R E G R E S S I O N E Q UA T IO NS
500
300
200
1 2 ,0 0 0
1 0 ,0 0 0
8 ,0 0 0
6 ,0 0 0
4 ,0 0 0
2 ,0 0 0
- 2 ,0 0 0
-4 ,0 0 0
-6 ,0 0 0
- 8 ,0 0 0
100
-1 0 ,0 0 0
N U M BE R O F U N IT S
400
D IS T A NC E F R O M 9 5 % c i (p s i)
Figure 5. Histogram showing hte difference between UCS predicted by the PLT using equation 5, and the 95% confidence
interval of the measured UCS. The zero bar includes all cases that fell withing the 95% CI.
Siltstone
Sandstone
Limestone
All states
Location
All states
Midwest
West Virginia
All states
Midwest
West Virginia
All states
Midwest
West Virginia
Midwest
All states
K
21.8
22.4
20.2
20.2
19.6
20.8
20.6
20.2
20.4
21.9
21.0
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH (UCS,psi)
ALL DATA
35000
ROCK TYPE
UCS=21 PIV
SHALE
SILTSTONE
SANDSTONE
LIMESTONE
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
SHALE
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH (UCS,psi)
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
SILTSTONE
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH (UCS,PSI)
25000
20000
15000
s
10000
5000
200
400
600
800
POINT LOAD INDEX (IS(50),psi)
1000
Figure 6c. Regression between uniaxial compressive strength and point load index. Siltstone.
1200
SANDSTONE
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH (UCS,psi)
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
0
200
400
600
800
LIMESTONE
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH (UCS,psi)
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
0
500
1000
POINT LOAD INDEX (Is (50), psi)
Figure 6e. Regression between uniaxial compressive strength and point load index. Limestone.
1500
CONCLUSION
The PLT is an efficient method to determine intact rock
strength properties from drill core samples. It has become an
accepted test in geotechnical evaluations.
This study found that a conversion factor K=21 worked
well for a variety of rock types and geographic regions. The
variability of the PLT, as measured by the standard deviation,
was no greater than that of the UCS test. There is some
indication that K decreases for lower strength rocks, but the
tendency was not very pronounced. Geologic and engineering
judgment should be used when converting PLT results to UCS.
It must be remembered that both tests can only be used to
estimate intact rock strength and not rock mass strength.
The point load test provides for full utilization of data that
can be gained from exploration drilling programs. Intact rock
strength information can be acquired for use in geotechnical
evaluation and design work through numerical modeling and
rock mass classification systems. The cost of point load
testing is minimal when compared to the overall exploration
expense. Point load testing of roof and floor rock core of coal
seams that are to be mined by underground methods should be
standard procedure in any exploration program.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank Peabody Group for permission
to utilize the data and present this paper. The conclusions
contained here are solely those of the authors and not those of
Peabody Group. Also, the authors would like to thank Colin
REFERENCES
Bieniawski ZT. The Point Load Test in Geotechnical
Practice. Eng. Geol., Sept., 1975, pp. 1-11.
Broch E, Franklin JA. The Point Load Strength Test. Int.
Journal Rock Mech. Min. Sci 9, 1972, pp. 669-697.
Carter PG, Snedden M. Comparison of Schmidt Hammer,
Point Load and Unconfined Compression Tests in
Carboniferous Strata. Proceeding of a Conference on Rock
Engineering. University of New Castle, Tyne, England, 1977,
pp. 197-210.
Chau KT, Wong RHC. Uniaxial Compressive Strength
and Point Load Strength of Rocks. Int. Journal of Rock Mech.
Min. Sci and Geomech., 1996, Vol 33, No. 2, pp 183-188.
Das BM. Evaluation of the Point Load Strength for Soft
Rock Classification. Proceeding of the 4th International
Conference on Ground Control in Mining. Morgantown, WV,
1985, pp. 220-226.
Ferm JC, Weisenfluh GA. Cored Rocks in the Southern
Applachian Coalfields. U.S. Bureau of Mines Contract
No.H0230028 and No. JO188115. Library of Congress # 8151290, 1981, 93 pp.
Hassani FP, Whittaker BN, Scoble MJ. Application of the
Point Load Index Test to Strength Determination of Rock,
Proposals for a New Size Correlation Chart. Proceeding of the
21st U.S. Symp. on Rock Mech., Rolla, MO, 1980.
Hoek E. Rock Mechanics Laboratory Testing in the
Context of a Consulting Engineering Organization. Int. J.
Rock Mech. Min. Sci. and Geomech, Abstract 14, 1977,
pp.93-101.
ISRM.
International Society of Rock Mechanics
Commission on Testing Methods, Suggested Method for
Determining Point Load Strength, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min.
Sci. and Geomech. Abstr. 22, 1985, pp.51-60.
Jermy CA, Bell FG. Coal bearing strata and the stability
of coal mines in South Africa. Paper in Proceedings of the 7th
Intl. Cong. on Rock Mech. Intl. Soc. Rock Mech., Aachen,
Germany, 1991, pp. 1125-1131.
Mark C, Molinda GM. Rating Coal Mine Roof Strength
from Exploratory Drill Core. In the Proceeding of the 15th
International Conference on Ground Control in Mining,
Golden CO, 1996, pp. 415-428.
Molinda GM, Mark C. Rating the Strength of Coal Mine
Roof Rocks. U.S. Bureau of Mines IC 9444, 1996, 36 pp.
O'Rourke JE. Rock Index Properties for Geoengineering
Design in Underground Development. SME preprint 88-48,
1988, 5 pp.
Read JRL, Thornton PN, Regan WM. A Regional
Approach to the Point Load Test. Proceeding of the Aust-NZ
Geomech. Conference 2, 1980, pp. 35-39.
Rusnak JA. Application of the Coal Mine Roof Rating,
Derived from Drill Core, In the Roof Support Design of a Coal
Belt Conveyor Tunnel. Proc. of the 17th International