SOUTH DAKOTA SCHOOL OF MINES AND TECHNOLOGY

MEM 304L – ROCK MECHANICS LABORATORY

99/100 – great job.

REPORT
BASIC MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
OF ROCKS
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH TESTING

TO: Dr. Kelli McCormick

FROM: Bernardo Moreno Baqueiro Sansao
DATE: February 5th, 2014
 1

REPORT: BASIC MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF ROCKS – UNIAXIAL

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TESTING

TO: Dr. Kelli McCormick

FROM: Bernardo Moreno Baqueiro Sansao
DATE: February 5th, 2014
SUBJECT: MEM 304L Rock Mechanics Lab – Basic Mechanical Properties of Rocks
– Uniaxial Compressive Strength Testing

Introduction

In Rock Mechanics, understand the behavior of rocks and rock masses is essential
to avoid accidents in civil constructions and in mines. The uniaxial compressive strength
test is one of the most important tests to learn more about the behavior of rocks. Tunnels,
shafts, drifts, bridges, buildings, are built over or in the rock, then it is necessary to
discover how much load the rock can support. Lab tests are not the same as in-situ tests,
several considerations must be taken into account when the test data will be applied in-
situ, the specimen prepared in lab may not contain discontinuities or water content, which
may change the results of uniaxial compressive strength of an in-situ rock mass. In this
lab, a specimen of rock will be tested by applying a load in the specimen and reading
information from the software, then will be possible to calculate the uniaxial compressive
strength of the rock. Very good.

Equipment
In the this lab the following equipment were used:
Vernier Caliper
Protractor
Tinius-Olsen Testing Machine (Hydraulic Loader Pump)
Bearing block and spherical seat
Data acquisition system

Procedure

A specimen of a clayey sandstone rock was used to do this test. It is very

important to describe the sample, because a different sample of the same rock can have a
different result. The specimen was not brittle, but some grains can be easily released. The
direction of layering is almost perfect perpendicular to the cylinder’s central axis. It is
possible to realize that some layers are darker than others, it is also possible to see some
very little holes in the surface, and this is because the rock has some porosity. Looking
from the top of the specimen, it is possible to see some lines made by an arrange of
grains. In one of the cross-sectional areas, a little quantity of grains were missed which
may decrease this area. (Images of the specimen are in the Appendix).
The specimen was placed above a bearing block and a spherical seat which was
greased. The spherical seat is to make sure that the load is going to be applied uniformly
and axially to the specimen. The Tinius-Olsen Testing Machine was prepared to apply the
 2

load in the specimen and its hydraulic pump started to load. Several seconds later the
failure happened. The computer system created an Excel file containing information
about the test, as how long the test took, and the loads applied in the specimen during the
test.
After the test, the angle of failure relative to the long axis of the specimen was
measured.

Data collected, analysis and calculations

The diameter of the specimen was measured three times using a Vernier caliper, after
measuring, the normal average was taken as the diameter length. The reading was done in
centimeters and then converted to inches. (1cm = 0.39370 inches).

1st diameter length reading = 5.37cm

2nd diameter length reading = 5.38cm
3rd diameter length reading = 5.37cm

Normal average:

5.37cm corresponds to 2.11 inches

The height of the specimen was also measured three times using the same Vernier
caliper, the normal average was taken as the height length. The reading was also done in
centimeters and then converted to inches.

1st height length reading = 12.00cm

2nd height length reading = 12.02mm
3rd height length reading = 12.00mm

Normal average:

12.01cm corresponds to 4.73 inches

The height to diameter ratio of the sample is given by: 4.73 in / 2.11 in = 2.24

The surface area (cross-sectional area) of the specimen where the load was applied is
given by: A = (d2/4)

A= (2.112/4) = 3.50 in2

The uniaxial compressive strength is given by:

Co =
 3

Fc is the corrected peak load, in pounds. The formula to correct the Fc is given by:
Fc = 0.951 (DAQ) + 2021.7 , once the range used was the Middle Range.
DAQ is the load reading from the digital acquisition system.
In this test, the peak load was 37,138.32 lb.

Then, the Fc is given by:

Fc = 0.951 (37,138.32) + 2021.7 = 37,340.24 lb

Co = 37,340.24 lb / 3.50 in2 = 10,668.64 lb/in2

A protractor was used to measure the angle of the failure. The measured angle was
approximately 30o. The angle was measured as shown in the figure 1. Nice figure.

Figure 1. Representation of the measured angle of the failure.

Data from others groups were taken to see the rock strength variability. The same
core drill was used to make all the specimens, hence the cross-sectional area is
approximately the same, probably if there were some pieces of rock missing in the other
specimens, it must be taken into account. Actually, we’ve used two different diameter
rock bits, so the cross-sectional areas aren’t necessarily the same. Still, it’s a good
approximation if no other data is available. The maximum load applied data from this
experiment and other two groups’ experiment are shown in the table 1.

Group BS ZL (this experiment) Group JH CS Group ZT AH MB

DAQ 37.138.32 lb 22,752.61 lb 21,442.23 lb
Table 1. Maximum load applied

Now using the formula: Co = for the other groups.

Fc is given by: Fc = 0.951 (DAQ) + 2021.7

Co (Group JH CS) = 6,759.84 lb/in2

 4

Co (Group ZT AH MB) = 6,403.79 lb/in2

The final results (uniaxial compressive strength) are shown in the table 2.

Group BS ZL (this experiment) Group JH CS Group ZT AH MB

Co 10,668.64 lb/in2 6,759.84 lb/in2 6,403.79 lb/in2
Table 2. Uniaxial Compressive Strength

Conclusions

In this experiment, was possible to learn how to make the uniaxial compressive
strength test and figure out that the different specimens from the same type of rock can
have different results. Probably the direction of layering was not the same or some
internal characteristics are different. It is very important to understand that this
measurement depends on how the test is conducted and if the specimen has internal
discontinuities that can make the failure happen in a lower load. True. The difference in
the values of uniaxial compressive strength shown in the table 2 could be caused by the
difference between the samples. Thus, the compressive strength of a rock mass in-situ
form can vary so much, and this is important to know to build safe constructions and
provide safe structure in mines. Good point.
Coverpage - 5 5 5
Introduction - 15 10 15
Equipment - 5 5 4
Procedure -5 5 5
Data - 25 25 25
Analysis and Calculation 30 30
- 30
Conclusion - 15 15 15
Total - 100 95 99

Appendix
 5

Figure A. Clayey Sandstone Rock Specimen

Figure B. Top view of the specimen

 6

Figure C. Specimen after failure