Comparative study of coal rocks compressive behaviors and failure criteria

  • Harinandan KumarEmail author
  • Upendra Singh Yadav
  • Subhash Kumar
  • Kishan Kumar
  • Ravi Yadav
  • Anveshika Shanker
  • Anurag Tripathi
  • Gitiksha Khandelwal
Original Paper


The mining practice, particularly in underground mines, undergoes several geomechanical uncertainties including crack propagation due to machine operation and blasting. The geomechanical uncertainties reduce the stability of underground strata. Thus, the assessment of the strength parameters and failure criteria of the coal mass of the underground structure is crucial for safe mining practice. The paper deals with the experimental investigation of geomechanical properties of different coal samples obtained from Raniganj Coalfield, India. The uniaxial and triaxial compressive strength properties (compressive strength (MPa),Young’s modulus (MPa), bulk modulus (MPa), modulus of rigidity (MPa), Poisson’s ratio, axial strain, lateral strain, vertical stress (MPa), horizontal stress (MPa), cohesion (MPa), and internal friction angle (degree)) were determined as per the prescribed standard. The compressive strength of the coal samples varied from 2 to 7.07 MPa at the depth of 100 to 650 m. The corresponding axial and lateral strains varied from 0.0039 to 0.007 and 0.0012 to 0.03. The moduli (Young’s modulus, bulk modulus, and rigidity modulus) of the coal samples varied from 428.571 to 1683.333 MPa, 666.667 to 1309.259 MPa, and 150 to 654.63 MPa. The triaxial parameters like cohesion and angle of internal friction varied from 0.4 to 2 MPa and 31 to 43°. The failure behavior of the coal was determined using different failure criteria (Bieniawski’s empirical strength criterion, H-B criterion, and Vipulanandan correlation model) using the statistical method. The constant values obtained from the different failure criteria were utilized to predict the vertical stress. Based on the experimental observation and the predicted values using the established failure criteria, the design of the coal pillar was predicted. The innovation of this paper is to predict the application of the suitable failure criteria for the design of underground support system and determination of design parameters based on the predicted values.


Compressive strength Rock failure criteria Regression analysis 



Shearing stress (MPa)


Normal stress (MPa)


Internal friction angle (degree)


Cohesion (MPa)


Angle (degree)


Pillar strength (MPa)


Compressive strength (MPa)


Compressive load (N)


Diameter of specimen (mm)


Axial strain (%)


Lateral strain (%)

ϑ or μ

Poisson’s ratio


Young’s modulus (MPa)


Modulus of rigidity (MPa)


Bulk modulus (MPa)


Vertical stress (MPa)


Factor of safety

W or Wp

Width of pillar (m)


percentage of extraction (%)


Height of pillar (m)


Height of pillar (2s2)


Depth of occurrence (m)


Density (kg/m3)


Hoek-Brown constant for intact rock




Indian standard


Horizontal stress (MPa)


Coal mine regulations


Sample from Raniganj Coalfield in Barachak area


Sample from Raniganj Coalfield in Chinakuri area


Sample from Raniganj Coalfield in Hijli area


Sample from Raniganj Coalfield in Narsamuda area


Sample from Raniganj Coalfield in Shiv Dega area


  1. Bieniawski ZT (1974) Estimating the strength of rock materials. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 11(8):A160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brace WF, Paulding BW, Scholz J (1966) Dilatancy in the fracture of crystalline rocks. J Geophys Res 71:3939–3953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Das SK, Basudhar PK (2009) Comparison of intact rock failure criteria using various statistical methods. Acta Geotech 4(3):223–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Deisman N, Mas Ivars D, Darcel C, Chalaturnyk RJ (2010) Empirical and numerical approaches for geomechanical characterization of coal seam reservoirs. Int J Coal Geol 82(3–4):204–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Deisman N, Khajeh M, Chalaturnyk RJ (2013) Using geological strength index (GSI) to model uncertainty in rock mass properties of coal for CBM/ECBM reservoir geomechanics. Int J Coal Geol 112:76–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gonzatti C, Zorzi L, Agostini IM, Fiorentini JA, Viero AP, Philipp RP (2014) In situ strength of coal bed based on the size effect study on the uniaxial compressive strength. Int J Min Sci Technol Google Scholar
  7. Goswami S (2013) Environment management in mining areas (a study of Raniganj and Jharia Coal Field in India). Glob J Hum Soc Sci 13(7):9–20Google Scholar
  8. Jaiswal A, Shrivastva BK (2012) A generalized three-dimensional failure criterion for rock masses. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 4(4):333–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jiang H (2017) Three-dimensional failure criteria for rocks based on the Hoek-Brown criterion and a general lode dependence. Int J Geomech 17(8):1–12Google Scholar
  10. Jiang H, Zhao J (2015) A simple three-dimensional failure criterion for rocks based on the Hoek–Brown criterion. Rock Mech Rock Eng 48(5):1807–1819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jiu K, Ding WL, Huang WH, You S, Zhang Y, Zeng W (2013) Simulation of paleotectonic stress fields within Paleogene shale reservoirs and prediction of favorable zones for fracture development within the Zhanhua Depression, Bohai Bay Basin, east China. J Pet Sci Eng 110:119–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kumar H, Mishra MK, Mishra S (2019) Experimental and numerical evaluation of CBM potential in Jharia Coalfield India. Geomech Geophys Geo-Energy Geo-Resour:1–26Google Scholar
  13. Lai GT, Reza MS, Rafek AG, Serasa AS, Hussin A, Ern LK (2016) Assessment of ultimate bearing capacity based on the Hoek-Brown failure criterion. Sains Malaysiana 45(11):1603–1607Google Scholar
  14. Lee YK, Pietruszczak S, Choi BH (2012) Failure criteria for rocks based on smooth approximations to Mohr-Coulomb and Hoek-Brown failure functions. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 56:146–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Li Z, Shi J, Tang A (2017) An investigation of failure modes and failure criteria of rock in complex stress states. J South Afr Inst Min Metall 117(3):245–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lisjak A, Grasselli G, Vietor T (2014) Continuum-discontinuum analysis of failure mechanisms around unsupported circular excavations in anisotropic clay shales. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 65:96–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu J, Sun S, Yue L, Wei J, Wu J (2017) Mechanical and failure characteristics of rock-like material with multiple crossed joint sets under uniaxial compression. Adv Mech Eng 9(7):1–18Google Scholar
  18. McPhee C, Reed J, Zubizarreta I (2015) Chapter 12 - geomechanics Tests. Dev Pet Sci 64:671–779Google Scholar
  19. Mohammed AS (2018) Vipulanandan models to predict the mechanical properties, fracture toughness, pulse velocity and ultimate shear strength of shale rocks. Geotech Geol Eng:1–14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mohammed A, Mahmood W (2018) Vipulanandan failure models to predict the tensile strength, compressive modulus, fracture toughness and ultimate shear strength of calcium rocks. Int J Geotech Eng:1–11.
  21. Noorian Bidgoli M, Jing L (2014) Anisotropy of strength and deformability of fractured rocks. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 6(2):156–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pan J, Meng Z, Hou Q, Ju Y, Cao Y (2013) Coal strength and Young’s modulus related to coal rank, compressional velocity and maceral composition. J Struct Geol Google Scholar
  23. Peng S, Zhang J (1985) Rock strength experiments and failure criteria. Eng Geol Undergr Rocks:75–100Google Scholar
  24. Rafiai H, Jafari A (2011) Artificial neural networks as a basis for new generation of rock failure criteria. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 48(7):1153–1159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Saeidi O, Rasouli V, Vaneghi RG, Gholami R, Torabi SR (2014) A modified failure criterion for transversely isotropic rocks. Geosci Front 5(2):215–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stefanak J, Kala Z, Mica L, Norkus A (2018) Global sensitivity analysis for the transformation of Hoek-Brown failure criterion for rock mass. J Civil Engineering and Management 24(5): 390-398Google Scholar
  27. Vipulanandan C (2019) Transferring technology from control studies to actual applications. CIGMAT Report, Center for Innovative Grouting Material and TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  28. Win CT, Amijaya DH, Surjono SS, Husein S, Watanabe K (2014) A comparison of maceral and microlithotype indices for interpretation of coals in the Samarinda Area, Lower Kutai Basin, Indonesia. Adv Geol 2014:1–17Google Scholar
  29. Zeng F (2012) Organic and inorganic geochemistry of coal. Coal, Oil Shale, Natural Bitumen. Heavy Oil Peat 1:1–23Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harinandan Kumar
    • 1
    Email author
  • Upendra Singh Yadav
    • 1
  • Subhash Kumar
    • 1
  • Kishan Kumar
    • 1
  • Ravi Yadav
    • 1
  • Anveshika Shanker
    • 1
  • Anurag Tripathi
    • 1
  • Gitiksha Khandelwal
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Petroleum and Earth SciencesUniversity of Petroleum and Energy StudiesDehradunIndia

Personalised recommendations