Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

On the Ratios between Elastic Modulus and Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Heterogeneous Carbonate Rocks

  • Technical Note
  • Published:
Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The ratios M R = E/σ c for 11 heterogeneous carbonate (dolomites, limestones and chalks) rock formations collected from different regions of Israel were examined. Sixty-eight uniaxial compressive tests were conducted on weak-to-strong (5 MPa < σ c < 100 MPa) and very strong (σ c > 100 MPa) rock samples exhibiting wide ranges of elastic modulus (E = 6100–82300 MPa), uniaxial compressive strength (σ c = 14–273.9 MPa), Poisson's ratio (ν = 0.13–0.49), and dry bulk density (ρ = 1.7–2.7 g/cm3). The observed range of M R = 60.9–1011.4 and mean value of M R = 380.5 are compared with the results obtained by Deere (Rock mechanics in engineering practice, Wiley, London, pp 1–20, 1968) for limestones and dolomites, and the statistical analysis of M R distribution is performed. Mutual relations between E, σ c, ρ, M R for all studied rocks, and separately for concrete rock formations are revealed. Linear multiple correlations between E on the one hand and σ c and ρ on the other for Nekorot and Bina limestone and Aminadav dolomite are obtained. It is established that the elastic modulus and M R in very strong carbonate samples are more correlated with ρσ c combination and ε a max, respectively, than in weak to strong samples. The relation between M R and maximum axial strain (ε a max) for all studied rock samples (weak-to-strong and very strong) is discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ACI (1989) Building code requirements for reinforced concrete (ACI 318-89). American Concrete Institute, Detroit

  • Al-Shayea NA (2004) Effect of testing methods and conditions on the elastic properties of limestone rock. Eng Geol 74:139–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deere DU (1968) Geological considerations. In: Stagg KG, Zienkiewicz OC (eds) Rock mechanics in engineering practice. Wiley, London, pp 1–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Gokceoglu C, Zorlu K (2004) A fuzzy model to predict the uniaxial compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of problematic rocks. Eng Appl Artif Intell 17(1):61–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haldane JBS (1919) The combination of linkage values and the calculation of distances between the loci of linked factors. Genetics 8:299–309

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatzor YH, Palchik V (1998) A microstructure—based failure criterion for Aminadav dolomites. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 35(6):797–805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISRM (1981) Rock characterization testing and monitoring. In: Brown ET (ed) ISRM suggested methods. Pergamon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Ocak I (2008) Estimating the modulus of elasticity of the rock material from compressive strength and unit weight. J S Afr Inst Min Metall 108(10):621–629

    Google Scholar 

  • Palchik V (1999) Influence of porosity and elastic modulus on uniaxial compressive strength in soft brittle porous sandstones. Rock Mech Rock Eng 32(4):303–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palchik V (2006) Stress-strain model for carbonate rocks based on Haldane’s distribution function. Rock Mech Rock Eng 39(3):215–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palchik V (2007) Use of stress-strain model based on Haldane’s distribution function for prediction of elastic modulus. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 44(4):514–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palchik V, Hatzor YH (2004) The influence of porosity on tensile and compressive strength of porous chalks. Rock Mech Rock Eng 37(4):331–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sonmez H, Tuncay E, Gokceoglu C (2004) Models to predict the uniaxial compressive strength and the modulus of elasticity for Ankara agglomerate. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 41(5):717–729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sonmez H, Gokceoglu C, Nefeslioglu HA, Kayabasi A (2006) Estimation of rock modulus: for intact rocks with an artificial neural network and for rock masses with a new empirical equation. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 43(2):224–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasarhelyi B (2005) Statistical analysis of the influence of water content on the strength of the Miocene limestone. Rock Mech Rock Eng 38(1):69–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. Palchik.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Palchik, V. On the Ratios between Elastic Modulus and Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Heterogeneous Carbonate Rocks. Rock Mech Rock Eng 44, 121–128 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-010-0112-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-010-0112-7

Keywords

Navigation