KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 179 Sayı: 179

An alternative approach to estimate the shear strength parameters of intact rock

Prof. Dr. Kamil Kayabalı(Department of Geological Engineering, Ankara University, 06830, Ankara, Türkiye)0000-0002-0228-0777
Atakan Balci(Department of International Affairs, The General Directorate of Ilbank, 06560, Ankara, Türkiye)0009-0005-1817-8530
Sayfa
124–137
Yayın Tarihi
2026-04-27
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Overall, the findings suggest that the proposed approach has potential as an alternative testing method in rock mechanics.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Engineering structures built on or within rock masses require a proper characterization of their geomechanical properties.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Triaxial compression (3XC) tests are routinely employed to determine the cohesion © and friction angle (ϕ) of intact rocks.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Overall, the findings suggest that the proposed approach has potential as an alternative testing method in rock mechanics.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Intact Rock · Shear Strength Parameters · Triaxial Compression Test

Abstract

Engineering structures built on or within rock masses require a proper characterization of their geomechanical properties. In this context, determining the strength parameters of intact rock is essential. Triaxial compression (3XC) tests are routinely employed to determine the cohesion © and friction angle (ϕ) of intact rocks. However, this test not only involves inherent uncertainties but also typically requires a full day to complete a single set of samples. The objective of this study is to evaluate a more practical approach for determining the c and ϕ of intact rocks. For this purpose, 20 types of intact rock were tested via 3XC, uniaxial compression (UC), and single-shear (SS) methods. The internal friction angles were determined from UC tests, while the cohesion values were obtained from SS tests. The c-ϕ pairs derived from the 3XC tests were compared with those obtained from the UC and SS tests. The results indicate that SS tests tend to overestimate cohesion compared to 3XC tests, whereas UC tests generally underestimate friction angles. Overall, the findings suggest that the proposed approach has potential as an alternative testing method in rock mechanics.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Kayabalı, P. D. K., Balci, A. (2026). An alternative approach to estimate the shear strength parameters of intact rock. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Dergisi, Cilt: 179 Sayı: 179, 124–137. https://doi.org/10.19111/bulletinofmre.1856342

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (37)

  1. Alidaryan, M., Khosravi, M. H, Bahaaddini, M., Moosavi, M., Roshan, H. 2023. Mobilization of Cohesion and Friction Angle of Intact Rocks in the Shearing Process. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 1-13.
  2. American Society for Testing Materials. 1995. Standard Test Method for Triaxial Compressive Strength of Undrained Rock Core Specimens Without Pore Pressure Measurements, D2664, 100 Barr Harbor Dr., West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  3. American Society for Testing Materials. 2001. Standard Practices for Preparing Rock Core Specimens and Determining Dimensional and Shape Tolerances, D4543, 100 Barr Harbor Dr., West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  4. American Society for Testing Materials. 2002a. ASTM D2938, Standard Test Method for Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Core Specimens, 100 Barr Harbor Dr., West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  5. American Society for Testing Materials. 2002b. ASTM C805, Standard Test Method for Rebound Number of Hardened Concrete, 100 Barr Harbor Dr., West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  6. American Society for Testing Materials. 2002c. ASTM C597, Standard Test Method for Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity Through Concrete, 100 Barr Harbor Dr., West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  7. American Society for Testing Materials. 2016. ASTM D5607, Standard Test Method for Performing Laboratory Direct Shear Strength Tests of Rock Specimens Under Constant Normal Force, 100 Barr Harbor Dr., West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
  8. Barla, G., Barla, M, Martinotti, M. E. 2010. Development of a New Direct Shear Testing Apparatus. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering 431, 117-122.
  9. Broch, E., Franklin, J. A. 1972. The Point-load Strength Index. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 96, 669-697.
  10. Cai, M. 2010. Practical estimates of tensile strength and Hoek-Brown parameter mi of brittle rocks. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering 432, 167-184.
  11. Diamantis, K., Exarhakos, G., Migiros, G., Gartzos, E. 2016. Evaluating the Triaxial Characteristics of Ultramafic Rocks from Central Greece Using the Physical, Dynamic and Mechanical Properties. Open Access Library Journal 312, 1-20.
  12. Fener, M., Kahraman, S., Bilgili, A., Günaydın, O. 2005. A Comparative Evaluation of Indirect Methods to Estimate the Compressive Strength of Rocks. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering 38, 329-343.
  13. Goodman, R. E. 1991. Introduction to Rock Mechanics, John Wiley and Sons, 562.
  14. Gong, F. Q., Si, X. F., Li, X. B., Wang, S. Y. 2019. Dynamic Triaxial Compression Tests on Sandstone at High Strain Rates and Low Confining Pressures with Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 113, 211-219.
  15. Hoek, E., Brown, E. T. 1997. Practical estimates of rock mass strength. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 348, 1165-1186.
  16. ISRM. 2007. The Complete ISRM Suggested Methods for Rock Characterization, Testing, and Monitoring: 1974-2006. Suggested Methods Prepared by the Commission on Testing Methods, International Society for Rock Mechanics, Compilation Arranged by the ISRM Turkish National Group Ankara, Turkey, 628.
  17. Jia, Z. R., Shi, J. 2011. A Method of Data Processing for Determining Shear Strength Parameters of Rock. Applied Mechanics and Materials 97, 397-401.
  18. Jiang, Y., Xiao, J., Tanabashi, Y., Mizokami, T. 2004. Development of an Automated Servo-Controlled Direct Shear Apparatus Applying a Constant Normal Stiffness Condition. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 41, 275-286.
  19. Jimenez, R., Serrano, A., Olalla, C. 2008. Linearization of the Hoek and Brown Rock Failure Criterion for Tunnelling in Elasto-plastic Rock Masses. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 457, 1153-1163.
  20. Kalantari, S., Hashemolhosseini, H., Baghbanan, A. 2018. Estimating Rock Strength Parameters using Drilling Data. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 104, 45-52.
  21. Karaman, K., Cihangir, F., Ercikdi, B., Kesimal, A. 2013. Evaluation of Cohesion and Friction Angle of Intact Rock using Indirect Methods. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi 42, 13-19.
  22. Karaman, K., Cihangir, F., Ercikdi, B., Kesimal, A., Demirel, S. 2015. Utilization of the Brazilian Test for Estimating the Uniaxial Compressive Strength and Shear Strength Parameters. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy 1153, 185-192.
  23. Kayabalı, K., Selçuk, L. 2010. Nail Penetration Test for Determining the Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Rock. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 472, 265-271.
  24. Kömürlü, E., Demir, A. D. 2018. Determination of Cohesion Values of Rock Materials using Double Shear Jaws. Periodica Polytechnica. Civil Engineering 624, 881.
  25. Labuz, J. F., Zang, A. 2012. Mohr-Coulomb Failure Criterion. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 456:975-979.
  26. Lee, Y. K., Bobet, A. 2014. Instantaneous Friction Angle and Cohesion of 2-D and 3-D Hoek-Brown Rock Failure Criteria in Terms of Stress Invariants. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering 47, 371-385.
  27. Li, H. B., Zhao, J., Li, T. J. 1999. Triaxial Compression Tests on a Ganite at Different Strain Rates and Confining Pressures. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 368, 1057-1063
  28. Lundborg, N. 1966. Triaxial Shear Strength of Some Swedish Rocks and Ores, Proc. 1st Cong. ISRM Lisbon 1, 251-255.
  29. Palassi, M., Emami, V. 2014. A New Nail Penetration Test for Estimation of Rock Strength. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 66, 124-127.
  30. Ramamurthy, T. 2001. Shear Strength Response of Some Geological Materials in Triaxial Compression. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 385, 683-697
  31. Selcuk, L., Gökce, H. S., Kayabalı, K., Şimşek, O. 2012. A Nondestructive Testing Technique: Nail Penetration Test. ACI Structural Journal 1092, 245-252.
  32. Shahani, N. M., Ullah, B., Shah, K. S., Hassan, F. U., Ali, R.; Elkotb, M. A., Ghoneim, M. E., Tag-Eldin, E. M. 2022. Predicting Angle of Internal Friction and Cohesion of Rocks Based on Machine Learning Algorithms. Mathematics 1020, 3875.
  33. Shakoor, A., Brown, C. 1996. Development of a Quantitative Relationship between Unconfined Compressive Strength and Los Angeles Abrasion Loss for Carbonate Rocks. Bulletin of Engineering Geology & the Environment 531, 97-103.
  34. Shen, J., Jimenez, R. 2018. Predicting the Shear Strength Parameters of Sandstone using Genetic Programming. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 77, 1647-1662.
  35. Sivakugan, N., Das, B. M., Lovisa, J., Patra, C. R. 2014. Determination of c and Φ of Rocks from Indirect Tensile Strength and Uniaxial Compression Tests. International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 81, 59-65.
  36. Srivastava, L. P., Singh, M. 2015. Effect of Fully Grouted Passive Bolts on Joint Shear Strength Parameters in a Blocky Mass. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering 483, 1197-1206.
  37. Wu, X., Jiang, Y., Li, B. 2018. Influence of Joint Roughness on the Shear Behavior of Fully Encapsulated Rock Bolt. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering 513, 953-959.