Introduction

The exploitation of useful minerals is accompanied by gangue mining. Both useful minerals and
gangue can be mined by various methods. Useful minerals in underground mines most frequently
include hard coal, ores of metals, in particular copper, iron, zinc and lead; rock and potassium
salts; sulphur and others. Opencast mining also involves the mining of brown coal or building
rock, such as marble or granite.
The simplest method, which is still applied on a small scale, is manual mining, for example with
picks or
hammers. However, the vast majority of mining processes are mechanized. The techniques used
in underground
mining machines are usually based on cutting, planning and drilling. Salts, as well as hard
mineable and abrasive
rocks, such as ores, are frequently mined with explosives. The winning e ciency, and, in
consequence, the
e ciency of exploitation, is mostly in uenced by the mechanical properties of unmined rock,
which are
determined by a number of parameters. A parameter easy to determine and use is uniaxial
compressive strength
R , expressed in megapascals. This parameter does not describe the rock in a su cient way,
however. Knowing c
merely the value of compressive strength does not allow mining resistance to be determined
(Biały, 2013), (Biały, 2014) (Biały and Fries, 2019). Rocks characterized by high compressive
strength R can be easily
mineable and vice versa; despite a relatively low value of R , the rock can be hard mineable. For
this reason, c
rock mineability is frequently speci ed by determining mineability index A, which is expressed in
newtons per centimetre, and by breakout angle ψ, expressed in degrees. All the three values
enable selecting a method of winning, appropriate tools and head, as well as estimating the
resistance of mining (Bołoz et al., 2018). It is of paramount importance, especially in the case of
the most popular and e cient machines, i.e., mechanized longwall systems and roadheaders.
Compressive strength and rock mineability are usually determined in laboratory conditions. A
sample subjected to tests can have a di erent direction in relation to that in the deposit.
Investigations into rock properties conducted in laboratory conditions concern only one direction.
Typical winning machines used in underground mining carry out the rock cutting process in a
di erent way. An analysis of typical machines has revealed that mining resistance depends on
various directions, which are most frequently inconsistent with the direction for which the
mechanical properties of unmined rock have been determined. On the other hand, the results of
mechanical properties tests conducted in three perpendicular directions indicate considerable
di erentiation in the obtained results, that is, rock anisotropy. Generally, anisotropy points to the
in uence of direction on rock properties. However, investigations conducted in three
perpendicular directions are, in fact, research into orthotropy, which is a special case of
anisotropy. For the analyzed problem, there is no need to determine directions in which properties
are the most di erentiated, as the directions are imposed by the directions of cutting and location
in the deposit.
The direction for which mechanical rock properties will be determined should, therefore, be
carefully determined while taking into account the exploitation method planned. Determination of
the direction is vitally important, especially if there is a possibility of carrying out tests only in one,
selected direction.
The article has been based on the results of laboratory research on rock properties obtained in
numerous works in this eld. Various rocks, such as brown coal, rock salt, sandstone, dolomite
and shale, have been subjected to tests. The collected results have been subjected to analysis,
and the observed correlations have been presented. Recommendations for selecting the direction
of investigations into rock properties and their interpretation in relation to the speci ed mining
method have been based on the theory of cutting as well as the experiences and analysis of
cutting processes carried out with various machines.
Literature review
Information on anisotropy appears in publications devoted to mechanical properties of rocks,
from the point of view of mining and geology as well as mining mechanization. It is a well-known
and obvious subject. Below have been quoted selected research results and relevant conclusions.
ffi
fl
ff
ff
ff
ffi
fi
fi
fl
ff
ffi
ffi
fi
 The investigations quoted in the literature most frequently concern properties of particular rocks
or the in uence of various parameters (sample length/diameter ratio, humidity, weathering, etc.)
on compressive strength (Agustawijaya, 2007). As early as several dozen years ago, it was found
that rock anisotropy could cause di erences in mechanical properties in 1:5 ratio (Muller and
Pacher, 1965). The authors of those investigations emphasized that anisotropy was a typical
phenomenon. The chart developed by the authors, which has been presented in Fig. 1a, concerns
the case of strati ed rocks.
In one of the publications (Nasseria et al., 2003), detailed results of research on a few types of
shale for a full range of angles have been presented. The results of uniaxial compressive strength
have revealed threefold di erences in values, depending on the direction of shale layers during
testing. Similar results were obtained for other materials, including shale (Fig. 1b), (Shuxin, 1992).
Sometimes the method of mining is chosen only on the basis of information on uniaxial
compressive strength obtained as a result of investigations into core barrels at the stage of
prospecting works. In such a case,
82
c

Łukasz BOŁOZ et al. / Acta Montanistica Slovaca, Volume 25 (2020), Number 1, 81-93
the only available data is the value of R in one direction ( g. 1c). In some investigations, attention
has been c
drawn to di erences in uniaxial compressive strength, reaching up to 50%, depending on the core
barrel inclination angle (Majcherczyk and Niedbalski, 2004).
Fig. 1. E ect of strati ed rocks anisotropy: a. on σ3 to σ1 strength ratio – shale (Muller and
Pacher, 1965), b. on the variation of peak principal stress di erence – slate (Shuxin, 1992), c. on
compressive strength depending on strata inclination angle (Majcherczyk and Niedbalski, 2004)
In numerous works concerning the mechanical properties of rocks that have been published in
recent years, attention has been drawn to anisotropy (Małkowski, 2015), (Ozcelik and Yilmazkaya,
2011), (Özbek et al., 2018), (Dinc et al., 2011). Apart from research into typical rocks mined in
underground plants, it is worth quoting investigations into rocks from open-pit mines. Rocks
subjected to testing included limestone, dolomite, claystone, marble (Hoek, 1980). There are
reports in the subject literature indicating that the way rock is deposited in a rock mass in uences
the resistance of mining. However, these dependencies have not been presented, especially in
relation to various methods of mining. An example is the analysis of the in uence of travertine
anisotropy on the e ciency of diamond line cutting (Ozcelik and Yilmazkaya, 2011). This study
also contains an extensive review of works in the eld of anisotropy of hard coal, diatomite,
sandstone and other rocks. In one of the studies, the authors undertook to explain the e ect of
rock anisotropy on the drilling process by means of numerical analyses (Schormair et al., 2006).
The study is only concerned with the analysis of results obtained for percussion drilling.
Mechanical cutting of rocks
The equipment that is most often used for mechanical cutting of rock raw materials includes
cutting, planning or drilling machines. In this article, the focus has been placed on selected most
popular machines. The recommendations presented in subsequent chapters also apply to the
machines listed below (machine numbering is the same as in subsequent drawings)
1, 2. roadheaders ( g. 2b),
3. longwall shearers ( g. 2a),
4. coal ploughs ( g. 2c),
5. longwall shearers with vertical axes of rotation of the cutting heads ( g. 2d),
6. shearers drilling in Auger Mining System ( g. 2e),
7. continuous miners and machines for Continuous Highwall Mining ( g. 2f).
These machines are to various degree used all over the world. Roadheaders are widely applied in
hard coal mines, but also in salt mines, ore mines, and the construction branch. Cutting shearers
and coal ploughs are basic, and the most common cutter-loaders in mechanized longwall
systems used to mine hard coal deposits. Similarly, longwall shearers with vertical axes of rotation
of cutterheads are applied in the mining of hard coal deposits. Drilling machines are used in
underground mines with thin and steeply sloped deposits, whereas continuous miners, similarly to
roadheaders, work in various mines, such as ore, hard coal, rock salt mines (Bołoz, 2018a),
(Bołoz, 2018b).
Working elements of mining machines are the subject of numerous studies and investigations in
the eld of design (Bołoz and Castaneda, 2018), (Bołoz and Midor, 2018), (Kotwica, 2018),
(Gospodarczyk et al., 2013), (Gospodarczyk et al., 2016) as well as the selection, wear and
fi
fl
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fl
ff
fl
 renovation of mining tools (Bołoz, 2019), (Bołoz and Midor, 2019), (Prokopenko et al., 2018),
(Ťavodová et al., 2016), (Hasilová and Gajewski, 2019). The cutterheads that have been
schematically presented in subsequent drawings are usually equipped with conical picks or at
picks. Flat, non-rotary picks (radial and forward attach picks) are typically applied as plough head
tools. Conical or at picks are the most frequently applied in cutterheads of various kinds of
shearers. An
83

Łukasz BOŁOZ et al. / Acta Montanistica Slovaca, Volume 25 (2020), Number 1, 81-93
exception is the shearer produced by Corum, which has been shown in the gure above. The
most energy- consuming process carried out by these machines is the winning process, which
“consumes” the most of machine power. Hence, a more precise estimate of power demand based
on correctly determined and interpreted mechanical properties of unmined rock will result in a
better selection of machines.
Fig. 2. Selected winning machines in underground mining: a. longwall shearer (MB12 320E
TMachinery a. s.), b. roadheader (R-130 FAMUR S. A.), c. coal plough (PL 738V Ostroj a. s.), d.
longwall shearer with vertical axes (KTB200 Corum Group), e. drilling shearer (VS-SEAL-625 z
OKD Ostrava), f. continuous miner (CM210 CAT)
Investigations into mechanical properties of rocks
Physical and mechanical properties of rocks numerically describe their most important features.
Physical parameters include absorbability as well as di erently de ned density and humidity.
Among mechanical parameters, the following are listed: di erently de ned strength, internal
friction angle, cohesion, Poisson ratio, mineability index, toughness index as well as abrasiveness
and abrasibility. Parameters that are of huge importance for the mining process are mechanical
properties. In practice, the most frequently determined is uniaxial compressive strength, but it is
insu cient to select tools and estimate the resistance of mining. From the point of view of tools
durability, an important parameter is rock abrasiveness (Mucha, 2019), which is a key issue in
terms of pick replacement frequency, but it is not the subject of this article. The parameter which
de nes the resistance of unmined rock during the winning process is mineability. Uniaxial
compressive strength is determined in accordance with standards concerning sample preparation
(PN-G-04301) and strength determination (PN-G-04303), while rock mineability is de ned by
means of two values: cuttability index A and breakout angle ψ. According to the method
developed by AGH University of Science and Technology, it is empirically determined by
measuring the cutting force when making a straight cut of a speci ed depth, with a speci ed pick.
The station for testing the planing process enables making a cut of a speci ed depth, width and
length. During the cutting process, the values of signals from the system of sensors embedded in
the holder with strain gauges are recorded, which allows for determining the value of the cutting,
side and normal force. After making the cut, its real depth and width are measured. Knowing the
cutting resistance, the depth of cutting and the values of relevant indexes, one can determine the
cuttability, which is proportional to the force of cutting and inversely proportional to the depth of
cutting (Krauze, 2000).
84

Łukasz BOŁOZ et al. / Acta Montanistica Slovaca, Volume 25 (2020), Number 1, 81-93
Anisotropy of mechanical rock properties on the basis of investigations
Anisotropy of rocks has been demonstrated in numerous investigations and publications. Below
have been presented the results of laboratory tests conducted by the author or with his
participation. The research was aimed at determining the mechanical properties of unmined rock
in order to select the best mining method, so it concerned typical rocks that are mined
mechanically, such as hard coal, rock salt, copper ores.
Investigations into hard coal were based on samples provided from two di erent locations, from
mines in Ordos, China. Tests were carried out in order to determine the uniaxial compressive
strength and cuttability index (Fig. 3). The strength was determined for three perpendicular
directions. The cuttability index was measured on three perpendicular planes in two perpendicular
directions.
Fig. 3. The investigation into hard coal: a. provided sample b. before Rc tests, c. after cuttability
index tests
The results of tests for the coal from the rst location have been given in Table 1. Di erences
between particular R values for di erent cutting directions are very big. The strength in the up-
down direction accounts
fi
ffi
fl
ff
fi
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fl
c
for more than 300% of the value for the right-left direction. It is similar in the case of cuttability
index. Index A for the right longwall accounts for ca 175% of the index for the sidewall. A
noticeable di erence is also observed for two directions on one longwall. For example, the index
on the right longwall in the up-down direction constitutes 150% of the value for the perpendicular
direction, i.e., back sidewall. In consequence, the category of the tested coal mineability changes
depending on the direction from well mineable to more than average mineable despite the fact
that it concerns the same samples.
Tab. 1. Results of tests for the coal from the rst location
No.
1
2
3
Rc direction
up-down
right-left
sidewall-back
Rc [MPa]
14
5
9
Longwall
sidewall
up
right
Direction A
up-down
right-left back-sidewall right-left up-down back-sidewall
A [N/cm]
1 137 1 738 1 252 1 557 1 982 1 347
ψ [°] 44 45 49 47 57 47
Category
well mineable average mineable average mineable average mineable more than average mineable
average mineable
Similarly, for the coal from the other location, the results have been presented
in Table 2. The strength in the up-down direction accounts for nearly 370% of the value for the
right-left direction. The cuttability index A is di erent depending on the longwall and direction.
Index A on the right longwall in the back-sidewall direction accounts for more than 125% of the
value for the perpendicular direction, i.e. up-down. As a result, the category of the tested coal
mineability ranges from more than average to hard mineable.
Tab. 2. Results of tests for the coal from the second location
No.
1
2
3
Rc direction
up-down
right-left
sidewall-back
Rc [MPa]
19
5
6
Longwall
sidewall
up
right
Direction A
up-down
right-left back-sidewall right-left up-down back-sidewall
ff
fi
ff
 A [N/cm]
1 975 2 367 2 113 2 292 1 889 2 395
ψ [°] 62 57 59 57 59 58
Category
hard mineable
more than average mineable more than average mineable more than average mineable more than
average mineable more than average mineable
85

Łukasz BOŁOZ et al. / Acta Montanistica Slovaca, Volume 25 (2020), Number 1, 81-93
One of the projects involved conducting comprehensive investigations into copper ores in the
form of dolomites, sandstones and shales. An appropriate amount of rock was taken from the
mine, and more than one hundred samples were prepared for strength and cuttability tests (Fig. 4,
Fig. 5). Uniaxial compressive strength and cuttability in three directions were tested. Below have
been presented maximum observed values determined on the basis of samples taken from one
solid for each of the rocks (Tab. 3, Tab. 4, Tab. 5).
Fig. 4. Investigations into Rc of copper ores: a. sample preparation, b. shale during Rc testing, c.
a scrap of shale, sandstone and dolomite after tests
Fig. 5. Copper ores cuttability tests: a. dolomite, b. sandstone, c. shale
The results of compressive strength tests for sandstone indicate high di erentiation of values for
all three directions. The biggest – 4, 5-fold di erences can be observed between the up-down and
back-sidewall directions. The value of one of the remaining combinations of directions is twice
higher than that of the other combination. Similarly, the cuttability index for the back-sidewall
direction is twice lower than the value for the remaining directions. Due to high values irrespective
of the direction, this sandstone has been classi ed as particularly hard mineable. It should be
noted, however, that the applied classi cation does not have a separate category for values
higher than those described with the term of “particularly hard mineable”, although they can be
four times higher.
Tab. 3. Results of tests for sandstone
No.
123
Rc direction
up-down
right-left sidewall-back
Rc [MPa]
16 72 37
Direction A
up-down back-sidewall up-down
A [N/cm]
22 886 11 716 20 610
ψ [°] 39 65 49
Category
particularly hard mineable particularly hard mineable particularly hard mineable
For dolomite strength results, the relative di erences are not so big. The largest
di erence between the sidewall-back and up-down direction is slightly more than 40%, which,
however, with high strength values reaches almost 40 MPa. On the other hand, there is a
signi cant di erence in the cuttability index, the values of which are twice higher. Hence, there is a
di erence in the mineability category between the up-down and the remaining directions.
86

Łukasz BOŁOZ et al. / Acta Montanistica Slovaca, Volume 25 (2020), Number 1, 81-93
Tab. 4. Results of tests for dolomite
No.
123
Rc direction
up-down
right-left sidewall-back
Rc [MPa]
89 104 127
Direction A
ff
ff
fi
ff
fi
ff
fi
ff
ff
up-down back-sidewall up-down
A [N/cm]
2 559 5 252 5 303
ψ [°] 71 61 75
Category
hard mineable particularly hard mineable particularly hard mineable
Shale tests revealed di erences in uniaxial compressive strength, the level of which
was more than twice higher for one of the values. A considerably lower strength in the sidewall-
back direction and the characteristic shale structure caused that the sample was destroyed
during cuttability tests in the up-down direction. The results of the cuttability index for the
remaining directions di er by nearly 35%. An interesting nding is more than a triple di erence in
the value of breakout angle ψ. This, however, is a typical characteristic of shale.
Tab. 5. Results of tests for shale
No.
123
Rc direction
up-down
right-left sidewall-back
Rc [MPa]
63 61 27
Direction A
back-sidewall up-down
A [N/cm] ψ [°] Category sample was destroyed
6 097 22 particularly hard mineable 4 549 71 particularly hard mineable
In recent years, single investigations have often been carried out to determine the
uniaxial compressive strength of various types of rock in three directions. It should be emphasized
that depending on the type and homogeneity of the rock, the results even for one direction may
vary several times. For example, dolomite was characterized by signi cant di erences; in the case
of single samples tested in one direction, more than a threefold di erence in results was observed
(158 MPa and 46 MPa). However, individual, much lower than other values are not important for
the estimation of energy consumption of the process and for the choice of the mining method.
One should be guided by the maximum values. Di erences in the results of tests for various
samples of dolomite and sandstone reached up to approximately 50%, depending on the
compression direction, for example, 113 MPa and 77 MPa for two perpendicular directions of
compression.
Rock salt is an example of a mineral that, from the point of view of mechanical cutting, has
several interesting properties (Mansouri and Ajalloeian 2018), (He et al., 2019). Salt is not very
abrasive, which means that it causes the wear of tools only to a small extent. Salt is characterized
by quite high cutting resistance and frequently - by high cutting indexes. Samples of rock salt
from the Polish mines were subjected to tests (Fig. 6).
Fig. 6. Rock salt tests: a. provided sample b. after Rc tests, c. after cuttability index tests
Investigations into the mechanical properties of salts in three directions have revealed that the
obtained values of uniaxial compression strength depend on the direction to a lesser extent. The
value of uniaxial compressive strength determined for perpendicular directions was 35 MPa, 33
MPa and 34 MPa, respectively, which means that the di erences do not exceed 6%. In some
extreme cases, the di erences for individual samples reached ca 17%. Due to the speci city of
the mining process and the scope of the order, the cuttability tests were carried out only for two
perpendicular directions. The average cuttability index A was 5 083 N/cm and 5 860 N/cm,
respectively. The di erence reaches over 15%, with maximum di erences of nearly 35%.
87

Łukasz BOŁOZ et al. / Acta Montanistica Slovaca, Volume 25 (2020), Number 1, 81-93
The direction of mechanical properties determination with respect to the mining method
In order to determine the mechanical properties of unmined rock, its cuttability index, breakout
angle, toughness or uniaxial compressive strength are tested. Tests are usually performed for
samples taken from the excavated workings. Taking a sample for tests enables determining its
properties in any direction in laboratory conditions. It should be noted that toughness is an energy
indicator and does not depend on the direction. A sample can be taken from working to be mined
by means of various previously mentioned machines. For the diagram shown in Fig. 7, the sample
can be taken from excavations marked A, B or C. For a popular longwall system, sample P3 can
ff
ff
ff
ff
ff
ff
fi
ff
ff
fi
ff
ff
fi
 be taken from the longwall (excavation C), sample P2 from the top road (excavation B) or sample
P1 from the bottom road (excavation A). Typically, the use of roadheader (1, 2) was considered for
roadway excavations and the use of longwall shearer (3) and coal plough (4) for the longwall. At
the same time, it was assumed that, apart from classic longwall shearers, also cutting shearers
with vertical axes of rotation of the heads could be used (5). The diagram also includes a boring
machine in the Auger Mining system (6) and a cutterhead for the Continuous Highwall Mining
system (7). The last two systems are not used in typical longwall excavations. However, in this
situation, samples marked as P1 and P2 can be taken from previously made holes or headings
described as excavations A and B, so the cutting direction system remains the same. The
situation is similar for the room and pillar mining system, where the continuous miner is used. The
interpretation for such a shearer is identical as for the cutting head (7).
The presented layout of sampling locations in speci c excavations can also be generalized for
other mining excavations and machines used, for example for borer miners, such as Ural-360,
Marietta, Xcel Miners 4-Rotor or for cutting machines. Then, the direction of cutting and the
corresponding direction of determining the mechanical properties of the sample should be
analyzed using the method presented below.
Fig. 7. The layout of locations of test samples and directions of cutting of particular machines
Markings in Fig. 7:
P1 – sample located in excavation A,
P2 – sample located in excavation B,
P3 – sample located in excavation C,
1 – roadheader in excavation A,
2 – roadheader in excavation B,
3 – classic longwall shearer,
4 – coal plough,
5 – longwall shearer with vertical axes of cutterheads,
6 – tunnel boring machine in Auger Mining System (AM),
7 – shearer in Continuous Highwall Mining System (CMH),
v –vectorofcuttingheadtravellingspeedforeachofthemachines(1-7), p
v – vector of the cutterhead cutting speed for each of the machines (1-7), s
V1 – view of unmined rock in excavation A, V2 – view of unmined rock in excavation B, V3 – view
of unmined rock in excavation C.
The place of cutting and the type of cutting machine determine the cutting direction and, in
consequence, the direction in which mechanical properties of the unmined rock should be
determined. Therefore, diagrams have been prepared for all excavations (A, B, C) from which the
sample may come (P1, P2, P3) so as to assign
88

Łukasz BOŁOZ et al. / Acta Montanistica Slovaca, Volume 25 (2020), Number 1, 81-93
the direction of determining the mechanical properties of the sample taken to the type of mining
machine used. The diagrams present the sample in three projections as well as the cutting heads.
The cutting heads were correlated with a speci c view of the sample. The drawings were made so
as to enable an analysis of the cutting direction and the direction in which the mechanical
properties of the sample should be determined. Three cases were analyzed as follows:
• sample P1 – a sample taken from excavation A – g. 8,
• sample P2 – a sample taken from excavation B –
• g. 9,
• sample P3 – a sample taken from excavation C – g. 10.
Fig. 8. Cutting directions for sample P1 taken from excavation A
Fig. 9. Cutting directions for sample P2 taken from excavation B
In each of the presented situations, the mining method depends on the direction in which the
mechanical properties of the sample should be determined. The direction that most strongly
in uences the cutting resistance was determined for the analyzed cutting heads. The direction is
understood as the direction in which the mechanical properties of the sample were determined.
Uniaxial compressive strength can be determined for the sample in three perpendicular directions.
Cuttability tests can also be carried out in three perpendicular directions on six available sample
surfaces. The adopted names of sample surfaces were marked symbolically: up (U), down (D),
right (R), left (L), sidewall (S), back (B), so there are three directions for uniaxial compressive
strength: U-D, R-L, S-B. Cuttability tests can be done in two perpendicular directions on each of
the longwalls, for example on the sidewall surface in U-D and R-L direction. In addition, cuttability
fi
fl
fi
fi
fi
fi
tests can be performed for two orientations in each direction, for example, U-D and D-U. Until
present, the impact of cutting orientation on the obtained results of cuttability tests has not been
comprehensively studied. Based on the research results, it can be concluded that orientation
does have an impact, especially if the surface prepared for cutting is not perpendicular or parallel
to the cleavage plane. Recommended planes, directions and orientations have been given below.
If the mining method is known, the rock properties should be determined in accordance with the
provided recommendations. In the case of coal ploughs and longwall shearers, the direction of the
cutting speed vector changes with a change in the direction of machine movement in the
longwall.
89

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Fig. 10. Cutting directions for sample P3 taken from excavation C
In the case of sample P1 taken from excavation A (Fig. 8), the following dependencies are
observed: mining with roadheader (1) and CHM (7):
o uniaxial compressive strength in U-D direction, o cuttability on R surface, U-D orientation,
mining with longwall shearer (3):
o uniaxial compressive strength in U-D direction,
o cuttability on B or S surface, U-D or D-U orientation,
mining with plough head (4):
o uniaxial compressive strength in S-B direction,
o cuttability on R surface, S-B and B-S orientation,
mining with longwall shearer with vertical axes (5): o uniaxial compressive strength in R-L
direction,
o cuttability on B or S surface, L-R orientation
mining with a boring head (6):
o uniaxial compressive strength in R-L direction, o drillability in R-L drilling direction.
In the case of sample P2 taken from excavation B (Fig. 9), the following dependencies are
observed: mining with roadheader (2) and CHM (7):
o uniaxial compressive strength in U-D direction, o cuttability on L surface, U-D orientation,
mining with longwall shearer (3):
o uniaxial compressive strength in U-D direction,
o cuttability on B or S surface, U-D and, possibly, D-U orientation,
mining with plough head (4):
o uniaxial compressive strength in S-B direction,
o cuttability on surface L, S-B and B-S orientation,
mining with longwall shearer with vertical axes (5): o uniaxial compressive strength in R-L
direction,
o cuttability on B or S surface, R-L orientation.
mining with drilling head (6):
o uniaxial compressive strength in R-L direction, o drillability in L-R drilling direction.
In the case of sample P3, taken from excavation C (Fig. 10), the following dependencies can be
observed mining with roadheader (1, 2) and CHM (7):
o uniaxial compressive strength in U-D direction, o cuttability on S surface, U-D orientation,
mining with longwall shearer (3):
o uniaxial compressive strength in U-D direction,
o cuttability on R or L surface, U-D and, possibly, D-U orientation,
mining with plough head (4):
 o uniaxial compressive strength in R-L direction,
o cuttability on S surface, R-L and L-R orientation,
mining with longwall shearer with vertical axes (5):
•
Łukasz BOŁOZ et al. / Acta Montanistica Slovaca, Volume 25 (2020), Number 1, 81-93
90

•
o uniaxial compressive strength in S-B direction, o cuttability on R or L surface, B-S orientation,
mining with drilling head (6):
o uniaxial compressive strength in S-B direction, o drillability in S-B drilling direction.
Łukasz BOŁOZ et al. / Acta Montanistica Slovaca, Volume 25 (2020), Number 1, 81-93
The two-way classic longwall shearer is equipped with two cutting heads, which cut in opposite
directions. The front head usually cuts downward, while the back one - upward. The front
cutterhead cuts with its entire diameter, hence the most important thing is to determine the U-D
cuttability, whereas the back head cuts the remained coal towards the free surface, hence the
mining resistance is lower, and there is no need to determine the D-U cuttability.
Longwall shearers with vertical axes are equipped with two cutting heads, which cut in the same
direction, i.e. towards the free surface, regardless of the direction of the shearer's movement. The
cutting direction in the coal plough is identical with the direction of the head’s movement.
However, in the case of other machines (1, 2, 6, 7) there is no change in the direction of cutting.
In the case of drilling with a head (6) equipped with conical picks, the picks cut the unmined rock
in a plane perpendicular to the direction of drilling. Each pick is in contact with unmined rock at all
times. This type of cutting necessitates the determination of the value of uniaxial compressive
strength in three directions and the value of cuttability on four planes. To simplify the
determination of unmined rock properties for drilling, it is recommended that drillability should be
determined in accordance with the drilling direction and uniaxial compressive strength in the same
direction.
Samples P1 and P2 can also be taken from the face of excavation A and B; in such a case, the
analysis in question also applies. On the other hand, samples P1 and P2 can be taken from the
sidewall of the gallery, which is opposite to the one indicated in the drawing. In this case,
appropriate directions should be taken into account in the analysis, according to the presented
methodology. Sample P3 can be taken from the drift face; in such a case, the interpretation of
directions will remain unchanged.
Summary
The presented test results do not allow for approaching the problem in a comprehensive way but
provide su cient evidence pointing to the existence of signi cant discrepancies, depending on
the direction of determining the mechanical properties of rocks. In some cases, the di erences
reach 500%. It should be emphasized that there is no need to perform tests in three directions.
However, it is crucial to analyze all the potential mining methods and take them into consideration
when determining the mechanical properties of rocks. Knowing the sample orientation in the
deposit and using the presented methodology, it is possible to specify the way of determining
mechanical properties so that the results are adjusted to the planned method of mining to the
largest extent possible. In the event various techniques or machines are considered, testing may
be required in more than one direction.
If the mining technique is well known, for example, if it is a very common method of mining with a
longwall shearer, the only problem comes down to choosing the direction of determining the
mechanical properties, as shown above. So obtained results will allow for a more accurate
estimate of the cutterheads' power demand.
The investigations, the results of which are quoted in the article, have revealed the need for further
research so as to determine unambiguous dependences, especially with respect to the e ect of
the cutting orientation during cuttability tests on the obtained test results. The tests conducted in
di erent directions and in perpendicular orientations give only a general view on this issue,
indicating di erences in the results.
The most important conclusion and recommendation is to carefully select the direction of
determining rock properties depending on the method planned. To facilitate the interpretation of
results and sproperly choose this direction, the methodology presented in the article should be
applied.
The literature review has revealed numerous reports of the rock anisotropy problem. Researchers
draw attention to the impact of properties determination direction in relation to the deposition or
ff
ffi
ff
fi
ff
ff
 strati cation of rock samples on the obtained results. However, until the present, this issue has
not been described comprehensively in terms of mechanical mining. The problem presented in
the article, together with recommendations regarding the choice of direction for determining rock
properties and their interpretation in the case of selecting the method of exploitation is the rst
such study.
91

Łukasz BOŁOZ et al. / Acta Montanistica Slovaca, Volume 25 (2020), Number 1, 81-93
References
Agustawijaya, D. S. (2007). The Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Soft Rock. Civil Engineering
Dimension. 9(1), pp. 9-14
th
Biały, W. (2014). Coal cutting force measurement systems - (CCFM). 14
and Technologies In Geology. Exploration and Mining. SGEM2014 Conference Proceedings, Vol.
III, pp. 91-98.
Biały, W. and Fries, J. (2019). Computer Systems Supporting the Management of Machines/
Equipment in Hard Coal Mines. Case Study. Management Systems in Production Engineering,
Volume 27 issue 3/2019. pp. 138-143. ISSN 2299_0461. DOI 10.1515/mspe-2019-0022
Bołoz, Ł. (2018). Longwall shearers for exploiting thin coal seams as well as thin and highly
inclined coal
seams, "Mining – Informatics, Automation and Electrical Engineering", 2(534), pp. 59-65.
Bołoz, Ł. (2018). Mining of thin coal seams using surface-underground methods, "Mining –
Informatics,
Automation and Electrical Engineering", 3(535), pp. 59-73.
Bołoz, Ł. (2019). Directions for increasing conical picks' durability, In: New trends in production
engineering,
Sciendo, 2(1), pp. 277-285.
Bołoz, Ł., Krauze, K. and Kubin, T. (2018). Mechanization of longwall extraction of hard and
abrasive rocks.
Multidisciplinary Aspects of Production Engineering. Sciendo, 1(1), pp. 331-337.
Bołoz, Ł. and Leonel, F. Castañeda, (2018). Computer-aided support for the rapid creation of
parametric models of milling units for longwall shearers. Management Systems in Production
Engineering, 26(4), pp. 193-
199.
Bołoz, Ł. and Midor, K. (2018). Process innovations in mining industry and e ects of their
implementation
presented on example of longwall milling heads. Acta Montanistica Slovaca, 23(3), pp. 282-292.
Bołoz, Ł. and Midor, K. (2019). The procedure of choosing an optimal o er for a conical pick as an
element of realizing the sustainable development concept in mining enterprises. Acta
Montanistica Slovaca, 24(2),
pp. 140-150.
Dinc, O., Sonmez H., Tunusluoglu C. and Kasapoglu K.E. (2011). A new general empirical
approach for the
prediction of rock mass strengths of soft to hard rock masses, International Journal of Rock
Mechanics
and Mining Sciences, 48, pp. 650-665.
Gospodarczyk, P., Kotwica, K. and Stopka, G. (2013). A new generation mining head with disc
tool of complex
trajectory, Archives of Mining Sciences, 58(4), pp. 985–1006.
Gospodarczyk, P., Kotwica, K., Mendyka, P. and Stopka, G. (2016). Innovative roadheader mining
head with
asymmetrical disc tools, Exploration and mining, mineral processing. International
Multidisciplinary
Scienti c GeoConference SGEM, 2, pp. 489–496.
Hasilová, K. and Gajewski, J. (2019). The use of kernel density estimates for classi cation of
ripping tool wear,
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 88, pp. 29-34.
He M., Li N., Zhu C., Chen Y. and Wua H. (2019). Experimental investigation and damage
modeling of salt
fi
fi
ff
ff
fi
fi
rock subjected to fatigue loading, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences,
114, pp.
17-23.
Hoek, E. and Brown, E.T. (1980). Empirical Strength Criterion for Rock Masses. Journal of
Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering, 106, pp. 1013-1035.
Kotwica, K. (2018). Atypical and innovative tool, holder and mining head designed for
roadheaders used to
tunnel and gallery drilling in hard rock. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 82, pp.
493-503. Krauze, K. (2000). Urabianie skał kombajnami ścianowymi. Wydawnictwo naukowe
„Śląsk”, Katowice, Majcherczyk, T. and Niedbalski, Z. (2004). Wpływ nachylenia otworów
badawczych na zmianę parametrów
wytrzymałościowych skał, XXVII Zimowa szkoła mechaniki górotworu, Kraków, pp. 898-907.
Małkowski, P. (2015). The impact of the physical model selection and rock mass strati cation on
the results of numerical calculations of the state of rock mass deformation around the roadways,
Tunnelling and
Underground Space Technology, 50, pp. 365-375.
Mansouri, H. and Ajalloeian, R. (2018). Mechanical behavior of salt rock under uniaxial
compression and creep
tests, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 110, pp. 19-27.
Mucha, K. (2019). The new method for assessing rock abrasivity in terms of wear od conical
picks. In: New
Trends in Production Engineering, Sciendo, 2(1), pp. 186-194.
Muller, L. and Pacher, F. (1965). Modellversuche zur Klarung der Bruchgefahr geklufteter Medien,
Felsmech. u.
Ing. Geol., Suppl. II, pp. 7-24.
Biały, W. (2013) New devices used in determining and assessing mechanical characteristics of
coal. 13 GeoConference on Science and Technologies in Geology, Exploration and Mining,
SGEM2013 Conference Proceedings, June 16-22, 2013, Vol. 1, BUŁGARIA ISBN
978-954-91818-7-6/ISSN 1314- 2704. pp. 547-554.
th
92
SGEM GeoConference on Science
SGEM

Łukasz BOŁOZ et al. / Acta Montanistica Slovaca, Volume 25 (2020), Number 1, 81-93
Nasseria, M.H.B., Raob K.S. and Ramamurthyb T. (2003). Anisotropic strength and deformational
behavior of Himalayan schists, International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 48,
pp. 626-636.
Ozcelik, Y. and Yilmazkaya E. (2011). The e ect of the rock anisotropy on the e ciency of
diamond wire cutting machines, International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 40,
pp 3-23.
Özbek, A., Gül, M., Karacan, E. and Alca, Ö. (2018). Anisotropy e ect on strengths of
metamorphic rocks, Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 10, pp. 165-175.
Prokopenko, S. A., Vorobiev, A. V., Lyudmila, A. and Janocko, J. (2018). Waste Cutters Utilization
in Underground Coal Mining, Acta Montanistica Slovaca, 23(1), pp. 81-89.
Schormair, N., Thuro, K. and Plinninger, R. (2006). The in uence of anisotropy on hard rock drilling
and cutting, The Geological Society of London, IAEG, Paper 491, pp. 1-11.
Shuxin, W. (1992). Fundamental studies of the deformability and strength of jointed rock masses
at three- dimensional level, dissertation, The University of Arizona (http://hdl.handle.net/
10150/185923).
Ťavodová, M., Kalincová, D., Hnilicová, M. and Hnilica R. (2016). The in uence of heat treatment
on tool properties mulcher, Manufacturing technology, 16(5), pp. 1169-1173.
93

International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
ff
fl
ff
fl
ffi
fi
 Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
13
Evaluation of Rock and Explosive Properties for
Fragmentation Characterization: An Application of
WipFrag
Muhammed Ozigi Otokiti1, Babatunde Adebayo1
1Department of Mining Engineering, Federal University of Technology, Akure Nigeria
* Corresponding Author’s Email: [email protected]
doi: https://doi.org/10.37745/ijeats.13/vol12n11332 Published March 24, 2024
Citation: Otokiti M.O. and Adebayo B. (2024) Evaluation of Rock and Explosive Properties for
Fragmentation
Characterization: An Application of WipFrag, International Journal of Engineering and Advanced
Technology
Studies 12 (1), 13-32
ABSTRACT: This study investigates the rock explosive properties in selected Lokoja quarries,
Nigeria, with the goal of characterizing fragmentation for optimized downstream operations. The
analysis includes porosity, UCS values, and permeability assessment in Gitto quarry, highlighting
advantages in material application. Comparisons between rock formations (Q1 and Q2) reveal
varying compressive strengths, crucial for determining appropriate explosive energy for e cient
fragmentation. Blast design parameters from Q1 and Q2 indicate consistent values, aiding in
operational planning. Fragmentation analysis, conducted using WipFrag software, delineates size
ranges and classi es the blast as having a moderate distribution. Correlations between blast
fragmentation size and powder factor underscore the impact on e ciency. A classi cation chart
and table are presented for convenient interpretation of results, providing valuable insights for
enhancing blasting practices in Lokoja quarries and ultimately improving productivity. The
fragmentation analysis result carried out in this study using WipFrag software shows that the
50%,
80% and Maximum block size passing size ranges from 539.94 – 1349.53 mm, 690.07 – 1907.81
mm, 808-2280 mm respectively. The blast fragmentation sizes are classi ed as moderate
distribution blast based on the uniformity index value ranging from 1.95 to 2.4. The relationship
between blast fragmentation size and powder factor was evaluated using linear correlation
coe cient. It was noted that, X20, X50, X80 has high R2 values greater than 60% respectively.
KEYWORDS: rock, blasting, explosive, fragmentation, WipFrag, fragment classi cation
INTRODUCTION
The evaluation of rock and explosive properties for fragmentation characterization is crucial in
optimizing mining operations. Rock mass attributes, blast design parameters, explosive
properties
are three groups of elements that have an impact on blasting operations [1]. The variables that
can
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
14
be controlled in blast design include burden, drill hole spacing, stem height, drill hole inclination,
diameter, length, drilling pattern, blasting direction, sub drilling, blasting sequence [2, 3]. Taiwo
and Adebayo mentioned that the criteria of explosive materials include the explosive type, density,
strength, moisture heat resistance, speci c charge, all of which can be altered [4]. The
characteristics pertaining to the makeup of the rock mass make up the third group. These
uncontrollable characteristics are among the factors that have the most impact on the outcomes
of
blasting [5, 6].
Several authors’ work has mention that good blast fragmentation in mining operations provides
several advantages. [7] explained that e cient blasting enhances ore recovery, reduces energy
consumption during crushing and grinding, improves overall processing e ciency, and minimizes
downstream processing costs. [8] and [9] also explained that optimal fragmentation also facilitates
better ore handling, transportation, and ultimately results in increased productivity and pro tability
for mining operations.
More over when identical blast geometry and explosive energy input are applied to two di erent
ffi
fi
ffi
fi
ffi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
ffi
ff
fi
 rock masses, they will result in very varied levels of fragmentation [10]. Literature explained that
due to the fact that each rock mass has a unique propensity to resist being broken up by blasting,
a property known as blastability [11, 12].
Rock fragmentation using Explosive energy has been thoroughly investigated through tests other
techniques. Numerous downstream mining operations, such as loading, transportation, crushing,
grinding, are impacted by the particles that are produced. The ideal rock fragmentation size is
between 100 and 800 mm, which means the rock pieces do not require postblast treatment [13].
Majorly the e ciency of blast fragmentation is classi ed based on size distribution. The lack of a
comprehensive understanding and systematic assessment using tools like WipFrag hinders
e cient blasting practices. This study aims to address this gap, focusing on the application of
WipFrag for improved fragmentation analysis and subsequent mining performance
enhancements.
The e ect of blast design on blast fragment characteristics is a critical aspect of mining
operations.
Inadequate blast design can result in suboptimal fragmentation, a ecting downstream processes
such as crushing and grinding [8, 14-15].
Seven to twenty- ve percent of the explosive energy is used in fragmentation inging [16]. The
remainder of the energy is lost as y rock, ground vibration, air blast, noise and backbreak,
therefore, by lowering the amount of lost energy, blasting performance can be enhanced. The
causes of fragmentation, such as rock-mass characteristics, blast geometry, explosive properties,
have been researched by [17]. The strength discontinuity characteristics, density, porosity, the
capacity of rocks to propagate shock waves are a few of the rock-mass properties that have been
examined [18].
The e ect of explosive properties on blasting outcomes is a pivotal factor in mining operations.
Variables such as explosive type, energy, and initiation sequence signi cantly in uence blast
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
15
fragmentation, muckpile shape, and overall e ciency. This study also carried out a
comprehensively analyze how diverse explosive properties impact blasting performance, seeking
insights for improved blast design and downstream operational enhancements. The last section
investigated the correlation between blast design parameters and resulting fragment
characteristics,
seeking insights for optimizing blasting practices and enhancing overall mining e ciency.
LITERATURE REVIEW ON BLAST FRAGMENTATION AND INFLUENTIAL
FACTORS
Review of Rock Fragmentation
Rock fragmentation refers to the process of breaking a larger solid material, such as rocks or ores,
into smaller pieces or fragments [19]. The degree of blast fragmentation signi cantly in uences
the overall productivity and economics of these industries. Rock fragmentation is a crucial aspect
of mining and quarrying, in uencing various downstream processes and overall operational
e ciency [20, 21]. E cient fragmentation ensures optimal ore recovery and processing, reducing
energy consumption and operational costs. Numerous factors contribute to rock fragmentation,
including geology, drilling practices, and blast design. Advances in technologies like laser
pro ling and image analysis have enabled more accurate measurement and analysis of rock
fragment sizes, shapes, and distribution. Understanding fragmentation dynamics facilitates
improved blast design, allowing for customization based on geological variations [22].
Furthermore, precise fragmentation analysis aids in equipment selection, reducing wear and tear
on crushers and mills. This review highlights the multifaceted nature of rock fragmentation,
emphasizing its pivotal role in enhancing the sustainability and pro tability of mining and
quarrying operations.
Geomechanical properties in uencing fragmentation
Geochemical properties of rocks can also signi cantly in uence fragmentation during blasting and
drilling operations in quarrying and mining [23]. These properties encompass the chemical
composition and mineralogy of the rocks, which can impact their response to explosive forces.
One critical geochemical property is the mineral composition of the rock. Di erent minerals have
ffi
ffi
fi
ff
ff
ffi
fi
ffi
fl
fl
fl
ffi
fi
fi
fl
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
fl
fl
ffi
fl
 varying degrees of hardness and brittleness, which can lead to variations in how the rock
fractures
and fragments during blasting [24]. The presence of certain chemical elements or compounds
within the rock can also in uence fragmentation behavior. For instance, the occurrence of reactive
minerals, such as sul des, can lead to the generation of gases during blasting, contributing to
further fragmentation [25].
Techniques for measuring fragmentation
Measuring fragmentation is a critical aspect of evaluating the e ciency of blasting operations in
quarrying and mining. Several techniques have been developed to assess the size distribution
and
characteristics of fragmented material including WipFrag software [26]. One common method is
sieving analysis, where the crushed or blasted rock is passed through a series of screens with
di erent mesh sizes, and the percentage of material passing through each sieve is determined,
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
16
providing information on particle size distribution [27]. Image analysis involves capturing high-
resolution images of the fragmented material and using specialized software to analyze particle
sizes and shapes, providing detailed information on individual particles and size distribution
parameters [28].
Advanced technologies such as laser scanning and photogrammetry o er 3D point cloud models
of the blasted rock or muckpile, enabling accurate calculation of volume and size distribution of
fragmented material [29]. Computer-based simulation techniques, like Discrete Element Method
(DEM) simulations, can model rock breakage and fragmentation under blasting conditions,
providing insights into fracture patterns and particle sizes generated during blasting [30].
WipFrag is a software tool widely used for blast image analysis in mining and quarrying.
Employing advanced image processing algorithms, WipFrag accurately analyzes images of
blasted
material, providing valuable data on particle sizes, shapes, and distribution [31]. This information
is crucial for optimizing blast designs and improving fragmentation outcomes. By automating the
analysis process, WipFrag enhances e ciency and reduces human error, allowing for rapid
assessment of blast performance. Its user-friendly interface facilitates quick interpretation of
results, enabling mining professionals to make informed decisions for better blast optimization,
ultimately contributing to increased productivity and cost-e ectiveness in the extraction and
processing of materials. The WipFrag software was adopted in this study for blast image
fragmentation.
Case Study and Data Description
Description of case study area
Between latitudes 7°45'N and 7°53'N and longitudes 6°39'E and 6°48'E is Lokoja, which is where
the rivers Niger and Benue converge (Figure 1-4). The complex of the basement lies beneath it.
The town is strategically positioned and easily reachable because to Nigeria's excellent road
system, which connects the country's north and south as well as its north and west. With a few
isolated laterite-capped hills that range in elevation from 30 m to 400 m above sea level, the area
has low to moderate relief. The Niger-Benue river system drains it. A dendritic pattern can be seen
in the drainage system. The rainy and dry seasons, which are unique in Lokoja, each have their
own characteristics. The dry season runs from November to March, whereas the rainy season
runs
from April through October. The average annual precipitation is between 1000 and 1500 mm,
while the average annual humidity is at 70%. With 6.7 hours of sunshine on average every day,
the yearly average temperature is 27°C. In the area, temperatures can reach as high as 33°C or
36°C. The region's vegetation is of the Guinea Savannah variety, with gallery forests that are
denser lining parts of the rivers (Federal Ministry of Aviation, 2007). The location of the two
quarries are shown in the Figures 1-4.
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
ff
fi
fl
ffi
ff
ffi
ff
 Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
17
Figure 1: Geology Map of Kogi State showing Lokoja L.G.A
Figure 3.2 Geological Map of the Study Areas
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
18
Figure 2: Map Showing the Location of Golden Quarry
Figure 2: Map Showing the Location of Gitto Quarry Limited
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
19
Figure 4: Map Showing the Relative Location and Distance of the Selected Quarries.
Sample Collection and Analysis
In this study, systematic sampling plan to collect rock samples was developed. Random locations
were selected within each quarry to ensure representative sampling, each rock sample was
labelled
with essential information, including the quarry location, depth, date of collection, and geological
description.
Determination of Rock Properties
Blasting parameters for each rock blast were obtained from the site. The needed parameters
which
include Number of blast holes, Average depth of blast holes, Diameter, Holes Spacing and
Burden,
Types and quantity of explosives was used. The followings were also determined from the
measured parameters: Volume of rock blasted, Tonnage of rock blasted, Tonnage of Explosives
used, Ratio of Tonnage of rock blasted to Tonnage of Explosives used.
Determination of Explosive Properties
The explosive properties of the case study mine were collected and documented. The explosive
type, strength and density among other properties were collected for this study.
Determination of Rock permeability
Samples collected were subjected to several rock strength and physical lab tests. The
permeability
test was carried out on a cylindrical rock sample. The sample was placed in a permeameter, and
uid was injected at the center of the sample. The ow rate and pressure drop were measured,
and
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
20
permeability was calculated using Darcy’s law, as expressed in Equation (1)
=−
ℎ
(1)
Where;
Q is the rate of water ow
K is the permeability
A is the cross sectional area
Dh/dl is the hydraulic gradient
Determination of Rock Hardness
The test involved the use of Schmidt impact hammer of type N for the hardness determination of
lump rock samples. The rebound value of the Schmidt Hammer is used as an index value for the
fl
𝑄
𝑑
𝑑
𝑙
𝐾
𝐴
fl
fl
 intact strength of rock material, but it was also used to give an indication of the compressive
strength of rock material [32]. The standard method for the Schmidt hammer test as described by
[32] was followed. The measured test values for the samples were arranged in descending order.
The lower 50% of the values were discarded and the average obtained of the upper 50% values
was used to obtain the Schmidt Rebound.
Determination of Rock Porosity
The porosity test was conducted on collected samples in according to ISRM [32]. The following
equations were used to calculate the porosity, in Equation 2.
(ŋ) =

× 100% (2)
Density
The dry density was determined according to ISRM [32]. Equation 3 was used to get the
saturated volume of the sample.
Saturated Volume of sample = 2 − 1 (3)
Where V1 (ml) is the initial water level and V2 (ml) is the nal water level in the cylinder after the
immersion of the irregular rock sample.
The dry density of the rock samples was calculated using shown in Equation 4
Dry density of the rock sample =

2− 1
(4)
Where M (g) is the oven dried mass at a temperature of 1050C.
Determination of Uniaxial Compressive Strength
Cylindrical core samples of diameter 50 mm and length 125 mm was prepared for compression
under the compression machine in accordance with ISRM [32]. The load was subsequently
applied
continuously at a constant rate of 35 kN per minute. Failures occurred within 10 minutes of
loading
in all cases.
UCS of the rocks were calculated using Equation 5
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
21
UCS=

A=

π (D
2)2 (5)
Where, Pmax is load on specimen (N); A is the cross sectional area of sample (m2); D is average
specimen diameter (m); and UCS is expressed in MPa.
Blast Fragmentation Analysis Technique
Image analysis involves extracting meaningful information from visual data. The methodology
typically includes pre-processing, where images are enhanced or normalized, followed by
segmentation to identify regions of interest. Feature extraction captures relevant characteristics,
and classi cation categorizes objects based on these features. Post-processing re nes results
and
may involve ltering or merging. Machine learning techniques, such as deep learning, are
commonly used for image analysis, training models on annotated data.
In this study, WipFrag software was used for the processing of blast images to analysis the
fragmentation distribution sizes. Picture was taken, using digital camera, to get their images sizes
and interpolated as below, for example: The blast design parameters data collected from blasts
from two experimental sites were analyzed to nd out their impacts on rock fragmentation level.
The main important parameters which decide the fragmentation level of particular blasts are
𝑃
𝑉
𝑉
𝑉
𝑀
𝑃
𝑃
𝑜
𝑣
𝑚
𝑚
𝑟
𝑜
𝑎
𝑎
𝑠
𝑥
𝑥
𝑡
𝑉
𝑦
fi
fi
𝑉
𝑉
fi
fi
fi
 burden to hole diameter ratio, spacing to burden ratio, stemming column length, sti ness ratio,
explosives amount and type, initiation mode and charge/powder factor. The image analysis
approach used was in accordance to the description published by Taiwo et al. [9].
The ow sheet for the study methodology is present in Figure 5.
Figure 5: Flow Chart of the developed Classi cation model
Site visitation and data
collection Rock strength test
Blast image collection
Blast Image analysis using
WipFrag V4
Blast Fragment Classi cation Correlation of blast fragment clas
and uncontrollable parameters
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
22
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Rock Properties Result
Table 1 shows the result of the geotechnical properties of the rock samples collected from the
chosen study area. The result shows that the rock formation in Gitto quarry has the highest water
porosity and UCS value of 33% and 123 MPa respectively. The low permeability of both samples
(1.2 × 10-17 m2) might be signi cant in the context of quarrying. The Low permeability result as
suggested by Cueto et al. [33] signi es that these rocks are less likely to absorb water, which may
a ect the fragmentation process. Water absorption can lead to changes in the mechanical
properties of rocks and may impact the e ciency of explosive fragmentation.
Table 1: Rock properties Analysis Results
Golden Quarry Gitto Quarry
S/NO PROPERTIES Q1 Q2
1. Permeability (m2) 1.2 ×10-17 1.2 x 10-17
2. Hardness 6 – 8 6 – 8
3. E ective porosity/water absorption
(%)
0.20 0.33
4. Bulk Density (g/cm3) 2.73 2.71
5. Uniaxial Compressive Strength
(MPa)
120 123
The moderate to high hardness (6-8) of both samples is crucial in assessing their resistance to
abrasion during the blasting process. According to Ghorbani et al. [34], rock hardness a ects the
rock mechanics and excavatability. Mehrdanesh et al. [35] also noted that hard rocks require more
energy for fragmentation, and the understanding of hardness is essential for selecting appropriate
explosive strategies.
Focusing on the advantage of porosity, the lower e ective porosity of Q1 (0.20%) may be
advantageous in quarrying, as it implies less water absorption. This could lead to more
predictable
fragmentation patterns, as water-induced alterations in rock properties can a ect the e ciency of
explosives. Lower porosity can contribute to more controlled blasting outcomes.
The slight di erence in bulk density between Q1 (2.73 g/cm3) and Q2 (2.71 g/cm3) may have
implications for the selection and optimization of explosive charges. Bulk density a ects the
energy transmission and distribution during blasting, and understanding this property helps in
designing e ective blasting patterns.
The higher uniaxial compressive strength of Q2 (123 MPa) compared to Q1 (120 MPa) indicates
that Q2 may be more resistant to crushing forces. This information is vital for determining the
appropriate explosive energy required for e cient fragmentation. Rocks with higher compressive
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
ff
ff
fl
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
ffi
ffi
fi
ff
ff
ff
ff
ffi
ff
 Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
23
strength might need higher explosive energy for e ective breakage.
In the context of this study, understanding these rock properties is crucial for evaluating and
optimizing the blasting process in selected quarries in Lokoja. The information gathered from
these
property evaluations will guide the selection of suitable explosives and blasting techniques
tailored
to the speci c rock characteristics in the quarries.
Blast Design and Explosive Properties
Blast Design Parameters
The average values of various blast parameters, such as hole diameter is 10 m hole depth with a 1
m sub drill and a 2 m stem height, indicate a detailed consideration of the geological layers in the
quarries. These values suggest an intention to penetrate speci c rock formations e ciently and
optimize stemming for e ective energy transfer during blasting.
The study shows that the chosen hole diameter of 6 inches indicates a balance between precision
and e ciency. This diameter is suitable for a variety of rock types and provides a compromise
between the need for e ective fracturing and the practicalities of drilling operations.
The spacing and burden of 2.5 meters suggest a relatively tight drilling pattern. This may be
indicative of a desire for controlled blasting to achieve a more uniform fragmentation. The values
align with the intention to optimize fragmentation while considering the geological characteristics
of the quarries in Lokoja. The choice of a staggered drill pattern and the number of holes (150)
indicate a systematic approach to blasting. The staggered pattern suggests a deliberate e ort to
enhance fragmentation, while the number of holes is a key factor in achieving the desired
tonnage,
considering the rock's response to blasting.
The study revealed that Q1 and Q2 have average speci ed tonnage of 25,000 tons and the
powder
factor of 0.45 kg/m3 which is crucial values for estimating the required explosive quantity. These
values suggest an aim to achieve e cient fragmentation without excessive energy consumption,
aligning with the project's goal of characterizing fragmentation in the quarries.
In summary, each parameter value has been selected with a speci c purpose in mind, re ecting a
careful consideration of the geological conditions in Lokoja and the project's objective to optimize
fragmentation for e cient quarrying operations.
Explosive Properties Result
Dynogel stands out as an exceptionally powerful explosive employed in the selected quarry under
study. Distinguished by its non-nitroglycerin composition and remarkable strength, this cap-
sensitive explosive is available in watergel or packaged emulsion forms, suitable for blast holes of
all diameters. Notably resistant to water, Dynogel signi cantly minimizes the emission of noxious
fumes. With an excellent capacity for fragmentation, it enables substantial throw and facilitates
the smooth movement of fractured rocks. The rm consistency of Dynogel ensures complete
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
24
borehole coupling, ultimately optimizing blasting outcomes. Representing our most potent
formulation, this explosive boasts high density and velocity, making it a standout choice for quarry
operations. Table 2 presents the various properties of the explosive.
Table 2: Properties of the explosive used at the Quarry
Quarries
Q1 Q2
Detonation velocity 5250 m/sec 5250 m/sec
Density 1.19 g/cc 1.20g/cc
Sensitivity No 6 detonator No 6 detonator
Water Resistance Excellent Excellent
Powder Factor 0.35 kg/m3 0.35-0.45 kg/m3
Blast Fragment Size Analysis Results
ffi
fi
ffi
ff
ff
ffi
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fl
ff
 Before blasting the rock on-site, all blast design and explosive characteristics were measured.
With
an appropriate camera, photos of the complete muck pile with the scaling object in place were
recorded immediately after blasting. Images were imported using WipFrag version 4. Each image
of a blast was outlined using both automatic and manual editing tools. After sifting the delimited
images, the fragmentation distribution curve was derived. Figures 6 illustrates the WipFrag
meshing images for selected blast outcomes utilized for determining the uniformity index. The
fragmentation size distribution curve was utilized obtained with the mean size, 80% passing sizes,
uniformity index (n), and maximum size for each blast result.
The analysis result shows that the 50%, 80% and Max size passing size ranges from 539.94 –
1349.53 mm, 690.07 – 1907.81 mm, 808-2280 mm respectively. The blast fragmentation sizes are
classi ed as moderate distribution blast throw based on the uniformity index value ranging from
1.95 to 2.13. Figures 6 present the distribution curve and delineated image results from selected
blast rounds. The software result shows that the blast fragmentation e ciency ranges from 40 to
56% which demand adjustment of the case study mine blast design to minimize the boulder
production and optimize the explosive energy towards good fragmentation.
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
25
Q1-1a Q1-1b
Q1-2a Q1-2b
Q2-1a Q2-1b
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
26
Q1-2a Q1-2b
Q2-2a Q2-2b
Figure 6: Fragmentation Analysis Result for selected Five blast rounds
Table 3 presents the 80%, 20%, 50%, and uniformity index of 15 blast rounds obtained from the
case study mine. The fragmentation result was classi ed based on the uniformity index as
explained by Nourian and Moomivand [36]. The classi cation shows that Q1-1, Q1-2, Q2-2-6,
and Q1-5-6 are classi ed as well distributed fragmentation. The study revealed that, higher
powder
factor enhances good blast fragmentation uniformity as shown in Table 3.
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
27
Table 3: Blast Fragmentation size Distribution Classi cation
Blast B PF X20 X50 X80 N Fragment
Classi cation
Q1-1 2 0.4 850 891.38 1907.81 2.14 Well distributed
B1-2 2.5 0.5 421 660.79 690.07 2.13 Well distributed
Q1-3 2 0.34 429.31 740 1598.72 1.95 Moderately
distributed
Q1-4 2 0.4 425.66 716 1402.53 1.8 Moderately
distributed
Q1-5 2 0.42 421 696.57 976 2.08 Well distributed
Q2-1 2 0.4 700 822.82 1714.64 2.2 Well distributed
Q2-2 2.5 0.5 395 567.23 671.73 2.02 Well distributed
Q2-3 2.5 0.5 387 539.94 655.45 1.8 Moderately
distributed
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
 Q2-4 2.5 0.5 325 526.22 590 2.13 Well distributed
Q2-5 2.5 0.5 324.5 487.16 567.23 2.04 Well distributed
Q2-6 1.5 0.54 304.81 421.33 540 1.6 Moderately
distributed
Q1-6 1.5 0.55 291.99 415.04 454.38 2.15 Moderately
distributed
Q2-7 1.5 0.55 240 375.47 415.04 1.85 Moderately
distributed
Q1-7 1.5 0.55 63.11 343.39 343.39 1.85 Moderately
distributed
Q1-8 1.5 0.55 23.56 297.8 286.98 1.15 Fairly Distributed
The powder factor, representing the amount of explosive used per unit volume of rock, is crucial
in controlling blast fragmentation size in mining and quarrying [8]. This study shows that, an
optimal powder factor provides e cient energy transfer during detonation, in uencing rock
breakage and fragmentation patterns as shown in the X50, X20, and X80 sizes as shown in Figure
7.
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
28
Figure 7: Blast fragment classi cation chart based on Powder Factor
Figure 7 presents the relationship between blast fragmentation size and explosive powder factor.
The chart shows classi cation path for blasting output as a function of powder factor, it shows
that
the fragmentation size decreases with increase in the quantity of explosive used per tonnage.The
correlation relationship between fragmentation size and powder factor was also established in this
study. The nding shows that blast fragmentation size has strong correlation with powder factor.
The linear correlation formula generated on the chart for X50, X20, and X20 has coe cient of
correlation equal to 88.15%, 61.81%, and 88.75% respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
This study assesses rock explosive properties in chosen Lokoja quarries, Nigeria, aiming to
characterize fragmentation. Findings from this work enhance blast operation for optimized
downstream operation and productivity.
The following conclusions were drawn from the results of the analysis:
1. The result shows that the rock formation in Gitto quarry has the highest porosity and
UCS value of 33% and 123 MPa respectively. The low permeability of both samples (1.2
× 10-17 m2) also reveal signi cant advantage in the context of quarry material application.
2. The study revealed that Q2 (123 MPa) has higher compressive strength as compared to
Q1 (120 MPa). The ndings indicates that Q2 may be more resistant to crushing forces.
This information is vital for determining the appropriate explosive energy required for
e cient fragmentation.
X20 = -2611.2PF + 1637.3
R² = 0.6181
X50 = -2738PF + 1891.9
R² = 0.8815
X80= -8102.6K + 4775.9
R² = 0.8875
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Frgament Sizes (mm)
Powder Factor (kg/m^3)
X20
X50
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fl
ffi
 X80
Linear (X20)
Linear (X50)
Linear (X80)
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
29
3. The blast design parameter data from Q1 and Q2 show that the average values of various
blast parameters, such as hole diameter is 10 m hole depth with a 1 m sub drill and a 2 m
stemming height.
4. The fragmentation analysis result carried out in this study using WipFrag software shows
that the 50%, 80% and Maximum block size passing size ranges from 539.94 – 1349.53
mm, 690.07 – 1907.81 mm, 808-2280 mm respectively. The blast fragmentation sizes are
classi ed as moderate distribution blast based on the uniformity index value ranging from
1.95 to 2.4.
5. The relationship between blast fragmentation size and powder factor was evaluated using
linear correlation coe cient. It was noted that, X20, X50, X80 has high R2 values greater
than 60% respectively.
6. Classi cation chart and Table was developed to provide easy use interpretation of blast
fragmentation result.
Con icts of interest
The authors declare no con ict of interest.
Ethical statement
Authors state that the research was conducted according to ethical standards.
Data Availability
Data will be made available on request
References
[1]. Görgülü, K., Arpaz, E., Uysal, Ö., Durutürk, Y. S., Yüksek, A. G., Koçaslan, A., & Dilmaç,
M. K. (2015). Investigation of the e ects of blasting design parameters and rock properties
on blast-induced ground vibrations. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 8, 4269-4278.
[2]. Taiwo, B. O., Yewuhalashet, F., Ogunyemi, O. B., Babatuyi, V. A., Okobe, E. I., & Orhu,
E. A. (2023). Quarry slope stability assessment methods with blast induced e ect
monitoring in Akoko Edo, Nigeria. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 41(4),
2553-2571.
[3]. Taiwo, B. O., Angesom, G., Fissha, Y., Kide, Y., Li, E., Haile, K., & Oni, O. A. (2023).
Arti cial Neural Network Modeling as an Approach to Limestone Blast Production Rate
Prediction: a Comparison of PI-BANN and MVR Models. Journal of Mining and
Environment, 14(2), 375-388.
[4]. Taiwo, B. O., & Adebayo, B. (2023). Improvement of Blast-induced Fragmentation Using
Arti cial Neural Network and BlastFrag© Optimizer Software. Materials and
Geoenvironment, 69(1), 1-13.
[5]. Ghasemi, E., Sari, M., & Ataei, M. (2012). Development of an empirical model for
predicting the e ects of controllable blasting parameters on yrock distance in surface
mines. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 52, 163-170.
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
30
[6]. Singh, P. K., Roy, M. P., Paswan, R. K., Sarim, M. D., Kumar, S., & Jha, R. R. (2016).
Rock fragmentation control in opencast blasting. Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering, 8(2), 225-237.
[7]. Kinyua, E. M., Jianhua, Z., Kasomo, R. M., Mauti, D., & Mwangangi, J. (2022). A review
of the in uence of blast fragmentation on downstream processing of metal ores. Minerals
Engineering, 186, 107743.
[8]. Taiwo, B. O. (2022). E ect of charge load proportion and blast controllable factor design
fi
fi
fl
fi
fl
fi
ff
ffi
ff
fl
ff
fl
ff
 on blast fragment size distribution. Journal of Brilliant Engineering, 3(3), 1-6.
[9]. Taiwo, B. O., Famobuwa, O. V., Mata, M. M., Sazid, M., Fissha, Y., Jebutu, V. A., ... &
Abubakar, O. (2024). Granite Downstream Production Dependent Size and Pro tability
Assessment: an application of Mathematical-based Arti cial Intelligence Model and
WipFrag Software. Journal of Mining and Environment, 15(2), 497-515.
[10]. Thornton, D., Kanchibotla, S. S., & Brunton, I. (2002). Modelling the impact of rockmass
and blast design variation on blast fragmentation. Fragblast, 6(2), 169-188.
[11]. Adesida, P. A. (2022). Powder factor prediction in blasting operation using rock geo-
mechanical properties and geometric parameters. International Journal of Mining and
Geo-Engineering, 56(1), 25-32.
[12]. Bhatawdekar, R. M., Kumar, D., Changtham, S., Pathak, D., TrilokNath, S., & Mohamad,
E. T. (2021, December). Intelligent technique for prediction of blast fragmentation due to
the blasting in tropically weathered limestone. In International Conference on
Geotechnical Challenges in Mining, Tunneling and Underground Infrastructures (pp. 773-
783). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
[13]. Ivanova, R. (2015). Investigation on Fragmentation by Blasting: The in uence of distorted
blasthole patterns on fragmentation, roughness of the remaining bench face and blast
damage behind it in model scale blasting.
[14]. Taiwo, B. O. (2023). Improvement of small-scale dolomite mine blast fragmentation
e ciency using hybrid arti cial intelligence and soft computing approaches—a case
study. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 16(12), 668.
[15]. Singh, S. P., & Abdul, H. (2013). Investigation of blast design parameters to optimize
fragmentation. In Rock Fragmentation by Blasting: The 10th International Symposium on
Rock Fragmentation by Blasting, 2012 (Fragblast 10) (pp. 181-186). Taylor & Francis
Books Ltd.
[16]. Proud, W. G. (2022). Explosives and Explosive E ects. In CBRNE: Challenges in the 21st
Century (pp. 101-136). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
[17]. Salmi, E. F., & Sellers, E. J. (2021). A review of the methods to incorporate the geological
and geotechnical characteristics of rock masses in blastability assessments for selective
blast design. Engineering geology, 281, 105970.
[18]. Cui, J., Xie, L., Qin, Y., Liu, X., Qiao, W., Hu, Z., ... & Huang, K. (2022). Study on blasting
characteristics of soft-hard rock strata based on energy elds and particle expansion
loading algorithm. Geo uids, 2022.
[19]. Taiwo, B. O., Fissha, Y., Palangio, T., Palangio, A., Ikeda, H., Cheepurupalli, N. R., ... &
Kawamura, Y. (2023). Assessment of Charge Initiation Techniques E ect on Blast
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
31
Fragmentation and Environmental Safety: An Application of WipFrag
Software. Mining, 3(3), 532-551.
[20]. Zhang, Z. X., Sanchidrián, J. A., Ouchterlony, F., & Luukkanen, S. (2023). Reduction of
fragment size from mining to mineral processing: a review. Rock Mechanics and Rock
Engineering, 56(1), 747-778.
[21]. Nikkhah, A., Vakylabad, A. B., Hassanzadeh, A., Niedoba, T., & Surowiak, A. (2022). An
evaluation on the impact of ore fragmented by blasting on mining
performance. Minerals, 12(2), 258.
[22]. Jang, H., & Topal, E. (2013). Optimizing overbreak prediction based on geological
parameters comparing multiple regression analysis and arti cial neural
network. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 38, 161-169.
[23]. Zairov, S., Ravshanova, M., & Karimov, S. (2018). Intensi cation of technological
processes in drilling and blasting operations during open-cut mining in Kyzylkum
region. Mining of Mineral Deposits.
[24]. Kinyua, E. M., Jianhua, Z., Kasomo, R. M., Mauti, D., & Mwangangi, J. (2022). A review
of the in uence of blast fragmentation on downstream processing of metal ores. Minerals
Engineering, 186, 107743.
[25]. Siddiqui, M. R., AlOthman, Z. A., & Rahman, N. (2017). Analytical techniques in
pharmaceutical analysis: A review. Arabian Journal of chemistry, 10, S1409-S1421.
ffi
fl
fl
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fl
fi
[26]. Jug, J., Strelec, S., Gazdek, M., & Kavur, B. (2017, December). Fragment size distribution
of blasted rock mass. In IOP Conference series: earth and environmental science (Vol. 95,
No. 4, p. 042013). IOP Publishing.
[27]. Gee, G. W., & Bauder, J. W. (1986). Particle‐size analysis. Methods of soil analysis: Part
1 Physical and mineralogical methods, 5, 383-411.
[28]. Kemeny, J. M., Devgan, A., Hagaman, R. M., & Wu, X. (1993). Analysis of rock
fragmentation using digital image processing. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, 119(7), 1144-1160.
[29]. Liu, Y., Pears, N., Rosin, P. L., & Huber, P. (Eds.). (2020). 3D imaging, analysis and
applications. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
[30]. An, H. M., Liu, H. Y., Han, H., Zheng, X., & Wang, X. G. (2017). Hybrid nite-discrete
element modelling of dynamic fracture and resultant fragment casting and muck-piling by
rock blast. Computers and Geotechnics, 81, 322-345.
[31]. Taiwo, B. O., Yewuhalashet, F., Adamolekun, L. B., Bidemi, O. O., Famobuwa, O. V., &
Victoria, A. O. (2023). Development of arti cial neural network based mathematical
models for predicting small scale quarry powder factor for e cient fragmentation coupled
with uniformity index model. Arti cial Intelligence Review, 56(12), 14535-14556.
[32]. ISRM (1981) Rock characterisation testing and monitoring. In: Brown ET (ed) Pergamon
press, Oxford, 211pp
[33]. Cueto, N., Benavente, D., Martínez-Martínez, J., & García-del-Cura, M. A. (2009). Rock
fabric, pore geometry and mineralogy e ects on water transport in fractured dolostones.
Engineering geology, 107(1-2), 1-15.
International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology Studies 12 (1), 13-32, 2023
Print ISSN: 2053-5783(Print)
Online ISSN: 2053-5791(online)
Website: https://www.eajournals.org/
Publication of the European Centre for Research Training and Development -UK
32
[34]. Ghorbani, S., Hoseinie, S. H., Ghasemi, E., & Sherizadeh, T. (2022). A review on rock
hardness testing methods and their applications in rock engineering. Arabian Journal of
Geosciences, 15(11), 1067.
[35]. Mehrdanesh, A., Monjezi, M., Khandelwal, M., & Bayat, P. (2023). Application of various
robust techniques to study and evaluate the role of e ective parameters on rock
fragmentation. Engineering with Computers, 39(2), 1317-1327.
[36]. Nourian, A., & Moomivand, H. (2020). Development of a new model to predict uniformity
index of fragment size distribution based on the blasthole parameters and blastability
index. Journal of Mining Science, 56, 47-58.

See discussions, stats, and author pro les for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/336277301
Engineering Properties of Some Basement Rocks of Nigeria as Aggregate in Civil
Engineering Pavement Construction
Article · January 2019
DOI: 10.20448/journal.506.2019.61.28.37
CITATIONS
3
READS
1,503
1 author:
Falowo O. O.
Federal University of Technology, Akure
60 PUBLICATIONS 186 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Falowo O. O. on 18 May 2020.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded le.
28
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
Asian Review of Environmental and Earth Sciences
Vol. 6, No. 1, 28-37, 2019
ISSN(E) 2313-8173/ ISSN(P) 2518-0134
fi
fi
ff
fi
ff
fi
ffi
fi
DOI: 10.20448/journal.506.2019.61.28.37
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
Engineering Properties of Some Basement Rocks of Nigeria as Aggregate in Civil
Engineering Pavement Construction
Falowo Olumuyiwa Olusola
Department of Geology, University of Benin, Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria.
Abstract
The engineering performance of construction materials is strongly related to their physical
properties. Therefore in order to determine the suitability of the rock units in northern parts of
Ondo State, Nigeria as aggregates for pavement construction, eight rock samples comprising
porphyritic granite, granite, migmatite, granite gneiss, quartz schist, granodiorite, charnockite,
and quartzite, were subjected to physical tests which include moisture content, dry density,
porosity, speci c gravity, aggregate impact value, aggregate crushing value, point load strength
index, uncon ned compressive strength, and shear strength. The tests were conducted in
accordance to ASTM D2216 and ISRM-2386 standard test methods. The aggregate impact value
of the samples ranges from 11.2 (Quartzite/granite gneiss) to 17.3 (Charnockite), while aggregate
crushing value varies from 18.4 (Quartzite) to 25.2 (Charnockite). The water absorption of the
rock units ranges between 0.27 and 0.82%, and porosity recorded 0.18 – 0.46%. Point load
strength index, shear strength, and uncon ned compressive strength of the samples ranges from
7.40 - 9.87, 60.5 – 92.6MPa, and 121.1 – 185.3 respectively. The values of AIV and ACV are
within the standard speci cation value for road material, cement concrete pavement and wearing
surfaces of 30% and 45% maximum. Therefore the rock units are very excellent as aggregate for
road pavement construction and categorized as strong aggregate in terms of quality for road
pavement. It is also observed that porosity and speci c gravity are the major parameters that
show strong positive correlations (≥0.5) with important geotechnical parameters such as shear
strength, uncon ned compressive strength, and point load strength index.
Keywords: Construction material, Aggregate, Pavement, Aggregate impact value, Aggregate
crushing value, Point load strength index.
Citation | Falowo Olumuyiwa Olusola (2019). Engineering
Properties of Some Basement Rocks of Nigeria as Aggregate in Civil
Engineering Pavement Construction. Asian Review of
Environmental and Earth Sciences, 6(1): 28-37.
History:
Received: 10 June 2019
Revised: 12 July 2019
Accepted: 20 August 2019
Published: 1 October 2019
Licensed: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution 3.0 License
Publisher: Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
Funding: This study received no speci c nancial support.
Competing Interests: The author declares that there are no con icts of
interests regarding the publication of this paper.
Transparency: The author con rms that the manuscript is an honest,
accurate, and transparent account of the study was reported; that no vital
features of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the
study as planned have been explained.
Ethical: This study follows all ethical practices during writing.
Contents
1.
Introduction .........................................................................................................................................
............................................. 29
2. Literature
Review ................................................................................................................................................
............................ 29
3. Description of Study
Area .....................................................................................................................................................
......... 29
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
4. Material and
Methods ..............................................................................................................................................
....................... 30
5. Results and
Discussion ...........................................................................................................................................
........................ 31
6.
Conclusion ..........................................................................................................................................
............................................... 36
References ..........................................................................................................................................
.................................................... 37
Asian Review of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 2019, 6(1): 28-37
29
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
Contribution of this paper to the literature
The present study was able contribute to the existing knowledge by providing some geological
information and engineering properties of some basement rocks of Southwestern Nigeria, as
aggregates in civil engineering construction especially pavements; since aggregates are
principal materials in pavement construction which can take the form of either stabilized or
unstabilized base or sub-base courses. The information is very crucial and pertinent to
designing high quality roads in the study area. In addition the work would also be useful in
selecting the rock types for quarry, for the production of aggregates for optimum use in
sustainable highway construction.
1. Introduction
Rock is one of the geomaterial used in construction in form of concrete, aggregate, building
stone, and
armourstone [1-4]. The suitability of rock for any civil engineering construction work depends on
its physical
property [5] and this is one of the basic goals of rock mechanics: to provide useful information
and methods for
predicting failure strength and associated parameters such as strain to failure and the e ect of
porosity and elastic
moduli [6]. For ages rocks have been used as a construction material because it’s readily
availability either in form
of igneous, sedimentary, or metamorphic rock. Although rocks requires little energy for extraction
and processing.
Indeed, rock is used more or less as it is found except for the seasoning, shaping and dressing
that is necessary
before it is used for civil engineering construction purposes. However the volume of material that
can be quarried;
the ease with which it can be quarried [6] the wastage consequent upon quarrying; and the cost
of transportation;
as well as its appearance and physical properties [7, 8] are the determining factors whether a rock
would re-
worked as construction material. Also texture, appearance, porosity, durability [9-11] etc. are also
desirable
qualities of aggregates. Crushed rock is produced for a number of purposes, the chief of which
are for concrete and
road aggregate [12-14]. Approximately 75% of the volume of concrete consists of aggregate,
therefore its
properties have a signi cant in uence on the engineering behaviour of concrete [12]. Aggregate is
divided into
coarse and ne types, the former usually consisting of rock material that is less than 40 mm and
larger than 4 mm
in size. The latter is obviously less than 4 mm. Fine types less than 75 mm should not exceed
10% by weight of the
aggregate [12]; [15].
2. Literature Review
Aggregate constitutes the basic material for road construction and is quarried in the same way as
aggregate for
fi
fi
fl
ff
 concrete [16, 17]. Because it forms the greater part of a road surface, aggregate has to bear the
main stresses
imposed by tra c, such as slow-crushing loads and rapid-impact loads, and has to resist wear.
Therefore, the rock
material used should be fresh and have high strength [12]; [18, 19]. In addition, the aggregate
used in the
wearing course should be able to resist the polishing action of the tra c. The properties of road
aggregate are
related to the texture and mineralogical composition of the rock from which it was derived. Most
igneous and
contact metamorphic rocks meet the requirements demanded of good roadstone [15]; [20]. On
the other hand,
many rocks of regional metamorphic origin are either cleaved or schistose and are therefore
unsuitable for
roadstone. This is because they tend to produce aky particles when crushed. Such particles do
not achieve good
interlock and, consequently, impair the development of dense mixtures for surface dressing. The
amount and type
of cement and/or matrix material that bind grains together in a sedimentary rock in uence
roadstone performance.
The shape of aggregate particles is an important property and is governed mainly by the fracture
pattern within a
rock mass. The surface texture of aggregate particles largely determines the strength of the bond
between the
cement and themselves. A rough surface creates a good bond, whereas a smooth surface does
not.
Many researchers [21-24] have tremendously contributed to knowledge in the aspects of
compositional
features and petrotectonic signi cance of quartzite and quartz-schist. Studies on the compressive
strength of
arti cial composite rock materials in relation to their moisture content in Malaysia [25] emphasized
probable
complex engineering challenges due to variation in the rock composition. Akpokodje [26] studied
certain rock
aggregates for the Nigerian Basement rocks. His ndings show that the aggregates are good
engineering materials
based on both compressive strength and water absorption characteristics. Adebisi and Adeyemi
[27] con rmed the
exclusive sensitivity of gneisses in South-west Nigeria to moisture content among other
properties. The present
study tries to employ eld disposition and more importantly, some basic physical/geotechnical
properties of the
rocks in northern part of Ondo, Southwestern Nigeria to elucidate further on their usefulness in
civil engineering
construction especially in the area of concreting, and aggregates in pavement construction.
3. Description of Study Area
The study area is located within the northern part of Ondo State, Nigeria Figure 1. The selected
areas include
Owo, Akoko, and Ose. These areas are located within longitudes 5°20´E and 6°10´E and latitudes
6°30´N and
7°40´N. The area is accessible through the Benin - Ifon highway, Abuja - Lokoja Highway and
Ado-Akure highway.
The study area has a topographical elevation varying from 40 m – 750 m above the sea level. The
northern part of
the study area is a rugged terrain (i.e. hilly) especially in Akoko area [28]. The annual rainfall ranges
between
1000 and 1800 mm, with a mean annual rainfall of 1500 mm, and average wet days of about 100.
The mean annual
temperature is between 21°C and 33°C with mean temperature of 24°C and mean humidity of
80% [29].
fi
fi
ffi
fi
fi
fl
fi
ffi
fl
 Asian Review of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 2019, 6(1): 28-37
30
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
Figure-1. Location map of the study area.
Source: Ministry of works and housing, Ondo State, Nigeria.
The geology of study area falls within the southwestern basement complex Figure 2 and consists
of migmatite,
granites, granodiorite, granite gneiss, ne grained quartzite, charnockite, pegmatite and quartzo-
feldspathic veins,
schist, and quartz schist. These rock types dominate Owo and Akoko areas, notably along Owo –
Oba Akoko,
Iwaro – Akungba, Akungba – Supare, Ikare, Epinmi, Sosan, Oke Agbe, and Ido Ani. The migmatite
complex which
is the most widespread basement rock in the area is mainly medium grained gneiss. They are
strongly foliated
rocks frequently occurring as outcrops. On the surface of these outcrops, severely contorted,
alternating bands of
dark and light coloured minerals can be seen. These bands of light coloured minerals are
essentially feldspar and
quartz, while the dark coloured bands contain abundant biotite. A small proportion of the area
especially to the
northeast, overlies the coarse grained granites and gneisses, which are poor in ferromagnesian
minerals. These
rocks are covered by regoliths with thickness variation across the town. Sand, clayshale,
limestone, grift,
sandstone, shale, coal, sandstone, and mudstone dominated the southern parts. The sedimentary
rocks/deposit is
mainly of the post Cretaceous sediments and the Cretaceous Abeokuta Formation.
4. Material and Methods
In total, eight rock samples were collected from di erent lithological units in the study area which
include
porphyritic Granite, ne grained Granite, Migmatite, Granite gneiss, Quartz schist, Granodiorite,
Charnockite, and
Quartzite Figure 2 and labelled as S1 – S8. The sites where the samples were taken are shown in
Figure 3. Their
geotechnical properties which comprises moisture content determination, Aggregate impact value
(AIV),
Aggregate crushed value (ACV), Point load strength test, speci c gravity, Water absorption test,
Uncon ned
compression test, and direct shear strength test. The values of the presented rock properties were
predominantly
determined as an arithmetic average of two to ve rock specimen tests. All laboratory tests were
carried out in
accordance with ASTM D– 2216 [30] and ISRM [31] for physical properties such as density,
porosity, void ratio,
moisture content and water absorption of the samples. The aggregate impact value (AIV) and
aggregate crushed
value (ACV) were prepared using BS 812: Part 110-112 British Standard Institution 1377 [32].
ISRM [31] IS:
2386 – part -3 for speci c gravity determination for coarse aggregate.
Porosity was measured by dividing the amount of water lling the pore spaces, deduced from
weight of each
sample by density of water at room temperature. Void ratio was calculated based on the dry
weight of each rock
sample by subtracting one from the product of the sample volume and density, divided by the
mass of the sample.
Density was estimated from the ratio of bulk mass of each sample to its bulk volume. The mass of
each specimen
was determined after drying to a constant mass at a temperature of 105° C for 24 hours, and
allowing it to cool in
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
 the desiccator for about 30 minutes. The volume of each sample was measured from its
dimension, while water
absorption was calculated as percentage by weight of water absorbed in terms of oven-dried
weight of each sample.
All numerical data obtained from the measured physical properties were subjected to statistical
analysis, including
regression plots in order to establish the relationship between the measured physical properties.
The uncon ned compressive strength, direct shear strength, point load test were determined as
outlined in
ISRM [33]. For Point Load, the corrected Point Load Strength Index, Is(50) was calculated using
Equation 1.
Asian Review of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 2019, 6(1): 28-37
31
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
Figure-2. Geological map of the study area showing locations of sample collection.
Source: Nigeria geological survey agency.
( ) ……………………………. (1)
Where:
P = Failure load.
= Equivalent core diameter.
= (for axial, block lump test).
A = W × D.
W = Minimal cross sectional width.
D = Minimal cross sectional distance.
F = size correction factor.
F=()
5. Results and Discussion
The results of the physical properties of the tested rock samples are summarized in Table 1 and 2.
The natural
moisture content of rock samples varies from 0.15% in Quartzite to 0.43% in Granodiorite. The
water absorption
potential of the samples ranges between 0.27% (Quartzite) and 0.82% (porphyritic Granite).
Water content is one of the most important factors in uencing rock strength. Considerable
research has been
carried out to investigate rock strength under both dry and water saturated conditions. According
to these results,
the petrophysical properties of rocks decrease with increasing moisture. Quartzite is a
metamorphosed arenaceous
rock with granulose texture. Predominantly composed of quartz. Quartzite is usually thought of as
thermally
metamorphosed rocks but regional metamorphism also produces them. The low moisture content
of the quartzite
could have as a result of degree of metamorphism which increases the mineral bonding, while the
high water
obtained in Granodiorite may be attributed to their texture.
The speci c gravity of the samples is between 2.65 (Granite) and 2.73 (Granodiorite/Charnockite).
The
relatively high values obtained for Granodiorite and Charnockite could attributed to their mineral
composition, as
they tend to contain less quartz but high ferromagnesian minerals which denser and heavier in
weight. The values
of speci c gravity obtained correlated well with range of values for crystalline rocks as reported in
Anon [34] and
Blyths and Freitas [35].
Asian Review of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 2019, 6(1): 28-37
32
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
Figure-3. Various sites where representative samples of the rock units are collected.
Source: Fieldwork, 2017.
fi
fi
fi
fl
 The water absorption of the rock samples varies from 0.27 for Quartzite to 0.82 for porphyritic
Granite.
However the values obtained for granite (approx. 0.5) and Quartzite (approx. 0.3) are very close to
those reported
in Bell [12] for roadstone properties of some common aggregate in Table 3.
The Dry Unit Weight recorded for the rock units ranges from 26.59 (Quartzite) to 27.04 KN/m³
(Quartz
Schist), while porosity ranges between 0.18 (Quartzite) – 0.46 (porphyritic Granite). According to
Anon [34] in
Table 4, the rock samples can be regarded as high to very high rocks, since their dry unit weight is
greater than
25KN/m3 (25 Mg m-3). This is consistent with the determined density of metamorphic rocks [5].
The rock units
are characterized by low porosity as their values are less than 1. This implies that they are
compact and impervious
in their natural states. Rock porosity depends on not only the density of the solid matrix material,
but also the
density of pore uids as well as saturation.
The aggregate impact value (AIV) gives a relative measure of the resistance of the aggregate to
sudden shock
or impact. The particular purpose which an aggregate is meant to serve requires the aggregate to
have a particular
strength which is usually stated in the speci cation Table 5. This test provides a method for
measuring this
strength. The values of AIV ranges from 11.2 (Quartzite/Granite Gneiss) to 17.3 (Charnockite).
Gneiss has a
rough banding or foliation, in which pale coloured bands of quartz and feldspar lie parallel with
bands or streaks of
ma c minerals Figure 3; the ma c minerals are mainly biotite, hornblende, or in some cases
pyroxene. Biotite is
often accompanied by muscovite, and garnets are common accessory minerals. A gneiss breaks
less readily than a
schist and commonly splits across the foliation; it is often coarser in texture than most schists,
though some
gneisses are relatively ne-grained [35]. Therefore based on this characteristics of gneiss, this
might be
responsible for low AIV recorded relative to other rock samples. From Table 5, the rock units can
categorized as
strong aggregate in terms of quality for road pavement. These values of AIV of the rock samples
correlate well
with some rock units of the same lithology (granite and quartzite) reported by Bell [12]. The
aggregate crushing
value provides a relative measure of resistance to crushing under a gradually applied compressive
load. Aggregate
used in road construction should be strong enough to resist crushing under tra c wheel loads. If
the aggregates
are weak, the stability of the pavement structure is likely to be adversely a ected. To achieve a
high quality of
Asian Review of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 2019, 6(1): 28-37
33
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
pavement, aggregate possessing low aggregate crushing value should be preferred. The ACV
recorded a range of
18.4 (Quartzite) – 25.2 (Charnockite). The aggregate crushing value for road material; cement
concrete pavement
should not exceed 30%, while ACV for wearing surfaces should not exceed 45%. Therefore the
rock units are very
excellent as aggregate for road pavement construction.
Figure-4. Pictures of some equipment and processes undertaken in the course of the laboratory
analysis.
fi
fl
fi
fi
fi
ff
ffi
 Source: Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria.
The point load strength test is used as an index test for strength classi cation of rock materials.
The test
method is performed to determine the point load strength index ( ) of rock specimens. The point
load strength
index (PLSI) of the samples ranges between 7.40 and 9.87. Charnockite is characterized with
relatively high PLSI
of the sampled rocks. The Charnockite obtained in the study area are ne to medium-grained,
equigranular and
massive, sometimes porphyritic. Charnockitic rocks constitute one of the important petrological
units within the
Precambrian Basement Complex of Nigeria. They are generally characterized by their dark
greenish to greenish
grey appearance which makes them easily recognizable in hand specimen. They usually contain
quartz +
plagioclase + alkali feldspar + orthopyroxene + clinopyroxene + hornblende ± biotite ± fayalite.
Accessory
minerals are usually zircon, apatite, and iron ores [36, 37]. Therefore high value of PLSI observed
in the
Charnockite could be as a result of its texture and chemical composition. Hence based on Table 6
according to
Franklin and Broch [38] the rocks can be categorized as very high strength rock materials with
corresponding
compressive strength between 50 and 160 MPa, which correlates with the actual values obtained
for the sampled
rocks i.e. 121 – 185.3MPa. Subsequently using Table 7 and 8, according to Geological Society,
International
Association of Engineering Geologist and International Society for Rocks Mechanics, they are
very strong rock
units.
Asian Review of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 2019, 6(1): 28-37
34
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
Table-1. Summary of the physical properties of sampled rocks.
Sample
no.
Rock unit MC (%) AIV ACV PLSI
(MPa)
SG WA
(%)
UCS
(MPa)
ST
(MPa)
S1 Porphyritic Granite 0.41 15.2 24.2 7.40 2.65 0.82 121.1 60.5
S2 Granite 0.39 13.1 23.1 8.08 2.69 0.48 143.1 71.6
S3 Migmatite 0.34 14.4 23.1 8.05 2.66 0.57 122.1 61.1
S4 Granite Gneiss 0.38 11.2 19.7 8.82 2.70 0.33 127.5 63.7
S5 Quartz Schist 0.24 12.4 22.2 8.89 2.66 0.66 159.4 79.7
S6 Granodiorite 0.43 12.1 21.1 9.52 2.73 0.44 170.2 85.1
S7 Charnockite 0.34 17.3 25.2 9.87 2.72 0.47 165.9 82.9
S8 Quartzite 0.15 11.2 18.4 8.84 2.65 0.27 185.3 92.6
Note: MC-moisture content, AIV-aggregate impact value, ACV-aggregate crushed value PLSI-
point load strength index, WA-water absorption, UCS-
uncon ned compressive strength, ST-shear strength.
Table-2. Results of the dry unit weight, porosity, and water content of the rock samples.
Sample no. Rock unit Dry unit Wt. (KN/m³) Porosity (%) Water content (%)
S1 Porphyritic Granite 26.72 0.46 0.16
S2 Granite 26.82 0.37 0.23
S3 Migmatite 26.90 0.37 0.15
fi
fi
fi
 S4 Granite Gneiss 26.71 0.38 0.29
S5 Quartz Schist 27.04 0.29 0.12
S6 Granodiorite 27.03 0.30 0.22
S7 Charnockite 26.79 0.31 0.19
S8 Quartzite 26.59 0.18 0.11
Table-3. Some representative values of the roadstone properties of some common aggregates.
Rock type Water
absorption
Speci c
gravity
Aggregate
crushing value
Aggregate impact
value
Basalt 0.9 2.91 14 13
Dolerite 0.4 2.95 10 9
Granite 0.8 2.64 17 20
Micro-granite 0.5 2.65 12 14
Hornfels 0.5 2.81 13 11
Quartzite 1.8 2.63 20 18
Limestone 0.5 2.69 14 20
Greywacke 0.5 2.72 10 12
Source: After Bell [12].
Table-4. Dry density and porosity.
Class Dry density (Mg m-3) Description Porosity (%) Description
1 Less than 1.8 Very low Over 30 Very high
2 1.8-2.2 Low 30-15 High
3 2.2-2.55 Moderate 15-5 Medium
4 2.55-2.75 High 5-1 Low
5 Over 2.75 Very high Less than 1 Very low
Source: After Blyths and Freitas [35].
The shear strength of the samples varies from 60.5 (porphyritic Granite) to 92.6 MPa (Quartzite).
Quartzite is
derived from the conversion of siliceous rock such as sandstone through the process of
metamorphism. The
original quartz grains of the sandstone (and siliceous cement if present) are recrystallized as an
interlocking mosaic
of quartz crystals. Therefore Quartzite in its massive, unweathered state is very strong, in terms of
crushing and
shear strengths.
Figures 6-11 show regression plots of the physical parameters measured. Porosity, water
absorption, speci c
gravity (SG), and moisture content (MC) are chosen as independent variables, while shear
strength (SS),
uncon ned compressive strength (UCS), AIV, ACV, and PLSI are dependent variables. Figure 4
shows fair positive
relationship (r2 = 0.4078) between WA against P. SS and USC have a high positive coe cient of
correlation with
porosity i.e. r2 = 0.8291; 0.8287 respectively Figure 5 and 6.
Low positive correlation coe cient exists between UCS and MC (0.31); AIV and WA (0.25); AIV
and P (0.15);
ACV and P (0.32). However ACV shows a fair positive correlation with WA (r2 = 0.4815), while
PLSI recorded a
good correlation coe cient of 0.5 with speci c gravity Figure 11. Therefore from the regression
analysis plots,
porosity and speci c gravity are the major properties that show strong positive correlations with
shear strength,
uncon ned compressive strength, and point load strength index [39].
Table-5. Classi cation of aggregate based on aggregate impact value.
AIV (%) Quality of aggregate
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
ffi
fi
ffi
<10 Exceptionally strong
10-20 Strong
20-30 Satisfactorily for road surfacing
>35 Weak for road surfacing
Source: Thuro and Plinninger [39].
Asian Review of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 2019, 6(1): 28-37
35
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
Table-6. Point load strength classi cation.
Class Point load strength index (MPa) Equivalent uniaxial compressive
strength (MPa)
Extremely high strength Over 10 Over 160
Very high strength 3-10 50-160
High strength 1-3 15-60
Medium strength 0.3-1 5-16
Low strength 0.1-0.3 1.6-5
Very low strength 0.03-0.1 0.5-1.6
Extremely low strength Less than 0.03 Less than 0.5
Source: After Franklin and Broch [38].
Table-7. Classi cation of compressive strength of rocks.
Class Compressive strength (MPa) Term
1 Over 200 Extremely strong
2 100-200 Very strong
3 50-100 Strong
Source: After Anon [40].
Table-8. Grades of uncon ned compressive strength.
Geological Society, Anon [40] IAEG [34] ISRM [41]
Term Strength (MPa) Term Strength (MPa) Term Strength (MPa)
Very weak Less than 1.25 Weak Under 15 Very low Under 6
Weak 1.25-5.00 Moderately
strong
15-50 Low 6-10
Moderately weak 5.00-12.50 Strong 50-120 Moderate 20-60
Moderately strong 12.50-50 Very strong 120-230 High 60-200
Strong 50-100 Extremely
strong
Over 230 Very high Over 200
Very strong 100-200
Extremely strong Over 200
Source: After Anon [41].
Figure-5. Regression plot of water absorption against porosity.
Source: Data analysis.
Figure-6. Regression plot of shear strength against porosity.
Source: Data analysis.
Figure-7. Regression plot of uncon ned compressive strength (UCS) against porosity.
Source: Data analysis.
Asian Review of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 2019, 6(1): 28-37
36
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
Figure-8. Regression plot of UCS against moisture content.
Source: Data analysis.
Figure-9. Regression plot of aggregate impact value and aggregate crushing value against water
absorption.
Source: Data analysis.
Figure-10. Regression plot of aggregate impact value and aggregate crushing value against
porosity.
Source: Data analysis.
Figure-11. Regression plot of point load strength index and against speci c gravity.
Source: Data analysis.
6. Conclusion
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
 The degree at which rocks can be used as building stones, armourstone, aggregate in pavement
construction,
and concrete depends on physical properties, which is a re ection of compositional features. In
order to achieve this
parameters such as moisture content, dry density, porosity, speci c gravity, aggregate impact
value, aggregate
crushing value, point load strength index, uncon ned compressive strength, and shear strength
were determined
from eight di erent lithological rock units. Findings show that the rocks are characterized by low
porosity, very
high strength on the basis of point load strength index and shear strength. The samples show
strong quality as
aggregate in pavement construction. However Charnockite seems to have excellent physical
properties which could
attributed to its texture and mineral composition. It is also observed that porosity and speci c
gravity are the
major parameters that show strong positive correlations with important geotechnical parameters
such as shear
strength, uncon ned compressive strength, and point load strength index.
Asian Review of Environmental and Earth Sciences, 2019, 6(1): 28-37
37
© 2019 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group
References
[1] A. B. Hawkins, "Geomaterials in construction: An introduction," Quarterly Journal of
Engineering Geology, vol. 24, pp. 1-2, 1991.
[2] W. J. French, "Introduction: Applied petrology – the stability of concrete aggregates," Quarterly
Journal of Engineering Geology, vol.
13, p. 205, 1980.
[3] A. R. Clark and J. S. Palmer, "The problem of quality control and selection of armourstone,"
Quarterly Journal of Engineering
Geology, vol. 24, pp. 119-122, 1991. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1144/
gsl.qjeg.1991.024.01.12.
[4] P. G. Fookes, "Geomaterials," Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology, vol. 24, pp. 3-15,
1991.
[5] D. P. Krynine and W. R. Judd, Principles of geotechnics and geology, 1st ed. New Delhi, India:
McGraw Hill, 1958.
[6] F. Ighrakpata, O. Molua, E. Igherighe, and J. Idialu, "Comparison of the strength of two di erent
rock samples," The Paci c
Journal of Science and Technology, vol. 13, pp. 384-390, 2012.
[7] A. Yavuz, N. Turk, and M. Koca, Geological parameters a ecting the marble production in the
quarries along the Southern ank of the
Menderes Massif, in SW Turkey. Engineering Geology, vol. 80, pp. 214-241, 2005. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2005.05.003.
[8] D. Je erson, "Building stone: The geological dimension," Quarterly Journal of Engineering
Geology and Hydrogeology, vol. 26, pp. 305-
319, 1993. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1144/gsl.qjegh.1993.026.004.06.
[9] A. Arizzi and G. Cultrone, "The in uence of aggregate texture, morphology and grading on the
carbonation of non-hydraulic
(aerial) lime-based mortars," Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, vol. 46,
pp. 507-520, 2013. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1144/qjegh2012-017.
[10] T. E. Dibb, D. W. Hughes, and A. B. Poole, "Controls of size and shape of natural
armourstone," Quarterly Journal of Engineering
Geology, vol. 16, pp. 31-42, 1983a. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1144/gsl.qjeg.1983.016.01.03.
[11] T. E. Dibb, D. W. Hughes, and A. B. Poole, "The identi cation of critical factors a ecting rock
durability in marine environments,"
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology, vol. 16, pp. 149-161, 1983b. Available at: https://
doi.org/10.1144/gsl.qjeg.1983.016.02.08.
[12] F. G. Bell, Engineering geology. Jordan Hill, Oxyford, United Kingdom: Elsevier Ltd, 2007.
ff
ff
fi
fi
fl
fl
fi
fi
fl
ff
fi
ff
fi
ff
 [13] J. Bullas, "Modi cation of the formula used in the determination of the ten per cent nes
value of aggregate," Quarterly Journal of
Engineering Geology, vol. 23, pp. 187-188, 1990. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1144/
gsl.qjeg.1990.023.02.07.
[14] I. B. Cameron, "Wearing course aggregates in Northern Ireland," Quarterly Journal of
Engineering Geology, vol. 5, pp. 81-83, 1972.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1144/gsl.qjeg.1972.005.01.09.
[15] P. Fookes, "An introduction to the in uence of natural aggregates on the performance and
durability of concrete," Quarterly Journal
of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, vol. 13, pp. 207-229, 1980.
[16] I. Sims, "Quality and durability of stone for construction," Quarterly Journal of Engineering
Geology and Hydrogeology, vol. 24, pp. 67-
73, 1991. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1144/gsl.qjeg.1991.024.01.06.
[17] I. Sims, "Sand, gravel and crushed rock aggregates for construction purposes: Geological
society engineering group working
party," Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, vol. 19, pp. 325-338, 1986.
Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1144/gsl.qjeg.1986.019.03.13.
[18] I. Collis and R. A. Fox, Geological society, aggregates: Sand, gravel and crushed rock
aggregates for construction purposes (Eds. I. Collis and
R.A. Fox) vol. 1: Engineering Geology Special Publication, 1985.
[19] J. P. Latham, Geological society, advances in aggregates and armourstone evaluation (ed. J.-
P. Latham): Engineering Geology Special
Publication, 1998.
[20] P. Fookes and A. Poole, "Some preliminary considerations on the selection and durability of
rock and concrete materials for
breakwaters and coastal protection works," Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and
Hydrogeology, vol. 14, pp. 97-128, 1981.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1144/gsl.qjeg.1981.014.02.03.
[21] C. Okonkwo, "Structural geology of basement rocks of Jebba area, Nigeria," Journal of
Mining and Geology, vol. 28, pp. 203-209,
1992.
[22] C. Okonkwo, "Geochemistry of quartzites and quartz-mica schist in Jebba area, Nigeria,"
Journal of Mining and Geololgy, vol. 28, pp.
203-209, 2005.
[23] C. T. Okonkwo and J. A. Winchester, Geochemistry of semi-Pelitic Schist Konga Area,
Northwestern Nigeria. Global Journal of Pure and
Applied Sciences, vol. 7, pp. 303 – 309, 2001. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4314/
gjpas.v7i2.16249.
[24] A. A. Elueze and O. A. Okunlola, Petrochemical and petrogenetic characteristics of
metasedimentary rocks of Lokoja – Jakura Schist Belt,
Central Nigeria. Journal of Mining and Geology, vol. 39, pp. 163 – 173, 2003. Available at: https://
doi.org/10.4314/jmg.v39i1.18787.
[25] Z. Mohamed, K. Mohamed, and C. G. Chun, "Uniaxial compressive strength of composite
rock material with respect to shale
thickness ratio and moisture," Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, vol. 13, pp. 1-10,
2008.
[26] E. Akpokodje, "Properties of some Nigeria rock aggregates," Journal of Mining and Geology,
vol. 23, pp. 185-190, 1992.
[27] N. O. Adebisi and G. O. Adeyemi, "Compressive strength properties of gneisses in
Southwestern Nigeria," Quarterly Publication of
Scienti c Society of Mineral Wealth Technology Geotechnology, vol. 156, pp. 43-50, 2001.
[28] R. W. Marans and W. Rodgers, Toward an understanding of community satisfaction: In
Hawley A.H. and Rock V.P. (Eds), Metropolitan
America in Contemporary Perspective. London: Wiley Publishing, 1975.
[29] N. P. Iloeje, A new geography of Nigeria. Lagos: Longman Nig. Ltd., 1981.
[30] ASTM D– 2216, American standards for testing and materials – standard test methods for
laboratory determination of moisture content of soil
and rock. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International, 1992.
fi
fi
fl
fi
[31] B. E. ISRM, Suggested methods: Rock characterization, testing and monitoring. Pergamon,
Oxford: ISRM Commission on Testing
Methods, 1981.
[32] British Standard Institution 1377, Methods of test for soil for civil engineering purposes.
London: BS1377, 1990.
[33] J. Franklin, "Suggested method for determining point load strength," International Journal of
Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences,
vol. 22, pp. 53-60, 1985. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(85)92985-7.
[34] O. Anon, "Classi cation of rocks and soils for engineering geological mapping. Part 1: Rock
and soil materials," Bulletin of the
International Association of Engineering Geology, vol. 19, pp. 355-371, 1979. Available at: https://
doi.org/10.1007/bf02600503.
[35] F. G. H. Blyths and M. H. D. Freitas, A geology for engineers, 7th ed. Jordan Hill, Oxyford,
United Kingdom: Edward Arnold,
Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 1984.
[36] V. O. Olarewaju, The charnockitic intrusives of Nigeria. In: Oshi O (Ed), The basement complex
of Nigeria and its mineral resources (A
Tribute to Prof. M. A. O. Rahaman). Ibadan: Akin Jinad & Co, 2006.
[37] N. G. Obaje, Geology and mineral resources of Nigeria. London New York: Springer Dordrecht
Heidelberg, 2009.
[38] J. L. Franklin and E. Broch, "The point load test," International Journal Rock Mechanics and
Mining Science, vol. 9, pp. 669–697, 1972.
[39] K. Thuro and R. J. Plinninger, Scale e ects in rock strength properties. Part 2: Point load test
and point load strength index. Rock mechanics
– a challenge for society, Särkkä & Eloranta (Eds.): Swets & Zeitlinger Lisse, 2001.
[40] Q. Anon, "The description of rock masses for engineering purposes," Journal of Engineering
Geology, vol. 10, pp. 355-388, 1977.
[41] O. Anon, "Basic geotechnical description of rock masses. International society of rock
mechanics commission on the classi cation of
rocks and rock masses," International Society of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and
Geomechanical Abstracts, vol. 18, pp. 85-110,
1981.
Asian Online Journal Publishing Group is not responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or
liability, etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content.
Any queries should be directed to the corresponding author of the article.
View publication stats

Engineering Properties of Rocks

Objectives :
The aim of this lesson is to understand the important physical properties of rocks and their
determination, geological
characteristics, general characteristics, modulus properties of rocks, building stones and their
occurrences. The role of
a geotechnical engineer is also highlighted.
1.0 Introduction :
Engineering properties of rocks is a collective nomenclature which includes all such properties of
rocks that are
relevant to engineering application after their extraction from natural beds or without extraction
i.e. insitu
conditions.The rst set include all those properties for which a rock must be tested for selection
as a material for
construction such as a building stone, road stone or aggregate for concrete making.The second
set of the properties
include the qualities of a natural bed rock as and where it exists. That would determine its
suitability or otherwise as a
construction site for aproposed engineering project.
Obviously, in both cases, the economy and safety of an engineering project are greatly dependent
upon the proper
understanding and determination of theengineering properties of rocks.Engineering properties of
rock are controlled
fi
fi
fi
ff
 by the discontinuities within the rock mass and theinherent properties of the intact rock.
Therefore, engineering
properties must account for the properties of the intact rock and for the properties of the rock
mass as a whole.
A combination of laboratory testing of small samples, empirical analysis, and eld observations
should be employed
to determine the requisite engineering properties. Rock properties can be divided into two
categories: intact rock
properties and rock mass properties. Intact rock properties are determined from laboratory tests
on small samples
typically obtained from coring, outcrops or exposures along existing cuts. Common engineering
properties typically
obtained from laboratory tests include speci c gravity, point load strength, compressive strength,
tensile strength,
shear strength, modulus, and durability.
Rock mass properties are determined by visual examination and description of discontinuities
within the rock mass. It
should follow the suggested methodology of the International Society of Rock Mechanics (ISRM
1978), and how
these discontinuities will a ect the behavior of the rock mass when subjected to the proposed
construction.
2.0 Physical properties of rocks:
In most of the engineering applications, rocks are used as building stones. A building stone may
be de ned as a rock
that can be safely used as a rough unit or as a properly cut and shaped (dressed) block or slab or
column or sheet in
di erent situation in an engineering construction.The following physical properties are considered
to be important for
a rock to be used as a building material.
2.1 Crushing Strength
It is also termed as compressive strength of a stone. It may be de ned as maximum force
expressed per unit area
which a stone can withstand. Any force beyond the compression strength will cause a failure of
the stone.
Mathematically, compressive strength is expressed by simpler method as follows
Where Compressive strength, P= Load at failure, A = Area of cross section of stone under P
The determination of compressive strength of a building stone involves making standard test
specimens (which are
either cubes of 5cm side or cylinders of length: diameter ratio of 2 or 2.5). These specimens are
then loaded gradually
one at a time after placing on the base plate of a universal testing machine, till the rst crack
appears in the specimen.
Any further loading will crush the specimen.The compressive strength determined in this way
using the above
relationship is called “uncon ned or universal compressive strength”. Because the test specimen
has no lateral
support or restraint.
When the compressive strength is tested by a method providing a lateral support , as by keeping
the specimen in a
special cell lled with a liquid under pressure. The value obtained, then it is called as con ned or
triaxial compressive
strength.
The crushing strength of a rock depends on a number of factors, such as its
i. Mode of formation
ii. Composition
iii. Texture and structure
iv. Moisture content and
v .extent of weathering it has already su ered
Igneous rocksare crystalline rocks. They are compact and characterized by interlocking in texture
and uniform in
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
 structure. These rocks possess very high crushing strengths compared to sedimentary and
metamorphic rocks. In the
sedimentary and metamorphic rocks, the presence of planes of weakness along bedding planes,
foliation and
schistosity and cleavage, greatly a ects the compressive strength, both in direction and
magnitude.
The sand stone may show a very low crushing strength when loaded parallel to bedding planes
than when loaded
perpendicular to the same structure.Except for sandstone, quartzite and most other sedimentary
and metamorphic
rocks are composed of clays, calcareous and hydrated silicate minerals which are inherently weak
is strength.
Crushing strengths of common types of building stones are generally higher than the loads that
they are supposed to
withstand, in ordinary type of building constructions. The compressive strengths of some rocks
and their range are as
follows. They are expressed in Kg/cm2. Dolerite=1500-3500, Basalt= 1500-3500,
Quartzite=1500-300, Granite=
1000-2500, Marbles=700-2000, Gneisses=500-2500, Sand Stone= 200-2500, Limestone=
200-2000.
During the last few years thousands of tests have been made to classify the rocks on the basis of
uniaxial compressive
strength in to grades. The following classi cation proposed by Deere and Miller has been found
usefull.
Class Description Uniaxial compressive strength(Kg/cm2
A Very high strength More than 2240
B High strength 1120—2240
C Medium strength 500—1120
D Low strength 200—500
E Very low strength less than 200
2.2 Transverse strength:
It is de ned as the capacity of the stones to withstand bending loads. Such loads are only rarely
involved in situations
where stones are commonly used. But when a stone is intended for use as a beam or a lintel, its
transverse strength is
determined as modulus of rupture using the following relationship.
R = Modulus of rupture; W = weight at which sample breaks; l= length of the specimen; b = width
of specimen; d =
thickness of the specimen.
This property is determined practically by loading transversely a bar shaped test specimen
generallyof
20cmsx8cmx8cm dimension and is supported at ends from below.
It has been found that in stone, the transverse strength is generally 1/20th to 1/10th of their
compressive strengths.
2.3 Shear Strength :
Shear strength is the resistance o ered by a stone to shear stresses, which tends to move one
part of a specimen with
respect to the other. It is obtained by using the relationship. Shear strength of a stone is also not
commonly
determined except when the stone is to be used as a column
Where P = load at failure; A = area of cross section of the specimen.
It has been observed that shear strength of most common building stones ranges from 70 to 140
kg/cm2.
In laboratory testing, a bar shaped specimen is held with grip andis supported at ends below, is
loaded from above.
Rupture occurs when the shear strength is exceeded.
2.4 Tensile Strength:
Tensile strength of a rock is related to its ability to withstand breakage. It happens after some
level. That level is its
fi
ff
ff
fi
 strength.It may be determined directly or indirectly. The tensile (pulling) strength that has to be
applied to a material
to break it. It is measured as a force per unit area.The direct method would require elaborate
means to avoid bending
while applying tensile forces by gripping the specimens at the ends. Since tensile stresses are
seldom required
accurately, an indirect method is commonly applied.
The indirect method is calledthe Brazilian test. It consists of loading a test cylinder diametrically in
such a way that
the applied loads would develop tensile rupturing along the diametrical plane of the specimen.
Loads are gradually increased till the cylinder fractures. The load P, at rupture being thus known.
Transverse strength
Ts is calculated by using the formula
D = diameter of the specimen; L = length of the specimen
2.5 Porosity :
The shape, size and nature of packing of the grains of a rock give rise to the property of porosity
or development of
pore spaces within a rock. Numerically it is expressed as the ratio between the total volume of
pore spaces and the
total volume of the rock sample. Porosity is commonly given in percentage terms. Presence of
interlocking crystals,
angular grains of various sizes and abundant cementing materials are responsible for low porosity
of stones.
Conversely the rock will be highly porous it composed of spherical or rounded grains, (sandstone)
or if the cementing
material is distributed unevenly or is of poor character.
Porosity is an important engineering property of rocks. It accounts for the uid absorption value of
the stones in most
cases and also that a higher porosity signi es a lesser density which generally means a lesser
compressive strength.
Porosity values for a few common building stones. Granite-0.1 to 0.5%, Basalt- 0.1 to 1%,
Sandstone- 5 to 25%,
Limestone- 5 to 20%, Marble- 0.5 to 2%, Quartzite- 0.1 to 0.5%,
2.6 Absorption Value:
It de nes the capacity of a stone to absorb moisture when immersed in water for 72 hours or till it
gets full
saturation.It is generally expressed in percentage terms of original dry weight of the mass. . It
maybe obtained from
the relationship
Where Ws = weight at saturation; W0 = dry weight of the sample used.
2.7 Permeability:
It is the capacity of a rock to transmit water. Sand stones and limestones may show high values
for absorption or 10%
or even more. Selection of such highly porous verities of these stones for use in building
construction, especially in
most situations, would be greatly objectionable.
Presence of water within the pores not only decreases the strength of the rock but also makes the
stones very
vulnerable to frost action, in cold and humid climatic conditions.
2.8 Density :
It is de ned as weight per unit volume of a substance.But in the case of rock it is not only the
solid mineral matter
which wholly accounts for the total volume of a given specimen.A part of the rock may comprise
of pores or open
spaces, which may be empty, partly lled or wholly lled with water. Accordingly, three types of
density may be
distinguished in rocks. They are a)Dry density, b) bulk density and c) saturated density.
1.Dry density: It is the weight per unit volume of an absolutely dried rock specimen, it includes the
volume of the
pore spaces present in the rock.
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
 2.Bulk density: It is the weight per unit volume of a rock sample with natural moisture content
where pores are only
partially lled with water.
3.Saturated density: It is the density of the saturated rocks or weight per unit volume of a rock in
which all the pores
are completely lled with water.
The fourth type is also recognized as true density. Itis the weight per unit volume of the mineral
matter(without pores
and water) of which a rock s made up. The most engineering calculations, it is the bulk density
which is used
frequently.
Bulk density values in gram/cubic cm for some common building stones are granite-2.7,
basalt-2.9, sandstone-2.6,
and limestone-2.2 to 2.6.
2.9 Abrasive Resistance :
It is more a qualitative than a quantitative property. It may be broadly de ned are the resistance
which a stone o ers
to rubbing action of one kind or another.Determination of this is of considerable signi cance when
stones are
intended for use in situations where rubbing by natural or arti cial causes is involved as a
routine.Example a) stones
used in paving along roads, b) Facing stones in buildings of arid region where strong sand laden
winds are
blown.These type of situations demand stones that have not only high abrasive resistance but
also of essentially
uniform, composition. So that thewear is as uniform as possible.
Stones composed of more than one mineral like granite may look quite appealing. In such cases,
when freshly used,
but within short time, they may get pitted or dis gured because of unequal wear of the di erent
mineral components.
2.10 Frost and re resistance
Many building stones show quick disintegration of building stones or rocks when used in
situations involving frost
formation (excessive cold) or heating. Frost causes disintegration by expansion of water on
breezing within the rock
pores.
In the case of re, the unequal expansion in di erent mineral components and also at di erent
depths from surface
inwards may cause disintegration. This e ect becomes more pronounced when the rock is rst
heated and then
suddenly cooled by water by water. Heavy stones including granites crumble to piecesunder such
a treatment. It is
easy to understand that rocks which are found porous and weak in strength are easily
deteriorated in cold humid
climates by frost action. Limestone and sandstones fall in this category. They show very poor frost
resistance.
Fire resistance is especially determined when the stone is intended for use around stoves, heating
places and in the
wall of furnaces. Only compact and massive sandstones and quartzites suite reasonably well in
re and heating
places.
3.0 Methods of Determining and Rock Properties :
Subsurface rock properties are generally determined using one or more of the following methods:
• In-situ testing during the eld exploration programme;
• Laboratory testing, and
• Back-analysis based on site performance data
3.0 In-Situ Field Testing :
The Geotechnical Engineers are expected to determine various soil and rock parameters under
natural in-place
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fi
ff
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
ff
fi
 conditions. This type of testing is useful for projects, where obtaining representative samples
suitable for laboratory
testing is di cult, such as those involving soft clays, loose sands and/or soils below the water
table.
Common in situ tests are performed in conventional drilled borings, whereas specialized tests
require a separate
borehole or di erent insertion equipment. Field in situ borehole tests can be grouped into three
categories:
a)Correlation Tests
Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
Dynamic Penetration Test (DPT)
b)Strength and Deformation Tests
Penetrometers, such as Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT) and Piezocone
Penetrometer Test (PQS)
Pressure meters (PMT), such as Menard, Self-Boring, and Dilatometer
stress or Shear Devices, such as Vane Shear and Borehole Shear Tests
c)Permeability Tests
Pump Tests and Slug Tests
Water Pressure Tests
Hydraulic Conductivity Tests
Percolation Tests
3.2 Laboratory Testing of Rock :
Rock strength is measured by laboratory testing. Strengths are very di erent depending on the
stress eld applied to
the rock. All rocks and soils are very much stronger inpossessing compression strength than in
tensile strength.
The two common laboratory tests to determine the compressive strength of rock are:
a)Uni-axial Uncon ned Compression Test –In this method a cylindrical rock core is loaded axially
until it fails.
b)Tri-axial Con ned Compression Test – In this method a cylindrical rock core is placed in a cell,
subjected to all
around (con ning) pressure by hydraulic oil acting through a thin impermeable membrane, and
loaded axially to
failure.
There are a variety of testsused to determine the tensile strength of rock:
Direct Pull Test - A cylindrical rock core sample is anchored at both ends and stretched.
Brazilian Test - A relatively thin disk is load across the diameter until it splits.
Beam Flexure Test - A thin slab of rock is loaded vertically when supported at three or four points
along its length.
3.3 Back-analysis based on site performance data:
Back-analysis is a quantitative approach to adjust soil or rock properties to match measureable
site performance.
Back-analysis is a method used to determine engineering properties of soil or rock. It is often
used with geotechnical
failures. When failures occur, back analysis can be used to model the conditions, and loads which
resulted in failure.
Back-analysis can also be used in some situations where failure has not occurred but the
geotechnical performance
can be quanti ed (e.g., deformations). Back-analysis is a quantitative approach to adjust soil or
rock properties to
match measureable site performance.
Most back-analyses in geotechnical engineering are based on methods that utilize eld
displacement monitoring data.
Following are the methods of back analysis.
Back-Analysis of Slopes
Back-Analysis of Soil Settlement Resulting from Changes in Loading
Back-Analysis of Foundations
Use of Numerical Modeling for Back-Analysis
4.0 Geological characteristics of rocks
4.1 Mineralogical composition :
fi
ffi
fi
fi
ff
fi
fi
ff
fi
 Rocks are made up of smaller units of the minerals. Their properties depend upon the nature and
composition of these
minerals. It has been observed that rocks composed chie y of silica (SiO2) especially in free form,
are the strongest
in all respects Quartzites are the strongest in all respects.Fresh Quartzite, Sand Stone and granite
are some of the
examples.
Carbonate rocks show a wide variation in their properties. A particular deposit of these rocks has
to be tested by
taking random representative samples before the stone is recommended for use in engineering
construction of any
importance. Presence of some minerals even in small quantites is to be viewed with caution while
using in building
stones. These minerals are mica, gypsum, sulphides, tremolite, int and chert and clays. These
destroy the inherent
strength of the rock.
4.2 Texture and Structure:
Texture de nes the size, shape and mutual relationship of the mineral compounds in a rock.
Whereas structure
determines the development of large scale features in the rock mass as a whole. Rocks may be
coarse grained,
medium grained or ne grained.
The ne grained equigranular textured rocks are better building stones compared to coarse
grained and inequigranular
rocks. In the later cases di erent compounds often tend to behave as separate units under the
imposed loads and
thereby reaction o ered is of a complexes and certainly weaker character.
Structurally speaking features like bedding planes, foliations, cleavage, joints and ow structures
which might not be
fully represented in small sized test specimens, but which may be present in rock masses on a
large scale, have to be
given due considerations.
4.3 Resistance to weathering (Durability):
It is essentially a geological character of a stone that is commonly determined by its composition,
texture and
structure on the one hand and the climate environment where the stone is ultimately used on the
other hand.
A stone may remain almost fresh and untarnished for 500 years or more when used in the interior
of a building. But
the same stone used on the exterior might get pitted and weathered badly within 100 years.Good
example is granite.
Similarly, limestone used in building construction, in industrial townships may weather badly and
quickly due to
reaction with sulphorous acid polluted air. Whereas the same rock used only a little amount in
temples and forts and
historical buildings may last for centuries. An engineer and especially a town planner has to bear
in mind this fact that
rocks also live and sensitive to the environment in which they are placed.
Durability of a stone can be experimentally determined by subjecting the stone sample to
disintegrating action of
Sodium sulphate. Test specimens generally of 5cm side cubes, are dried perfectly and weighed.
They are suspended in
14% solution of Sodium sulphate for 4 hours at 27 degree Celsius and then air dried and oven
dried at 105degree
Celsius. The stone samples are subjected to 30 such cycles and lots of weight determined which
gives a measure of
the durability of the rock. Greater the loss in weight after these cycles, poorer is the durability of
the stone.
5.0 General characteristics of rocks: In addition to these engineering and geological properties of
rocks, there are
fi
fi
ff
fi
ff
fl
fl
fl
 certain other characteristics that may add value or otherwise to them. They are a) cost, b) colour.
5.1Cost: It is an important consideration similar to engineering properties or geological
character.A stone may be
quite suitable for use in building construction on rst two considerations, but still it may not nd
use for the simple
reason that it is uneconomical.Cost of a building stone depends upon its availability, accessibility
and workability.
Good quality building stones are not available elsewhere.
Their transport from one place to another might be a very costly a air.The workability of a stone is
understood the
ease in e ort and economy with which it can be extracted from its place of occurrence
and dressed to the desired dimensions and shapes. Harder and stronger rocks become costlieron
these accounts.
5.2 Color: Color is the property of appears and gets involved only where the stone is used in
construction exposed to
public view.For stones to be used in foundations is dams or in situations where they are ultimately
to be given
covering, color of a rock has no relevance in its selection.
In the case of residential or o cial building, it becomes a property of major importance. The color
of a rock is a
geological character depending upon the type of rock and more precisely upon the composition
of rock. Eg. Granites
are light coloured, Basalt are dark, and Sandstone are lighter shades.
6.0 Modulus properties or Flexible strength or Elastic properties of rocks
The elasticity of rocks indicates their deformation under loads. The deformation is recovered when
loads are removed.
It is determined in accordance with Hook’s law which states that in elastic substances stress is
directly proportional to
strain.
It is expressed by the relationship
Q/E=E
Where Q= stress, E= Strain, E= Modulus of elasticity, It is also termed as young’s modulus.
It is tested for rocks by loading test specimens usually a cylinder of L/D ratio 2, Under uniaxial
compression and
sometimes tension.
The axial deformation i.e. change in parallel to stress direction is determined at the application of
each increment of
load using strain gauges. This process of loading and determining the strain is continued till the
specimen actually
breaks.
That is the ultimate limit up to which the specimen could be deformed. The limit up to which it
remains elastic i.e.
recovers the original shape when the load is removed is reached slightly earlier.
Rocks arehighlyanisotropic so far as their elastic constants are concerned. They show all varieties
ranging from
perfectly elastic to practically inelastic. This depends on their composition, texture and
structures.It is possible to
broadly group the rocks into three categories, based on their Modulus of elasticity.
6.1 Quasi elastic:
These are rocks in which the stress-strain relationship is expresses by almost a straight-line till the
point of failure.
Such rocks include massive, denselypacked uniformly structured verities of igneous sedimentary
and metamorphic
groups such as Syenites, Diorites,Dolerites, gabbros, basalts and quartzites.Quasi elastic rocks
show E values ranging
from 6x10 to the power of 5 to 11x 10 to the power of 5 kg/cm2.
6.2 Semi elastic Rocks:
Are coarse, grained slightly open packed with some porosity and very minor in any structure
discontinuities. The semi
ff
ffi
fi
ff
fi
 elastic rock show E value range between 4x10 to the power of 5 to 6x10 to the power of 5 kg/
cm2.
Coarse grained igneous rocks like granites, some massive compact sediments like Sandstones
and dolomite may often
show semi elastic properties. In this group the curve indicating the modulus of elasticity. Such a
characteristic that is
slope tends to decrease with increasing loads.
6.3 Non elastic Rocks :
Are those in which stress strain relationship tends to break in two zones.A initial zone of steep
slope followed by a
curve of least slope. These are open textured coarse grained and rich in structural
discontinuities.Values of E obtained
with such rocks are commonly of the order of less than 4x10 to the power of 5 kg/cm2.
7.0 Important Building stones
Any type of rock that satis es the above considerations may be used as a building stone.
Granites, Sand
stones,Limestones, Marbles and Quartzites and others like Dolerites,Syenites, Basalts and
Gneisses etc. are some of
them are not available , because they do not possess all the requisite properties.
Let us see one by one…
7.1 Granites: These are the most commonly used building stones of all the igneous rocks.They
generally possess all
the essential qualities of a good building stone showing very high crushing strength, low
absorption values, least
porosity, interlocking texture, variety of appealing colors, and susceptibility to perfect polish.
Indian occurrence: India has got good reserves of granite and granitic rocks. The archean group
of rocks of
peninsular India are comprised chie y of Gneisses and Granites
7.2 Sandstone: Massive sandstones consisting of closely interlocking and angular grains and free
from structural
defects nd extensive use of building stones. Ferruginous and calcareous varieties should not be
used for exterior
work, especially in industrial towns. Argillaceous sandstones are generally weak in character.
Massive varieties with
siliceous cement possess su cient strength and are easily workable.
Indian occurrence: India has got immense reserves of Sandstones t for construction purposes.
The most important
supplies come from two important stratigraphical systems, namely the Vindhyan and Gondwana
systems. Vindhyan
sandstones are ne grained in texture and available in abundance in a variety of colours like white,
cream and deep
red and grey etc. They are easily quarried and economically workable.
These stones are available in a large area of the country for over 350,000 sq.kms extending from
Bihar to Aravallis.
Many buildings of Delhi, and Agra are built of these stones. No other rock formation of India
posseses such as
assemblages of characters rendering it so eminently suitable for building or architectural work.
The gondawana formations of India have also yielded very good quality of sandstones. The ne
grained sandstones of
Cuttack( known as Athgarh sandstones) have been used most widely and famous temples of
Jaganathpuri are built of
them. 7.3 Lime stones: These sedimentary rocks are veryextensively used as building stones. It is
not due to their
physical properties. It is due to the crushing strength. They may be weak showing values much
below 300 kg/cm2 or
as strong as 1500 kg/cm2 or even more.A similar variation in other property like absorption,
speci c gravity and
porosity may be observed.
The use of limestones as facing stones even if they are su ciently hard should be avoided in
situations where
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fl
ffi
fi
fi
 a. The air is polluted with industrial gases
b. The air from sea can approach them easily.
The reason for rst precaution is that sulphuric acid vapours contained in the industrial gases
react with calcium
carbonate of limestone producing gypsum (calcium sulphate) crystals. This change involves an
increase in the volume
and results in disintegration of the surface layer of the rock.Salt crystals, may be formed from
moist air from sea and
cause dampness and disintegration of the stone.
Indian occurrence:Lime stones occur in many geological formations of this country. i. The
cuddapah system
outcropping in Andhra, Chennai, Delhi and Chattisgarh, ii) The Bijawar, Kondalite and Aravalli
groups iii)
TheVindhyan system of Madhya Pradesh, vi)The hill limestone, exposed at many places in
northern India.
7.4 Marbles: These are metamorphic rocks that are used for ordinary structural work as well as for
decorative
purposes.
Marbles are varying intheir texture, color and composition. Their absorption value is generally
below 1% and
normally they possess su cient crushing strength.
They have been extensively used as decorative stones and this is because of their susceptibility
to brilliant polish and
beautiful colors.
Indian occurrence: Most important source of commercial marbles in the crystalline formations of
Rajasthan. i)
Makrana in Jodhpur-white and pink, ii) Kharva in Ajmer – green and yellow, iii) Kishengarh and
Jaipur are famous
for black and dense marbles.
7.5 Slate: It is another metamorphic rock, characterized by a perfect cleavage and because of this
property it does not
nd any use in building stones except for paving roo ng purposes.
8.0 Conclusion :
It is a well-known fact that rocks play a vital role in constructing the structures which are destined
to be strong,
appealing and economical.
All the factors which have been considered so far give a clear guideline for an engineer to choose
the right type of
naturally occurring rocks or stones to be used to build such structures.
By choosing all the properties judiciously in conjunction with one another, it is possible to adhere
to the safety
regulations prescribed in building standards. A combination of laboratory testing of small
samples, empirical analysis
and eld observations should be employed to determine the requisite engineering properties.
Engineering properties of rocks are very essential properties to be determined in every project of
civil engineering,
construction engineering and structural engineering.

1. Introduction
• Background of Study:
o Explore the fundamental importance of rock properties in mining engineering.
o Discuss the critical engineering properties: mechanical (compressive strength, tensile
strength, shear strength) and physical (density, porosity, permeability).
o Explain how understanding these properties helps ensure the stability and safety of
mining operations.
o Mention the advancements in technology, such as remote sensing and geophysical
methods, that have improved rock characterization.
• Aim of the Study:
fi
fi
fi
ffi
fi
 o To investigate and analyze the engineering properties of rocks to determine their
in uence on mine stability and design.
• Objectives:
o To determine the critical physical properties of rocks.
o To analyze geological characteristics in uencing rock behavior.
o To evaluate the modulus and mechanical properties of di erent rock types used in mining.
o To review the classi cation systems (e.g., Rock Mass Rating (RMR) and Geological
Strength Index (GSI)).
• Scope of the Study:
o Focus on various rock types commonly found in mining: sedimentary, igneous, and
metamorphic rocks.
o Consider environmental factors a ecting rock properties in mine planning and design.
2. Literature Review
• Mechanical Properties of Rocks:
o Review the signi cance of compressive and tensile strength in maintaining the stability of
mining structures.
o Discuss methods for testing and evaluating these properties (e.g., compressive testing,
nano-indentation).
• Physical Properties and Their Impact:
o Analysis of properties such as porosity and permeability and their implications for
groundwater management in mines.
o Discuss the e ects of rock density and abrasiveness on equipment wear and
maintenance.
• Chemical Composition:
o Investigate the impact of rock chemistry on stability and issues like acid mine drainage.
• Classi cation Systems:
o Overview of rock mass classi cation systems (e.g., RMR, GSI) and their role in mine
design.
• Advancements in Rock Property Characterization:
o Explore recent technologies like geophysical methods and numerical modeling for
enhanced rock analysis.
3. Methodology
• Micro-Mechanical Testing Approach:
o Explain the process of estimating rock properties using nano-indentation testing.
o Specimen Preparation:
▪ Detailed procedure for specimen preparation using sandpaper and aluminum oxide
suspension.
▪ Achieving a smooth nish for accurate testing using anhydrous ethanol.
• Testing Procedure:
o Conduct tests to measure uncon ned compressive strength (UCS) and elastic modulus.
o Discuss data collection methods and analysis techniques.
• Mechanical Properties Estimation:
o Utilize empirical and semi-empirical equations to upscale micro-mechanical properties to
rock masses.
4. Results and Analysis
• Results of Nano-Indentation Tests:
o Present data on the UCS and elastic modulus of various rock samples.
o Analyze the correlation between micro-mechanical properties and macro-scale
mechanical behavior.
• Evaluation of Accuracy:
o Discuss the accuracy and reliability of the proposed testing methodology, including
limitations and potential sources of error.
• Comparison of Rock Types:
o Compare the mechanical properties of di erent rock types (e.g., sedimentary vs. igneous)
based on test results.
fl
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ff
fl
ff
ff
 o Analyze how these di erences impact mine design and stability.
5. Discussion
• Implications for Mine Design:
o Evaluate how the identi ed properties in uence decisions in mine planning, particularly
for underground mining operations.
o Discuss the role of rock properties in preventing mine collapses and ensuring the safety
of mining activities.
• Environmental Considerations:
o Consider the impact of rock properties on
water in ow and management, as well as potential environmental hazards like acid mine
drainage.
• Technological Advancements:
o Discuss the role of new technologies in improving the precision of rock property
assessments and reducing the risk of unforeseen issues.

6. Conclusion and Recommendations

• Conclusion:
o Summarize the ndings on the importance of understanding rock properties for mine
stability.
o Highlight the signi cance of integrating modern testing techniques in rock property
analysis.
• Recommendations:
o Suggest further research on less explored rock types or conditions (e.g., extraterrestrial
rocks for space mining).
o Recommend the adoption of advanced testing methods for more accurate
characterization.

7. References
• Ensure a comprehensive list of all academic sources and papers cited in the project,
including:
o Hoek, E., & Brown, E. T. (2019). Practical estimates of rock mass strength.
o Hustrulid, W., McCarter, M., & Van Zyl, D. (2021). Slope Stability in Surface Mining.
o Kefeni, K. K., Msagati, T. A., & Mamba, B. B. (2017). Acid mine drainage: Prevention and
treatment.
o Li, C., Zhang, Q., & Wang, J. (2022). Advances in geophysical methods for mining.
fl
fi
fi
ff
fi
fl