Japanese Geotechnical Society Special Publication International Mini Symposium CHUBU (IMS-CHUBU)

Degradation and improvement of mechanical properties of rock under triaxial compressive cyclic
loading

A. Taheri i), N. Hamzah ii) and Q. Daiii)

i) Senior Lecturer, School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering, Adelaide, Australia.
ii) PhD student, School of Civil, Environmental and Mining Engineering, Adelaide, Australia.

ABSTRACT

An extensive experimental study on mechanical properties of a sandstone subjected to cyclic loadings are presented
and discussed in this study. Cyclic loading test were performed in triaxial condition at confining pressure of 4 MPa.
The mechanical properties of the rock were altered by cyclic loading; dependent upon the applied stress level during
cyclic loading the rock may experience damage or hardening as a result of cyclic loading. It was identified that a
critical maximum normalized deviator stress (i.e. deviator stress at the beginning of unloading normalized by rock
peak strength) exists between 92-95% which defines the limit between hardening and damage behavior during cyclic
loading. If the cyclic loading deviator stress is lower than this critical boundary, the peak strength my increase in post-
cyclic monotonic loading. This increase in peak strength is directly proportional to the normalized deviator stress in
unloading; the amount of increase in peak strength decreases with a decrease in cyclic loading deviator stress. In cyclic
damage tests, in general, the increase of Poisson’s ratio, v, and the degradation of tangent Young’s modulus, Etan,
indicate the progressive accumulation of damage in the rock sample over the loading cycles. In cyclic hardening tests,
however, v values for the cyclic hardening test remained fairly constant and Etan values slightly increased. Moreover,
it was found that in cyclic damage tests the amount of axial and lateral strains cumulated during cyclic testing in much
greater than those values for cyclic hardening tests.

Keywords: Cyclic loading, Rock, Damage, Hardening

1 INTRODUCTION rock can become “strain hardened” and in turn increases

Mechanical behaviour of rocks under cyclic loading
is critical in understanding the stability of surface and
underground excavation in civil engineering and mining
development projects. The mechanical properties of the
rock are altered by cyclic loading and consequently rock
may fail at stress levels lower than the monotonic failure
stress.
Effects of cyclic loading on mechanical properties of
geomaterials have been studied by several researchers.
Taheri et al. (2012) conducted a study on the effects of
cyclic pre-shearing on the stress–strain behavior of
cement-mixed gravel. It was concluded that the decrease
in peak strength by several relatively large unload/reload
pre-cycles is insignificant. Previous studies, however,
mostly support that the strength of rock decreases as a
result of cyclic loading due to progressive damage of
rock (Bieniawski 1967, Eberhardt et al. 1999, Koseki et
al. 2003, Chen et al. 2006, Xiao et al. 2010, Wang et al.
2013). According to Ray et al. (1998), the percentage
decrease in uniaxial compressive strength increases with
the number of cycles applied. Along with this, Singh
(1989) discusses, however, that in some cases the
applied stress level in cyclic loading does not cause rock
failure during a very large number of cycles. Instead, the
its uniaxial compressive strength. Burdine (1963)
compared the static strength of Berea sandstone samples
with and without 1000 pre-cyclic loading under the same
confining pressure. The results revealed that the static
failure values for the samples experienced pre-cyclic
loading are relatively higher than fresh samples. Cyclic
loading can have very significant rock strength
hardening effect. An investigation carried out by Ma et
al. (2013) showed that the strength of rock salt can
increase up to 171% after a certain number of cyclic
loading during triaxial compressive testing.
Apart from peak strength, Young’s modulus, E, and
Poisson’s ratio, , behave differently depending on
specifications of cyclic loading (Eberhardt et al. 1999).
The effects of cyclic loading on the tangent Young’s
modulus, Etan, can become significant and quite
complicated (Taheri and Tatsuoka 2012, 2015). There
are very few studies on variations of rock deformability
during cyclic loading. More specifically variations in
rock deformability when rock experience hardening, as
a results of cyclic loading, have not been studied yet.
It is aimed in this study to investigate effect of cyclic
loadings on mechanical properties of sandstone, as a
typical medium-strong sedimentary rock, under confined

http://doi.org/10.3208/jgssp.v05.017 71
condition. For the first time, damage and hardening without damaging the sample. As schematically shown
behaviour of rocks during cyclic loading, in terms of in Fig. 1a, the deviator stress value at this indicator point,
peak strength and deformability, is investigated by qid, always provides a constant value for the ratio of
undertaking a series of cyclic triaxial tests. qid/qf.

2 EXPERIMENTAL METHOD
2.1 Sample preparation and testing set-up
For this study the Hawkesbury sandstone which is a
medium-strong sedimentary rock was selected.
Hawkesbury sandstone is an early Middle Triassic
(Anisian) formation widely exposed in the Sydney Basin
in Australia. The rock has an average UCS of 44 MPa
and average density of 2.3 gr/cm3. Cylindrical specimens
were prepared by coring the rock blocks. The diameter
of the specimens was 42 mm. The end faces and sides of
the specimen were prepared smooth and straight
according to the ISRM standard. The aspect ratio (i.e.
length to diameter ratio) of the samples was maintained
at 2.4 for all the samples.
Tests were conducted by using a closed-loop servo-
controlled testing machine with a loading capacity of a)
250 kN. The loading rate can be adjusted from 0.0001 to
600 mm/min. The triaxial cell is equipped with a linear
variable differential transformer (LVDT) to measure
axial displacement and control axial loading. The axial
and lateral strains were measured with pairs of axial and
lateral strain gauges. To prevent the strain gauges from
being damaged inside the Hoek cell, a novel method to
protect strain gauges was developed and applied
successfully (Taheri et al. 2016b).
3.2 Loading method
As demonstrated by Bastian et al. (2014),
Hawkesbury sandstone is not completely a homogenous
rock. To investigate the effect of cyclic loading on
mechanical properties, it was essential to have identical b)
samples. To remove variations among samples they Fig. 1. Loading method; a) Use of Esec=max as an indicator point
cored all the samples in a same direction using a rock to predict peak Strength, b) Applying a pre-monotonic before
block. However, the uniaxial compressive strength of the cyclic loading
samples were varied up to 25%. In order to analyze the
effect of cyclic loading on rock mechanical properties, it Therefore, in this study, a pre-monotonic loading was
is essential to eliminate the effect of sample variation. To applied in each cyclic loading test which was used to
solve this problem, a method to predict rock peak obtain at maximum Esec, without failing the sample.
strength, qf, without failing the specimen is required to The peak strength, , was estimated by using
allow results to be confidently attributed to cyclic divided by the constant, c. Constant c value were
loading effect, rather than estimating rock strength from obtained to be 0.94 to estimate the peak strength of each
previous tested specimens under monotonic loading sample in the pre-monotonic loading under constant
assuming that all the samples are completely identical. loading rate of 0.05 mm/min. When Esec maximum point
This method is briefly explained below as it is discussed is reached, sample fully unloaded and then subjected to
in detail by Taheri et al. (2016a). a cyclic loading under a pre-defined cyclic unloading
Analysing the results of monotonic tests on the stress level, qu, and unloading amplitude, qb. As shown
sandstone samples, it was found that during monotonic by Bastian et al. (2014) variations among the
loading the secant Young’s modulus, Esec, evaluated by Hawkesbury sandstone specimens in terms of
the external LVDT, keeps increasing until the axial stress deformability parameters is negligible, therefore,
come to a point closer to the failure point, after which the normalization of deformability parameters wasn’t
Esec starts decreasing. The results showed that this point required. Fig. 1b shows the testing method adopted for
is a reliable indicative point to predict peak strength this study. If the rock specimen did not fail after 1300
cycles, a monotonic load was applied until failure in

72
order to examine the effect of long cyclic loading on qf next section), if the applied stress level in cyclic loading
value. However, to investigate effect of number of cycles is considerably lower than the monotonic peak strength,
on mechanical properties of sample which does not fail rock won’t fail during cyclic loading and it can even
during cyclic loading, in few number tests number of become stronger.
cycles before post-monotonic loading were varied
ranging between 10-10,000 cycles.
To study the effect of stress level on rock behaviour
during cyclic loading, the deviator stress at which cyclic
loading was initiated, qun, was varied. In addition, the
cyclic loading amplitude, qb, was set at 0.5qun, 0.75qun,
and 1.0qun.

4 TEST RESULTS
4.1 General behavior
Several specimens tested in this study failed as a
result of cyclic loading. The fatigue stress for those
specimens was found to be smaller than the predicted qf,
which indicates a progressive damage mechanism due to
cyclic loading. Many samples, however, didn’t fail
during cyclic loading after at least 1300 cycles.
Therefore a monotonic load was applied until failure. It
was found that in all the tests which did not fail due to
cyclic loading, the deviator stress at failure was higher
Fig. 2. Improvement in rock peak strength due to cyclic loading
than the monotonic peak strength. This indicates that the
strength of the rock specimens increased as a result of
cyclic loading. In other words, if the stress level at the
beginning of cyclic loading is not high enough to
generate a failure in sandstone due to progressive cyclic
loading damage, the rock strength, as a result of cyclic
loading for a long period of time, may be increased.
Based on these results, if the unloading stress value is
lower than a certain value (i.e. boundary) which is called
hereafter “Cyclic Damage Stress (CDS)” value, rock
experience hardening in mechanical properties as a result
of cyclic loading. Fig. 2, schematically demonstrates
how rock monotonic loading peak strength can increase
during post-monotonic test after a cyclic hardening test
if unloading stress level is lower than CDS. The
combination of damage and hardening effect of cyclic
loading on peak strength has been observed by few other
Fig. 3. Cyclic damage-hardening mechanism schematic model
researchers (Singh 1989, Burdine 1963, Ma et al. 2013)
and schematically is demonstrated in Fig. 3.
4.2 Stress-strain behavior 5 VARIATIONS OF MECHANICAL
Fig. 4 shows typical stress—strain results for PROPERTIES
specimens which failed and didn’t fail during cyclic
loading. Figs. 4a & c demonstrate deviator stress versus 5.1 Peak strength
axial and lateral strain values whereas Figs. 4b & d Figs. 5a & b shows the plot of normalized deviator
exhibit deviator stress vs. volumetric strain. The stress- unloading stress versus number of cycles at failure for
strain results in Figs. 4a & b are very dense until a stage specimens with 75% and 100% unloading amplitude
where stress-strain loop becomes loose until sample respectively, where sample is failed during cyclic
fails. Figs. 4 c & d shows the typical results for a sample loading (i.e. cyclic damage tests). It may be seen in these
which did not fail during cyclic loading. As can be seen figures that when unloading amplitude is constant, a
in these figures, the sample does not experience much higher normalized unloading stress will result in failure
axial, lateral and volumetric plastic deformation after after fewer cycles. A strong linear correlation can be
1300 cycles as compare to the cyclic damage test. As observed in the results.
explained earlier (and will be discussed in detail in the

73
 were choose which failed almost after similar number of
cycles (~100) but under different unloading amplitudes
of 50%, 75% and 100%. The figure shows that a higher
unloading amplitude will results in higher normalized
unloading stress when sample failure occurs in the
similar number of cycles. Therefore, fatigue life
becomes longer with a decrease in unloading amplitude.

a)

a)

b)

b)

c) Fig. 5. Normalized unloading stress vs number of cycle at failure

for (a) 100% unloading amplitude cyclic damage tests and (b) 75%
unloading amplitude cyclic damage tests

d)
Fig. 4.Typical stress-strain results a) & b) a cyclic damage test; c)
& d) a cyclic hardening test

Fig. 6 shows the relationship between normalized

unloading stress and unloading amplitude in cyclic Fig. 6. Normalized unloading stress vs unloading amplitude for
cyclic damage tests
damage tests. For this comparison, results of three tests

74
 Fig. 7 presents the amount of peak strength increase
observed in post-monotonic loading after a cyclic
loading in cyclic hardening tests. General trend of the
results for three series of tests undertaken under different
unloading amplitudes (i.e. 50%, 75% and 100%) are
presented by solid lines. There values has been
determined through an accurate post-test analysis by
using the precise maximum Esec values obtained during
each pre-monotonic loading (refer to Taheri et al.
2016a).
Based on results presented in Fig. 7, it is
hypothesized that there exists a value of qun/qf which lies
between 92-95% that indicates the critical boundary of
rock strength hardening and damage under cyclic
loading. As mentioned earlier, this boundary is called the
cyclic damage stress (CDS). Fig. 7, shows that an
increase in fatigue strength is directly proportional to the
normalized deviator stress, qun/qf in unloading. In this
way, increase of peak strength with cyclic loading
decreases with a decrease in qun/qf. In addition, peak
strength increase reduces if unloading amplitude during
cyclic loading decreases.
Fig. 8 shows increase in peak strength of cyclic
damage tests undertaken under 100% unloading
amplitude after different number of cycles. As can be
seen in this figure, increase in rock strength, increases
with an increase in number of cycles and an exponential
function can be fitted to the results with good accuracy.
Fig. 7. Peak strength increase vs normalized unloading stress for
cyclic hardening tests
The unexpected results observed in Figs. 7 and 8
could be related to inherent properties of sandstone
which is a porous rock. When sandstone is subjected to
cyclic loading under an unloading stress level which is
not close enough to rock monotonic peak strength (i.e.
below CDS), weak bounding between particles breaks,
however, the applied stress level is not enough to create
critical cracks and unstable damage in the material. Pore
spaces in sandstone, then, can be filled with fine material
75
which are produced as a result of breakage of weak
bounding. As can be seen in Fig. 4c & d, in a typical
hardening test, axial strain increases and volumetric
strain doesn’t increase which means that sample
experience a slight shrinkage until end of cyclic loading.
This can be considered as a confirmation for this
statement. As a result of this, the sample experience
compaction during the test and therefore, exhibit higher
peak strength when subjected to a monotonic loading
after cyclic loading. Analyzing variations of rock
stiffness and Poisson’s ratio and comparing the results
with those obtained by cyclic damage tests confirms this
theory.
Fig. 8. Peak strength increase vs number of cycles in pre-cyclic
loading for cyclic hardening tests
5.2 Deformability
To quantify the effects of cyclic loading on
deformability for both cyclic hardening and cyclic
damage tests. Tangent Young’s modulus, Etan, and
Poisson’ ratio, v, values were determined at 50% of
unloading stress, qun, for each loading cycle and
presented in Fig. 9 for typical tests being undertaken at
50%, 75% and 100% unloading amplitude. For the case
of cyclic damage tests, the samples which almost failed
under similar number of cyclic were used for this
comparison.
As can be seen in Fig. 9a for a cyclic damage test,
there is a continuous degradation in Etan, until beginning
of large plastic deformation, after which there is a rapid
decrease in stiffness until failure. Moreover, In Fig. 9b it
may be seen that v, initially increases rapidly, followed
by a stage of slower accumulation and then it begins to
rapidly increase as the rock approaches failure. In
general, the increase of Poisson’s ratio and the
degradation of stiffness indicate the progressive
accumulation of damage in the rock sample over the
loading cycles. The tests undertaken at different
unloading amplitude almost follow similar trend,
however, reduction in stiffness of the sample tested
under 100% unloading amplitude is more significant.
 amplitudes. The stiffness and Poisson’s ratio values
resulted from cyclic hardening tests indicate that the
behaviour of the sample is significantly different from
those presented in Figs. 9a & b. Etan and v values for the
cyclic hardening test remained fairly constant with cycle
loading. Even, Etan slightly increased (from 0 to 2GPa)
between the first and last loading cycle when unloading
amplitude is 100%. This suggests that, as explained
earlier, cyclic loading causes existing pores to be closed,
the sample is experiencing compaction and therefore, its
mechanical properties is improved.

a) 5.3 Cumulative strain

When a sample experiences the load that exceeds the
elastic limit of the sample, it will incur a permanent
strain. This permanent strain is accumulated
incrementally with each cycle. Cumulative strain can be
used to represent the non-visible damage or hardening
incurred on a specimen. In order to study the behavior of
this cumulative strain the axial and lateral cumulative
strain values for typical cyclic damage and hardening
tests being undertaken at 50%, 75% and 100% unloading
amplitude were plotted against cycle numbers as shown
in Fig. 10. As can be seen in this figure, in cyclic damage
tests the amount of axial and lateral strains cumulated
b) during cyclic testing is far greater than those values
recorded for cyclic hardening tests. In addition,
accumulative axial and lateral strains in both cyclic
damage and hardening tests increases with an increase in
unloading amplitude. Interestingly, this is consistent
with the results presented in Figs. 6 and 7; damage and
hardening both increases with an increase in unloading
amplitude.
In Figs. 10a & b, for cyclic damage tests, axial and
lateral strains increase quickly at the beginning and then
a relatively uniform accumulation in strain follows by a
rapid strain increase as it heads towards failure. The
rapid increase of strain at the end of the tests is due to
c) generation and expansion of unstable axial and mostly
lateral macro-cracks when sample approaches to failure.
The rapid increase is more significant in cumulative
lateral strain and for 100% unloading amplitude test.
Figs. 10c & d for cyclic hardening tests show that
cumulative strains are rapidly cumulated within the first
10% of 1300 cycles (i.e. first 130 cycles) where
generally crack closure stage ends. After this, sample
moves into another stage where cumulative strains
increase slowly and gradually till the end of cyclic
loading test. As discussed earlier, the sample mostly
experience compaction in this stage.

d) 10 CONCLUSIONS

Fig. 9. Variations of tangent Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio
versus number of cycles for a) & b) cyclic damage tests; c) & d)
cyclic hardening tests.
Figs. 9c and 9d presents example of results obtained
for a cyclic hardening tests at different unloading
Mechanical behavior of a sandstone under triaxial
compressive loading condition is investigated when
subjected to systematic cyclic loading. Effect of different
parameters including stress level at unloading, unloading
amplitude, and number of cycles were evaluated.

76
 cyclic loading the rock may become weaker or stronger
as a result of cyclic loading. Variations of deformability
properties during cyclic loading confirmed this argument.
In general, it was found that the amount of increase
in peak strength decreases with a decrease in cyclic
loading deviator stress. In addition, peak strength
increase reduces if unloading amplitude during cyclic
loading decreases. In addition, it was found that in cyclic
damage tests the amount of axial and lateral strains
cumulated during cyclic testing in much greater than
those values for cyclic hardening tests. Damage and
hardening both increases with an increase in unloading
a) amplitude.
Hardening behavior of sandstone during cyclic
loading was related to inherent properties of sandstone
which is a porous rock. When sandstone is subjected to
cyclic loading at a stress level below cyclic damage
stress, weak bounding between particles breaks, which
causes pore spaces to be filled with fine material. As a
result the sample experience compaction during the
cyclic loading and its mechanical properties improves.
Contrary to this, if unloading stress is higher that
cyclic damage stress, sample experience irreversible
damages during cyclic loading and therefore, fails after
a number of cycles due to generation of unstable axial
b) and lateral macro cracks.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Ms. X. Pan, Mr. C.
Ho, Mr. Y. Zhao, Ms. A. Royle, Mr. Y. Zhao., previous
honours students, for their help in undertaking the
experiment and analyzing the results.

c)
d)
Fig. 10. Variations of cumulative strain versus normalized
number of cycles for a) & b) cyclic damage tests; c) & d) cyclic
hardening tests.
Peak strength of the rock was altered by cyclic
loading; dependent upon the applied stress level during
REFERENCES
1) Bastian, T. J., Connelly, B. J., Lazo Olivares, C. S., Yfantidis
N. and Taheri, A. (2014): Progressive damage of
Hawkesbury sandstone subjected to systematic cyclic
loading. Research Journal Review, AusIMM, 3:15-22.
2) Bieniawski, Z. T. (1967): Mechanism of brittle fracture of
rock, Parts I, I & Iii, International Journal of Rock Mechanics
and Mining Sciences, 4: 395-430.
3) Burdine, N.T. (1963): Rock failure under dynamic loading
conditions, Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal 3, 1-8.
4) Chen, Z. H., Tham, L. G., Yeung, M. R., and Xie, H. (2006):
Confinement effects for damage and failure of brittle rocks.
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining
Sciences, 43:1262-1269.
5) Eberhardt, E., Stead, D. and Stimpson, B. (1999):
Quantifying progressive pre-peak brittle facture damage in
rock during uniaxial compression, International Journal of
Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 36: 361-380.
6) Koseki, J., Indou, H. and Hayano, K. (2003): Cyclic triaxial
tests on residual deformation and small strain properties on
soft rocks, Swets & Zeitlinger B.V., Lisse, The Netherlands.
7) Ma, L., Liu, X., Wang, M., Xu, H., Hua, R., Fan, P., Jiang, S.,
Wang, G. and Yi, Q. (2013): Experimental investigation of
the mechanical properties of rock salt under triaxial cyclic
loading, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Sciences, 62: 34-41.
8) Ray, S. K., Sarkar, M. and Singh, T. N. (1998): Effect of

77
 cyclic loading and strain rate on the mechanical behaviour of
Sandstone, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Sciences, 36: 543-549.
9) Singh, S. K. (1989): Fatigue and strain hardening behaviour
of Graywacke from the Flagstaff formation, Engineering
Geology, 26: 171-179.
10) Taheri, A., Sasaki, Y., Tatsuoka, F. and Watanabe, K. (2012):
Strength and deformation characteristics of cemented-mixed
gravelly soil in multiple-step triaxial compression, Soils and
Foundations, 52(1): 126-145
11) Taheri, A. and Tatsuoka, F. (2012): Primary stress-strain
relations inferred from multiple-step triaxial compression test
results, Soils and Foundations, 52(4): 748-766.
12) Taheri, A., and Tatsuoka, F. (2015): Small and large strain
behaviour of a cement-treated soil during various loading
histories and testing conditions, Acta Geotechnica, 10(1):
131-155.
13) Taheri A., Royle A., Yang Z. and Zhao Y. (2016a): Study on
variations of peak strength of a sandstone during cyclic
loading. Geomechanics and Geophysics for Geo-energy
and Geo-Resources, 2(1): 1-10
14) Taheri A., Yfantidis N., Lazo Olivares C.S., Connelly B.J.
and Bastian, T.J. (2016b): An experimental study on
degradation of mechanical properties of sandstone under
different cyclic loadings. Geotechnical Testing Journal,
39(4): 673-687
15) Wang, Z., Li, S., Qiao, L. and Zhao, J. (2013): Fatigue
behaviour of granite subjected to cyclic loading under triaxial
compression condition. Rock Mechanics and Rock and
Engineering, 46, 1603–1615.
16) Xiao, J. Q., Ding, D. Q., Jiang, F. L. and Xu, G. (2010):
Fatigue damage variable and evolution of rock subjected to
cyclic loading. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Sciences, 47: 461-468.

78