Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 452e457

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Rock Mechanics and

Geotechnical Engineering
journal homepage: www.rockgeotech.org

Full length article

The use of point load test for Dubai weak calcareous sandstones
Amr Farouk Elhakim*
Department of Public Works, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Intact rock is typically described according to its uniaxial compressive strength (UCS). The UCS is
Received 15 December 2014 needed in the design of geotechnical engineering problems including stability of rock slopes and
Received in revised form design of shallow and deep foundations resting on and/or in rocks. Accordingly, a correct measure-
9 April 2015
ment/evaluation of the UCS is essential to a safe and economic design. Typically, the UCS is measured
Accepted 5 June 2015
Available online 25 June 2015
using the unconfined compression tests performed on cylindrical intact specimens with a minimum
length to width ratio of 2. In several cases, especially for weak and very weak rocks, it is not possible to
extract intact specimens with the needed minimum dimensions. Thus, alternative tests (e.g. point load
Keywords:
Point load test
test, Schmidt hammer) are used to measure rock strength. The UCS is computed based on the results of
Uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) these tests through empirical correlations. The literature includes a plethora of these correlations that
Rock characteristic elastic modulus vary widely in estimating rock strength. Thus, it is paramount to validate these correlations to check
Dubai calcareous sandstone their suitability for estimating rock strength for a specific location and geology. A review of the
Calcarenite available correlations used to estimate the UCS from the point load test results is performed and
summarized herein. Results of UCS, point load strength index and Young’s modulus are gathered for
calcareous sandstone specimens extracted from the Dubai area. A correlation for estimating the UCS
from the point load strength index is proposed. Furthermore, the Young’s modulus is correlated to the
UCS.
Ó 2015 Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Production and hosting by
Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) of rock is the most
commonly used parameter in the characterization of intact rock. It
is needed for different applications including the design of foun-
dations resting on and/or in rocks and the stability of rock slopes.
The UCS is typically determined from the axial loading of uncon-
fined intact rock specimens. The uniaxial compression test should
be performed on cylindrical specimens with a length to width ratio
of 2e2.5. The standard specimen height should range between
100 mm and 300 mm. The specimen ends perpendicular to the
cylinder axis should be flat, smooth and parallel as per ASTM
(2008a). Alternatively, the UCS may be estimated using the point
load test, which is conducted on specimens in the form of cores,
blocks or irregular pieces with a diameter of 30 mm and 85 mm,
respectively (ASTM, 2008b). The point load test is especially useful
when core specimens cannot be extracted from fractured or
* Tel.: þ20 1111921320.
E-mail address: aelhakim@hotmail.com.
Peer review under responsibility of Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chi-
nese Academy of Sciences.
1674-7755 Ó 2015 Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sci-
ences. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2015.06.003
weathered rock masses. Furthermore, the point load test is simpler
and more economical compared to the UCS test.
2. The point load test
The point load test gradually applies a concentrated compres-
sive force using conical platens on the rock specimen until it fails by
splitting. The loading system consists of a loading frame, a hy-
draulic jack, and a pressure gauge. The test can be conducted in the
field or in the laboratory. The failure load is recorded and used to
calculate the point load strength index Is, according to the following
equation (ASTM, 2008b):
.
Is ¼ Pult D2e (1)
where Pult is the failure load (N), and De is the equivalent core
diameter (mm).
It has been found that the point load strength index depends on
the specimen size (Thuro and Plinninger, 2001). According to ASTM
(2008b), the standard specimen diameter D is 50 mm. However, it
may not always be possible to obtain specimens having a 50 mm in
diameter (Brook, 1980). Therefore, it is common to perform the test
on specimens of different sizes and determine the point load strength
index Is. The size is corrected to obtain the value of Is which would
have been measured by a diametrical test with D ¼ 50 mm and is
 A.F. Elhakim / Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 452e457 453

given the symbol Is50 (ASTM, 2008b). Several correction schemes for
size have been developed over the years since the beginning of the
point load test (e.g. Broch and Franklin, 1972; Brook, 1985; Thuro and
Plinninger, 2001; ASTM, 2008b). The specimen size correction pro-
posed by ASTM (2008b) is implemented in this paper.
3. Geology of Dubai in the United Arab Emirates
The near-surface geology of the United Arab Emirates can be
divided into two groups: lower formation or ‘Solid Geology’ and
upper formation or ‘Superficial Geology’. The Superficial Geology
comprises beach dune sands, marine sands and silts. The Solid
Geology is composed of alternating beds of calcarenite/calcareous
sandstone with some carbonate sand bands, gypsiferous sandstone
with cemented sand layers, and calcisiltite and siltstone, from the
top down (Beau et al., 2008). A geological map of the general
location under investigation is presented in Fig. 1, which shows the
expected stratigraphy of the coastal areas of Dubai (Alsharhan and
Kendall, 2003). It consists of Quaternary marine, aeolian, sabkha
and fluvial deposits that lie on the top of aeolianite and marine
calcarenite (Ghayathi formation) which overlay the Barzman for-
mation that is comprised of fluvial sediments characterized by
poorly sorted conglomerates (Macklin et al., 2012). The rocks
considered in this study belong to the Ghayathi formation
described as marine calcarenite.
4. Mechanical and chemical characteristics of Dubai
calcareous sandstone
Boreholes were drilled at a number of sites at Dubai in the
United Arab Emirates. Rock samples were extracted using a double
tube core barrel headed with diamond bit, producing a nominal
core diameter of 76 mm. The boreholes extended into the rock at a
depth of approximately 8 m (approximately 13 to 21 DMD
(Dubai Municipality Datum)). Chemical testing of 21 specimens
shows that the calcium carbonate (CaCO3) contents vary between
50.62% and 93.57% with an average of 71.32%.
According to ARGEMA classification of carbonate formations
shown in Table 1 (Le Tirant and Nauroy, 1994), cemented forma-
tions with carbonate contents higher than 30% are defined as soft to
hard carbonate rock. For geomaterials with calcium carbonate
contents lower than 30%, the material performs as a silicate.
Accordingly, it is warranted to describe such materials as “car-
bonate rock” (Le Tirant and Nauroy, 1994).
The unconfined compressive strength is generally considered as
the reference value for the compressive strength which is typically
measured using uninstrumented uniaxial compression tests
(ASTM, 2002a). The recorded values of the unconfined compressive
strengths varied between 0.13 MPa and 15.75 MPa. Thus, the tested
rock specimens were classified as weak to very weak ones ac-
cording to Mayne et al. (2001).

Offshore and lagoonal skeletal sands

N
Reef, Holocene coralgal boundstones and related deposits
Tidal delta or shoals, oolitic sands shallow lagoon mangroves, cyanobacteria flats
Beach-dune grainstones
g light-colored
g calcareous, quartzose
q and ooli c sands
Coastal sabkha, calcareous silts and muddy sands with displacive suflate nodules
and salt crusts. Flooded by storm and spring des and occasional wadi runoff Ras Al
Con nental inland sabkha, silt and muddy sands with displacive and Khaimah
sulfate and halite evaporites, flooded by wadi or rising groundwater
Calcareous sandstones and grainstones, porous cross-bedded
sands (Miliolite) commonly with well-rounded grains
Gravel plain and desert dune, gravel covered desert floor,
locally with sand veneer and surface evaporites
Alluvial fan, boulders, gravel and sand deposited by Umm Al
ephermal runoff from the Oman Mountains Qaiwain
Mountains, upli ed Ter ary and Cretaceous sedimentary rocks
Loca on of major ci es

Arabian Gulf Ajman

Sharjah

Dubai
Area under study
in this paper

10 km

Fig. 1. Geological map of the United Arab Emirates showing the area under study (Alsharhan and Kendall, 2003).
454 A.F. Elhakim / Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 452e457

Table 1 5. Existing correlations between the point load strength

ARGEMA classification of carbonate formations (Le Tirant and Nauroy, 1994). index and UCS of rock
Designation of Grain size Carbonate Cementation
materials content A plethora of correlations for estimating the UCS using the point
Fine carbonate From 1 mm to 2 mm Greater Uncemented or load strength index Is50 have been developed over time. A selected
sediments (muds than 10% weakly cemented summary of the available UCSepoint load strength index correla-
and fine silts) tions is presented in Table 2. More details about these relationships
Carbonate sands From a few ten Greater Uncemented or
are given in corresponding references. One of the earliest and most
microns to a few than 30% weakly cemented or
millimeters irregularly cemented widely used correlations was proposed by Broch and Franklin
Cemented carbonate All grain sizes Greater Soft to hard rock (1972) and Bieniawski (1975), based on tests performed on
formations than 30% different rock types. Since then, several other correlations were
formulated either for different types of rocks or for local forma-
tions. Most of the developed equations are linear with zero inter-
cept, qu ¼ kIs50 (e.g. Broch and Franklin, 1972; Bieniawski, 1975;
Alternatively, instrumented uniaxial compression tests may be Beake and Suttcliffe, 1980; Puech et al., 1988). The value of the
used to define the stressestrain response up to failure to determine constant k varies between 3.1 and 25. This means that using the
the deformation characteristics of intact rock specimens in addition inappropriate equation may result in overestimating the UCS by
to its UCS (ASTM, 2002b). The test is conducted by applying an axial approximately 800%. Other equations used to express the correla-
load to the specimen and recording the corresponding deforma- tion between Is50 and the UCS also include linear with non-zero
tion. Young’s modulus (either secant or tangent) can be determined intercept (e.g. Kim et al., 2004; Cha et al., 2007), power (e.g.
by plotting the stressestrain curves. In this study, the elastic Tsiambaos and Sabatakakis, 2004; Min and Moon, 2006; Salah
modulus of the intact rock specimens is computed as the tangent et al., 2014), and exponential equations (e.g. Salah et al., 2014).
value at 50% of the unconfined compressive strength and is known The estimated UCSs using these correlations result in values with
as the characteristic elastic modulus (ER50). The measured values of large variability. Thus, it is highly recommended to develop corre-
the characteristic elastic modulus (ER50) vary between 34.4 MPa lations to be used for specific rock types and local geologies.
and 1911.5 MPa with an average of 372 MPa, which are within the
typical values reported for sedimentary rocks according to AASHTO 6. Correlation between the UCS and point load strength index
(2012). for Dubai calcareous rock
For the tested specimens, the Poisson’s ratio ranged between
0.22 and 0.365 with an average of 0.297. These values lie within the The relationship between the point load strength index (Is50)
typical range of 0.1e0.46, with a mean of 0.29 proposed by and the UCS (qu) for Dubai calcareous sandstone is shown in Fig. 2.
Carmichael (1982) and Mayne et al. (2001). As expected, the UCS increases with the point load strength index

Table 2
Correlations between the point load strength index Is and the UCS.

Rock type Correlation Reference Rock type Correlation Reference

Hard strong rock qu ¼ 24Is50 Broch and Franklin (1972), Gneiss qu ¼ 16.656Is50 þ 21.7 for Cha et al. (2007)
Bieniawski (1975) qu ¼ 29e209.3 MPa
Calcarenites of the qu ¼ 12.2Is50 Beake and Suttcliffe (1980) All rock types qu ¼ 24Is50 ASTM (2008b)
Arabian-Persian Gulf
Calcarenites of the qu ¼ 3.1Is50 Puech et al. (1988) Limestone of Imgye qu ¼ 26Is50 Kim et al. (2012)
Arabian-Persian Gulf area, Korea
All rock types qu ¼ 25Is50 Egyptian Code for Soil Quartzite qu ¼ 22.8Is50 for Singh et al. (2012)
Mechanics, Design, qu ¼ 32.5e98.9 MPa
and Construction of
Foundations (2001)
Mudstones qu ¼ 21.431Is50 for Kahraman (2001) Sandstone qu ¼ 21.9Is50 for
qu ¼ 2e115 MPa qu ¼ 17.6e56.4 MPa
Innsbruck quartz phyllite qu ¼ 19.9Is50 Thuro and Plinninger (2001) Shale qu ¼ 14.4Is50 for
(perpendicular to foliation) qu ¼ 9.9e18.8 MPa
All rock types qu ¼ 18.7Is50 Gabbro qu ¼ 14.4Is50 for
qu ¼ 17.3e137 MPa
Tuffs qu ¼ 22Is50 þ 49 for Kim et al. (2004) Limestone qu ¼ 22.3Is50 for
qu ¼ 80.4e208 MPa qu ¼ 86.9e129.8 MPa
Limestones, marlstones and 1:71
qu ¼ 7:3Is50 Tsiambaos and Sabatakakis Meta-siltstone and qu ¼ (20e21)Is50 Li and Wong (2013)
sandstones (2004) meta-sandstone
Limestones, marlstones and qu ¼ 23Is50 All rock types qu ¼ 9.459Is50 Salah et al. (2014)
sandstones
Sedimentary rocks 1:71
qu ¼ 7:3Is50 Min and Moon (2006) All rock types 0:75
qu ¼ 9:459Is50
for Is50 > 3.5 MPa
and qu ¼ 2.1e254 MPa
Dandot sandstone, Sakkessar qu ¼ 11.076Is50 Akram and Bakar (2007) Very weak rock qu ¼ 5.833sqrt (0.57Is50) Salah et al. (2014)
sandstone, marl
Sandstone, mudstone, qu ¼ 18.11Is50 for Diamantis et al. (2009) Weak rock qu ¼ 5.414exp(0.57Is50)
and shale qu ¼ 23.1e173.9 MPa
Conglomerate qu ¼ 5.4Is50 Elkateb (2009) All crystalline gypsum qu ¼ (11.08e11.24)Is50
Sandstone qu ¼ 6.2Is50 All mudstone qu ¼ 6.05sqrt (Is50)
Siltstone qu ¼ 8.6Is50 Very weak sandstone qu ¼ 5.679sqrt (Is50)
Limestone qu ¼ 6.5Is50
 A.F. Elhakim / Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 452e457
Fig. 2. Correlation between the point load strength index and UCS for Dubai calcareous
sandstone (linear correlation with non-zero intercept).
(Is50). Linear regression analysis is used to provide mathematical
representation of the correlation between the point load strength
index and the UCS. The best fit correlation is represented by Eq. (2).
The coefficient of determination (R2) for this equation is 0.65, which
indicates a relatively good relationship. It is also shown that most of
the measurements are bounds by one standard deviation around
the regression line. The standard error (calculated as the ratio of the
standard deviation to the mean of the collected data) was
computed as 40.6%.
qu ¼ 2:59Is50 þ 0:21
Alternatively, Eq. (3) represents a linear relationship between
the UCS and point load strength index with a zero intercept with
the results presented in Fig. 3. This correlation has almost the same
coefficient of determination of 0.64 compared to Eq. (2). The
standard error associated with Eq. (3) is computed to be 38.5%.
qu ¼ 2:86Is50
Eq. (3) has an important advantage over Eq. (2) which yields a
non-zero value for the UCS at Is50 ¼ 0, implying that the rock has a
quantifiable strength although the measured strength is zero. The
developed correlation is in close agreement with the equation
proposed by Puech et al. (1988) for calcarenites of the Arabian-
Fig. 3. Correlation between the point load strength index and UCS for Dubai calcareous
sandstone (linear correlation with zero intercept).
455
Persian Gulf. Considering the correlations reported for extremely
soft rock (e.g. Puech et al., 1988; Elkateb, 2009; Salah et al., 2014), a
conversion factor (K) of 2.86e6.5 is suitable for such formations.
The relationship suggested by Broch and Franklin (1972) and
Bieniawski (1975), which is one of the commonly used formulas,
overestimates the UCS by approximately 800% when used for such
rock formations. Such a large error is unacceptable and emphasizes
the need for developing local correlations to estimate rock strength
based on the point load test results.
Despite the relatively high scatter evident from the measured
data presented in Figs. 2 and 3, an acceptable correlation is still
established with most of the data lying within one standard devi-
ation from the proposed correlation. Part of the inconsistency may
be attributed to the intrinsic variability in the physical and me-
chanical properties of rock due to its heterogeneous nature as
indicated by Idris et al. (2011). The degree of natural variation in a
specific rock property depends on many factors such as the type of
rock, the degree of weathering, the property investigated, etc.
Kulhawy and Prakoso (2001) stated that there are substantial
depositional variations in calcareous rocks leading to considerable
ranges in rock properties. Their study showed that the coefficient of
variation reaches 39% and 59% for the strengths of calcareous rocks
obtained using uniaxial compression and point load tests, respec-
tively. Thus, the error in the predicted strengths may be partly
explained by the natural variability in the rock properties.
7. Relationship between the UCS and elastic modulus
The relationship between the rock characteristic elastic
modulus ER50 and the UCS is investigated using the ratio of rock
elastic modulus to the UCS (modulus ratio), which was first intro-
(2)
duced by Deere (1968). The modulus ratio of the tested samples
varied between 81 and 265 with an average of 140, which lie within
the typical values reported by Mayne et al. (2001). The measured
UCSs are plotted versus the characteristic elastic modulus ER50 as
presented in Fig. 4. The data are compared to the trend lines re-
ported by Deere and Miller (1966) for sedimentary rocks. This
classification describes the rock to be having high modulus ratio,
(3) which is greater than 1:500. For modulus ratios smaller than 1:200,
the rock is described to be having low modulus ratio. Accordingly,
the tested specimens, generally, have low modulus ratios. Lower
values of the modulus ratio indicate that the rocks can sustain
Fig. 4. Characteristic elastic modulus versus the UCS of Dubai calcareous sandstone.
456 A.F. Elhakim / Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 452e457
higher deformation before fracturing compared to rock specimens
with higher modulus ratios (Tziallas et al., 2009).
A best fit linear equation is used to represent the relationship
between the rock elastic modulus and UCS, as presented in Fig. 5,
yielding the following relationship:
ER50 ¼ 125:7qu (4)
2
The coefficient of determination (R ) for this equation is 0.96,
indicating a strong correlation between the characteristic elastic
modulus (ER50) and the UCS. Furthermore, the proposed correlation
is in close agreement with the lower bound correlation for sedi-
mentary rocks proposed by Tziallas et al. (2009), which estimates
the rock modulus to be 124 times its UCS.
8. Conclusions
The point load test provides a fast and economic method for
evaluating the UCS of rock specimens. The point load strength in-
dex (Is50) is empirically correlated to the UCS. There is a plethora of
correlations for estimating the UCS from the point load strength
index, as summarized in Table 1. A review of published literature
shows the available correlations including linear, exponential and
power functions. Existing correlations are typically developed us-
ing specific data of certain rock types (e.g. Tsiambaos and
Sabatakakis, 2004) or regions (e.g. Puech et al., 1988; Elkateb,
2009). Alternatively, some of the published correlations are based
on data collected from all rock types and/or different regions (e.g.
Thuro and Plinninger, 2001). The literature review shows that there
is a large degree of variability in estimating the UCS from the point
load strength index. Based on the data collected in Dubai, Eqs. (2)
and (3) were derived for estimating the UCS of Dubai calcareous
sandstone from the point load strength index. As discussed above,
it is shown that the developed Is50-qu correlation is considered
acceptable despite the relatively large scatter. It is in close agree-
ment with the equation proposed by Puech et al. (1988) for cal-
carenites of the Arabian-Persian Gulf.
Furthermore, it is also shown that the tangent elastic modulus of
the intact rock specimens at 50% of the unconfined compressive
strength (ER50) is approximately equal to 125.7qu. Thus the results
of the point load test are used to estimate the strength and defor-
mation parameters of intact rock through the proposed empirical
relationships. Finally, it is important to develop site-specific
Fig. 5. Correlation between the characteristic elastic modulus and the UCS of Dubai
calcareous sandstone.
correlations for different rock types because of the large variation in
the published correlations. Using “generic” correlations could lead
to unrealistic evaluations of rock strength and deformation
parameters.
Conflict of interest
The authors wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of
interest associated with this publication and there has been no
significant financial support for this work that could have influ-
enced its outcome.
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
AASHTO LRFD bridge design specifications. AASHTO; 2012.
Akram M, Bakar MZA. Correlation between uniaxial compressive strength and point
load index for salt-range rocks. Pakistani Journal of Engineering and Applied
Sciences 2007;1:1e8.
Alsharhan AS, Kendall CGStC. Holocene coastal carbonates and evaporites of the
southern Arabian Gulf and their ancient analogues. Earth-Science Reviews
2003;61:191e243.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). D2938 Standard test method
for unconfined compressive strength of intact rock core specimens. West
Conshohocken, USA: ASTM International; 2002a.
ASTM. D3148 Standard test method for elastic moduli of intact rock core specimens
in uniaxial compression. West Conshohocken, USA: ASTM International; 2002b.
ASTM. D4543 Standard practices for preparing rock core as cylindrical test speci-
mens and verifying conformance to dimensional and shape tolerances. West
Conshohocken, USA: ASTM International; 2008a.
ASTM. D5731 Standard test method for determination of the point load strength
index of rock and application to rock strength classifications. West Con-
shohocken, USA: ASTM International; 2008b.
Beake RH, Suttcliffe G. Pipe pile drivability in the carbonate rocks of the southern
Arabian Gulf. In: Proceedings of the international conference on structural
foundations on rock, Sydney, Australia. Rotterdam, Netherlands: A.A. Balkema;
1980.
Beau P, Maghazy M, Chiriotti E. Importance of geological and geotechnical model
upgrading for the tunnel/station interface during the TBM breakthrough on the
Dubai metro project. In: Proceedings of the world tunnel congress
2008dunderground facilities for better environment and safety; 2008.
p. 1130e8.
Bieniawski ZT. The point-load test in geotechnical practice. Engineering Geology
1975;9(1):1e11.
Broch E, Franklin JA. The point-load strength test. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts 1972;9(6):
669e76.
Brook N. Size correction for point load testing. International Journal of Rock Me-
chanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts 1980;17(4):231e5.
Brook N. The equivalent core diameter method of size and shape correction in point
load testing. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and
Geomechanics Abstracts 1985;22(2):61e70.
Carmichael RS. CRC handbook of physical properties of rocks, vol. 2. CRC Press;
1982.
Cha AR, Song JH, Choi HS, Chun BS. The study on the correlation between uncon-
fined compressive strength and point load strength within the geniss complex
in Gyunggi Province. Journal of the Korean Geo-Environmental Society
2007;8(1):21e6 (in Korean).
Deere DU. Geological consideration. In: Stagg KG, Zienkiewicz OC, editors. Rock
mechanics in engineering practice. New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 1968.
p. 1e20.
Deere DU, Miller RP. Engineering classification and index properties of intact rock.
Technical Report No. AFWL-TR-65e116. Urana, USA: University of Illinois; 1966.
Diamantis K, Gartzos E, Migiros G. Study on uniaxial compressive strength, point
load strength index, dynamic and physical properties of serpentinites from
Central Greece: test results and empirical relations. Engineering Geology
2009;108(3e4):199e207.
Egyptian code for soil mechanics, design, and construction of foundations, vol. 2.
Cairo, Egypt: Ministry of Housing, 2001. pp. 272e276.
Elkateb T. The point load test in the Persian Gulf carbonate rocks. In: Proceedings of
the 17th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engi-
neering, Vol. 1; 2009. p. 372e5.
Idris MA, Saiang D, Nordlund E. Numerical analyses of the effects of rock Mass
property variability on open stope stability. In: The 45th US rock mechanics/
geomechanics symposium, San Francisco, USA. American Rock Mechanics As-
sociation (AMRA); 2011. p. 1530e40.
Kahraman S. Evaluation of simple methods for assessing the uniaxial compressive
strength of rock. International Journal Rock Mechanical and Mining Sciences
2001;38(7):981e94.
 A.F. Elhakim / Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 452e457
Kim HG, Koh YK, Oh KH. A study on the mechanical properties of the cretaceous
tuffs in Goheung area. The Journal of Engineering Geology 2004;14(3):273e85
(in Korean).
Kim GM, Kim DH, Kang JS, Kang SS, Baek H. A study of the correlation between
uniaxial compressive strength and point load strength index of limestone of
Imgye area. Tunnel and Underground Space 2012;22(5):330e8 (in Korean).
Kulhawy FH, Prakoso WA. Foundations in carbonate rocks and karst. In: Brandon TL,
editor. Foundations and ground improvement. Reston, USA: American Society
of Civil Engineers (ASCE); 2001. p. 1e15.
Le Tirant P, Nauroy JF. Design guides for offshore structures: foundations in car-
bonate soils. Technip Editions; 1994.
Li D, Wong LNY. Point load test on meta-sedimentary rocks and correlation to UCS
and BTS. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering 2013;46(4):889e96.
Macklin S, Ellison R, Manning J, Farrant A, Lorenti L. Engineering geological char-
acterisation of the Barzaman Formation, with reference to coastal Dubai, UAE.
Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 2012;71(1):1e19.
Mayne PW, Christopher BC, DeJong J. Manual on subsurface investigationseNa-
tional Highway Institute Publication No. FHWA NHI-01-031. Washington, DC,
USA: Federal Highway Administration; 2001.
Min TK, Moon JK. A review of strength estimation method on Ulsan sedimentary
rocks. Journal of the Korean Geotechnical Society 2006;22(8):63e75 (in Korean).
Puech A, Beuce JP, Colliat JL. Advances in the design of piles driven into non-
cemented to weakly cemented carbonate formations. In: Proceedings of the
International Conference on Calcareous Sediments, Vol. 1; 1988. p. 305e12.
Perth, Australia.
Salah H, Omar M, Shanableh A. Estimating unconfined compressive strength of
sedimentary rocks in United Arab Emirates from point load strength index.
Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics 2014;2:296e303.
Singh TN, Kainthola A, Venkatesh A. Correlation between point load index and
uniaxial compressive strength for different rock types. Rock Mechanics and
Rock Engineering 2012;45(2):259e64.
457
Thuro K, Plinninger RJ. Scale effects in rock properties. Part 2: point load test and
point load strength index. In: Rock mechanicsea challenge for society, pro-
ceedings of the ISRM regional symposium EuroRock 2001. CRC Press; 2001.
p. 175e80.
Tsiambaos G, Sabatakakis N. Considerations on strength of intact sedimentary
rocks. Engineering Geology 2004;72(3e4):261e73.
Tziallas GP, Tsiambaos G, Sarglou H. Determination of rock strength and deform-
ability of intact rocks. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 2009;14:
1e12.
Dr. Amr Farouk Elhakim is an assistant professor at the
Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University. In July 1995, he
earned his B.Sc. in Civil Engineering with honors degree.
He worked as a teaching / research assistant in the Soil
Mechanics and Foundations Research Laboratory of Cairo
University. In the same year, he enrolled for a Masters
program in Geotechnical Engineering in Cairo University,
where he earned his M.Sc. in July 1998. He then joined the
Geosystems Engineering Group at Georgia Tech, where he
worked under the supervision of Prof. Paul W. Mayne. In
May 2001, he earned another Masters in Geotechnical
Engineering from Georgia Tech. He then finished his Ph.D
in Summer 2005 from the same university. He has several
publications in the fields of in-situ testing, deep excava-
tions, design of axially and laterally loaded piles, displacements of shallow foundations
and the use of small strain soil modulus in foundation design. Furthermore, he has
worked in geotechnical consulting in several projects.