See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/248164901

Correlating sound velocity with the density, compressive strength and

Young's modulus of carbonate rocks

Article  in  International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences · July 2004

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2004.01.012

CITATIONS READS

209 2,918

2 authors:

Ergul Yasar Yasin Erdogan

İskenderun Technical University, Turkey Iskenderun Technical University
38 PUBLICATIONS   1,064 CITATIONS    27 PUBLICATIONS   452 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

lightweight building materials View project

Adana Metrosu View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ergul Yasar on 29 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 41 (2004) 871–875

Technical Note
Correlating sound velocity with the density, compressive strength and
Young’s modulus of carbonate rocks
E. Yasar*, Y. Erdogan
Department of Mining Engineering, Çukurova University, Adana 01330, Turkey
Accepted 14 January 2004

1. Introduction in 1949. The velocities of the P and S waves

Ultrasonic techniques are non-destructive and easy to
apply, both for site and laboratory conditions. In rock
engineering, sound velocity (SV) techniques have
increasingly been used to determine the dynamic
properties of rocks. The SV of a rock mass is closely
related to the intact rock properties and measuring the
velocity in rock masses interrogates the rock structure
and texture. The important influencing factors are rock
type, mineralogical composition, rock texture and
structure, grain size and shape, density, porosity,
anisotropy, porewater, confining pressure, temperature,
weathering and alteration zones, bedding planes, and
joint properties (roughness, filling material, water, dip
and strike, etc.).
The aim of this study is to determine the mechanical
and physical properties of carbonate rocks using P-wave
velocity. A number of researchers, such as Birch [1,2],
Deere and Miller [3], Inoue and Ohomi [4], Babuska
et al. [5], Gaviglio [6], Kern [7], Barruol and Kern [8],
Karpuz and Pa-samehmeto&glu [9], and Kahraman [10],
have studied the relations between rock properties and
SV and they have found that the SV is closely related to
rock properties.
The SV testing method determines the velocity
of propagation of elastic waves in laboratory con-
ditions. ISRM [11] describes three methods which
are the high and low frequency ultrasonic pulse
techniques and the resonant method. The velocities
of longitudinal waves were determined with the
pulse transmission method first used by Hughes et al.
are calculated from the measured travel time and
the distance between transmitter and receiver. In
order to measure a SV index value, the Pundit
testing machine was used. The Pundit has a pulse
generator, transducers, and an electronic counter
for time internal measurements (Fig. 1).
The SV measurement was conducted on five core
samples of 42 mm in diameter and three cubic samples
that were prepared in laboratory conditions. Conven-
tionally, the maximum ðPmax Þ; mean ðPmean Þ and
minimum ðPmin Þ velocities are found. The Pmean para-
meter is calculated as a weighted average value of
velocities measured over the whole samples. Table 1
shows the SV classification [12]. After analysis and tests
results, good empirical relations between SV and UCS,
E and r were found.
Emitter
Recevier
Rock sample
Ultrasonic Tester

*Corresponding author. Tel.: +90-322-3386084; fax: +90-322-

3386126. Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of SV measuring equipment (the PUN-
E-mail address: eyasar@cukurova.edu.tr (E. Yasar). DIT).

1365-1609/$ - see front matter r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijrmms.2004.01.012
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
872 E. Yasar, Y. Erdogan / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 41 (2004) 871–875

2. The study area and rock properties
Marble factories and quarries in the Adana, Afyon,
Elazı&g, Hatay and Mersin regions of Turkey were visited
Table 1
SV classification [12]
Class SV (km/s)
1 o2:5
2 2.5–3.5
3 3.5–4
4 4–5
5 >5
and block samples were collected to fulfill the objective
of this research. During sampling, rock types having no
bedding planes were selected to eliminate any aniso-
tropic effects on the measurements. The name, the
location and the class of the collected rocks are
given and shown in Table 2 and Fig. 2. Fig. 3 shows
the percentage participation of the three different rock
types of the carbonate rocks that were included in the
study.
Definition The samples of rocks were tested in the Mining
Very low velocity Engineering laboratory of C - ukurova University for
Low velocity determination of statistical relations with the mecha-
Middle velocity nical and physical properties. A minimum of eight
High velocity
samples was used for each test, after they were pre-
Very high velocity
pared in line with the ISRM Suggested Methods.

Table 2
Rock types used in the laboratory tests

Rock code number Rock name Rock class Rock type Origin

1 Ceyhan Beige Sedimentary Limestone Adana/Ceyhan

2 Karaisali Limestone Sedimentary Limestone Adana/Karaisali
3 Osmaniye Vis-ne Metamorphic Marble Osmaniye
4 Barbaros Beige Sedimentary Dolomitic limestone Mersin/Tarsus
5 Elazı&g Vis-ne Metamorphic Marble Elazı&g
6 Afyon S- ekeri Metamorphic Marble Afyon
7 ’
Iskenderun Limestone Sedimentary Limestone ’
Hatay/Iskenderun
8 Bah@e Dolomits Sedimentary Dolomite Osmaniye/Bah@e
9 Tarsus Marbles Metamorphic Marble Mersin
10 Dolomite Sedimentary Dolomite Hatay
11 Dolomite Sedimentary Dolomite Gaziantep
12 Pozantı Limestone Sedimentary Limestone Adana/Pozantı
13 Kozan Limestone Sedimentary Gravelled limestone Adana

Fig. 2. Rock type locations in the study area.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Yasar, Y. Erdogan / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 41 (2004) 871–875 873

After determination of the physico-mechanical values of the test results between SV index and uniaxial
properties, as shown in Table 3, statistical rel- compressive strength; Young’s modulus and density are
ations were evaluated between the other material shown in Figs. 4–6.
properties. Relatively high correlation values between SV index
and uniaxial compressive strength of R2 ¼ 0:80 (Fig. 4),
Young’s Modulus of R2 ¼ 0:86 (Fig. 5) and density of
3. Statistical analysis of the test results R2 ¼ 0:81 (Fig. 6) were found. It is seen that there are
linear relations between these properties and the sound
The results of SV, uniaxial compressive strength, velocities of the rocks. The SV increases with increases
Young’s modulus and density of the rocks were in sc ; E and r: The regression straight lines represents a
analyzed using the method of least squares re- fairly good correlation between the velocity and the
gression. The equation of the best-fit line, the 95% tested properties.
confidence limits, and the correlation coefficient
ðR2 Þ were determined for each regression. The SV values
of the rocks were correlated with the uniaxial compres- Table 4
sive strength ðsc Þ; Young’s modulus ðEÞ and density ðrÞ Regression analysis results
for each rock type. In all cases, the best-fitted relations Parameters to be related Regression equation R2
were found to be straight lines. Good relations were Y ¼ AX 7B
found between SV index and other properties of the SV—uniaxial compressive strength SV ¼ 0:0317sc þ 2:0195 0.80
rocks. SV—Young’s modulus SV ¼ 0:0937E þ 1:7528 0.86
The results of regression equations and the correlation SV—density SV ¼ 4:3183r  7:5071 0.81
coefficients are given in Table 4. The graphs of the mean

6
50
Sound Velocity (Pmean, km/s)

5.5

40 5
Percentage (%)

4.5
30
4

20 3.5

3
10
2.5

0 2
Dolomit Marble Limestone 25 50 75 100 125

Rock Types Uniaxial Compressive Strength (σc, MPa)

Fig. 3. Percentage participation of the rock types tested. Fig. 4. Correlation of SV and uniaxial compressive strength.

Table 3
Results of the SV tests and other rock properties of rock

Location Rock type SV (SV mean) (km/s) UCS ðsc Þ (MPa) Young’s modulus ðEÞ (GPa) Density ðrÞ ðg=cm3 Þ

Adana/Ceyhan Limestone 4:970:40 78:274:28 26.5 2.71

Adana/Karaisali Limestone 2:970:10 38:772:05 14.4 2.43
Osmaniye Marble 4:070:25 58:673:20 24.2 2.81
Mersin/Tarsus Dolomitic limestone 4:270:36 70:274:68 27.4 2.78
Elazı&g Marble 3:870:12 64:873:24 23.8 2.70
Afyon Marble 5:270:44 72:273:16 29.7 2.89
’
Hatay/Iskenderun Limestone 5:6 þ 0:38 116:9 þ 5:18 43.1 2.96
Osmaniye/Bah@e Dolomite 5:270:38 73:974:49 30.7 2.89
Mersin/Tarsus Marble 4:970:40 109:675:26 37.8 2.94
Hatay Dolomite 3:870:10 69:773:28 24.4 2.77
Gaziantep Dolomite 3:170:11 41:271:05 16.3 2.36
Adana/Pozantı Limestone 5:870:20 120:876:84 45.4 2.97
Adana/Kozan Gravelled limestone 3:070:36 34:871:85 15.0 2.45
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
874 E. Yasar, Y. Erdogan / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 41 (2004) 871–875

Data from each test were used in the developed data point plots from the 1:1 diagonal line. A point lying
empirical equations to estimate the uniaxial com- on the line indicates an exact estimation, as shown
pressive strength ðsc Þ; Young’s modulus ðEÞ and den- in Figs. 7–9.
sity ðrÞ: The estimated values of sc ; E and r were
then plotted against the measured values, sc ; E and r
for each test (Table 5, Figs. 7–9). The error in the 125
estimated value is represented by the distance that each
100
7

Estimated UCS (σc)

75
Sound Velocity (Pmean, km/s)

6
50
5
25
4

0
3 0 25 50 75 100 125
Measured UCS (σc)
2
Fig. 7. Estimated sc ; measured sc for SV test.
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Young's Modulus (E, GPa)

Fig. 5. Correlation of SV and Young’s modulus.

50
Estimated Young's Modulus (E)

6.0
40
Sound Velocity (Pmean, km/s)

5.5

5.0 30

4.5
20
4.0

3.5 10

3.0
0
2.5 0 10 20 30 40 50
2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 3.2 Measured Young's Modulus (E)
Density (ρ, g/cm³)
Fig. 8. Estimated Young’s modulus and measured Young’s modulus
Fig. 6. Correlation of SV and density. from SV tests.

Table 5
Estimated and measured values of sc ; E and r for SV test

Collection area Uniaxial compressive strength (MPa) Young’s modulus (GPa) Density ðg=cm3 Þ

Estimated Measured Estimated Measured Estimated Measured

Adana/Ceyhan 90.87 78.20 33.59 26.50 2.87 2.71

Adana/Karaisali 27.78 38.70 12.24 14.40 2.41 2.43
Osmaniye 62.48 58.60 23.98 24.20 2.66 2.81
Mersin/Tarsus 68.79 70.20 26.12 27.40 2.71 2.78
Elazı&g 56.17 64.80 21.85 23.80 2.62 2.70
Afyon 100.33 72.20 36.79 29.70 2.94 2.89
’
Hatay/Iskenderun 112.95 116.90 41.06 43.10 3.04 2.96
Osmaniye/Bah@e 100.33 73.90 36.79 30.70 2.94 2.89
Mersin/Tarsus 90.87 109.60 33.59 37.80 2.87 2.94
Hatay 56.17 69.70 21.85 24.40 2.62 2.77
Gaziantep 34.09 41.20 14.38 16.30 2.46 2.36
Adana/Pozantı 119.26 120.80 43.19 45.40 3.08 2.97
Adana/Kozan 30.93 34.80 13.31 15.00 2.43 2.45
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
E. Yasar, Y. Erdogan / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 41 (2004) 871–875 875

3.2 References

3.0 [1] Birch F. The velocity of compressional waves in rocks 10 kbars:

Estimated Density (ρ)

Part 1. J Geophys Res 1960;65:83–1102.

[2] Birch F. The velocity of compressional waves in rocks 10 kbars:
2.8
Part 2. J Geophys Res 1961;66:2199–224.
[3] Deere DU, Miller RP. Engineering classification and index
2.6 properties for intact rock. Air Force Weapons Lab. Tech. Report,
AFWL-TR 65-116, 1966, Kirtland Base, New Mexico.
2.4 [4] Inoue M, Ohomi M. Relation between uniaxial compressive
strength and elastic wave velocity of soft rock. Proceedings of the
International Symposium on Weak Rock. Tokyo, 1981. p. 9–13.
2.2 [5] Babuska V, Pros Z. Velocity anisotropy in granodiorite and
2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 quartzite due to the distribution of microcracks. Geophys J R
Measured Density (ρ) Astron Soc 1984;76:121–7.
[6] Gaviglio P. Longitudinal waves propagation in a limestone: the
Fig. 9. Estimated density and measured density from SV tests.
relationship between velocity and density. Rock Mech Rock Eng
1989;22:299–306.
[7] Kern H. P and S wave anisotropy and shear-wave splitting at
4. Conclusions pressure and temperature in possible mantle rocks and their
relation to the rock fabric. Phys Earth Planet Inter 1993;78:
The study indicates that the uniaxial compressive 245–56.
[8] Barruol G, Kern H. Seismic anisotropy and shear-wave splitting
strength ðsc Þ; Young’s modulus ðEÞ and density ðrÞ of in lower-crustal and upper mantle rocks from the Ivrea zone
various carbonate rock types can be estimated from experimental and calculated data. Phys Earth Planet Inter
their SV values by using simple linear mathematical 1996;95:175–94.
relations. The correlation equations are as follows: [9] Karpuz C, Pas-amehmeto$glu AG. Field characterization of
weathered Ankara andesites. Eng Geol 1997;46:1–17.
SV ¼ 0:0317 : sc þ 2:0195; R2 ¼ 0:80; ð1Þ [10] Kahraman S. Evaluation of simple methods for assessing the
uniaxial compressive strength of rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
SV ¼ 0:0937 : E þ 1:7528; R2 ¼ 0:86; ð2Þ 2001;38:981–94.
[11] ISRM. Basic geotechnical description of rock masses. Int. Soc. for
Rock Mech., Commission on Standardization of Laboratory and
SV ¼ 4:3183 : r  7:5071; R2 ¼ 0:81: ð3Þ Field Tests. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1981a;
18:87–110.
The equations are practical, simple and accurate [12] Anon. Classification of rocks and soils for engineering geological
enough to apply and are recommended for use in mapping. Part 1—Rock and soil materials. Bull Int Assoc Geo
practice. 1979a;19:364–71.

View publication stats