CIVL 2002

Engineering Geology and

Rock Mechanics
Brazilian Test
NG KWOK CHAK (3035009926)
12/9/2012

CIVL 2002

Engineering Geology and Rock Mechanics

OBJECTIVE

To determine the uniaxial tensile strength of prepared rock specimens indirectly by the Brazil
Test.

Figure 1

INTRODCTION

The justification for the test is based on the experimental fact that the most rocks in biaxial
stress fields fail in tension at their uniaxial tensile strength.

Compression Load
Cracking

Tension

Tension

Compression Load
Figure 2

CIVL 2002

Engineering Geology and Rock Mechanics

APPARATUS

DGM loading machine

It has a control panel showing the instantaneous

applied load. At the moment when the rock
specimen fails, one of the pointers will stop
showing the failure compressive load (Fig. 3).

Steel Loading Jaws

This is the apparatus where the specimens are

mounted (Figure 4).

Electronic Calipers

It is used to measure the diameter and thickness

of each rock specimen (Figure 5).

Masking Tape

They are used for wrapping the periphery of the

rock specimens to reduce contact irregularities.
They are also used to prevent the specimens from
breaking into pieces after failure, so that the
failure plane can be observed (Figure 6).

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

THEORY
The tensile strength of a material is a measure of its ability to resist uniaxial tensile loads without yielding
or fracture. A direct-pull uniaxial test is difficult to apply to rock and in many cases some type of indirect
test is employed to determine tensile strength. The Brazilian test, where a disc of the test material is
loaded across a diameter, is often employed. The figure below illustrates the principle of the test and
Equation 1 is used to calculate the equivalent tensile strength (T*).

CIVL 2002

Engineering Geology and Rock Mechanics

Figure 7

Figure 8

Basically, the technique involves loading disc-shaped specimens in compression across their diameter.
Such loading generates a tensile stress at the center of the disc in a direction perpendicular to the direction
of applied load (in the plane of the disc face). When the applied load reaches a critical level, the disc splits
lengthwise in tension. Apparent tensile strength is calculated using the following equation:

where T0* is the tensile strength, P is the maximum compressive load recorded during the test, D is the
diameter, and t is the thickness of the test specimen.
Notes:
1. Only the small circular disc of rock would be used (but D is not less than 50 mm) in the Brazilian
Test to ensure the rock specimen to be an intact rock and relatively free from cracks and joints.
2. The ration between D and t is about 2: 1.
3. The disc circumference should be wrapped in masking tape.
4. The rock specimen should be loaded at in constant rate, 200N/s is recommended, so that the
specimen within a reasonable time.
There are two possible modes of failure:
1. Axial splitting along vertical failure
2. Shear and crushing failure at loading

Figure 9

Figure 10

CIVL 2002

Engineering Geology and Rock Mechanics

PROCEDURE
1.
2.
3.
4.

Eight test specimens shall be cut and prepared using clean water.
The test specimens shall be wrapped around its periphery with one layer of the masking tape
Each specimen shall be coded. The diameter and thickness shall be measured.
The specimens shall be mounted squarely in the test apparatus such that the curved platens
load the specimen diametrically with the axes of rotation for specimen and apparatus
coincident.
Load on the specimen shall be applied continuously at a constant rate. A loading rate of 200N/s
is recommended.
The failure compressive load shall be recorded and the corresponding tensile strength was
calculated.

5.
6.

DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLE
Lithological description
8 rock specimens have been tested in this experiment. Specimens 33-36 were tested by our group
(Group J) whereas specimens 37-40 are tested by another group, Group I. In general, all the
specimens are very similar in appearance and their properties are as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.

The rocks are grey in colour with white pattern

No visible cracks are observed
No weathering is observed on the surface
The grains cannot be identified easily by naked eyes

Remarks:
For Specimen 38, it seems to have a joint, which is perpendicular to the pen.

CIVL 2002

Engineering Geology and Rock Mechanics

RESULTS
a) Dimension of Specimens and Tensile Strength
By the Equation,

2P
0.636 P

Dt
Dt

The data of our group (Group J):

The data of group I:

CIVL 2002

Engineering Geology and Rock Mechanics

b) Mode of failure
Axial Failure

Figure 11

Figure 13

Figure 12

Figure 14

For the specimen 34, 35, 36, 37, they almost got pure axial failure. It can be observed that they split
along the plane of applied compressive force as the blue line illustrate. The reason for the specimen
that can`t get the perfect axial failure may due to the multi-point contact suffer the compressive
force when it was nearly to fail. As we can see that, most specimens are not a perfect circle as it did
before the experiment, especially for the contact position.
6

CIVL 2002

Engineering Geology and Rock Mechanics

Shear and crushing failure

Figure 15

Figure 17

Figure 16

Figure 18

Figure 19
7

CIVL 2002

Engineering Geology and Rock Mechanics

For the specimen 33,38,39,40, they fail in a mixing failure mode with both of axial and shear factors. It is
observed that these specimen as a relative low ultimate tensile strength. It might due to their
composition difference, such as different grain size and grain arrangement. For the specimen 38, 39 and
40, they have more black patterns then others. Also, it might due to their internal joint and fracture. For
the specimen 38, as the Figure 17 and Figure 18 shown (the direction of the pen pointing to respect to
the specimen are same in both), the vertical rupture plane due to shear is parallel to the fracture in
Figure 17.
Average Tensile Strength
As the Experiment is based on the assumption of specimen in axial tensile failure, only the data of
specimen 34, 35, 36 and 37 are taken for the calculation of the tensile strength for the intact rock
the specimen.
Average Tensile Strength = (8.089+9.347+6.804+4.622)/ 6= 7.216 MPa
DISCUSSION, SUGGESTI ON, COMMENT
a) Comment on preparation of rock specimen
As observed, the rock specimens used in this experiment have smooth and straight sides and there
are no observable tool marks on the surface of the specimens. Furthermore, all the diameters of the
specimens are greater than 60 mm which fits our requirement that the specimens should be larger
than 50 mm. However the thickness of the specimen is about the 55% of the diameter instead on
the 50% suggested. Nevertheless, the rock specimens are generally well prepared and agree with
the instructions.
b) Source of error
From the results of the Brazil test, the tensile strengths of the specimens range from 4.372MPa to
9.347MPa. There is large deviation of the tensile strength form the average tensile strength
(7.216MPa). The deviation can be explained by the following sources of error:
1.

Rock is heterogeneous in nature. Also, it is an aggregate rather than a single material. As a

result, even the specimens are taken from the same rock mass, the rock specimens may vary
in physical properties.

2.

The assumptions that the rock specimens are intact and relatively free from cracks and joints
or other discontinuities are not true. There are discontinuities in the rock, like joints and
fissures.

3.

The compressive load may be subjected to eccentricity due to technical problems of the
loading machine or imperfect steel jaws manufacturing.

CIVL 2002

Engineering Geology and Rock Mechanics

4.

The contact between the specimen and jaws was not perfectly point contact as assumed in
the derivation of the formula.

5.

As friction was present within the hydraulic ram of the loading machine, the indicated load
was likely to be higher than the actual applied load.

6.

The specimens are not having perfect vertical and horizontal surfaces.

7.

The crack initiation load is usually smaller that the peak load because the test does not
ensure crack initiation occurs at maximum tensile stress. A 4-point-beam test or 3-pointbeam test should be used instead to ensure crack initiation is accompanied by peak load. It is
often, however, difficult to obtain an intact rock beam sample from nature.

8.

Induction of the tensile stress is hindered as the masking tape is confining the specimen. In
other words, compressive stress is induced by the masking tape and true induced tensile
stress cannot be revealed.

9.

Although there are no signs of weathering were observed on the surface, weathering may
exist within the rock specimens. Weathering might weaken the interactions among the
mineral grains and thus lower the tensile strength of the specimens. More fraction of the
specimen is weathered, lower tensile strength are resulted.

10.

As shown in the result of the experiment, the value of the diameters of the rock specimens
measured are quite varied. The diameter measured may be smaller than the actual one. To
avoid this, we should record the diameter until the largest value is measured.

c) Precautions
The following precautions should be noted when carrying out the experiment:
1.

The applied compressive load should not larger than the induced tensile stress by three
times, or the specimen may not fail by tension in the lateral direction.

2.

The measured tensile strength depends on the width of contact area between the specimen
and the loading jaws. If the width is larger than 10o at failure, its effect should be taken into
account when calculating the tensile stress.

CIVL 2002

3.

Engineering Geology and Rock Mechanics

If failure involves cracking, crushing or splitting perpendicular to or at an oblique angle to the

line of loading, the test of that rock specimen should be rejected. Sample anisotropy in the
form of foliation, bedding, etc. should be noted with respect to the direction of loading.

d) Improvements
Following improvements can be done to increase the accuracy of the result of the experiment:
1.

The tensile strength obtained through the Brazil test highly depends on the rate of the
applied load. As a result, the tensile strength obtained in the above section only represents
the tensile strength of a particular applied rate. Therefore, tests with different loading rate
should be carried out in order to improve the accuracy of the experiment.

2.

The result of Brazil test may have a large deviation during the experiment. More samples
(more than 10 samples) should be tested so as to obtain a more accurate result.

3.

It is better to measure the dimension with more times so as to increase the accuracy. When
measuring the diameter of the specimen, we should shift the Electronic Calipers until largest
value is gained which indicates the diameter.

CONCLUSION
Actually, the result in these experiment is a question, as there is only four sets of data can fulfill the
assumption which is far from enough as the requirement, 10 set of data. It might need to do it again with
the improvements mentioned above.
Then, I would like to conclude with the importance of Brazilian test. It is the method to find the tensile
strength of the rock. By knowing the tensile strength of the rock material, Engineer can determine
whether the material is a suitable choice for the application is their mind. This is extremely important for
the safety of in the design.
REFERENCE
1. Charles Jaegar, Rock Mechanics & Engineering, 2nd Edition 1979, Cambridge University Press;
2. Stagg & Zienkiewiez, Rock Mechanics in Engineering Practice, John Wiley & Sons Limited;
3. Richard E. Goodman, Introduction to Rock Mechanics, 2nd Edition

10