Rate Dependence of Splitting Tensile Behaviors of Sandstone and Mudstone

  • Jun-Jie WangEmail author
  • Yu-Qiao Li
  • Fu-Xian Jian
  • Da Huang
Technical Note


The tensile strength measured by Brazilian test is termed the splitting tensile strength. The values of splitting tensile strength and corresponding strain may be affected by loading and/or strain rates used in the Brazilian test. In order to investigate the effects, several Brazilian tests with two-type loading modes were carried out. One is under a constant loading rate (BT-CLR), and the other is under a constant strain rate (BT-CSR). Lightly weathered sandstone and mudstone are selected as test materials. Experimental data indicate that, while the loading rate increases from 0.3 to 0.5 MPa/s, the splitting tensile strengths of sandstone and mudstone are increasing about 12.2% and 16.0%, respectively. With increasing the strain rate from 0.005 to 0.02 mm/s, the splitting tensile strengths of sandstone and mudstone increase about 9.3% and 12.8%, respectively. With increment of loading and/or strain rate, the critical strains of both sandstone and mudstone decrease. The effect degree, in percentage, on the mudstone is greater than one on the sandstone.


Splitting tensile behavior Sandstone Mudstone Loading rate Strain rate 



The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. U1865103, and the Chongqing Science and Technology Commission of China under Grant No. cstc2017kjrc-cxcytd30001, respectively.


  1. ASTM Standard D3967-16 (2016) Standard test method for splitting tensile strength of intact rock core specimens. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. Cho SH, Ogata Y, Kaneko K (2003) Strain-rate dependency of the dynamic tensile strength of rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 40(5):763–777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dan DQ, Konietzky H, Herbst M (2013) Brazilian tensile strength tests on some anisotropic rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 58:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Guo JJ, Wang JJ (2018) Mechanism analysis of the failure for a safe jointed rock high slope: tectonic structures and damage. Geotech Geol Eng 36(1):455–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Wang JJ, Chai HJ, Li HP, Zhu JG (2008) Factors resulting in the instability of a 57.5 m high cut slope. In: Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on landslides and engineered slopes, vol 1, pp 1799–1804Google Scholar
  6. Wang JJ, Zhang HP, Deng DP, Liu MW (2013) Effects of mudstone particle content on compaction behavior and particle crushing of a crushed sandstone–mudstone particle mixture. Eng Geol 167:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Wang JJ, Zhao TL, Chai HJ, Tang SC (2016) Failure of a rock slope 16.5 years after excavation in repeated strata of sandstone and mudstone. Environ Earth Sci 75:1458CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jun-Jie Wang
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Yu-Qiao Li
    • 3
  • Fu-Xian Jian
    • 4
  • Da Huang
    • 5
  1. 1.Chongqing Engineering Research Center of Diagnosis Technology and Instruments of Hydro-ConstructionChongqing Jiaotong UniversityChongqingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Chongqing Engineering Research Center of Disaster Prevention and Control for Banks and Structures in Three Gorges Reservoir AreaChongqing Three Gorges UniversityChongqingPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Key Laboratory of Hydraulic and Waterway Engineering of Ministry of EducationChongqing Jiaotong UniversityChongqingPeople’s Republic of China
  4. 4.National Engineering Research Center for Inland Waterway RegulationChongqing Jiaotong UniversityChongqingPeople’s Republic of China
  5. 5.School of Civil and Transportation EngineeringHebei University of TechnologyTianjinPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations