Advertisement

Environmental Earth Sciences

, 78:567 | Cite as

An empirical strength criterion for the Antalya tufa rock, southern Turkey

  • Evrim Sopacı
  • Haluk AkgünEmail author
  • Jaak J. K. Daemen
Original Article
  • 40 Downloads

Abstract

This paper formulates an empirical strength criterion for the heterogeneous Antalya tufa rock mass assuming that the heterogeneity effect is represented by the unit weight and the porosity of the tufa rock, which is highly variable from a geomechanical point of view. Unconstrained non-linear regression analyses have been used to identify the strength criterion and material constants in terms of fitting an equation and determining its regression parameters. Prior to this approach, the fitting of the laboratory data to the failure criteria defined by Coulomb (Mem Acad R Des Sci 3:38, 1776), Bieniawski (J S Afr Inst Min Metal 74(8):312–320, 1974) and Hoek and Brown (J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 106(GT9):1013–1035, 1980) has been performed by means of constrained regression analyses. For the regression analyses, the results of the uniaxial and triaxial compressive strength tests along with the Brazilian tensile strength tests have been used. The regression analysis has been performed in two stages. In the first stage, the results of the uniaxial and triaxial compressive strength tests have been included in the analyses; in the second stage, the results of the Brazilian tensile strength tests have been added to the regression analyses performed in the first stage.

Keywords

Antalya Tufa rock Empirical strength criterion Karst Curve fitting 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Middle East Technical University (METU) Research Fund Project No. BAP-03-09-2009-03. Thanks are due to the staff of the Technical Research Department of DLH, especially to Mehmet Altıntaş for his kind assistance in the laboratory tests. Cengiz Tan and Ebru Deniz are gratefully acknowledged for their assistance in SEM, DTA and TGA analyses, respectively. Furthermore, technical supports of Uğur Kuran and Mustafa Gürbüz in geotechnical field testing, assistance of Süha Aykurt, Oğuz Tüfenkçi and Ersin Barboros in site investigations are gratefully acknowledged. We would like to express our gratitude toward Serdar Özüş and Özlem Alpaslan for providing geotechnical literature. Deepest gratitude is also due to Ahmet Benliay, Mustafa Yücel Kaya, Hakan Tanyaş, Dr. Mustafa Kerem Koçkar, Dr. Kıvanç Okalp, Dr. Arif Mert Eker and Selim Cambazoğlu for their endless support.

Funding

The research performed in this study was supported by the Middle East Technical University (METU) Research Fund Project No. BAP-03-09-2009-03, which the second author (Haluk Akgün) has received from the Middle East Technical University (METU) Research Fund.

References

  1. ASTM D7012-10 (2010) Standard test method for compressive strength and elastic moduli of intact rock core specimens under varying states of stress and temperatures, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PAGoogle Scholar
  2. Bieniawski ZT (1974) Estimating the strength of rock materials. J S Afr Inst Min Metal 74(8):312–320Google Scholar
  3. Colmenares LB, Zoback MD (2002) A statistical evaluation of intact rock failure criteria constrained by polyaxial test data for five different rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 39:695–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coulomb CA (1776) Essai sur une Application des Regles de Maximis et Minimum a quelques Problemes de Statique Relatifs a l’Architecture. Mem Acad R Des Sci Paris 3:38Google Scholar
  5. Drucker DC, Prager W (1952) Soil mechanics and plastic analysis or limit design. Q Appl Math 10:157–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fell R, Mc Gregor P, Stapledon D (1992) Geotechnical engineering of embankment dams. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  7. Ford TD, Pedley HM (1996) A review of tufa and travertine deposits of the world. Earth Sci Rev 41:117–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fuenkajorn K, Daemen JJK (1992) An empirical strength criterion for heterogenous tuff. Eng Geol 32:209–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Glover C, Roberston AHF (2003) Origin of tufa (cool-water carbonate) and related terraces in the Antalya area, SW Turkey. Geol J 38:329–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hoek E, Brown ET (1980) Empirical strength criterion for rock masses. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 106(GT9):1013–1035Google Scholar
  11. ISRM (1981) Suggested methods for the quantitative description of discontinuities in rock masses. In: Barton ET (ed) Rock characterization, testing and monitoring. Pergamon Press, Oxford, p 221Google Scholar
  12. Jaeger JC, Cook NGW (1979) Fundamentals of rock mechanics, 3rd edn. Chapman and Hall, New York, p 593Google Scholar
  13. Kim MK, Lade PV (1984) 1984, Modeling rock strength in three dimensions. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 21:21–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Karabıyıkoğlu M, Tuzcu S, Çiner A, Deynoux M, Orcen, S, Hakyemez A (2005) Facies and environmental setting of the Miocene coral reefs in the late-orogenic fill of the Antalya Basin, Western Taurids, Turkey. In: Kelling G, Robertson AHF, Van Buchem F (eds) Cenozoic Sedimentary Basins of South Central Turkey. Sedimentary Geol 173:345–371Google Scholar
  15. Pariseau WG (2007) Fitting failure criteria to laboratory strength tests. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 44:637–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pedley HM (1990) Classification and environmental models of cool freshwater tufas. Sedimentary Geol 68:143–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sopacı E (2012) Geotechnical characterization and rock mass classification of the Antalya karstic rock masses, PhD Dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Department of Geological Engineering, Ankara, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  18. Sopacı E, Akgün H (2015) Geotechnical assessment and engineering classification of the Antalya tufa rock, southern Turkey. Eng Geol 197:211–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sopacı E, Akgün H (2016) Engineering geological characterization of the Antalya karstic rocks, southern Turkey. Environ Earth Sci 75(5):1–20 (Article 366) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. You M (2011) Comparison of the accuracy of some conventional triaxial strength criteria for intact rock, technical note. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 48(2011):852–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Yu M-H, Zan Y-W, Zhao J, Yoshimine MA (2002) Unified strength criterion for rock material. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 39:975–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Evrim Sopacı
    • 1
  • Haluk Akgün
    • 2
    Email author
  • Jaak J. K. Daemen
    • 3
  1. 1.Golder Associates Inc.RenoUSA
  2. 2.Geotechnology Unit, Department of Geological EngineeringMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Mining and Metallurgical Engineering, Mackay School of Earth Sciences and EngineeringUniversity of NevadaRenoUSA

Personalised recommendations