Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment (2019) 78:6061–6074

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-019-01518-x

ORIGINAL PAPER

Specimen shape and cross-section effects on the mechanical

properties of rocks under uniaxial compressive stress
Kun Du 1,2 & Rui Su 1 & Ming Tao 1 & Chengzhi Yang 1 & Aliakbar Momeni 3 & Shaofeng Wang 1

Received: 12 September 2018 / Accepted: 25 March 2019 / Published online: 23 April 2019
# Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract
Uniaxial compressive properties of rocks are very important for designing and constructing engineering projects. Based on the
available standards for determining these properties, high quality core specimens with proper geometry are needed. In many
cases, the standard specimens, especially in clay-bearing, fractured, and weathered rocks, are always not able to be prepared. On
the other hand, in some natural conditions, rocks with different size, shape, and cross-section are undergoing uniaxial compres-
sive loading. Therefore, in order to evaluate the uniaxial compressive strength dependency behaviors of rocks on the shape and
cross-section of tested specimens, some marble specimens with three different cross-sections, including circular, square, and
rectangular, as well as four different shape ratios (height to diameter/width ratio) of 0.5, 1, 2, and 3 were prepared and tested.
Axial and lateral strains, acoustic emission (AE), and camera photographs were recorded during the tests. Rock strength behavior
was evaluated based on several stress thresholds, including crack closure stress (σcc), crack initiation stress (σci), damage
stress (σcd), and peak stress (σucs). The results indicated that σcc was not dependent on the cross-sectional shape of specimens.
With increasing shape ratio, σcc gradually increased, while σcd and σucs greatly decreased, and σci remained at a constant value.
The cross-sectional shape effect became operative when r was less than or equal to 1. Moreover, the values of σcd and σucs of
rectangular prism specimens and square prism specimens are lower than those of cylindrical specimens, indicating that the
unstable crack propagation of prism specimens occurs earlier. The difference gap of σcd and σucs between specimens with
different cross-sectional shapes was dramatically decreased with increasing shape ratio. The AE and camera recorded data
indicated that the fracture modes of rectangular and square prism specimens are more likely to change from shearing to slabbing
fracture when the shape ratio decreased from 3 to 0.5. The main crack developed surface turned from wide surface to narrow
surface with the shape ratio of rectangular prism specimens changing from 3 to 1 and 0.5. The research results are of referential
meaning to the design of pillars in underground hard rock mines.

Keywords Uniaxial compression test . Cross-sectional shape . Height to width ratio . Fracture mode . Acoustic emission (AE)

Introduction as true triaxial tests (Li et al. 2018; Feng et al. 2019) fatigue and
Hopkinson dynamic tests, as well as the engineering design,
The uniaxial compression test is an important testing method modeling, and analysis, uniaxial compression tests should be
for obtaining the basic mechanical indices of rocks. Before conducted firstly to obtain the uniaxial compressive parameters
carrying out other types of tests, such as true triaxial tests, such and properties of rocks (Frew et al. 2001; Zhang and Zhao
2014; Du et al. 2016; Gong et al. 2018; Martin 1997; Jaeger
et al. 2009; Li et al. 2017). It has been widely reported that the
* Ming Tao size and shape of the rock specimen can affect the mechanical
mingtao@csu.edu.cn
properties of rocks under uniaxial compressive stress. The size
effect mainly describes the impact of the diameter (D) of cylin-
1
School of Resources and Safety Engineering, Central South drical specimens (Hoek and Brown 1980; Košťák and
University, Changsha 410083, Hunan, China Bielenstein 1971; Hudson et al. 1972; Kahraman and Alber
2
Advanced Research Center, Central South University, 2006; Hong et al. 2008; Jamshidi et al. 2016) and the side
Changsha 410083, Hunan, China length (A) of cubic specimens (Bieniawski 1968; Hoek and
3
Faculty of Earth Sciences, Shahrood University of Technology, Brown 1980; Liu et al. 1998) on the properties of rocks in
Shahrood, Iran
6062
uniaxial compression tests. The shape effect mainly refers to the
influence of the height to diameter ratio (r) of cylindrical spec-
imens or the height to width ratio (r) of prismatic specimens on
the characteristics of rocks in uniaxial compression tests (Green
and Perkins 1968; Bordia 1971; Hudson et al. 1972; Dhir and
Sangha 1973; Das 1986; Pan and Wei 2002; Paterson and
Wong 2005; Yang et al. 2005; Mogi 2007; Tuncay and
Hasancebi 2009; Liang et al. 2016). In addition, the cross-
sectional shape (the shape of the loading surface, e.g., circle,
square, or rectangle) of rock specimens also has an unclear
effect on the uniaxial compressive characteristics of rocks (Li
et al. 2011; Zhao et al. 2015; Xu and Cai 2017; Du et al. 2016).
There is no unified conclusion on the specimen size effect
on the uniaxial compressive properties of rocks. From the
testing results of cylindrical and cubic rock specimens in pre-
vious studies, the main conclusions are summarized as fol-
lows: (1) the uniaxial compressive strength σucs decreased
with the increase of the D or A of hard rock specimens
(Fig. 1a). Hoek and Brown (1980) preferred the cylindrical
specimen with a diameter of 50 mm as a standard. The σucs
remained nearly constant for cubic coal specimens after A
above 1000 mm, and the testing concept provided a reliable
method to obtain the basic mechanical parameters of coal-type
rock mass (Bieniawski 1968). In addition, the test results of
Hudson et al. (1972) on marble with D between 19 and
101.6 mm obtained an opposite conclusion (Fig. 1d); (2) a
peak or valley value of σucs for sedimentary specimens was
founded with certain D values, as shown in Fig. 1b. The σucs
of rock specimens with D between 40 and 60 mm was higher
than that of the specimens with larger or smaller D values
(Hawkins 1998). A minimum value of σucs was observed for
some particular sedimentary rock specimens with D between
40 and 60 mm (Jamshidi et al. 2016). The D of cylindrical
specimens should be no less than 54 mm according to the
International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM) suggested
methods (ISRM 2007), while it should be no less than 47 mm
according to the American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) suggested methods and between 48 and 54 mm ac-
cording to China’s national standard (GB/T 50266-2013)
(ASTM 2000; Chinese standard 2013).
The specimen shape is another important factor influencing
the uniaxial compressive properties of rocks. A series of uni-
axial compression tests were carried out on cylindrical speci-
mens with different values of height to diameter ratio r (Mogi
1966, 2007; Hudson et al. 1972; Hawkins 1998; Thuro et al.
2001; Unlu and Yilmaz 2008; Liang et al. 2016). In compar-
ison with previous studies, the main conclusions are presented
as follows: (1) with the decrease of r, there was a significant
increase of σucs (Fig. 1c); (2) long specimens had sufficient
elastic properties, and the magnitude of σucs remained con-
stant when r reaches a value greater than 2.5 (Mogi 1966,
2007) or 2 (Hudson et al. 1972; Hawkins 1998); (3) before
compressive failure, too long specimens may be deflected to
K. Du et al.
fracture, while shorter specimens may not fail along the inher-
ent weak plane (Tuncay and Hasancebi 2009). Therefore, the
recommended r is 2.0–2.5 in the ASTM suggested methods
and Chinese standard and 2.5–3.0 in the ISRM suggested
methods (ISRM 2007; ASTM 2000; Chinese standard 2013).
Several literatures reported that the cross-sectional shape of
specimens also had a greater effect on the mechanical properties
of rocks in uniaxial compression tests. The rectangular prism
granite specimens with a long side a of 50 mm, short side b of
25 mm, and height H of 100, 50, and 25 mm were used in
uniaxial compression tests by Li et al. (2011). The σucs value
of the specimens with H = 25 mm was lower than that of the
specimens with H = 50 mm, which experienced slabbing fail-
ure. Cylindrical (D = 50 mm and H = 100 mm) and rectangular
prism (A = 50 mm and H = 100 mm) granite specimens were
used by Zhao et al. (2015), and the σucs values of the two cross-
sectionally shaped specimens with the same processing
precision and rock homogeneity were very close. Xu and Cai
(2017) carried out uniaxial compressive numerical simulations
on different rock specimens with varying r values and cross-
sectional shapes (i.e., circle, square, and rectangle). There were
slight differences in the σucs of the numerically modeled spec-
imens with different r. The difference was less than 10 MPa,
and increased as the r decreased. In addition, the post-peak
behaviors of the specimens were influenced obviously by the
specimen cross-section. The specimen cross-section affecting
the post-failure slope in order from the largest to the smallest
was as follows: rectangular, circular, and square.
Furthermore, pillars in underground mines and surround-
ing rock at the intersection of underground crossed roadways
are usually under a uniaxial stress condition (Du et al. 2015).
The stability of pillars has attracted much attention in the past
several years. Pillars are important structures in underground
mining, as their main function is to provide temporary or
permanent support by opposing the weight of the overburden
stratum. In general, pillars are formed of the in-situ intact rock.
During the design and stability analysis of pillars, it is imper-
ative to consider their size and shape. In general, the r of the
destructive pillars in coal mines is larger than 0.3, while it is
0.5 in nonmetal mines and 1 in metal mines (Martin and
Maybee 2000; Zipf 2001), and, thus, the pillars are commonly
designed and constructed with a lower value of r in under-
ground mine fields. The fracture mode of pillars in hard rock
mines is progressive slabbing (Martin and Maybee 2000) or
shearing along preexisting angular discontinuities and pro-
gressive extrusion of soft infill materials on bedding planes
(Esterhuizen et al. 2011). The fracture development process
and crack generative mechanism of intact pillars can be better
understood through the results of laigh rock specimens in
uniaxial compression tests.
The effect of the cross-sectional shape of specimens on the
uniaxial compressive properties of rocks is rarely noticed, es-
pecially the contrastive study on specimens with different
Specimen shape and cross-section effects on the mechanical properties of rocks under uniaxial compressive... 6063

Fig. 1 Specimen size and shape effect in previous studies: a normalized diameter ratio r; d normalized strength versus diameter D of marble at
strength versus diameter D of hard rocks; b normalized strength versus different height to diameter ratio r values (Hudson et al. 1972)
diameter D of sedimentary rocks; c normalized strength versus height to

cross-sections. In addition, the previous studies on the speci- specimens of different r values and cross-sections are used
men shape effect mainly focus on σucs, and other process in uniaxial compression tests, and the authors intended to in-
parameters are often ignored. Therefore, in this study, rock vestigate the effect of specimen shape and its cross-sectional
6064
shape on the uniaxial mechanical properties of rocks (e.g.,
stress thresholds, fracture modes, and acoustic emission
[AE] properties) through the test results.
Experimental procedures
Rock specimens
The selected rock material was a kind of white marble from
Hunan province, China. Microscope examination was per-
formed to determine the mineralogical composition and grain
sizes of the marble, which has a primary mineral composition
of magnesite (~ 45%, grain size 0.1–0.5 mm), calcite (~ 35%,
0.05–0.5 mm), and other chink (~ 25%, 0.01–0.05 mm). It
was found that the marble had good homogeneity and incon-
spicuous anisotropy, as shown in Fig. 2a.
The cross-sectional shape of the rock specimens were circle
(D = 50 mm), square (A = 50 mm), and rectangle (a = 50 mm
and b = 25 mm). The H values of the rock specimens were
100, 50, and 25 mm, and the r (r of the rectangular prism
specimens in this study means the ratio of H and a) of the
rock specimens were 3, 2, 1, and 0.5, respectively. The top
Fig. 2 Marble specimens used in this study: a micrographs using an
optical microscope; b specimen shapes and cross-sections
K. Du et al.
and bottom ends of the specimens’ cross-sections were
polished to ensure that the two surfaces were smooth and
parallel to each other. The rock specimens with similar wave
velocity were selected for uniaxial compression tests, and each
group had three or four specimens (shown in Table 1). The
prepared specimens are shown in Fig. 2b.
Testing techniques
The uniaxial compression tests were conducted using a T-
shaped operation platform testing system (MTS, Model 322)
with the loading capacity of ± 500 kN and loading precision of
± 0.5% at Advanced Research Center, Central South
University, China. In the tests, the displacement control mode
was applied and the loading rate was set to be 0.15 mm/min.
Before loading, AE sensors and strain gauges were attached to
the free surface of the specimens. An AE testing system
(Physical Acoustics, PCI-2) and a strain acquisition system
(Donghua, DL3821) were used to record AE and strain infor-
mation while the axial load was applied until rock failure. In
addition, a CCD camera (Basler, piA2400-17gm) and the dig-
ital image correlation (DIC) technology were used to record
and analyze the deformation information of the crack surface
of specimens. The wide and narrow surface of rectangular
prism specimens were observed using different specimens.
The main testing systems used in this study are shown in
Fig. 3.
Experimental results and discussion
Stress thresholds
The pre-peak stress–strain (σ–ɛ) curve of rocks in uniaxial
compression tests can be divided into the following four
stages: (I) natural crack closure stage, (II) crack initiation
and elastic stage, (III) stable crack expansion stage, and (IV)
unstable crack expansion stage (Bieniawski 1967; Martin
1997; Eberhardt et al. 1998; Bruning et al. 2018). The stress
thresholds of adjacent stages are the crack closure stress σcc,
initiation stress σci, damage stress σcd, and peak stress (uniax-
ial compressive strength) σucs, as shown in Fig. 4. The σcc and
σci are associated with the closure of natural cracks and the
initial development of cracks, respectively (Nicksiar and
Martin 2012, 2013). The σcd indicates the onset of the unstable
crack expansion, which corresponds to the axial stress value at
the volumetric dilatancy point (Bruning et al. 2018). The σucs
is the peak value of the axial stress before the specimen failed.
The σcd and σucs are also called Blong-term strength^ and
Bshort-term strength^, respectively (Damjanac and Fairhurst
2010). The failure process of rock specimens is dominated by
the growth of cracks and the development degree of cracks
Specimen shape and cross-section effects on the mechanical properties of rocks under uniaxial compressive... 6065

Table 1 Marble specimens used

in the study Specimen group Specimen no. Height (mm) Diameter or width × thickness (mm) r

Circle C-1-1 25.38 49.03 0.52

C-1-2 25.57 49.06 0.52
C-1-3 25.29 49.03 0.52
C-2-1 50.62 49.11 1.03
C-2-2 50.92 49.07 1.04
C-2-3 50.20 49.10 1.02
C-3-1 100.70 49.06 2.05
C-3-2 99.65 49.11 2.03
C-3-3 100.46 49.02 2.05
C-4-1 150.01 48.74 3.08
C-4-2 150.87 48.70 3.10
C-4-3 150.02 48.71 3.08
Square S-1-1 25.67 50.18 × 50.69 0.51
S-1-2 25.73 50.70 × 50.11 0.51
S-1-3 25.71 50.09 × 50.23 0.51
S-2-1 50.43 50.62 × 50.26 1.00
S-2-2 49.96 50.56 × 51.05 0.99
S-2-3 50.65 50.55 × 50.69 1.00
S-3-1 100.96 50.63 50.80 1.99
S-3-2 100.09 50.48 × 50.04 1.98
S-3-3 100.73 50.39 × 50.46 2.00
S-4-1 151.09 50.54 × 50.31 2.99
S-4-2 150.50 50.83 × 50.14 2.96
S-4-3 150.88 50.15 × 50.67 3.01
Rectangle R-1-1 26.48 50.55 × 24.94 0.52
R-1-2 24.63 50.60 × 25.66 0.49
R-1-3 26.14 50.49 × 24.54 0.52
R-2-1 50.53 50.21 × 25.84 1.01
R-2-2 50.10 50.77 × 25.84 0.99
R-2-3 50.04 50.52 × 24.99 0.99
R-3-1 99.96 50.47 × 25.32 1.98
R-3-2 100.40 50.60 × 25.64 1.98
R-3-3 100.43 50.57 × 25.85 1.99
R-4-1 149.64 50.49 × 25.68 2.96
R-4-2 149.88 50.57 × 24.74 2.96
R-4-3 149.78 50.59 × 24.66 2.96

inside the rock specimens during the loading process could be
characterized by the aforementioned stress thresholds.
The calculation methods of the stress thresholds are also
shown in Fig. 4. The corresponding stress value of the reverse
point from increase to decrease of the volume strain (ɛv) is σcd.
Based on σcd, the axial strain (ɛa) and lateral strain (ɛl) linear
reference lines, AS and LS, are determined, as well as the
changes in axial strain (ΔASR) and lateral strain (ΔLSR) be-
tween the loading line and the linear reference line. The ɛl of
the rectangular prism specimens is the average of the strain
measured on the wide surface and the narrow surface.
Moreover, the stress corresponding to the maximum value of
ΔASR and ΔLSR are σcc and σci, respectively. They could be
determined using the axial strain response (ASR) and lateral
strain response (LSR) (Nicksiar and Martin 2012). The stress
thresholds of the different specimens in this study are provided
in Table 2.
The σcc values of the marble specimens with different
shapes and cross-sections are about 10–27% of the σucs and
have a positive relationship with the H of specimens. The
shape effect is found to be the main factor affecting the value
of σcc. Because the tested rock in this study is a typical hard
rock with low porosity, the relationship between the σcc and
the cross-section is irregular (Fig. 5a).
6066 K. Du et al.

Fig. 3 Main testing systems used

in this study

The σci of all marble specimens is about 63.66 ± 0.68 MPa
(35–65% of the σucs). There is no obvious shape or cross-
sectional shape effect on the σci, which may be a natural attri-
bute of rock materials. The σci could be used to accurately
estimate the slabbing strength of hard brittle rocks of under-
ground openings (Martin 1997; Martin and Christiansson
2009; Rojat et al. 2009), and is used as a lower bound estimate
for the long-term strength threshold of rocks (Damjanac and
Fairhurst 2010) (Fig. 5b).
The σcd is an indicator of the onset of unstable cracks and is
about 85–93% of the σucs. The σcd increases with the decrease
of r, and the σcd of the square prism and cylindrical specimens
with the same r values are similar. The σcd of rectangular
prism specimens with r = 2 and 3 is equal to that of square
prism and cylindrical specimens with r = 2 and 3. However,
the σcd of the rectangular prism specimens with r = 1 or 0.5 are
smaller than that of square prism and cylindrical specimens,
which indicates that the cross-sectional shape effect leads to

Fig. 4 Stages of pre-peak

stress–strain curve and stress
thresholds (modified form Martin
1997, Eberhardt et al. 1998, and
Bruning et al. 2018)
Specimen shape and cross-section effects on the mechanical properties of rocks under uniaxial compressive... 6067

Table 2 Stress thresholds of the

tests Specimen r E σcc σci σcd σucs σcc/σucs σci/σucs σcd/σucs
shape (GPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (%) (%) (%)

Circle 0.5 19.7 18.1 64.3 153.3 181.9 9.95 35.35 84.29
1.0 18.2 21.8 63.5 135.4 155.6 14.01 40.81 87.01
2.0 16.6 24.9 63.3 108.5 126.4 12.10 50.08 85.83
3.0 16.5 26.8 62.5 85.5 101.2 26.49 61.77 84.50
Square 0.5 18.2 18.2 64.4 151.4 163.3 11.21 41.89 92.72
1.0 17.7 22.1 63.2 134.1 150.3 11.71 42.06 89.25
2.0 16.7 24.7 64.3 111.6 127.1 14.38 46.34 87.21
3.0 16.8 25.89 63.4 83.5 99.5 26.02 63.72 83.92
Rectangle 0.5 21.8 18.3 63.8 140.2 151.4 12.02 48.75 92.62
1.0 20.8 22.7 65.3 123.4 140.5 12.53 44.35 87.85
2.0 18.0 25.1 62.4 107.2 127.6 13.82 54.15 86.12
3.0 17.4 26.6 63.5 81.5 100.2 26.55 63.39 81.44

The values in the table are the average of three specimens

an earlier occurrence of the unstable crack expansion for rect-
angular prism specimens (Fig. 5c).
The σucs represents the maximum carrying capacity of rock
specimens. When the r = 2 and 3, the σucs of rock specimens
with different cross-sectional shapes is nearly equal, which is
consistent with the results of Zhao et al. (2015). But when the
r ≤ 1, the σucs of the rectangular prism specimen is the
smallest, that of the cylindrical specimen is the largest, and
that of the square prism specimen is in between the two. There
are clear differences between the results in these tests and
those of Xu and Cai (2017). The numerical simulation results
of Xu and Cai (2017) show that the σucs of the square prism
specimen is larger than that of the rectangular prism specimen,
and the σucs of the rectangular prism specimen is larger than
that of the cylindrical specimen. However, the differences
were less than 10 MPa. In our test, when r = 1, the σucs of
the square prism and rectangular prism specimens are
5.3 MPa and 15.1 MPa lower than that of the cylindrical
specimen, respectively. When the r = 0.5, compared to
the σucs of the cylindrical specimen, the σucs of the square
prism and rectangular prism specimens were reduced by
18.6 MPa and 30.5 MPa, respectively. The difference in the
σucs may be mainly caused by the specimen shape and cross-
section effect (Fig. 5d).
Empirical strength formula
The main empirical formulas in previous literatures between
σucs and D or r are summarized in Table 3. Formulas 1–3 are
used to assess the specimen size effect on σucs of rocks and the
others can evaluate the shape effect on σucs of cylindrical
specimens. Formula 7 takes the σucs of the specimen with
shape ratio = 2.5 as a standard and is not suitable for this study.
The other six formulas were adapted to evaluate the relation-
ship between σucs and r of cylindrical specimens in this study.
The fitting curves, functions, and determination coefficient
(R2) are shown in Fig. 6. The second-order polynomial func-
tion (formula 9) and logarithmic regression function (formula
10) have higher determination coefficients of 0.9955 and
0.9902, respectively. The two formulas can be used for better
assessment of the relationship between σucs and r of cylindri-
cal specimens in static uniaxial compression tests, which was
also proved by Liang et al. (2016).
Figure 7 shows the results of the second-order polynomial
function and regression function mentioned above used for the
square prism and rectangular prism specimens. The black
fitting curves are calculated based on the parameters of cylin-
drical specimens (Fig.6e, f). The red or blue fitting curves are
the best fitting curves with the highest determination coeffi-
cient values. The determination coefficient of the logarithmic
regression function for rectangular prism specimens decreases
a little, which is lower than 0.9, and that of the second-order
polynomial function is also at a high level. There are obvious
differences between the two kinds of fitting curves, especially
for the prismatic specimens with r ≤ 1. The increase in value
of σucs for prismatic specimens after a shape ratio lower than 1
changes smoothly, which is mainly reflected by the magnitude
of a in formulas 9 and 10. In the second-order polynomial
function, the values of a are 0.0465 for cylindrical specimens,
− 0.08 for square prism specimens, and − 0.027 for rectangu-
lar prism specimens. In the logarithmic regression function,
the values of a are − 0.35, − 0.27, and − 0.207, respectively.
Fracture modes
The fracture modes of rock specimens under uniaxial com-
pressive loads are classified as splitting fracture, cone-shaped
fracture (coupled splitting and shearing fracture), and shearing
fracture (Zhang and Zhao 2014; Liang et al. 2016; Tao et al.
2018). Figure 8 shows the images of DIC under different axial
6068 K. Du et al.

ƒFig. 5 Stress thresholds versus height to width ratios (r) of the specimens
in this study

stresses and the σ–ɛ curves of the specimens in this study. The
fracture modes of the marble specimens are strongly depen-
dent on the specimen shape and cross-section.
The number of macrocracks increases with decreasing r.
For the specimens with r = 2 and 3, only a cluster of inclined
macrocracks appears, and the shearing fracture is the domi-
nant fracture mode (Fig. 8a, b). A similar crack development
and fracture mode lead to the almost same σucs value for dif-
ferent shaped specimens. The macrocracks of rectangular
prism specimens only appear on the wide surface. For the
specimens with r = 1, the number of macrocracks increases
compared to those of specimens with r = 2. Vertical tensile
cracks are found on the surface of the cylindrical specimen
and a cone-shaped piece appears in the rock fragments. The
crack angles of the square prism and rectangular prism spec-
imens are larger than that of the specimens with r = 2. The
failure mode is coupled splitting and shearing fracture mode
(Fig. 8c). For the specimens with r = 0.5, the direction of
macrocracks is parallel to the loading direction. The crack
distribution results are similar to those of Li et al. (2011).
Splitting is the dominant failure mode of the specimens, which
experience slabbing failure. It is worth mentioning that a small
cone-shaped piece is also noticed in the cylindrical specimens,
which experience coupled splitting and shearing fracture (Fig.
8d). Furthermore, the fracture plane of the rectangular prism
specimens with r = 1 and r = 0.5 is the narrow surface. The
crack propagation space is limited, which causes the σucs of
the rectangular prism specimens to be the lowest.

AE properties

It is well known that AE waveforms carry important informa-

tion about the microfailure cracks of rocks, and AE wave-
forms resulting from the tensile cracks have shorter rise time
(RT, delay between the onset and maximum amplitude of the
AE wave) and higher frequency than those of shear cracks
(Aggelis 2011; Wang et al. 2016). The parameters of AE
waveforms, such as the average frequency (AF), the RA value,
the AE energy, and the cumulative AE energy, exhibit strong
sensitivity to the fracture mode of cracks. AF is the ratio of AE
count number and the duration of the AE wave, and RA is the
ratio of the RT and the amplitude of the AE wave.
In contrast with the σ–ɛ curves, three typical periods (i.e.,
quiet period, active period, and remission period) can be ob-
tained from the AE activities of rock failure. During the natu-
ral crack closure stage and crack initiation and elastic stages,
no obvious damage of rock specimens was observed except
for the closure of the natural cracks, so fewer AE counts were
taken. With continuous loading, the number of microcracks
propagating across the specimens increased significantly,
Specimen shape and cross-section effects on the mechanical properties of rocks under uniaxial compressive... 6069

Table 3 Empirical formulas between σucs and the specimen size and shape ratio

No. Main factor Formula Factor scope Cross-section References

1 D σucs = a − b exp(− cD) 50–2760 mm Circle/square Liu et al. (1998)

2 σucs(D = x) = σucs(D = 50)(50/x) 0.18
10–200 mm Circle and square Hoek and Brown (1980)
3 lg(σucs) = a + b lg (V) 43.94–238.25 mm Circle Košťák and Bielenstein (1971)
4 r σucs(r = x) = σucs(r = 1)(0.222/x + 0.778) 1/3–2 Circle Obert and Duvall (1967)
Tuncay and Hasancebi (2009)
5 σucs(r = x) = σucs(r = 2)(0.24/x + 0.88) <2 Circle ASTM (1994)
6 σucs(r = x) = (σucs(r = 2)(0.25/x + 0.875) <2 Circle Kahraman and Alber (2006)
7 σucs(r = x) = σucs(r = 2.5)(a + bx) 1–2.5 Circle Tuncay and Hasancebi (2009)
σucs ðr ¼ xÞ ¼ σucs ðr ¼ 2ÞeðaþxÞ
b
8 0.5–3 Circle Yang et al. (2005)
9 σucs(r = x) = σucs(r = 2)(ax2 + bx + c) 1–3 Circle Liang et al. (2016)
10 σucs(r = x) = σucs(r = 2)(aln(x) + b ) 0.5–3.5 Circle

V is the volume of rock specimens; a, b, and c are the material constants

indicating that the specimens entered into the stable crack
expansion stage, and the AE energy increased significantly.
Finally, the rock specimens entered into the unstable crack
expansion stage. The AE counts increased dramatically, and
the AE energy and cumulative AE energy reached their max-
imum values at the time of rock failure, as shown in Fig. 9.
The main conclusions were made as follows: (1) the AE en-
ergy and cumulative AE energy of rock specimens with the
same r value were significantly different. The rectangular
prism specimens have the maximum AE energy and cumula-
tive AE energy values, whereas the cylindrical specimens
have the minimum values. (2) For the specimens with the
same cross-section, the smaller the r, the larger the AE energy
and cumulative AE energy.
The AF–RA curves are shown in Fig. 10. It is noticed that
the maximum value of the AF for the rectangular prism and
square prism specimens increased with the decrease of r, and
the change that appeared in the RA value was not trivial.

Fig. 6 Relationship between σucs and the shape ratio (r) of cylindrical specimens
6070 K. Du et al.

Fig. 7 Relationship between σucs and the shape ratio (r) of: a, b square prism specimens; c, d rectangular prism specimens

R-4-1 S-4-1 C-4-1

(a) r=3 r=3 r=3 (b)
R-3-1 S-3-1 C-3-3
r=2 r=2 r=2

(c) R-2-3 S-2-3 C-2-3

(d) R-2-3 S-2-3 C-2-3
r=1 r=1 r=1 r=0.5 r=0.5 r=0.5

Fig. 8 Stress–strain (σ–ɛ) curves, dynamic scanning capacitance microscope (DSCM) pictures, and fracture modes of the specimens tested in this study
Specimen shape and cross-section effects on the mechanical properties of rocks under uniaxial compressive...
Therefore, the number of tensile cracks in the rock specimens
with a lower r value increases during loading. The splitting
failure occurs in the rectangular prism and square prism
specimens with a lower r. However, the AF and RA values
of the cylindrical specimens barely change. These results
are consistent with the fracture modes of the different
specimens.
Conclusions
In this study, the marble specimens with different height to
width ratios (r) and cross-sectional shapes were tested under
uniaxial compressive stress with the aim to identify the effect
of specimen size and shape on the mechanical properties of
rocks. The overall conclusions of this study can be summa-
rized as follows:
(1) The specimen size and shape can slightly influence the
crack closure stress (σcc) of rocks. The initiation stress
(σci) remains constant for all specimens, and, overall, the
damage stress (σcd) and uniaxial compressive strength
(σucs) increase with the decrease of r. The σcd and σucs
Fig. 9 Cumulative acoustic emission (AE) energy and AE energy of rock specimens during the test: a, b specimens with r = 0.5; c, d specimens with r =
1; e, f specimens with r = 2; g, h specimens with r = 3
6071
of the three shape types of rock specimens with r = 2 are
nearly equal, but there are clear differences in the rock
specimens with r = 1 and r = 0.5. The onset of the unsta-
ble crack expansion occurs earliest for the rectangular
prism specimens, which is later for the square prism
and cylindrical specimens. The σucs of the rectangular
prism specimens is the lowest, and the σucs of the square
prism specimens is smaller than that of the cylindrical
specimens.
(2) Based on the statistical analysis carried out on the exper-
imental data, some equations were proposed for the eval-
uation of rock strength in specimens of different shapes
and sizes.
(3) The shearing fracture is the dominant failure mode for
the specimens with r = 2. The crack angles of cylindrical,
square prism, and rectangular prism specimens with r = 1
are larger than that of the specimens with r = 2, and the
failure mode is coupled with splitting and shearing. For
the specimens with r = 0.5, the direction of macrocracks
is parallel to the loading direction of rectangular prism
and square prism specimens, which indicates that the
specimens experience slabbing failure. There is also a
small cone-shaped piece in the cylindrical specimens
6072 K. Du et al.

Fig. 10 Average frequency (AF) versus RA (ratio of the rise time [RT] and the amplitude of the AE wave) of different specimens in this study: a–d
square prism specimens; e–h rectangular prism specimens; i–l cylindrical specimens
Specimen shape and cross-section effects on the mechanical properties of rocks under uniaxial compressive...
and the failure mode is also coupled splitting and shear-
ing, while splitting is dominant. In addition, the fracture
plane of rectangular prism specimens with r = 1 and r =
0.5 is the narrow surface.
(4) The values of acoustic emission energy (AEN) and cu-
mulative AE energy (CAEN) of rock specimens with the
same r value have significant differences. The rectangu-
lar prism specimens have the maximum AEN and CAEN
values, while cylindrical specimens have the minimum
values. For the specimens with the same cross-sectional
shape, the shorter the r, the larger the AEN and CAEN.
The maximum values of the average frequency (AF) for
the rectangular prism and square prism specimens in-
crease with the decrease of r, and the RA value (ratio of
the rise time [RT] and the amplitude of the AE wave)
changes little. Therefore, the number of tensile cracks
increases for the rock specimens with a lower r.
(5) From the testing results of the study, the pillars with a
lower r have a higher bearing capacity and should be
implemented in underground mines. The optimal shape
of the pillars should be cylindrical, which has the highest
bearing capacity and onset stress of unstable crack ex-
pansion. In mining practice, prism pillars are unavoid-
able. Thus, the narrow surface is the main macrocrack
development surface, so the short side length of prism
pillars should have a large value, and square cross-
sectional shape of pillars should be carried out
conscientiously.
Acknowledgements The work described in this paper was supported by
the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 51774326)
and the Hunan Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no.
2017JJ3390), as well as by the Fundamental Research Funds for the
Central Universities of Central South University (grant no. 2017zzts794).
References
Aggelis DG (2011) Classification of cracking mode in concrete by acous-
tic emission parameters. Mech Res Commun 38(3):153–157
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (1994) Annual
book of ASTM standards, vol 04.08. ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, USA
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2000) American
Society for Testing and Materials. Annual book of ASTM standards,
vol 04.08. ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Bieniawski ZT (1967) Mechanism of brittle fracture of rock, parts I, II
and III. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 4(4):395–430
Bieniawski ZT (1968) The effect of specimen size on compressive
strength of coal. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 5(4):
325–335
Bordia SK (1971) The effect of size and stress concentration on the
dilatancy and fracture of rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech
Abstr 8(6):629–640
Bruning T, Karakus M, Nguyen GD, Goodchild D (2018) Experimental
study on the damage evolution of brittle rock under triaxial confine-
ment with full circumferential strain control. Rock Mech Rock Eng
51(11):3321–3341
6073
Chinese standard (2013) Standard for test methods of engineering rock
mass. GB/T 50266-2013 (in Chinese)
Damjanac B, Fairhurst C (2010) Evidence for a long-term strength thresh-
old in crystalline rock. Rock Mech Rock Eng 43(5):513–531
Das MN (1986) Influence of width/height ratio on post-failure behaviour
of coal. Int J Min Geol Eng 4(1):79–87
Dhir RK, Sangha CM (1973) Relationships between size, deformation
and strength for cylindrical specimens loaded in uniaxial compres-
sion. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 10(6):699–712
Du K, Li XB, Li DY, Weng L (2015) Failure properties of rocks in true
triaxial unloading compressive test. Trans Nonferrous Metals Soc
China 25(2):571–581
Du K, Tao M, Li XB, Zhou J (2016) Experimental study of slabbing and
rockburst induced by true-triaxial unloading and local dynamic dis-
turbance. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49(9):3437–3453
Eberhardt E, Stead D, Stimpson B, Read RS (1998) Identifying crack
initiation and propagation thresholds in brittle rock. Can Geotech J
35:222–233
Esterhuizen GS, Dolinar DR, Ellenberger JL (2011) Pillar strength in
underground stone mines in the United States. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 48(1):42–50
Feng F, Li X B, Rostami J, Peng D X, Li D Y, Du K (2019) Numerical
investigation of hard rock strength and fracturing under polyaxial
compression based on Mogi-Coulomb failure criterion. Int J
Geomech 19(4): 04019005–1. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.
1943-5622.0001352
Frew DJ, Forrestal MJ, Chen W (2001) A split Hopkinson pressure bar
technique to determine compressive stress-strain data for rock ma-
terials. Exp Mech 41:40–46
Gong FQ, Luo Y, Li XB, Si XF, Tao M (2018) Experimental simulation
investigation on rockburst induced by spalling failure in deep circu-
lar tunnels. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 81:413–427
Green SJ, Perkins RD (1968) Uniaxial compression tests at varying strain
rates on three geologic materials. In: Proceedings of the 10th sym-
posium on rock mechanics, Austin, Texas, May 1968, pp 35–54
Hawkins AB (1998) Aspects of rock strength. Bull Eng Geol Environ 57:
17–30
Hoek E, Brown ET (1980) Underground excavations in rock. Institution
of Mining and Metallurgy, Stephen Austin and Sons Ltd., London,
pp 154–158
Hong L, Li XB, Ma CD, Yin TB, Ye ZY, Liao GY (2008) Study on size
effect of rock dynamic strength and strain rate sensitivity. Chin J
Rock Mech Eng 27(3):526–533 (in Chinese)
Hudson JA, Crouch SL, Fairhurst C (1972) Soft, stiff and servo-
controlled testing machines: a review with reference to rock failure.
Eng Geol 6(3):155–189
International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM) (2007) The complete
ISRM suggested methods for rock characterization, testing and
monitoring: 1974–2006. In: Ulusay R, Hudson JA (eds) Suggested
methods prepared by the commission on testing methods. ISRM,
compilation arranged by the ISRM Turkish National Group,
Kozan Ofset, Ankara, Turkey
Jaeger JC, Cook NGW, Zimmerman R (2009) Fundamentals of rock
mechanics. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ
Jamshidi A, Nikudel MR, Khamehchiyan M, Sahamieh RZ (2016) The
effect of specimen diameter size on uniaxial compressive strength,
P-wave velocity and the correlation between them. Geomech
Geoeng 11(1):13–19
Kahraman S, Alber M (2006) Estimating unconfined compressive
strength and elastic modulus of a fault breccia mixture of weak
blocks and strong matrix. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 43(8):1277–
1287
Košťák B, Bielenstein HU (1971) Strength distribution in hard rock. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 8(5):501–521
6074
Li DY, Li CC, Li XB (2011) Influence of sample height-to-width ratios on
failure mode for rectangular prism samples of hard rock loaded in
uniaxial compression. Rock Mech Rock Eng 44(3):253–267
Li G, Tang CA, Liang ZZ (2017) Development of a parallel FE simulator
for modeling the whole trans-scale failure process of rock from
meso- to engineering-scale. Comput Geosci 98(C):73–86
Li XB, Feng F, Li DY, Du K, Ranjith PG, Rostami J (2018) Failure
Characteristics of Granite Influenced by Sample Height-to-Width
Ratios and Intermediate Principal Stress Under True-Triaxial
Unloading Conditions. Rock Mech and Rock Eng 51:1321–1345
Liang CY, Zhang QB, Li X, Xin P (2016) The effect of specimen shape
and strain rate on uniaxial compressive behavior of rock material.
Bull Eng Geol Environ 75(4):1669–1681
Liu BC, Zhang JS, Du QZ, Tu JF (1998) A study of size effect for
compression strength of rock. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 17(6):611–
614 (in Chinese)
Martin CD (1997) Seventeenth Canadian geotechnical colloquium: the
effect of cohesion loss and stress path on brittle rock strength. Can
Geotech J 34(5):698–725
Martin CD, Maybee WG (2000) The strength of hard-rock pillars. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 37(8):1239–1246
Martin CD, Christiansson R (2009) Estimating the potential for spalling
around a deep nuclear waste repository in crystalline rock. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 46(2): 219–228
Mogi K (1966) Some precise measurements of fracture strength of rocks
under uniform compressive stress. Rock Mech Eng Geol 4:41–55
Mogi K (2007) Experimental rock mechanics. Taylor & Francis, London,
pp 6–11
Nicksiar M, Martin CD (2012) Evaluation of methods for determining
crack initiation in compression tests on low-porosity rocks. Rock
Mech Rock Eng 45(4):607–617
Nicksiar M, Martin CD (2013) Crack initiation stress in low porosity
crystalline and sedimentary rocks. Eng Geol 154(2):64–76
Obert L, Duvall WI (1967) Rock mechanics and the design of structures
in rock. Wiley, London
Pan YS, Wei JM (2002) Experimental and theoretical study on size effect
on strain softening of rock materials. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 21(2):
215–218 (in Chinese)
Paterson MS, Wong TF (2005) Experimental rock deformation—the brit-
tle field. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 1–63
Rojat F, Labiouse V, Kaiser PK, Descoeudres F 2009 Brittle rock failure
in the steg lateral adit of the lötschberg base tunnel. Rock Mech
Rock Eng, 42(2):341–359
K. Du et al.
Tao M, Zhao HT, Li XB, Li XA, Du K (2018) Failure characteristics and
stress distribution of pre-stressed rock specimen with circular cavity
subjected to dynamic loading. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 81:1–
15
Thuro K, Plinninger RJ, Zah S, Schutz S (2001) Scale effects in rock
strength properties. Part 1: unconfined compressive test and
Brazilian test. In: Proceedings of the ISRM regional symposium,
EUROCK 2001, rock mechanics—a challenge for society, Espoo,
Finland, June 2001, pp 169–174
Tuncay E, Hasancebi N (2009) The effect of length to diameter ratio of
test specimens on the uniaxial compressive strength of rock. Bull
Eng Geol Environ 68(4):491–497
Unlu T, Yilmaz O (2008) Investigation of the shape effect on the uniaxial
compressive strength of the intact rock. In: Türk N, Deliormanlı AH,
Kıncal C (eds) Proceedings of the 9th regional rock mechanics sym-
posium, Izmir, Turkey, pp 121–141
Wang H, Liu D, Cui Z, Cheng C, Jian Z (2016) Investigation of the
fracture modes of red sandstone using XFEM and acoustic emis-
sions. Theor Appl Fract Mech 85:283–293
Xu Y, Cai M (2017) Numerical study on the influence of cross-sectional
shape on strength and deformation behaviors of rocks under uniaxial
compression. Comput Geotech 84:129–137
Yang SQ, Xu WY, Su CD (2005) Study on statistical damage constitutive
model of rock considering scale effect. Chin J Rock Mech Eng
24(24):4484–4490 (in Chinese)
Zhang QB, Zhao J (2014) A review of dynamic experimental techniques
and mechanical behaviour of rock materials. Rock Mech Rock Eng
47(4):1411–1478
Zhao XG, Cai M, Wang J, Li PF (2015) Strength comparison between
cylindrical and prism specimens of Beishan granite under uniaxial
compression. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 76:10–17
Zipf RK (2001) Pillar design to prevent collapse of room-and-pillar
mines. In: Hustrulid WA, Bullock RC (eds) Underground mining
methods: engineering fundamentals and international case studies.
Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Littleton, CO, pp
493–511