International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004

Brazilian test: stress field and tensile strength of anisotropic rocks

using an analytical solution
J. Claessona,*, B. Bohlolib
a
Department of Building Physics, Chalmers University of Technology, Sven Hultinsg 8, Gothenburg 41296, Sweden
b
Ministry of Science Research and Technology, Dr. Beheshti Avenue, Tehran, Iran
Accepted 11 September 2002

Abstract

Tensile strength of rock is among the most important parameters influencing rock deformability, rock crushing and blasting
results. To calculate the tensile strength from the indirect tensile (Brazilian) test, one must know the principal tensile stress, in
particular at the rock disc center, where a crack initiates. This stress can be assessed by an analytical solution. A study of this
solution for anisotropic (transversely isotropic) rock is presented.
The solution is given explicitly. The key expansion coefficients are obtained from a complex-valued 2
2 matrix equation. The
convergence of the solution is greatly improved by a new procedure. It is shown that the dimensionless stress field depends only on
two intrinsic parameters, E 0 =E and b: The stress at the center of the disc is given in charts as a function of these parameters (and the
angle yb between the direction of applied force and the plane of transverse isotropy). Furthermore, a new, reasonably accurate,
approximate formula for the principal tension at the disc center, (0,0), is derived from the analytical solution:
 
P pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi cosð4yb Þ
spt ð0; 0ÞD ð 4 E=E 0 Þcosð2yb Þ  ðb  1Þ ;
pRL 4
where
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  
EE 0 1 2n0
b¼  :
2 G0 E 0
The elastic parameters of rock in two perpendicular directions were measured in the laboratory. The result of the stress analysis was
applied in calculating the indirect tensile strength of gneiss, which has a well-defined foliation plane (transversely isotropic). When
the results were compared with the tensile strength of rock obtained by using a conventional formula that assumes isotropic
material, there was a significant difference. Moreover, good agreement was observed for the tensile strength calculated from the
stress charts and the proposed formula, when compared with other published stress charts.
r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction method for determining the tensile strength of these

Indirect tensile (Brazilian) testing of rock cores is an
easy and common method for determining the tensile
strength of rock. Tensile strength is calculated in this
test by using an equation, which assumes isotropic
material properties. Since many rock types (e.g.
metamorphic and sedimentary) are anisotropic, and in
particular transversely isotropic, it is necessary to find a
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +46-31-772-1996; fax: +46-31-772-
1993.
types of rocks from the Brazilian test. Many researchers
[1–3] have studied the tensile strength of anisotropic
rocks by using the Brazilian test with the equation for
isotropic material.
A comprehensive analytical solution for an aniso-
tropic disc subjected to the Brazilian test was presented
by Amadei et al. [4]. It is based on a solution method
given by Lekhnitskii [5]. The calculation of stress and
tensile strength of the anisotropic rock sample requires
that the principal elastic constants E; E 0 ; n; n0 and G 0 be
determined (n=E ¼ n0 =E 0 ). Chen [6] presents in diagrams

1365-1609/02/$ - see front matter r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 1 3 6 5 - 1 6 0 9 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 9 9 - 0
992 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004
the principal stress at the center of a rock disc as a
function of the three dimensionless parameters E=E 0 ; n0
and E=G 0 :
The original objectives of this work were to study the
analytical solution of Lekhnitskii, Amadei et al. and
Chen, and to apply the results of the stress analysis to
calculate the tensile strength of anisotropic rock
material from laboratory tests.
The study resulted in a few improvements of the
solution method. The convergence of the series solution
was improved greatly by a new procedure. The stress,
strain and displacement can be calculated, even at the
disc periphery, with a high degree of accuracy and
without any problems of convergence. The key expan-
sion coefficients involve the solution of 4
4 matrix
equations (Eq. (24)), involving the real and imaginary
parts of Am and Bm ). This equation is reduced to a
simpler complex-valued 2
2 matrix (Eq. (25)). The
analytical solution shows that the dimensionless stress
field depends on only two intrinsic parameters (and on
the angle yb between the direction of the applied force
and the direction normal to the plane of transverse
isotropy). The stress at the center of the disc may be
given in the form of charts. Finally, it was found that
from the analytical solution, new, quite good approx-
imate formulas could be derived for the principal
tension and compression at the disc center (Eqs. (36)
and (37)). The tensile stress spt (0,0) at the center of the
disc can be obtained from either the charts or the
approximate formula, Eq. (36).
2. The Brazilian test
In the Brazilian (indirect tensile) test, a disc of
material is subjected to two opposing normal strip loads
at the disc periphery (Fig. 1 left). The applied load is P
(N). The rather thin disc has a radius R and thickness L:
In the standard method of ISRM [7], the tensile strength
of rocks, st ; is calculated from the equation (diameter
D ¼ 2R):
2P P small angle (y). The difference between stress in the
st ¼ ¼ :
pDL pRL
P P
y (E' ν')
L G'
Z replaced by the ‘‘plane of foliation’’ which is specific for
2R
(E, ν)
P
P pal elastic constants of the other two orthotropic
Fig. 1. Brazilian test for an anisotropic material.
Eq. (1) is based on the theory of elasticity for isotropic
media. The formula gives the tensile stress perpendicular
to the loaded diameter at the center of the disc at the
time of failure [6] when the applied force is P: Failure
initiates at the center of the core (where the ratio of
compressive to tensile stress is least and equals three)
and propagates outward along the loading direction [8].
Using Eq. (1) to calculate the indirect tensile strength of
anisotropic rocks is erroneous, since the stress distribu-
tion in anisotropic discs is different from that of
isotropic ones (Fig. 1).
Recently Exadaktylos and Kaklis [9] presented an
explicit solution for a transversely isotropic circular disc
subjected to Brazilian test. They gave explicit represen-
tation of stress and strains at any arbitrary point in the
disc and also proposed the formulation as a back-
analysis tool for the characterization of rock elasticity
and strength properties. In this paper, we present a
similar solution but in dimensionless form with im-
proved convergence of Fourier series solution and also
empirical formulas for the principal stresses at the center
of an anisotropic disc loaded diametrically. We finally
introduce some charts for determining stresses at the
center of the disc.
The material of the test sample is assumed to be
transversely isotropic in this study. To determine stress
distribution in anisotropic discs, material parameters in
the transversely isotropic plane and in the normal
direction are required. The modulus of elasticity and
Poisson’s ratio are E and n in the x-direction (and in the
z-direction perpendicular to the disc plane). The
corresponding quantities in the transverse y-direction
are E 0 and n0 : The modulus of shear in the (x; y)-plane
(and in the (y; z)-plane) is G 0 (Fig. 1). The angle between
the direction of the applied force and the normal to the
plane of transverse isotropy is yb ; 0pyb pp/2 (Fig. 3).
The forces act in the plane of the disc. We consider the
case of plane stress in the disc plane or, following
Lekhnitskii [5], the generalized plane stress.
The solution presented in the following is applicable
for any boundary forces. The opposing normal forces
in the Brazilian test act over a strip involving a certain
ð1Þ
disc due to a point or a narrow strip load, particu-
larly around the center, is negligible. Therefore,
a point load acting at a single angle yb was used in the
solution.
The plane of the so-called ‘‘transverse isotropy’’ is, in
fact, not strictly isotropic [10]. Therefore, this term is
x
metamorphic rocks used in this work. However, the
solution below is applicable to any orthotropic mate-
rial as long as the z coordinate follows one of the
orthotropic directions. The solution involves the princi-
directions in the disc plane.
 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004 993

3. Problem to be solved around the center, (0,0). It is required that the tangential
component of the displacement be zero at the point,
We consider plane stress in a transversely isotropic where the point force acts.
disc. The basic equations to fulfill are force balance, the The boundary functions Xb ðyÞ and Yb ðyÞ are ex-
relation between strain and displacement, and Hooke’s pressed as Fourier series:
law: X
N

qsx qtxy qtxy qsy Xb ðyÞ ¼ ½Xcm cosðmyÞ þ Xsm sinðmyÞ ;

þ ¼ 0; þ ¼ 0; ð2Þ m¼1
qx qy qx qy
XN

qu qv qu qv Yb ðyÞ ¼ ½Ycm cosðmyÞ þ Ysm sinðmyÞ : ð5Þ

ex ¼ ; ey ¼ ; gxy ¼ þ ; ð3Þ m¼1
qx qy qy qx
Here, Xcm and Ycm are cosine coefficients, and Xsm and
sx n0 sy sy n0 sx txy Ysm are sine coefficients of the boundary forces. The
ex ¼  0 ; ey ¼ 0  0 ; gxy ¼ 0 : ð4Þ
E E E E G coefficients for m ¼ 0; X0 and Y0 are zero, since the total
It should be noted that n (¼ n0 E=E 0 ) does not appear applied force must be zero. The moment of the applied
directly in the above equations. The four elastic forces must be zero. This means that the first component
parameters that occur in the equations are E; E 0 ; n0 (m ¼ 1) involves only three free Fourier coefficients:
and G 0 : The transversely isotropic disc has prescribed Xs1 ¼ Yc1 : General solutions are derived for each
forces along its periphery. The boundary force F b ðyÞ ¼ Fourier component m:
ðXb ðyÞ; Yb ðyÞÞ (N/m2) is a function of the angle y (Fig. 2).
The solution given below is valid for any boundary
forces. The cases, treated in detail are shown in Fig. 3. 4. Analytical solution
We consider diametrically opposed normal point (or
line) forces P (N) in the y-direction (left) and at any The analytical solution for isotropic case is well
oblique angle y ¼ p=2  yb (right), 0pypp=2: established for any boundary forces; see [11,12]. The
A rigid displacement and a rotation of the disc may be solution was extended to the case of an anisotropic disc
prescribed at will. It is necessary that the displacement by the Russian school following Muskhelishvili [13].
be zero at the center (uð0; 0Þ ¼ 0 and vð0; 0Þ ¼ 0). We Lekhnitskii [5] gives a complete solution, which has been
also need a condition for the rigid rotation of the disc used by Chen et al. [14] to analyze transversely isotropic
discs. A good survey of the Brazilian test and the
y analytical solution is given in [15].
Lekhnitskii’s solution is elaborated and presented in
n^ Fb detail in [16]. A survey of the solution technique is
presented here. The final solution is fully explicit. The
R expressions for the basic expansion coefficients Am and
θ x Bm are reformulated in a more explicit way, which
results in the matrix Eq. (25). A special problem is the
convergence of the sum of expansion or Fourier
components, in particular near and at the boundary.
The convergence is greatly improved by the new special
Fig. 2. Anisotropic disc subjected to a boundary force Fb ðyÞ: procedure presented in Section 5.

4.1. Solution for the first Fourier component

P y
θb The solution for the first Fourier component (m ¼ 1)
P
may be obtained directly. By direct identification in the
boundary conditions, we have
x sx1 ¼ Xc1 ; txy1 ¼ Xs1 ¼ Yc1 ; sy1 ¼ Ys1 : ð6Þ

4.2. Solution based on Airy’s stress function

P
The remaining problem is to determine the solution
P for the boundary forces, Eq. (5) of the higher Fourier
Fig. 3. Normal boundary forces acting along the y-axis or at any components, mX2: The technique based on Airy’s stress
angle yb : function is used. The second-order derivatives of Airy’s
994 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004

function give the stress field [6,15,16,17]. For b > 1; we have

qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
q2 F q2 F q2 F 4 0
m1 ¼ i E=E b þ b2  1;
sx ¼ sx1 þ ; sy ¼ sy1 þ ; txy ¼ txy1  :
qy2 qx2 qxqy qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ð7Þ m2 ¼ i 4 E=E 0 b  b2  1: ð13Þ

These expressions fulfill the equations of force balance For 21obo1; we have
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
(2) for any sufficiently regular function F ðx; yÞ: The m1 ¼ i 4 E=E 0 eijb =2 ; m2 ¼ i 4 E=E 0 eijb =2 ;
compatibility equation associated with Eqs. (2)–(4) gives jb ¼ arccosðbÞ: ð14Þ
the following equation for F ðx; yÞ:
  For b ¼ 1; the two roots m1 and m2 become equal. Then
1 q4 F 1 2n0 q4 F 1 q4 F the solution below is not valid. This case ðb ¼ 1Þ is not
þ  þ ¼ 0: ð8Þ
E 0 qx4 G 0 E 0 qx2 qy2 E qy4 dealt with here. Instead we may use the solution for b
close to 1 (for example b ¼ 1:001 or 0.999).
To obtain solutions to this equation, we use analytical
functions. Let f ðzÞ be an analytical function of the
complex variable z ¼ x þ iy; and let m be a complex- 4.4. The stress field from Airy’s function
valued constant. We choose the function
The stress and strain fields are obtained from
F ðx; yÞ ¼ f ðx þ myÞ: ð9Þ derivatives of F ðx; yÞ (Eq. (7)). Let F1 ðzÞ and F2 ðzÞ
denote the complex-valued derivatives of f1 ðzÞ and f2 ðzÞ:
Insertion of Eq. (9) in Eq. (8) gives the following
equation for F ðx; yÞ: df1 df2
F1 ðzÞ ¼ ; F2 ðzÞ ¼ ðz ¼ x þ iyÞ: ð15Þ
     dz dz
1 1 2n0 2 1 4 d4 f 

1þ  m þ m ¼ 0: The stress components are obtained from Eqs. (6), (7)
E0 G0 E 0 E dz4 z¼xþmy and (11):


The constant m is given by the roots of sx ðx; yÞ ¼ sx1 þ 2 Re m21 F01 ðx þ m1 yÞ þ m22 F02 ðx þ m2 yÞ ;
rffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  

4 E 2 E EE 0 1 2n0 sy ðx; yÞ ¼ sy1 þ 2 Re F01 ðx þ m1 yÞ þ F02 ðx þ m2 yÞ ;
m þ 2b m þ 0 ¼ 0; b ¼  : ð10Þ
E0 E 2 G0 E 0

txy ðx; yÞ ¼ tyx1  2 Re m1 F01 ðx þ m1 yÞ þ m2 F02 ðx þ m2 yÞ :
Here, the critical new elastic constant b is introduced.
ð16Þ
Eq. (10) has (normally) four roots:m1 ; m2 ; m3 ¼ m% 1 ; and
0 0
m4 ¼ m% 2 : We have four solutions of the type f ðx þ mj yÞ; Here, F1 and F2 denote the derivatives of the analytical
where fj ðzÞ are free analytical functions. Actually two functions F1 ðzÞ and F2 ðzÞ taken at z ¼ x þ mj y; j ¼ 1; 2:
free functions are needed to satisfy the two boundary
conditions. We choose 4.5. Boundary conditions


F ðx; yÞ ¼ 2 Re f1 ðx þ m1 yÞ þ f2 ðx þ m2 yÞ : ð11Þ
The stress field is expressed with two analytical
The above expression is a sufficiently general one to functions, F1 and F2 ; in the preceding two sections. In
solve our problem. Here, f1 ðzÞ and f2 ðzÞ are two this section the boundary conditions for these two
analytical functions. The constants m1 and m2 (and their functions are formulated. We integrate these functions
complex conjugates) are the roots of Eq. (10). in y: From this [6] we get, after an integration in y; the
following boundary conditions for the boundary func-
tions, excluding the first component, m ¼ 1:
4.3. The roots m1 and m2 Z y
 2

Xb ðy0 ÞmZ2 dy0 ¼ Re m1 F1 ðzb1 Þ þ m2 F2 ðzb2 Þ ;
We need the roots of Eq. (10) which involve the two 0 R
parameters E 0 =E and b: The parameter b is defined in Z y
Eq. (10). It is related to G 0 and other elastic constants,  2
Yb ðy0 ÞmZ2 dy0 ¼  Re½F1 ðzb1 Þ þ F2 ðzb2 Þ : ð17Þ
and we may rewrite Eq. (10) in the following way: 0 R
E0 Here, zb1 ðyÞ and zb2 ðyÞ are the arguments of F1 and F2
G0 ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi : ð12Þ
2ðb E=E 0 þ n0 Þ at the boundary of the disc:
zbj ðyÞ ¼ R cosðyÞ þ mj R sinðyÞ; j ¼ 1; 2: ð18Þ
The roots of Eq. (10) are different for b > 1 and
1obo1: In an isotropic case, b ¼ 1 (E 0 =E ¼ 1 and Let Xem and Yem be the complex-valued Fourier
G 0 ¼ 0:5E=ð1 þ n0 Þ). The case bo  1 is excluded, since coefficients for the integrals, Eq. (17), of the boundary
the criterion of deformational stability is not fulfilled forces. They are related to the Fourier coefficients in
 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004 995

Eq. (5) in the following way: 4.8. The matrix equation for Am and Bm
Xcm  iXsm Ycm  iYsm
Xem ¼ ; Yem ¼ : ð19Þ The basic Eqs. (24) for the expansion coefficients must
2mi 2mi
be fulfilled for both the real and imaginary parts. They
From Eq. (17) it can be seen that our task is to find two involve four unknowns. The two equations may be
analytical functions F1 ðzÞ and F2 ðzÞ so that written in matrix form, with Am and Bm ; and their
X
N
 2
 complex conjugates as unknowns. By considering the
Xem eimy þ X% em eimy ¼ Re m1 F1 ðzb1 Þ þ m2 F2 ðzb2 Þ ; complex conjugate of the matrix equation, it is possible
m¼2
R
to eliminate the complex conjugates of Am and Bm From
this we get the following matrix equation for the
XN
 2
Yem eimy þ Y% em eimy ¼  Re½F1 ðzb1 Þ þ F2 ðzb2 Þ : coefficients Am and Bm [16]:
R ! !
m¼2
ðm1  m% 2 Þð1  ðt1 t1 Þm Þ ðm2  m% 2 Þð1  ðt1 t%2 Þm Þ Am
ð20Þ
ðm% 1  m1 Þð1  ðt1 t1 Þm Þ ðm% 1  m2 Þð1  ðt2 t%2 Þm Þ Bm
!
Xem þ m% 2 Yem  t%m %
1 ðXem þ m % 2 Y% em Þ
4.6. Particular basic solutions ¼R
Xem  m% 1 Yem  t%2 ðX% em þ m% 1 Y% em Þ
m

To fulfill Eq. (20), we need functions that vary as m ¼ 2; 3; y : ð25Þ

expð7imyÞ at the periphery of the disc. The following The determinant of the (2
2)-matrix equation on the
particular set of basic functions will achieve this [5]: upper line is identically zero for m ¼ 1: This case is dealt
Pj;m ðzÞ ¼ ðWjþ ðzÞÞm þ ðWj ðzÞÞm ; m ¼ 1; 2; 3; y ; with separately in Section 4.1.

z=R þ R* j ðzÞ z=R  R* j ðzÞ 4.9. The stress field

Wjþ ðzÞ ¼ ; Wj ðzÞ ¼ ;
1  imj 1  imj
The total stress field is given by Eq. (16). Here, F01 and
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi F02 denote the complex-valued derivatives of F1 and F2 :
R* j ðzÞ ¼ ðz=RÞ2  1  m2j ; j ¼ 1; 2: ð21Þ These functions are given by derivatives of the sums,
Eq. (23):
After some calculations, the values of Pj;m at the
X
N X
N
boundary of the disc become F01 ðzÞ ¼ Am P01;m ðzÞ; F02 ðzÞ ¼ Bm P02;m ðzÞ: ð26Þ
imy
1 þ imj m¼2 m¼2
Pj;m ðzbj Þ ¼ eimy þ tm
j e ; tj ¼ ; j ¼ 1; 2: ð22Þ
1  imj The derivatives of Pj;m ðzÞ become Eq. (21):
þ m m
m ðWj ðzÞÞ  ðWj ðzÞÞ
P0j;m ðzÞ ¼ ; j ¼ 1; 2: ð27Þ
4.7. General series solution R R* j ðzÞ

A general solution for higher Fourier components 4.10. Fourier coefficients for normal point loads
(mX2) is now
X
N X
N The Fourier coefficients for opposing normal point
F1 ðzÞ ¼ Am P1;m ðzÞ; F2 ðzÞ ¼ Bm P2;m ðzÞ: ð23Þ forces acting at the angles y ¼ p=2  yb and y ¼ p=2 
m¼2 m¼2 yb become Eqs. (5) and (19)
Here, Am and Bm (m ¼ 2; 3; y) are complex-valued Xem ¼ pem sinðyb Þeimyb ; Yem ¼ pem cosðyb Þeimyb ;
coefficients to be determined by the boundary condi-
tions. From Eqs. (21)–(23), the basic equations to P sinð0:5pmÞ
pem ¼ ðm ¼ 1; 2; yÞ: ð28Þ
determine the expansion coefficients may be written in pRL m
the following way: The even coefficients are zero.
m1 Am þ m2 Bm þ m1 tm m
1 Am þ m2 t2 Bm ¼ RXem ;

Am þ Bm þ tm m 5. Improved convergence
1 Am þ t2 Bm ¼ RYem : ð24Þ
These equations determine the expansion coefficients Am It is a well-known experience that the convergence of
and Bm from any given Xem and Yem : A crucial point is Fourier series may be slow. The convergence of series
that the ingenious choice of basic functions (21) results (23) for the F-functions and their derivatives may also
in decoupled equations. The solution for any m-level is be quite slow, in particular at and near the boundary of
independent of the other levels. the disc. Lekhnitskii [5] stresses the importance of this
996 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004

problem. The normal stress component at the periphery when the procedure for improved convergence is used.
of the disc, shown in Fig. 4, was calculated with terms We see that the amplitude of the boundary oscillations is
up to m ¼ 9 and 15 (the even terms are zero). The load around 2
107 ; and that the point force is extremely
at y ¼ p=2 becomes sharper as the number of terms sharp. It turns out to be quite sufficient to use the terms
increases. We see that many terms are needed to up to m ¼ 7 even directly at the boundary, and certainly
represent the boundary force. The number of oscilla- at the center, in the calculations of the stress field.
tions increases linearly with the number of terms. But
the boundary value will always oscillate between 1 and
1 (for P ¼ pRL). The error at the center will decrease;
6. Summary of the general solution behavior
however rather many terms are needed to get high
accuracy, in particular near the boundary.
The solution for any boundary force is obtained from
The new procedure to obtain much better conver-
the formulas above in the following way. The Fourier
gence is described in detail in [16]. Only the main ideas
coefficients of the boundary forces are first calculated
are indicated here. The absolute values of the constants
t1 and t2 ; Eq. (22), are smaller than 1. They occur as (Eq. (5)). The Fourier coefficients of the integrals of the
boundary forces are given by Eq. (19). The constants in
powers of m in Eq. (25), and they tend towards zero with
Eq. (25) are obtained from Eqs. (10), (13), (14) and (22),
increasing m: We can get a simpler matrix equation by
and the expansion coefficients Am and Bm are deter-
setting these powers to zero in Eq. (25). The solution
mined from Eq. (25). The stress field is given by Eqs. (6)
Eq. (26) to the difference between the true coefficients
and (16). The functions F1 ðzÞ and F2 ðzÞ are defined by
from Eq. (25) and the simplified coefficients, when the
Eqs. (21) and (23), and their derivatives by Eqs. (26) and
powers of t1 and t2 are set to zero, will then converge
(27). The strain field is obtained from Hook’s relations,
much better. To this solution we must add another one
with the simplified coefficients. It is shown in [15] that Eq. (4), and the displacement field from a straightfor-
ward integration of Eq. (3) [16]. The solution is fully
the latter solution may be expressed analytically as two
explicit for any boundary functions.
integrals involving the boundary forces Xb ðyÞ and
The solution for opposing normal point forces is
Yb ðyÞ. These integrals are evaluated analytically. We get
obtained with the Fourier coefficients (Eq. (28)). This
closed-form analytical expressions for the solution with
solution was implemented in the mathematical compu-
the simplified coefficients.
ter program Mathcad. The procedure for improved
Fig. 5 shows the two components of the normal stress
convergence is included. In this type of program, it is
at the periphery of the disc using the terms up to m ¼ 7;
simple to test directly whether the solution fulfills all
conditions given by Eqs. (3)–(5) at any point. A good
test is the independent direct calculation of the
0
boundary force as shown in Figs. 4 and 5. An accuracy
of, say 5 decimals, is obtained without difficulty. The
calculation of the stress field with 10 000 points (Fig. 7)
Yn9(θ)
10 requires less than a minute or two of computer time on a
Yn15(θ)
good standard PC.
The following reference case will be used for the
20
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
graphical presentations of stress and displacement fields:
θ
E ¼ 50:7; E 0 ¼ 40; G0 ¼ 15:6 ðGPaÞ;
Fig. 4. Normal stress at the disc periphery calculated with the data in
Eq. (29) using terms up to m ¼ 9 and 15. n0 ¼ 0:28; P ¼ pRL
) E 0 =E ¼ 0:789; b ¼ 1:126: ð29Þ

The scale factor P=ðpRLÞ is set equal to 1. The

5.10-7
displacement field in an anisotropic disc with the data
Yn(θ)
0 of Eq. (29) is shown in Fig. 6. The angle between loading
Yn(θ)
direction and the normal to the foliation plane is yb ¼
-5.10-7 p=6: The left-hand figure shows the direction of the
displacement (all vectors have the same length). The
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 right-hand figure shows the displacement vector field.
θ The vectors with very large magnitudes near the applied
Fig. 5. Normal stress components at the disc periphery calculated with load have been excluded (in circles with the radius R=4)
the data in Eq. (29) using terms up to m ¼ 7; when the procedure for in order to have readable vector magnitudes further
improved convergence is used. away from the loads.
 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004 997

Fig. 6. Displacement field for an anisotropic disc with the data of Eq. (29) and yb ¼ p=6 (20
20 points covering 21ox=R; y=Ro1). Left: direction
of the displacement. Right: relative magnitude and direction.

Fig. 7. The principal tensile stress field of an anisotropic disc with the data of Eq. (29) and yb ¼ p=6:

The principal (essentially) tensile component of the
stress field of the anisotropic disc is shown in Fig. 7 for
the reference case in Eq. (29) with yb ¼ p=6: The tensile
stress at the center, spt ð0; 0Þ; is equal to 1.044. The
principal tensile stress is zero along the periphery of the
disc except along a part at top and bottom. Fig. 8, left,
shows the calculated principal tensile and compressive
stresses along the periphery of the disc. The normal
stress is zero except at the points where the applied force
acts (y ¼ p=2  p=6 ¼ p=3 ¼ 1:047). This means that
one of the principal stresses is zero at all points of the
boundary (except the two loading points). The principal
‘tensile’ stress is positive for p=3oyo2:144; and it tends
to infinity at the applied point force.
998 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004

0.02
σptr (r, 0.3.π)

σptr (r, 0.35.π)

σptb (θ)
0
σpcb (θ) σptr (r, 0.4.π)

σptr (r, 0.7.π)

0

-1
0 1 2 3 0.97 0.98 0.99 1
θ r

Fig. 8. Anisotropic disc with the data of Eq. (29) and yb ¼ p=6: Left: the principal tensile and compressive stresses along the periphery of the disc.
Right: radial variation of the principal tensile stress near the periphery for a few angles y:

ratioσtc

Fig. 9. The ratio of the principal tensile to compressive stress of a disc with the data of Eq. (29) and yb ¼ p=6:

The level curves in Fig. 7 are somewhat complicated
in the top and bottom near the periphery. The reason for
this is explained in Fig. 8, right. The radial variation of
the principal tensile stress is shown near the periphery
(0:97oro1) for a few angles y: For angles below y ¼
p=3; the stress decreases steadily to zero (y ¼ 0:3p in the
figure). On the other side of the applied force, the
principal stress decreases to values below zero in a small
interval in r; then increases to the values at the boundary
shown in Fig. 8, left. There is a small strip just inside the
periphery where the smallest principal stress is slightly
positive. The values are however very small (around
0.001 in Fig. 8, right). This strip is clearly visible at the
top and bottom in Fig. 7.
The ratio of the principal tensile stress to the principal
compressive stress in the disc is shown in Fig. 9. The
segments in the disc outside 0:8Royo0:8R; where
there are strong variations of the principal stresses, are
 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004
excluded. The largest value of the ratio, 0.363, occurs at
the center.
7. Parameters of the solution
The proposed solution is used for calculating the
tensile strength of a material subjected to the Brazilian
test. The solution’s dependence on the material para-
meters is thus of great importance. We are particularly
interested in the minimum number of independent
parameters and the scale factors. We consider the case
of two opposing normal point forces. The parameters
are then:
E; E 0 ; n0 ; G 0 ; R; L; P; yb ð0pyb pp=2Þ:
It should be noted that n does not appear in the
equations or in the solutions. There are four elastic
parameters, E; E 0 ; n0 and G0 ; the radius, R; and the
thickness, L; of the disc, the point load, P (N), and the
angle, yb ; of direction of the opposing forces.
The stress field is given by Eqs. (6) and (16). The
coefficients, Eq. (28), are proportional to P=ðpRLÞ and
depend on yb : The derivatives of the F-functions are
given by Eqs. (26) and (27), and the coefficients Am and
Bm by Eqs. (25). The derivatives become proportional to
P=ðpRLÞ; and they have m1 and m2 as parameters. The
three stress components are functions of x=R; y=R, are
proportional to P=ðpRLÞ; and have yb as the parameter.
The constants m1 and m2 become parameters; they are
functions of E 0 =E and b; Eqs. (13) and (14). We will use
the latter parameters as basic independent parameters.
Hence the stress component sx depends on the para-
meters in the following way:
P
sx ¼ s* x ðx=R; y=R; E 0 =E; b; yb Þ:
pRL
Here, the tilde sign denotes the corresponding dimen-
sionless quantity, which is obtained for P=ðpRLÞ ¼ 1:
The two other stress components have the same
dependence on the parameters. The initial four elastic
parameters are reduced to two parameters. Hooke’s law,
Eq. (3), gives the strain field. The scale factor may be
written as P=ðpRLE 0 Þ; and n0 becomes a third elastic
parameter for the strain field.
8. Symmetry due to interchange of axes
Whether there are symmetries in the solution is an
important question. There is actually a particular
intrinsic symmetry. Let us consider what happens when
the axes x and y are interchanged:
x-y; y-x:
999
The stress field is reversed, but the stress balance
expressed in Eq. (2) is of course still valid. This is also
true for the (renamed) displacement, Eq. (2), and
compatibility relation Eq. (24). Hooke’s law, Eq. (3),
remains to be fulfilled. The modulus of elasticity, E and
E 0 ; must also be interchanged, while G0 remains
unchanged. The change of Poisson’s ratio, n0 , is less
obvious. We make the following changes in the elastic
parameters:
E-E 0 ; E 0 -E; G-G0 ; n0 -n0 E=E 0 : ð33Þ
The first and second equations in Eq. (3) are inter-
changed, and Hooke’s law is retained in the transforma-
tion given by Eqs. (32) and (33). It is interesting to note
that b; Eq. (11), is unchanged but the angle of the
ð30Þ boundary forces change. We have
b-b; yb -p=2  yb ð0pyb pp=2Þ: ð34Þ
The solution is the same after the changes given by
Eqs. (32) and (34). Applying this to the stress field yields
s* x ðx=R; y=R; E 0 =E; b; yb Þ
¼ s* y ðy=R; x=R; E=E 0 ; b; p=2  yb Þ;
s* y ðx=R; y=R; E 0 =E; b; yb Þ
¼ s* x ðy=R; x=R; E=E 0 ; b; p=2  yb Þ;
t* xy ðx=R; y=R; E 0 =E; b; yb Þ
¼ t* xy ðy=R; x=R; E=E 0 ; b; p=2  yb Þ: ð35Þ
The above symmetry means that it is sufficient to
calculate the solution for 0pyb pp=4 for all E 0 =E and b:
Alternatively, we may restrict the ratio to E 0 =Ep1 and
let the angle vary over the full range 0pyb pp=2.
9. Principal stresses at the center of the disc
ð31Þ
The principal tension spt (0,0) at the center of the disc
is of particular interest. We are also interested in the
principal compression spc (0,0) and the ratio Ztc ¼
spt ð0; 0Þ=½spc ð0; 0Þ at the disc center. The principal
stresses at (0,0) have E 0 =E; b and yb as parameters.
Fig. 10, left, shows the variations of spt (0,0) with b for
yb ¼ 0 for a few E 0 =E. Fig. 10, right, shows the variation
with E 0 =E (=Eq) for yb ¼ p=6 for a few b.
It is valuable to have explicit expressions for the
principal stresses at the center. We derived the equations
below by using the best fits (Fig. 10) around E 0 =E ¼ 1
and b ¼ 1; whose values correspond to the isotropic
case. The variation with b may be approximated by
straight lines. In Fig. 10, left, we see that the slope –1/4
before (b21) gives a good fit for yb ¼ 0. By testing
different values of yb ; we found that the slope
2cosð4yb Þ=4 is a good fit for all angles. Fig. 10, right,
shows that the power ðE 0 =EÞ21=8 gives a good fit for the
ð32Þ angle yb ¼ p=6. We found that the powers 2cosðyb Þ=4 of
1000 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004

Fig. 10. Principal tension at (0,0) as a function of E 0 =E and b for P ¼ pRL: Left: yb ¼ 0; E 0 =E ¼ 0:5; 1, 2, variation with b; and best fit for E 0 =E ¼ 1:
Right: yb ¼ p=6; b ¼ 2; 1, 0.5, variation with E 0 =E (=Eq); and best fit for b ¼ 1:

Table 1 and (37) are consistent

Error in the approximate formulas (Eqs. (36)–(38)) for the principal

 with the symmetry relations,
Eq. (35) (since cos 2 p=2  yb ¼ cosð2yb Þ). The
tensile and compressive stresses and their ratio at the center of the disc
error in Eqs. (36)–(38) are very small in the immediate
Parameter range Maximum relative error in % (for all angles) vicinity of the isotropic value, E 0 =E ¼ 1; b ¼ 1; accord-
spt (0,0) spc (0,0) Ztc (0,0) ing to the first row in Table 1. We suspect that the
0
formulas are locally exact (to the first order in E 0 =E21
0.90oE =Eo1.10, 0.1 0.2 0.3
and b21).
0.90obo1.10
0.75oE 0 =Eo1.25, 0.8 1.2 2
0.75obo1.25
0.50oE 0 =Eo2; 10.8 10.8 18.8
0:50obo2 10. Principal stresses around the center of the disc

The tensile stress at the center of the disc causes the

E 0 =E give a good fit for all angles. From these
failure. The variation of the stress field near the center is
comparisons with the calculated values, we got the
also of interest. Fig. 11 shows the principal tensile stress
following approximate formula for the principal tension
(left) and the principal compressive stress (right) in the
at the center, x ¼ 0; y ¼ 0:
  area 20:5Roxo0:5R and 20:5Royo0:5R for the
P p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi cosð4yb Þ reference example, Eq. (29), with yb ¼ p=4:
spt ð0; 0ÞD ð 4 E=E 0 Þcosð2yb Þ  ðb  1Þ : ð36Þ
pRL 4 The variation of the stress around the center of the
disc is quite smooth in Fig. 11. The ratio of principal
The error for a few intervals around E 0 =E ¼ 1 and b ¼ 1
tensile to compressive stress has a maximum at the
is given in Table 1.
center. The stress field varies with yb but the maximum
With the same type of procedure, we obtained the
tensile value is always at the center. The tensile stress of
following approximate formula for the principal com-
Fig. 11 varies between the maximum 1.033 at the center
pression at the center:
  and the minimum 0.958 (7% variation) in the area of |x|,
3P p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi cosð4yb Þ |y|oR=10: The variation along the line x ¼ y of the
spc ð0; 0ÞD  ð 4 E 0 =E Þcosð2yb Þ þ ðb  1Þ :
pRL 4 applied force (yb ¼ p=4) is quite small. The value of the
ð37Þ principal tensile stress at x ¼ y ¼ R=2 is 0.997, com-
pared with 1.033 at the center. This supports the
The ratio of principal tension to compression at (0,0) experience that failure mostly starts at the center and
becomes that the stress field around the center will control
spt ð0; 0Þ outward propagation of the crack.
Ztc ð0; 0Þ ¼
spc ð0; 0Þ
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 ð 4 E=E 0 Þcosð2yb Þ  ðcosð4yb Þ=4Þðb  1Þ
D p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi : ð38Þ 11. Diagrams for the tensile stress at the center of the disc
3 ð 4 E 0 =E Þcosð2yb Þ þ ðcosð4yb Þ=4Þðb  1Þ

The errors in Eqs. (37) and (38) are given in Table 1 for The principal tensile stress at the center of a disc due
a few parameter intervals. The expressions in Eqs. (36) to normal point loads at the disc periphery may be
 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004
Fig. 11. Principal tensile (left) and compressive (right) stresses in the central area jxj; jyjoR=2 for the reference case, Eq. (29) with yb ¼ p=4:
written in the following way:
P determined (n=E ¼ n0 =E 0 ). This more complicated solu-
spt ð0; 0Þ ¼ spt0 ðE 0 =E; b; yb Þ:
pRL
The dimensionless principal tensile stress at the cen-
ter,spt0 ; depends on the dimensionless parameters E 0 =E
and b; and the angle yb : The scale factor is P=ðpRLÞ:
Fig. 12 shows the function spt0 ðE 0 =E; b; yb Þ in charts for
different angles yb : Each chart shows the variation of the
stress with the parameters E 0 =E and b for a particular
angle yb : The intervals are 0:25pE 0 =Ep1 and
0:25pbp4; and the angle yb equals np=12; n ¼
0; 1; y6: The values for E 0 =EX1 are obtained from
symmetry relations (35) with x ¼ y ¼ 0: For all para-
meter values
spt0 ðE 0 =E; b; yb Þ ¼ spt0 ðE=E 0 ; b; p=2  yb Þ:
Eq. (39) gives the tensile strength of the specimen
when the scale factor is considered (Fig. 12).
12. Summary and conclusions
The tensile strength of rock is a key parameter that
influences rock deformability, rock crushing and blast-
ing results. The indirect tensile, or Brazilian, test of rock
cores is a common method for determining the tensile
strength. Calculating the tensile strength from the
Brazilian test requires knowledge of the principal tensile
stress, in particular at the rock core center, where cracks
start. This stress can be assessed by a well-known
analytical solution for an isotropic material. There exists
a much more complicated solution for anisotropic cases,
Amadei et al. [4,5]. The calculation of stress and tensile
strength of anisotropic rock sample requires that
1001
the principal elastic constants E; E 0 ; n; n0 and G 0 be
ð39Þ tion for anisotropic (transversely isotropic) rock was
studied in detail, which resulted in a few improvements
of the solution method. The convergence of the series
solution was improved greatly by a new procedure.
The stress, strain and displacement can be calculated,
even at the disc periphery, with a high degree of
accuracy without any problems of convergence for
the two opposing normal point loads. The key
expansion coefficients involve the solution of 4
4
matrix equations. This equation system is reduced
to a simpler complex-valued 2
2 matrix equation
(Eq. 25).
The solution is given explicitly. The stress field is
ð40Þ obtained by combining Eqs. (5), (6), (10), (13), (14), (16),
(19), (21), (22) and (25)–(27). The solution was
implemented in a mathematical computer program
(Mathcad) without any problem. An accuracy of as
many as 5 decimal places is obtained without difficulty.
The calculation of the stress field in 10 000 points
requires less than 2 min of computer time on a good
standard PC.
The assessment of the analytical solution shows that
the dimensionless stress field depends only on two
intrinsic material parameters (E 0 =E and b, besides the
angle yb between the direction of the applied force and
the normal to the plane of foliation (transverse
isotropy). The principal tensile stress at the center of a
disc due to opposing normal point loads at the disc
periphery may be written in the following dimensionless
form:
P
spt ð0; 0Þ ¼ spt0 ðE 0 =E; b; yb Þ:
pRL
1002 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004

Fig. 12. Variation of the dimensionless principal tensile stress, spt0 ; at the center of a disc with E 0 =E; b; and yb : Values for E 0 =EZ1 are obtained from
Eq. (40). The tensile strength is obtained from Eq. (39).

The function spt0 ðE 0 =E; b; yÞ has been calculated for a It turned out to be possible to derive from the
wide range of parameter values (Fig. 12). Values for analytical solution new, quite good approximate for-
E 0 =EX1 are obtained from the symmetry relations mulas for the principal tension and compression at the
Eq. (40). disc center. The tensile stress at the center of the disc can
The stress distribution in the critical central region is be determined from either the charts or the approximate
readily obtained with the model. The variation of formula, Eq. (36):
principal stress and compression is quite smooth in the
central area (Figs. 7 and 11). The ratio of principal
 
tensile to compressive stress has a maximum at the P pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi cosð4yb Þ
center. The variation along the direction of the applied spt ð0; 0ÞD ð 4 E=E 0 Þcosð2yb Þ  ðb  1Þ
pRL 4
force is quite small. The value of the principal tensile
stress decreased from the center to the radius R=2 by pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  
only 4% (along the line of the applied force) as shown in EE 0 1 2n0
b¼  :
Fig. 11. 2 G0 E 0
 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004
Fig. 12 (continued).
References
[1] McLamore R, Gray KE. The mechanical behavior of the
anisotropic sedimentary rocks. J Eng Ind 1967;89:62–76.
[2] Istvan JA, Evans LJ, Weber JH, Devine C. Rock mechanics for
gas storage in bedded salt caverns. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
1997;34:3–4 [Paper No. 14].
[3] Seto M, Nag DK, Vutukuri VS, Katasuyama K. Effect of
chemical additions on the strength of sandstone. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 1997;34:3–4 [Paper No. 280].
[4] Amadei B, Rogers JD, Goodman RE. Elastic constants and
tensile strength of the anisotropic rocks. Proceedings of the Fifth
Congress of International Society of Rock Mechanics, Mel-
bourne. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1983. p. 189–96.
[5] Lekhnitskii SG. Anisotropic plates. New York: Gordon and
Breach Scientific Publications, 1968.
[6] Chen CS. Characterization of deformability, strength, and
fracturing of anisotropic rocks using Brazilian tests. Ph.D. thesis,
1003
Department of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineer-
ing, University of Colorado, Colorado, USA, 1996.
[7] ISRM, International Society for Rock Mechanics, Commission
on Standardization of Laboratory and Field Tests. Suggested
methods for determining tensile strength of rock materials. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1978;15:99–103.
[8] Hondros G. The evaluation of Poisson’s ratio and modulus of
materials of a low tensile resistance by the Brazilian (indirect
tensile) test with particular reference to concrete. Aust J Appl Sci
1959;10(3):243–68.
[9] Exadaktylos GE, Kaklis KN. Application of an explicit solution
for the transversely isotropic circular disc compressed diametri-
cally. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2001;38:227–43.
[10] Bohloli B, Ronge B, Gustafson G. Laboratory examination of
anisotropy in the foliation plane of metamorphic rocks. Bull Eng
Geol Environ 2001, accepted for publication.
[11] Timoshenko SP, Goodier JN. Theory of elasticity. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1970. 567pp.
1004 J. Claesson, B. Bohloli / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 991–1004

[12] Sokolnikoff IS. Mathematical theory of elasticity. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1956. 476pp.
[13] Muskhelishvili NI. Some basic problems in the mathematical
theory of elasticity. Groningen, The Netherlands: Noordhoff,
1963.
[14] Chen CS, Pan E, Amadei B. Determination of deformability and
tensile strength of anisotropic rock using Brazilian tests. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 1998;35(1):43–61.
[15] Amadei B. Importance of anisotropy when estimating and
measuring in-situ stresses in rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
Geomech Abstr 1996;33(3):293–325.
[16] Claesson J. Brazilian test, an analytical solution for a transversely
isotropic disc. Report, Department of Building Physics,
Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2001.
41pp.
[17] Callen HB. Thermodynamics. New York: Wiley, 1960. 376pp.