Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 434e439

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Rock Mechanics and

Geotechnical Engineering
journal homepage: www.rockgeotech.org

Full length article

Strength criterion for rocks under compressive-tensile stresses

and its application
Mingqing You*
School of Energy Science and Engineering, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo, 454010, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Estimating in-situ stress with hydraulic borehole fracturing involves tensile strength of rock. Several
Received 17 January 2015 strength criteria with three parameters result in tensile strengths with great differences, although they
Received in revised form may describe the relation between strength of rock and confining pressure with low misfits. The
16 May 2015
exponential criterion provides acceptable magnitudes of tensile strengths for granites and over-estimates
Accepted 20 May 2015
Available online 16 June 2015
that for other rocks, but the criterion with tension cut-off is applicable to all rocks. The breakdown
pressure will be lower than the shut-in pressure during hydraulic borehole fracturing, when the
maximum horizontal principal stress is 2 times larger than the minor one; and it is not the peak value in
Keywords:
Strength criteria
the first cycle, but the point where the slope of pressure-time curve begins to decline.
Tensile strength Ó 2015 Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Production and hosting by
Exponential criterion Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Hydraulic fracturing

1. Introduction Another issue is the effect of compressive stress on tensile

Numerous tests have been carried out to determine the
strengths of rocks under confining pressure (CP), as rocks in-situ
are usually under compression state. However, tension usually
appears in the vicinity of excavation and borehole, and the tensile
strength of each rock is much lower than the compressive strength.
The direct tension test is difficult to perform for rock (You et al.,
2006). In other hand, the Brazilian splitting test with rock disc is
easy to carry out in laboratory and provides a reasonable estimation
for the uniaxial tensile strength (UTS), although there are many
issues argued all along (Fairhurst, 1964; Hudson et al., 1972; Efimov,
2009; Yu et al., 2009; You et al., 2011).
Many strength criteria have been proposed to describe the state
of stresses in rock at failure, as reviewed in Yu (2002) and You
(2011). Clearly, an ideal strength criterion needs to closely fit test
data with acceptable accuracy over the stress state expected in
practice. Therefore, the tensile strength predicted by a strength
criterion is usually used in evaluating the criterion (Ghazvinian
et al., 2008; Bineshian et al., 2012). Tensile strengths predicted by
both the Coulomb criterion and the Griffith criterion are much
higher than the measured magnitudes of almost all rocks, although
the two criteria have clear physical backgrounds (Jaeger et al.,
2007).
* Tel.: þ86 391 3988278.
E-mail addresses: youmq@hpu.edu.cn, youmq640930@aliyun.com.
Peer review under responsibility of Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chi-
nese Academy of Sciences.
1674-7755 Ó 2015 Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sci-
ences. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2015.05.002
strength, i.e. strength criterion in tension-compression region. It
has practical utilization in the in-situ stress estimation with hy-
draulic breakout of borehole and some cases of wellbore stability.
This paper discusses four criteria with three material-dependent
parameters using test data of nine rocks from the published liter-
ature. The exponential criterion with tension cut-off is recom-
mended and adopted to estimate in-situ stress with hydraulic
borehole fracturing.
2. Strength criteria
Coulomb criterion was initially proposed in 1773 for determi-
nation of the shear strength of soil, and introduced for rocks later. It
is a linear equation with the principal stresses as
sS s
¼ 1þm 3 (1)
sC sC
where sS is the major principal stress or rock compressive strength,
s3 is the minor principal stress, sC is the uniaxial compressive
strength (UCS), and m is a material-dependent parameter. How-
ever, test results from cylindrical specimens of rocks compressed
under CP of s2 ¼ s3 exhibit convex curves of strength. Therefore,
many nonlinear criteria were proposed as modifications to the
Coulomb criterion, and briefly reviewed as follows.
Hobbs (1964) proposed an empirical criterion with three
parameters:

n
sS  s3 s
¼ 1þm 3 (2)
sC sC
 M. You / Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 434e439 435

Its special case at m ¼ 2 and n ¼ 1/2 is the normal parabolic

criterion (You, 2011): f ðxÞ ¼ 1=ð1 þ xÞ (10)
pffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffi
sS ¼ s3 þ sC (3) for Eq. (7) is equivalent to the criterion in Rafiai (2011) and
Bineshian et al. (2012), and the later manifested that the criterion
The criterion with one parameter merely fits strengths of was originally proposed in Bineshian (2000). In this paper, we
granular rocks better than the Coulomb criterion, nearly the same called it as the fractional criterion, which is just parallel to the
as the Hoek-Brown (HeB) criterion with two parameters. exponential criterion mentioned above.
The Murrell criterion (Murrell, 1965) was widely used at n ¼ 0.5 The average principal stress sm ¼ (s1þs3)/2 and the maximum
(Mogi, 2007): shear stress sm ¼ (s1s3)/2 are usually used to construct implicit

sS s

n pffiffiffi criteria. In fact, the abscissa and ordinate will become 2sm
strength
¼ 1þm 3 (4) and 2sm , respectively, after the coordinates of the principal
sC sC stresses with the same scale are rotated 45 counterclockwise.
The two criteria, Eqs. (2) and (4), are not applicable to negative Therefore, the implicit criteria are not discussed here.
s3 for power number n is less than 1, and are certainly beyond the
consideration for compressive-tensile strength. 3. Fitting solutions of strength criteria and tensile strengths
The Sheorey criterion (Sheorey et al., 1989) normalized with UCS predicted
is given in the following form:
In strength criteria, there are always material-dependent pa-

n
sS s rameters, which are determined by fitting the criteria to test data.
¼ 1þm 3 (5)
sC sC Test data of nine rocks, presented in Table 1, including granite,
limestone, marble, sandstone, and halite, are cited from the liter-
The criterion proposed in Carter et al. (1991) is in the similar ature (Von Kármán, 1911; Schwartz, 1964; Carter et al., 1991;
form. The derivative of sS to s3 for Eq. (5), and Eq. (4) as well, will be Haimson and Chang, 2000; Sriapai, 2010; You, 2010a) to evaluate
less than 1 when s3 is large enough. That means the differential the strength criteria. Average magnitude of strengths with the same
stress sSes3 will decrease with increasing CP. The phenomenon CP is used as one datum.
appears really for Solnhofen limestone (Mogi, 2007), and Indiana Different solutions of fitting the criteria to test data will be ob-
limestone (Schwartz, 1964) as well, within the test range of CP, as tained using various statistical methods. The least square method is
illustrated by You (2011). It is totally different from the common mostly used for the convenience in mathematical calculation, but
knowledge. the fitting solution will depart significantly from normal data to
The most famous criterion in power form is the generalized HeB reduce the squares deviation of abnormal data with huge error.
criterion (Hoek et al., 1992): Linear regression for a transformed equation of the HeB criterion

 may result in an imaginary number of UCS (You, 2010a, 2012).
sS  s3 s n Therefore, the fitting solution on the least absolute deviation, i.e.
¼ 1þm 3 (6)
sC sC the least mean misfit, is chosen in this paper.
The average values of the mean misfits for nine rocks are
The specific form at n ¼ 1/2 is called the HeB criterion (Hoek
2.9 MPa, 2.9 MPa, 3.1 MPa, and 3.5 MPa using the Sheorey criterion,
and Brown, 1980) that has been widely used in rock engineering
the fractional criterion, the exponential criterion, and the gener-
(Eberhardt, 2012). The criterion fails to describe strength of ductile
alized HeB criterion, respectively. Each criterion provides the least
rocks, such as limestone and marble under high CP.
mean misfits for some rocks. The exponential criterion is the best
Cohesion and friction in rocks do not act simultaneously at one
one for three rocks.
point, and the cohesion will be replaced by the frictional resistance
Certainly, the misfit is not the single standard to evaluate
when crack initiates in the rock under compression (You, 2005a).
strength criteria. As illustrated in You (2010a, 2012), the exponen-
The intact rock under shearing will yield and lose its cohesion, but
tial criterion may expose a few abnormal data of Mizuho trachyte
cracks do not slide macroscopically to increase the friction to the
and Jinping sandstone with huge misfit. A new example of Maha
maximum when CP is high enough. The differential stress sSs3, or
Sarakham halite (Sriapai, 2010) is shown in Figs. 1 and 2. Clearly, the
the maximum shear stress equivalently, has an upper limitation in
misfit of the exponential criterion is mainly pronounced for two
rocks, and is able to be described with a general criterion (You,
data indicated with A and B, as shown in Fig. 1. At least, datum A
2012):
may be pointed as an abnormal one. If the datum is deleted, then
sS  s3 ¼ QN  ðQN  Q0 Þf ðxÞ (7)
Table 1
where Q0 is the UCS; QN is the limitation of differential stress when Test data of conventional triaxial compression of nine rocks.
CP increases up to infinite; f(x) is a monotonically decreasing
Rock type Number of test CP UCS Reference
function, and satisfies f(0) ¼ 1, f(N) ¼ 0, and f0 (0) ¼ 1; and x can be
data (MPa) (MPa)
written as
Westerly granite 7 100 201 Haimson and Chang
ðK0  1Þs3 (2000)
x ¼ (8) Bonnet granite 13 40 226 Carter et al. (1991)
QN  Q0 Tyndall limestone 9 40 52 Carter et al. (1991)
Indiana limestone 11 69 45 Schwartz (1964)
where K0 is the increasing rate of strength at s3 ¼ 0. Carrara marble 6 162 137 Von Kármán (1911)
The exponential criterion (You, 2009, 2010a) is a specific case of Georgia marble 10 69 30.6 Schwartz (1964)
Pottsville 10 62 62 Schwartz (1964)
Eq. (7) at
sandstone
Zhaogu sandstone 10 45 132.4 You (2010a)
f ðxÞ ¼ expð xÞ (9) Maha Sarakham 9 28 23 Sriapai (2010)
halite
The fractional form
436 M. You / Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 434e439

Table 2
Measured UTSs and the magnitudes predicted by four strength criteria.

Rock type Measured Predicted UTS (MPa)

UTS (MPa)
Sheorey Generalized H Exponential Fractional
criterion eB criterion criterion criterion

Westerly 12.5 7.9 6.9 14.5 14.1

granite
Bonnet 13 5.8 5.5 12.2 11
granite
Tyndall 4 3.5 2.3 8 7
limestone
Indiana 2.5 4.3 3.1 9.3 5.9
limestone
Carrara 7.8 16 12.9 30.4 26.9
marble
Georgia 4.5 1.1 1.1 4.6 3.6
marble
Pottsville 3 1.9 1.4 5.4 4.6
sandstone
Zhaogu 7.2 2.9 2.1 9 7.6
sandstone
Maha 0.8 0.7 2.5 2.1
Sarakham
halite
Fig. 1. Fitting solutions using the exponential criterion and the generalized HeB cri-
terion for Maha Sarakham halite.
Table 3
Ratios of UCS to UTS predicted by four strength criteria.

Criterion Ratio of UCS to UTS

Minimum Maximum Average

Sheorey 8.6 45.7 25.9

Generalized HeB 10.6 63 31.8
Exponential 4.5 18.5 10
Fractional 5.1 20.5 11.7

Fig. 2. Fitting solutions using the fractional criterion for Maha Sarakham halite. The
thin line is for test data to the exclusion of datum A.
the fitting solution using the exponential criterion is almost the
same, but the mean misfit decreases from 1.3 MPa to 0.9 MPa.
The fractional criterion, bold line in Fig. 2, also presents a low
misfit for the halite, but misfit is distributed in four data, indicated
with A, B, C and D, located in two sides of the fitting solution. If the
datum A is deleted, then the fitting solution, thin line in Fig. 2, has a
significant change, but the mean misfit only decreases from 1.5 MPa
to 1.4 MPa. Compared to the fitting solution using the exponential
criterion as shown in Fig. 1, the fractional criterion seems not to
well describe the strengths under high CPs; hence, the limitation of
differential stress from the fractional criterion, QN presented in
Fig. 2, has lower confidence than that from the exponential
criterion.
The UTSs predicted by the fitting solutions of four criteria are
presented in Tables 2 and 3. The measured tensile strengths of eight
rocks with Brazilian test are also presented. The tensile strengths of
Westerly granite and Carrara marble are cited from Cai (2010) and
Ramsey and Chester (2004), respectively.
The Sheorey criterion and the generalized HeB criterion predict
reasonable tensile strengths only for Tyndall limestone and Indiana
limestone, respectively. Except for a few rocks, the tensile strengths
predicted by the two criteria are lower than the measured magni-
tudes. The ratios of UCS to UTS predicted by the generalized HeB
criterion are 10.6e63 with an average of 31.8 as presented in
Table 3, which is much higher than the practical value.
Both Rafiai (2011) and Bineshian et al. (2012) extended enve-
lopes of the fractional criterion to tension range. The later argued
that the criterion described tensile strengths well, but only test
results of coal were presented. As listed in Table 2, however, the
fractional criterion presents reasonable UTS values only for West-
erly granite and Zhaogu sandstone.
The exponential criterion provides reasonable UTS for four
rocks: Bonnet granite, Westerly granite, Zhaogu sandstone, and
Georgia marble. The tensile strength predicted by the exponential
criterion is 6% lower than the measured magnitude for Bonnet
granite, and higher than that of the other rocks, as presented in
Table 2. It may be concluded that the exponential criterion tends to
overestimate tensile strengths for rocks.
4. Strength criterion for rocks under compressive-tensile
stresses
The four criteria have nearly the same average magnitudes of
mean misfit for nine rocks. However, UTSs predicted by the four
criteria have great difference, as presented in Table 2. Clearly, the
magnitude T of UTS is an independent parameter for rock to be
 M. You / Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 434e439 437

determined from test; and it is impossible to describe strength for

all rocks under compressive-tensile stresses by simply extending a
criterion that is optimized from compression test data.
As the measured tensile strength of Bonnet granite, the
merely one case, is slightly larger than the predicted value ob-
tained from the exponential criterion, we may consider that the
entire envelope of the exponential criterion describes the
strength of Bonnet granite under compression-tension on the
safety side, as shown in Fig. 3. For other rocks, e.g. Zhaogu
sandstone as shown in Fig. 4, the exponential criterion with a
tension cut-off at s3 ¼ T is able to describe strength of rocks
under compressive-tensile stresses. The exponential criterion is
applicable low to sE for the major principal stress as shown
in Fig. 4.
Tensile strengths predicted by the Sheorey criterion and the
generalized HeB criterion, however, are much lower than the
measured magnitudes for many rocks, such as Bonnet granite,
Zhaogu sandstone, and Georgia marble, as presented in Table 2, and
so does the fractional criterion for Georgia marble and Bonnet
granite. Therefore, the tension cut-off is not applicable to the three
criteria mentioned above.
It should be noted that the strengths of rock especially under
low CPs are always dispersed, e.g. six UCSs of Zhaogu sandstone are
from 119.7 MPa to 142.9 MPa, as shown in Fig. 4. Therefore,
improvement for the tension cut-off as illustrated in You (2012)
may not be necessary.
The envelope of the exponential criterion for rocks under
compressive-tensile stresses is illustrated nearly as a straight line
for the variable x in the range of T  s3  0 for all rocks:

s1 ¼ Q0 þ K0 s3 (11) Fig. 4. Exponential criterion with a tension cut-off for Zhaogu sandstone.

where
but the tangent line of the exponential criterion at s3 ¼ 0. The
  parameter K0 is always larger than that in the Coulomb criterion.
ðK  1Þs3 
x ¼  0  << 1 (12) Tension cut-off is at sE ¼ Q0  K0T, and tensile strength under
QN  Q0 
compressive stress in the range of sE  s1  Q0 is
in the range of eT  s3  0 for all rocks. Therefore, we may use Eq.
(11) instead of the exponential criterion in the tension range to
sT ¼ ðQ0  s1 Þ=K0 (13)
simplify the calculation. The equation is not the Coulomb criterion, Strength criteria mentioned above do not consider the effect
of the intermediate principal stress. In fact, the commonly uti-
lized tension test under CP, also known as triaxial extension test,
is conducted in a stress state of s3 < 0 < s2 ¼ s1 (Ramsey and
Chester, 2004; You, 2010b), but the extension of conventional
triaxial compression criterion to the tensile stress means
s3 ¼ s2 < 0 < s1, for which there is indeed no test result available
for rocks.
The biaxial compression strength is not equal to the UTS;
therefore, the intermediate principal stress has more or less in-
fluence on the strength when the minor principal stress is
negative. However, as the tensile strength of rock is much lower
than the UCS, the minor principal stress with a negative
magnitude, i.e. tensile stress, will not be significantly influenced
by the intermediate principal stress at a given major principal
stress.

5. Hydraulic fracturing of rocks

Hydraulic fracturing is a borehole field test designed to assess

Fig. 3. Envelopes of four criteria for rock under compressive-tensile stresses. The
criteria are optimized from fracture strengths of Bonnet granite.
the state of in-situ stress in the earth crust. The overburden stress sz
is thought of as acting along the vertical direction, and the others on
the horizontal plane named sH and sh, are calculated using three
parameters, i.e. breakdown pressure Pb, re-opening pressure Pr, and
shut-in pressure Ps obtained from the pressure-time curve.
438 M. You / Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 434e439

The fracture induced hydraulically closes back at shut-in Table 5

pressure In-situ stresses measured with overcoring test.

Location Depth sV sh sH sH  2sh 3sh  sH

Ps ¼ sh (14) (m) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa)

Ertan 24.5 1.2 5 2.6 1.4

after the pump is shut off. It is strongly recommended that more 30 3 18 12 9
than one method be used for obtaining the crucial Ps (Haimson and 40.5 25.9 65.9 14.1 11.8
Linglong 290 8.28 6.84 15.58 1.9 4.94
Cornet, 2003). The re-opening pressure 290 9.37 7.26 17.51 2.99 4.27
410 10.73 10.18 25.77 5.41 4.77
Pr ¼ 3sh  sH (15) 410 11.51 8.64 25.55 8.27 0.37
South Crofty 790 18.5 11.3 37.7 15.1 3.8
Oskarshamn 490.5 7.6 8.1 30.8 14.6 6.5
is also relative to the determining techniques, as it is not the peak 501.6 13.1 6.2 26.3 13.9 7.7
value, but the point on the ascending portion of the pressure-time
curve in subsequent cycles, where the slope begins to decline from
that maintained in the breakdown cycle.
The breakdown pressure Pb is an identified magnitude taken as However, the real in-situ stresses may be different from Eq. (18).
the peak pressure attained in the first pressure cycle. In the ISRM For example, the in-situ stresses measured with overcoring test
suggested methods (Haimson and Cornet, 2003), it can be written (Pine et al., 1983; Anderson and Christianson, 2003; Tan et al., 2004;
as Cai et al., 2010) may exhibit large magnitudes of sH  2sh, as pre-
sented in Table 5. Furthermore, magnitudes of 3sh  sH are negative
Pb ¼ 3sh  sH þ T (16) at test locations in the South Crofty and Oskarshamn. The borehole
should break under pore pressure about 5 MPa, not need pump
which means that the major principal stress s1 does not influence pressure at all, if it was poured with water. The borehole of Ertan at
the tensile failure of rock. However, it should involve strength cri- a depth of 30 m would crack after drilling, for the magnitudes of
terion in compression-tension region. Based on the elastic fracture 3sh  sH is low to 9 MPa, about the tensile strength of sur-
mechanics, the far-field tensile stress and inner pressure, i.e. pore rounding rocks.
pressure P0, have the same effect on the Griffith crack (You, 2005b), One principal stress is nearly along the vertical direction in
therefore the breakdown pressure is every case presented in Table 5; therefore, the hydraulic fracturing

 method might be used in these situations, but breakdown pressure
Q  s1 Pb should be lower than the shut-in pressure, i.e. the minor prin-
Pb ¼ 3sh  sH þ min 0 ; T  P0 (17)
K0 cipal stress sh. In other words, Pb would not be the peak value in the
first cycle, but the point where the slope of pressure-time curve
where s1 is lower than the UCS, and parameters Q0 and K0 come begins to decline.
from the exponential criterion, as illustrated in Fig. 4 and Eq. (13).
This provides another magnitude for 3sh  sH, based on the re-
opening pressure Pr. 6. Conclusions
As mentioned above, the breakdown pressure Pb is the peak
pressure in the first pressure cycle. This implies an assumption that None of strength criteria, of which the parameters are deter-
Pb < PS or Pb < sh. Hence, the stresses must satisfy mined from conventional triaxial compression strengths, might
present reasonable tensile strength for all rocks. Tensile strength of

 rock is an independent parameter to be determined from test.
Q0  s1
sH  2sh < min ; T  P0 (18) The generalized HeB criterion usually presents a tensile
K0 strength lower than the measured magnitude. However, the
The pore pressure is not lower than the static hydraulic pressure exponential criterion predicts well tensile strengths for granites,
at the test interval, which is 10 MPa at a depth of 1000 m. The but overestimates for other rocks; therefore, the criterion may be
tensile strength of rock is around and usually lower than 10 MPa. extended to tensile-compressive stresses with the tangent line
Therefore, the magnitude of right side of Eq. (18) is around zero. combined a tension cut-off, and applicable to rock engineering,
Certainly, the stress magnitudes obtained from hydraulic frac- such as the estimation of in-situ stress with hydraulic fracturing.
turing always satisfy Eq. (18). Stresses from five boreholes (Chen Breakdown pressure may be lower than the shut-in pressure in
et al., 2004; Tan et al., 2004; Kang et al., 2007) are in the region some cases; and it is not the peak value in the first cycle, but the
of sH < 2sh, as presented in Table 4. point where the slope of pressure-time curve begins to decline.

Table 4 Conflict of interest

In-situ stresses measured with hydraulic fracturing test.
The author wishes to confirm that there are no known conflicts
Location Depth (m) sz (MPa) sh (MPa) sH (MPa) sH  2sh (MPa)
of interest associated with this publication and there has been no
Xinwen 790 20.94 16.56 32.39 0.73 significant financial support for this work that could have influ-
1220 32.33 22.8 42.1 3.5
Lixian 187 4.95 5.33 8.84 1.82
enced its outcome.
220 5.82 5.16 8.67 1.65
33 0.86 4.4 5.4 3.4
143 3.78 6.98 12.98 0.98 Acknowledgments
Cipin 154 4.13 6.8 12.05 1.55
790 21.17 13.8 21.1 6.5 The author would like to acknowledge the reviewers for their
Zigui 393 10.07 11.4 17.88 4.92 valuable comments and suggestions, and thanks to Reviewer #1 for
498 12.75 13.3 20.35 6.25
his reminding the initial proposer of the fractional criterion.
 M. You / Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7 (2015) 434e439 439

References Pine RJ, Tunbridge LW, Kwakwa K. In-situ stress measurement in the Carnmenellis
granite. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and
Geomechanics Abstracts 1983;20(2):51e62.
Anderson C, Christianson R. Variability of hydraulic fracturing rock stress mea-
Rafiai H. New empirical polyaxial criterion for rock strength. International Journal of
surements and comparison of triaxial overcoring results made in the same
Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 2011;48(5):922e31.
borehole. In: Rock stress. Rotterdam: A.A. Balkema; 2003. p. 315e20.
Ramsey JM, Chester MF. Hybrid fracture and the transition from extension fracture
Bineshian H. Verification of the applicability of rock failure criteria in relation to the
to shear fracture. Nature 2004;428(1):63e6.
limestone of Iran and suggestion of a suitable failure criterion. MS Thesis.
Schwartz AE. Failure of rock in the triaxial shear test. In: Proceedings of the 6th US
Tehran, Iran: Tarbiat Modares University; 2000.
Symposium on Rock Mechanics, Rolla, Missouri, USA; 1964. p. 109e51.
Bineshian H, Ghazvinian A, Bineshian Z. Comprehensive compressive-tensile
Sheorey PR, Ak Biswas, Choubey VD. An empirical failure criterion for rocks and
strength criterion for intact rock. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical
jointed rock masses. Engineering Geology 1989;26(2):141e59.
Engineering 2012;4(2):140e8.
Sriapai T. True triaxial compressive strengths of Maha Sarakham rock salt. MS Thesis.
Cai M. Practical estimates of tensile strength and HoekeBrown strength parameter
Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand: Suranaree University of Technology; 2010.
mi of brittle rocks. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering 2010;43(2):167e84.
Tan CX, Shi L, Sun WF, Lei WZ, Sun Y, Wang RJ, Wu SR. Research on tectonic stress
Cai MF, Liu WD, Li Y. In-situ stress measurement at deep position of Linglong Gold
plane. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering 2004;23(23):3970e8
Mine and distribution law of in-situ stress field in mine area. Chinese Journal of
(in Chinese).
Rock Mechanics and Engineering 2010;29(2):227e33 (in Chinese).
Von Kármán T. Festigkeitsversuche unter all seitigem Druck. Z Verein Deut Ingr
Carter BJ, Duncan SEJ, Lajtai EZ. Fitting strength criteria to intact rock. Geotechnical
1911;55:1749e59.
and Geological Engineering 1991;9(1):73e81.
You MQ. True-triaxial strength criteria for rock. International Journal of Rock Me-
Chen QC, Mao JZ, Hou YH. Study on influence of topography on in-situ stress by
chanics and Mining Sciences 2009;46(1):115e27.
interpretation of measurement data of in-situ stress. Chinese Journal of Rock
You MQ. Mechanical characteristics of the exponential strength criterion under
Mechanics and Engineering 2004;23(23):3990e5.
conventional triaxial stresses. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Eberhardt E. ISRM suggested method: the HoekeBrown failure criterion. Rock
Mining Sciences 2010a;47(2):195e204.
Mechanics and Rock Engineering 2012;45(6):981e8.
You MQ. Comparison of the accuracy of some conventional triaxial strength criteria
Efimov VP. The rock strength in different tension conditions. Journal of Mining
for intact rock. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences
Science 2009;45(6):569e75.
2011;48(5):852e63.
Fairhurst C. On the validity of the “Brazilian” test for the brittle materials. Inter-
You MQ. Comparison of two true-triaxial strength criteria. International Journal of
national Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics
Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 2012;54:114e24.
Abstracts 1964;1(4):535e46.
You MQ. Study of deformation and failure of rock based on properties of cohesion
Ghazvinian AH, Fathi A, Moradian ZA. Failure behavior of marlstone under triaxial
and friction. Journal of Geomechanics 2005a;11(3):286e95 (in Chinese).
compression. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences
You MQ. Study on the geo-stresses measurement with hydro-fracture of borehole.
2008;45(5):807e14.
Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 2005b;27(3):350e3 (in Chinese).
Haimson B, Chang C. A new true triaxial cell for testing mechanical properties of rock,
You MQ. Strength and failure of rock due to hydraulic fracture. In: Rock stress and
and its use to determine rock strength and deformability of westerly granite. In-
earthquake. London, UK: Taylor and Francis; 2010b. p. 185e8.
ternational Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 2000;37(3):285e96.
You MQ, Su CD, Chen XL. Brazilian splitting strengths of discs and rings of rocks in
Haimson BC, Cornet FH. ISRM suggested methods for rock stress estimation e Part
dry and saturated conditions. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engi-
3: hydraulic fracturing (HF) and/or hydraulic testing of pre-existing fractures
neering 2011;30(3):464e72 (in Chinese).
(HTPF). International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences
You MQ, Zhou ST, Su CD. Direct tensile experiment of rock specimens under
2003;40(6):1011e20.
confining pressure. Journal of Henan Polytechnic University 2006;25(4):255e
Hobbs DW. The strength and stress-strain characteristics of coal in triaxial
61 (in Chinese).
compression. Journal of Geology 1964;72(2):214e31.
Yu MH. Advances in strength theories for materials under complex stress state in
Hoek E, Wood D, Shah S. A modified HoekeBrown criterion for jointed rock masses.
the 20th Century. Applied Mechanics Review 2002;55(2):169e218.
In: Proceedings of the Rock Characterization Symposium of ISRM: Eurock 92.
Yu Y, Zhang J, Zhang J. A modified Brazilian disk tension test. International Journal
London, UK: British Geotechnical Society; 1992. p. 209e24.
of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 2009;46(3):421e5.
Hoek E, Brown ET. Underground excavation of rock. London, UK: Institution of
Mining and Metallurgy; 1980.
Hudson JA, Brown ET, Rummel F. The controlled failure of rock discs and rings Mingqing You obtained his B.Sc. from Fudan University,
loaded in diametral compression. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Shanghai, and M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees from China Uni-
Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts 1972;9(2):241e8. versity of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, China. He is
Jaeger JC, Cook NGW, Zimmerman RW. Fundamentals of rock mechanics. New York, now a professor of Henan Polytechnic University. He has
USA: Wiley-Blackwell; 2007. been involved in mechanical and geotechnical research
Kang HP, Lin J, Hang X. Research and application of in-situ stress measurement in and education for nearly 30 years. He is the author or co-
deep mines. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering 2007;26(5): author of more than 100 scientific papers and he serves
929e33 (in Chinese). in the Editorial Board of Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics
Mogi K. Experimental rock mechanics. London, UK: Taylor and Francis; 2007. and Engineering.
Murrell SAF. The effect of triaxial stress systems on the strength of rock at atmo-
spheric temperatures. Geophysical Journal Royal Astronomical Society
1965;10(3):231e81.