ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 19–22

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijrmms

ISRM Suggested Method for determining the Shore Hardness value

for rock$
R. Altindaga,, A. Güneyb
a
Department of Mining Engineering, Engineering and Architecture Faculty, Süleyman Demirel University, 32260 Isparta, Turkey
b
Engineering Faculty, Mugla University, 48000 Mugla, Turkey
Accepted 3 April 2005
Available online 13 June 2005

Abstract

Shore hardness (SH) has been accepted as a convenient and nondestructive method in measuring the hardness of rocks and widely
used in rock mechanics since it can be correlated with other mechanical properties of weak rocks, such as uniaxial compressive
strength (UCS). However, a need has arisen to propose a standard method as a measure of SH to minimize the errors when it is
utilized as a predictor of the UCS as well as other mechanical properties of rocks. Over the last few decades, several studies have
been conducted to predict consistent SH values using different procedures. However, the results of the tests can not be compared
and analyzed in an overall way. Therefore, this experimental study was implemented to meet and discuss the demand for a new
method to determine standardized SH values. In result, a new empirical equation was proposed to estimate size-corrected values of
SH based on a critical specimen volume of 80 cm3.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Physical properties; Rock hardness; Shore hardness; Size effect

1. Introduction large number of tests, found a relation between the

1.1. Hardness is one of the physical properties of
rocks and the Shore Hardness (SH) is a convenient and
inexpensive method widely used for estimating rock
hardness. The SH can be used to estimate the uniaxial
compressive strength (UCS) of weak rocks and is helpful
because determination of the UCS of weak rocks is time
consuming and expensive. Various researchers have
attempted to correlate SH with other mechanical
properties of rocks. Judd and Huber [1] obtained a
linear relation between the SH and the UCS and
reported a correlation coefficient of 0.71; while Deere
and Miller [2] and Bamford et al. [3], on the basis of a
$
Any comments on this ISRM SM should be sent to J A Hudson,
ISRM Commission on Testing Methods, at jah@rockeng.co.uk.
Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 246 211 1231;
fax: +90 246 237 0859.
E-mail address: rasit@mmf.sdu.edu.tr (R. Altindag).
logarithm of compressive strength and the SH and
reported a correlation coefficient of 0.87, from tests on a
wide range of rock types. Koncagül and Santi [4]
established a model to predict the UCS of specimens
using slake durability and SH with a correlation
coefficient of 0.68. The research mentioned above
indicates the ability to obtain a good relation between
the UCS and the SH.
1.2. Over the last few decades, efforts have been made
in proposing several methods to estimate consistent SH
values. Misra [5] has reported that rock specimens with
a diameter of 25 mm (surface area of 4.91 cm2) and a
length of 5 cm produced consistent SH values. Accord-
ing to the earlier publication by the International
Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM), entitled ‘‘Sug-
gested Methods for Determining Hardness and Abra-
siveness of Rocks’’ [6], it is suggested that for a reliable
SH value a test specimen should have a minimal surface
area of 10 cm2 and a minimal thickness of 1 cm. Rabia

1365-1609/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijrmms.2005.04.004
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
20 R. Altindag, A. Güney / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 19–22

and Brook [7] suggested that the minimal specimen

volume be 40 cm3 for the standard determination of SH
of a rock. Altindag [8] conducted research in which he
used core specimens of 54 mm in diameter drilled from
seven different rock types. The SH measurements were
conducted on seven or eight specimens for different
volumes for each rock type. The results indicated that
the SH values of the specimens increased with the
volume until a critical specimen volume was attained,
80 cm3, after which the SH values did not show
significant changes. It was concluded that a minimal
specimen volume of 80 cm3 is required in order to
determine a standard value of SH for a specific rock
type.
1.3. Various research results for determining consis-
tent specimen size were proposed and extensively
published. However, because of different procedures,
the test results cannot be compared and analyzed in an
overall way. Therefore, there is a need to propose a
standard method as a measure of SH to minimize the
errors when it is used as a predictor of the UCS and the
other mechanical properties of rocks.
1.4. In this Suggested Method, the apparatus, testing
procedure and the method of estimating SH values are
explained in detail with the empirical relations.

2. Scope

2.1. The purpose of this study is to identify and

discuss the need for a method to determine standardized
SH values, considering the specimen size effect, so that
the SH, as an essentially nondestructive hardness
measuring method, can be used as a reliable predictor
of other mechanical properties of rocks, especially the
UCS.
2.2. Therefore, in this study, a progressive investiga-
tion aimed at estimating the SH values is intended to
support this revision of the SH Suggested Method
prepared for the International Society for Rock
Mechanics (ISRM) to determine the hardness and
abrasiveness of rocks.
Fig. 1. A general view from the C-2 type Shore scleroscope consisting
of a base, rubber bulb, a tube containing the diamond-tipped hammer
and the measuring scale.
diamond tip must be shaped to produce a correct
reading on the reference bars of known hardness. The
SH is measured on a calibrated scale which gives the SH
value in its own units, ranging from 0 to 140.
3.3. A major advantage of the SH value is that it can
be obtained using relatively smaller prismatic rock
specimens than are normally required for other mechan-
ical testing methods in rock mechanics.

3. Apparatus
3.1. The apparatus, a C-2 type Shore Hardness
Scleroscope (Fig. 1), used for this purpose is nondes-
tructive and measures the relative values of SH by a
diamond-tipped hammer which is manually dropped
vertically and freely from a rested height on to a
horizontal, polished test surface.
3.2. Since hardness is a function of the elastic
resistance of a surface to local compression, the rebound
height of the diamond-tipped hammer becomes an
indication of the hardness of the material tested. The
4. Procedure
4.1. Specimen preparation
4.1. For testing purposes, the specimens can be
prepared as cores or in cubical shapes and a critical
specimen volume of close to 80 cm3 (Vc) should be
maintained. Fig. 2 shows the relations between the SH
value and the associated specimen volume, and indicates
that the SH values increased as the volume of the
specimens became larger—up to the critical specimen
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
R. Altindag, A. Güney / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 19–22 21

horizontally with the ground test surface facing up-

Fig. 2. Correlation between SH values and specimen volumes [9].
volume of 80 cm3, beyond which the SH values did not
vary significantly as the specimen volume increased and
attained a near-constant value.
4.2. Prior to the hardness tests, the test surface of each
specimen to be tested should be ground with No. 220
sandpaper until a smooth test surface is obtained. The
specimens should be dry. Wet specimens usually yield
lower values of SH [7]. At least three specimens of the
same rock type should be prepared, and more specimens
will naturally provide more confidence in the results.
4.3. The following equation1, V ¼ f ðA; tÞ to ensure an
appropriate specimen volume, may be used when
preparing the test specimens to determine the unknown
parameter: either the thickness (t) or the test surface
area (A), keeping the known parameter constant.
V c ¼ Amin tc ¼ 80 cm3 ðAmin X10 cm2 Þ
or
V c ¼ Ac tmin ¼ 80 cm3 ðtmin X1:5 cmÞ .
If the minimum specimen test surface area (Amin) is
obtained as 10 cm2, the critical specimen thickness (tc)
can be calculated using Eq. (1) as tc ¼ 8 cm.
Similarly, if the minimum specimen thickness (tmin) is
obtained as 1.5 cm, the critical specimen test surface area
(Ac) can be calculated by Eq. (2) as Ac ¼ 53.33 cm2.
wards, allowing a 2.44 g diamond-tipped hammer to
drop freely on the test surface, and carefully measuring
and logging the rebounding height on the scale—which
ranges from 0 to 140.
4.5. A total of 20 measurements should be made on
the entire test surface of each specimen allowing at least
a 5 mm spacing between the two indentations and a
5 mm margin from the edges of the specimen. Values of
SH determined near the edges of the test specimen will
be appreciably lower than those made nearer the center
of the specimen [7]. Naturally, biased results will be
obtained if readings taken near the very edge of the
specimen are included in the calculations.
4.6. When a rock specimen is shaly, bedded or
observably anisotropic, it should be tested in directions
which give the greatest and the least strength values,
which are generally normal and parallel to the planes of
anisotropy, respectively.
4.7. The apparatus must be cleaned and calibrated
prior to the tests to maintain the precision of the
apparatus.
5. Calculation of standard SH values
5.1. The SH is taken as the average of 20 readings for
each test specimen.
5.2. If the specimen volume cannot be obtained as
equal to or greater than 80 cm3 in volume (e.g.
(1)
(2)

4.2. Testing

4.4. The test procedure includes the following:

placement of the test specimen in the apparatus
1
Centimeter units have been used here, rather than the strict SI
millimeters, to avoid specifying the dimensions with unnecessarily Fig. 3. Plot showing the relation between SH and specimen volume up
large numbers. to 80 cm3 (Vc) [9].
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
22 R. Altindag, A. Güney / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 43 (2006) 19–22
V s oV c ¼ 80 cm3 ), size-corrected values of SH can be
estimated (SHe ) for the critical volume by using the
arithmetical means of the measured SH values (SHm) in
the following equation (Fig. 3) [9]:
SHe ¼ 0:248ð80  V s Þ þ SHm ðfor V s oV c Þ ,
(3)
where Vs is the volume of the tested specimen.
5.3. If the specimen volume can be obtained as equal
to or greater than 80 cm3 in volume (e.g.
V s XV c ¼ 80 cm3 ), the arithmetical means of the mea-
sured SH values are directly taken as the SH values.
6. Presentation of results
When presenting the results of SH tests, the report
should specify the information given below for each
specimen tested:
(a) Source of the specimen, including the geographic
location, depth and orientation when recovered.
(b) Lithological description of the rock.
(c) Number of specimens tested and the average SH for
each rock type.
(d) Orientation of the test surface with respect to the
bedding and foliation planes when these are
significant characteristics of the rock.
(e) Approximate mineral composition, grain shape and
sizes of the specimens.
(f) Date of sampling, date of specimen preparation and
testing, specimen preparation procedures.
(g) Specimen dimension characteristics: thickness, test
surface area and volume of the specimen.
(h) Value of the SH for each test.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the encouragement
and support given by Professor John A. Hudson of
Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine
in the UK.
References
[1] Judd WR, Huber C. Correlation of rock properties by statistical
methods. International Symposium on Mining Research, February
1961, Rolla, Missouri.
[2] Deere DU, Miller RP. Engineering classification and index
properties for intact rock. Urbana, IL: Department of Civil
Engineering, University of Illinois; 1966. p. 90–101.
[3] Bamford WE, Van Duyse H, Nieble C, Rummel F, Broch E,
Franklin JA, Atkinson RH, Tarkoy PJ, Deere DU. Suggested
methods for determining hardness and abrasiveness of rocks,
ISRM, Commission on Standardization of Laboratory and Field
Tests. Int J Rock Mech Min Geomech Abst 1978;15:89–98.
[4] Koncagül EC, Santi PM. Predicting the unconfined compressive
strength of the Breathit Shale using slake durability, shore hardness
and rock structural properties. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
1999;36:139–53.
[5] Misra B. Correlation of rock properties with machine performance.
PhD thesis. University of Leeds, 1972.
[6] ISRM (International Society for Rock Mechanics), Commission
on standardization laboratory and field results. Suggested Methods
for determining hardness and abrasiveness of rocks. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1978;15:89–97.
[7] Rabia H, Brook N. The shore hardness of rock. Technical Note.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech. Abstr 1979;16:335–6.
[8] Altindag R. Effects of specimen volume and temperature on
measurements of shore hardness. Technical Note. Rock Mech
Rock Eng 2002;35(2):109–13.
[9] Altindag R, Güney A. Effect of the specimen size on the
determination of consistent Shore hardness values. Technical Note.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2005;42:153–60.