Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/measurement
Prediction of compressive strength and elastic modulus
of carbonate rocks
N. Madhubabu a, P.K. Singh b,⇑, Ashutosh Kainthola b, Bankim Mahanta b, A. Tripathy b,
T.N. Singh b
a
Geo Constech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, India
b
Department of Earth Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400076, Maharashtra, India
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 8 June 2015
Received in revised form 18 March 2016
Accepted 24 March 2016
Available online 1 April 2016
Keywords:
Young’s modulus
Porosity
Ultrasonic velocity
Carbonate rocks
Artificial Neural Network
1. Introduction
Carbonate rocks are formed in a variety of geological
settings and are one of the best reservoir rocks for oil
exploration [60]. It is assumed that the proportion of crude
oil confined in carbonate rocks is around 50–60% with an
estimated production lifetime of more than 50 years [11].
Carbonate rocks are very low strength and are highly
susceptible to weathering due to chemically unstable
mineralogical and textural combination, and their high
reactivity with pH and temperature [41]. As important it
is to determine the geomechanical properties with high
accuracy, difficulty in sample preparation adhering certain
standards along with several inherent heterogeneities
makes it a formidable task for rock engineers. In rock
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 22 25767271.
E-mail address: prakashks@iitb.ac.in (P.K. Singh).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2016.03.050
0263-2241/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Measurement
a b s t r a c t
Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS) and Modulus of elasticity (E) of carbonate rocks are
very critical properties in petroleum, mining and civil industries. UCS is the measure of
the strength of the rock and E depicts the stiffness, together they control the deformational
behavior. But the heterogeneity introduced as a result of fractures, dissolution and
dependency on pH and temperature makes them a difficult material to study. Complex
diagenesis and resulting pore system makes the job even more daunting. So, an attempt
is made to predict these properties using simple index parameters such as Porosity,
Density, P-wave velocity, Poisson’s ratio and Point load index. Multiple Linear Regression
Analysis (MVRA) and Artificial Neural Networking (ANN) have been used for predicting
the two properties and the accuracy is tested by root mean square error. The results show
that ANN has a better predictive efficiency than MVRA and they can be applied for
predicting UCS and Young’s modulus of carbonate rocks with reasonable confidence.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
engineering, both uniaxial compressive strength (UCS)
and the Modulus of elasticity (E) are widely used parame-
ters as they are important for intact rock classification
and rock failure criteria [16]. These parameters have
great importance in rock physics applications, viz., onshore
and offshore geomechanical engineering, tunneling, dam
design, rock drilling and blasting, rock excavation and even
for slope stability.
There are two methods for assessing the properties of
rocks. First is the direct method where tests are conducted
on a crafted specimen in the laboratory, the other, known
as the indirect method, uses the previously derived
empirical equations from the literature [8]. The test proce-
dure for measuring UCS and E have been standardized by
both the American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) and the International Society for Rock Mechanics
(ISRM). Sound rock specimens are required for direct
determination of UCS and Young’s modulus of rocks in
 N. Madhubabu et al. / Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213
the laboratories. However, high quality core samples in
sufficient quantities are not possible to obtain from weak,
highly fractured, weathered carbonate rocks. Moreover,
the test procedures are expensive because of the require-
ment to precisely, carefully prepare the specimens to
ensure that the ends are smooth and perfectly parallel
and several other details as per standards. In addition,
careful execution of these tests are difficult, time consum-
ing and requires expensive equipment [20,8,34]. Point load
test is an alternative method to determine UCS as it gives
reliable values at a lower cost and with ease [50]. In order
to overcome these difficulties, indirect methods employing
simple index parameters like the density, porosity, P-wave
velocity, Point load index, Schmidt hammer were used
[29,14,13,47]. These simple index tests require a relatively
small number of samples, are quick, less expensive and
easy to execute.
In recent years, statistical methods used in rock
engineering, such as simple and multiple regression tech-
niques have been used for establishing predictive models.
In addition to these conventional methods, new techniques
like Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), fuzzy interference
systems, genetic programming and regression trees have
also been tested to estimate the required properties
[39,22,40,55,31,8,64,51,62]
ANN methods have become popular since the year
1990. It is a form of analysis which is based on the under-
standing of the brain and human nervous system [23].
Major advantage of ANN is its efficient handling of highly
non-linear relationships among data, even when the exact
nature of such relationship is not fully unknown [19].
Therefore, neural networks are best suited for UCS and
Young’s modulus predictions of carbonate rocks due of
the complex nature of inter-relationships among the
various quality parameters, composition and processing
conditions [16]. The performance of the ANN methods
was also compared with other statistical methods in the
present study (e.g., Regression analysis). Previous studies
have shown that ANN predictive models have better
efficiency than the conventional statistical methods
[46,56,8,16,62,34].
The objective of this study is to predict UCS and Young’s
modulus of carbonate rocks using the data gathered from
previous studies (163 sample data) and the data set of
carbonate rocks which have been collected from the
Miocene section of the Kutch basin, Gujarat, India.
2. Study area
The investigated area lies in the Kutch district of
Gujarat and is the westernmost part of India. It is a part
of Kutch basin which is a peri-cratonic rift basin and has
preserved a complete sequence from Triassic to Recent
[9]. The area composed of Cenozoic sequences, especially
the Miocene sediments, lies in Naliya, Kutch District,
Gujarat. The Lower Miocene rocks are exposed in Khari river
section (Fig. 1). A graphical log was also prepared show-
ing the lithounits, lithology, sedimentary textures, struc-
tures and different lithofacies from the field data (Fig. 1).
The first step towards preparation of graphic log was
203
identification of different sedimentary units which
was almost done in the field itself. In the present work,
individual beds in the sequence are given a standard color,
the thickness of individual beds, the texture, the sedimen-
tary structures (if any), and fossil contents are marked. As
can be seen from the log, clay minerals are ubiquitous
throughout the sequence, even the carbonate samples
collected from Miocene Formation for laboratory tests
contains a maximum clay content ranging up to 20%. The
limestone samples are enriched with fossils like Turritella,
Bivalves (Oysters and Pecten), etc. (Fig. 2) and also the
presence of cross lamination in the limestones were
observed in the field (Fig. 3).
3. Methodology: laboratory tests
3.1. Petrography
Thin section of two areas (S14 and S18) are presented in
this study as the prime focus was to predict strength
parameters of carbonate rocks. No correlation was made
between textural changes and geomechanical properties,
although we don’t neglect the possibility. The sections
clearly show the presence of fossils of different assemblage
along with micrite (brown) and sparite (off white) matrix
(Fig. 4). In case of S14, fossils are cemented together with
sparry calcite whereas mixed skeletal remains are surrounded
by micritic matrix in S18. Signatures of re-precipitation of
micrites on fossils can also be seen. Presence of micrite
indicates deposition under calm water condition whereas,
presence of sparry calcite in pore spaces suggests deposi-
tion under agitated water condition [10].
3.2. Ultrasonic velocity
Ultrasonic techniques for measuring P and S-wave
velocities are non-destructive and easy to execute, both
in the laboratories and field. Nowadays, pulse generation
method is used for the determination of parameters using
Pundit testing machine (Fig. 5) which consists of a pulse
transmission generator, transducers and electronic tester
for measurements of time [55,63]. A coupling gel is applied
on the faces to avoid any air gap between the sample and
transducers. A number of factors have been known to
influence the seismic velocity of rocks which include
water, clay, grain size, density, texture, porosity anisotropy
and others [30]. Considering the fact that the data obtained
by other researchers used in this study is to the standard
along with the data obtained in this study, P-wave can be
considered as a reliable parameter to relate with other
geomechanical properties [43].
3.3. Strength test
A number of block samples of carbonate rocks were
collected from the Miocene section of the Kutch basin. In
addition, 163 sample data of carbonates were taken from
previous research work around the world. Each data
set includes Porosity (£), Density (q), P-wave velocity
(V p ), Poisson’s ratio (l) Point load index (Is ), uniaxial
204 N. Madhubabu et al. / Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213

Fig. 1. Geological map of the study area and lithology of the collected samples prepared after Biswas [9].

Pecten Oyster
Turitella

Fig. 2. Turritella and Bivalve rich limestones in Kutch basin of Miocene formation.

compressive strength (UCS) and Modulus of elasticity (E).
From the recent study, thirteen number of block
samples, each having an approximate dimension of
0.2
0.2
0.2 m3 were collected in the field. Core samples
of 38 mm in diameter were prepared from the blocks and
the edges of the samples were cut parallel as per ASTM
standards (ASTM D4543) (Fig. 6).
The tests were conducted on the finished specimens by
the procedures specified in ASTM and ISRM standards
(Table 1). Proper care was taken to adhere to the standards
and hence, the material properties thus obtained are of
very high accuracy.
The destructive tests like UCS and Point load index
involves compression of the rock sample until the failure
occurs. Some of the failure modes for point load test and
UCS are shown in (Fig. 7). Failure modes under compres-
sion is very important in rock engineering problems
and has attracted many researchers. Basu et al. [7] have
particularly studied the failure pattern of three different
rock types (granite, schist and sandstone) and observed
 N. Madhubabu et al. / Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213 205

Fig. 3. Cross stratification in a thinly laminated limestones with clear boundaries.

Fig. 4. Thin section of fossiliferous limestone of S14 and S18 samples.

Fig. 5. Experimental set up for determination of P wave velocities in laboratory.

that the degree of fracturing increases as the strength of the

rock increases whereas, rocks with predefined structural
control tend to fail along the plane of weakness. The test
results of all the parameters are presented in Table 2.
Together with the data obtained from this study, the
total data set of carbonate rocks gathered from all over
the world are represented on the scatter plots for Porosity,
Young’s modulus, UCS and Point load index against their
respective P-wave velocities (Fig. 8).

3.4. Statistical observation: outlier study

Data collected from different geological environment is

Fig. 6. Cylindrical test samples prepared from carbonate rocks as per likely to show variability because of several source of inho-
standards. mogeneities introduced in their formation. Particularly,
206 N. Madhubabu et al. / Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213

Table 1
Standards for determination of different parameters of rocks.

Parameter Standard Formula

w q
Density ISRM, 1977 qdry ¼ wsat
sat fluid
wsub
wsat wdry
Porosity ISRM, 1977 £¼ wsat wsub
P-wave velocity ASTM D2845 [4], ISRMc [26] v ¼ Lt
Point load index ASTM D5731 [5], ISRM [28] Is ¼ DP2
e

UCS, Young’s modulus ASTM D7012 [6], ISRM [27] rc ¼ AF

Fig. 7. Failure modes observed in broken test samples of Point load index (left) and UCS (right).

Table 2
Laboratory test results of carbonate samples for different properties.

Samples Density (g/cc) Porosity (%) P-wave velocity (m/s) Poisson’s ratio Point load index in (MPa) UCS (MPa) Young’s modulus (GPa)
S-1 2.23 15.15 4233 0.25 0.52 11.03 5.56
S-2 2.53 7.85 4450 0.36 1.35 29.11 6.89
S-3 2.34 7.79 2939 0.34 – 3.53 6.29
S-5 2.41 2.74 3248 0.35 0.51 5.73 6.52
S-7 2.13 8.13 2664 0.23 1.04 11.38 5.23
S-9 2.34 7.01 2887 0.39 1.23 15.58 6.50
S-13 2.37 8.64 2963 0.36 0.86 6.17 6.44
S-14 2.24 1.09 3333 0.35 0.83 6.62 6.06
S-15 2.23 11.69 3109 0.39 0.86 5.29 6.25
S-16 2.11 14.04 3623 0.37 – 3.09 5.79
S-17 2.43 5.82 4348 0.39 0.78 14.56 6.78
S-18 2.00 18.66 2204 0.36 0.35 5.73 5.46
Aida-1 2.46 1.98 5000 0.36 1.36 33.08 6.68

carbonate rocks are most affected by the geological pro-
cesses owing to the nature of their formation. To observe
this variability, statistical theory was applied to predict
the outliers (a point distant from other observation points)
in the data sets by using box and whisker plot [61]. In a box
plot, the upper part of the box is called third quartile (Q3)
and the lower part is first quartile (Q1). The middle line
(median) dividing the data into two halves and is also ter-
med as second quartile (Q2). Another important term is the
interquartile range which is the difference between Q3 and
Q1. After obtaining these values, entire box plot is divided
into four invisible regions [15]. To determine the outliers,
the limits of inner and outer fences are defined and the
whiskers extend to most extreme value of the inner fence.
Two possibilities can be defined now based on the position
of data. If the data lies within inner fence it is termed as
mild outlier and if outside outer fence, extreme outliers.
The fences are defined as shown in Eqs. (1) and (2):
Inner fence ¼ Q 1  1:5IQR and Q 1  3IQR ð1Þ
Outer fence ¼ Q 3  1:5IQR and Q 3 þ 3IQR ð2Þ
4. Methodology: soft computing analysis
UCS and E are a prerequisite for rock mechanics related
studies in mining and civil works and also in any geotech-
nical studies pertinent to petroleum industry. Difficulty in
 N. Madhubabu et al. / Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213
Fig. 8. Plot of correlation between different geomechanical parameters against Ultrasonic velocity.
obtaining good quality cores from the carbonates and
requirement of high quality samples as per standards
restricts a geotechnician to obtain these properties with
reasonable confidence. Therefore, along with the data from
the present study, a large number of data set was collected
to avoid the complexity of the test procedures and present
an alternative and easy to use method. Multiple linear
regression analysis (MVRA) and Artificial Neural Networks
(ANN) were adopted to develop a relationship between the
various easily determinable index tests with an aim to esti-
mate corresponding UCS and E with relative confidence.
4.1. Multiple Linear Regression Analysis (MVRA)
Multiple linear regression uses several multiple input
parameters to predict output parameter. It is generally
expressed as the relation of a dependent variable (Y) and
a set of independent variables (X 1 ; X 2 ; X 3 ; . . . ::; X n ) where
the coefficient of each independent variables are constants
[42]. A multiple linear equation can be expressed as
Y 1 ¼ A þ B1 X 1 þ B2 X 2 þ B3 X 3 þ . . . . . . BN X N ð3Þ
207
The predicted Y value (Y 1 ) is then compared with
the measured Y value for the goodness of the prediction
equation. The result is evaluated using the correlation
coefficients.
4.2. Artificial Neural Network analysis (ANN)
Artificial Neural Networks have been widely used in
various branches of science and technology since the
1940s. ANN is generally a soft-computing system which
uses parallely arranged processing units called ‘‘neurons”,
organized in the form of layers. The interconnection
between two consecutive layers is called as ‘‘weights”
(Fig. 9).
The first and last layer of ANN structure is called the
input and the output layers respectively. The input layer
only serves to feed the input data to the hidden layer
which is between the input and output layers [12].
Generally, there can be many number of hidden layers in
the ANN structure, however, from practical purposes, only
one or two hidden layers are used [23]. The basic principle
behind the working of ANN is same as that of human brain
208 N. Madhubabu et al. / Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213

Fig. 9. A multiple perception neural network.

which analyzes the data and stores the data for future
predictions.
The application process of an ANN model design
involves the following steps viz. collecting the entire data
in one place, converting the data into ANN inputs as it
can read only normalized data i.e. between 0 and 1,
training, validating and testing the network topology and
repeat the above steps as long as it is required to predict
the optimum model [58,57,54].
For the study conducted, the type of neural network
employed is a Feed- forward back propagation network
[59] which is basically a multiple perception network
(MLP) (Fig. 9).
The network structure consists of two layers with
logarithmic sigmoid transfer function in the hidden layer
with 6 neurons and tangent sigmoid transfer function in
the output layer. The training function used is Gradient
Descent (TRAINGDX). The learning function used is
LEARNGDM which is an adaptive learning function. The
other training parameters selected are 1000 epochs and
the momentum coefficient as 0.9. Corresponding to the five
input parameters, five neurons were taken in the input
layer and in the same way two neurons corresponding to
the output properties in the output layer. The network
structure employed in this model is given in Fig. 10.
Previously, several researchers have done similar studies

Fig. 10. Network structure for ANN analysis.

 N. Madhubabu et al. / Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213
employing ANN which is discussed in detail by Lai and
Serra [2]; [38].
In order to get good satisfactory performance of the
model, the data should be normalized i.e. the data range
should vary between 0 and 1. The formula used for normal-
izing the data is given by Rafiq et al. [48]
X actual  X min
X Norm ¼
X max  X min
where X Norm is the normalized value, XActual is the actual
value, XMax is the maximum value of the data set and XMin
is the minimum value of the data set.
5. Results and discussion
From Fig. 8, the relationships of v p versus Porosity and
Young’s modulus of carbonate rocks appear to be linear but
clearly the data shows two regression trends, especially,
the v p versus Porosity plot demonstrates both positive
[33,49,37,21] and inverse linear relationships between
them. However, the data of v p versus UCS and PLI are
scattered implying that there might not be a good relation-
ship between them possibly because of varying mineral
composition, presence of secondary porosity and other
factors (Fig. 8). On the other hand, the correlations of v p
versus E [3,44,63] and v p versus UCS [17,44,63] shows
Fig. 11. Box and whisker plot showing the existence of outlier in different parameters.
209
positive relationships. Kainthola et al. Kainthola et al.
[35] conducted experiments for different rocks including
carbonates and found a linear relationship between point
load index and uniaxial compressive strength.
Overall, there is not a good relationship between the
different observed geomechanical properties with ultra-
sonic velocity. This could be due to the variations in depo-
sitional environments, composition, texture and complex
ð4Þ
diagenesis processes which alters the internal structures
completely, creating a significant effect on properties of
the carbonate rocks [1]. Flavio et al. [18] have compared
vp versus porosity with varying depositional environments
and suggested that the carbonates deposited on the
shallow water platform are confined to a narrow range
with low porosities and high ultrasonic velocity, whereas,
the carbonates from deeper shelf, slope and basin shows
large variations of porosity values towards the lower
ultrasonic velocity, however at higher ultrasonic velocity
values the trend is same as in the platform deposit. Han
et al. [24] observed that clay minerals exhibit lower
P-wave velocities (1.1–2.8 km/s) relative to other minerals,
the reason being the higher compressibility of clay miner-
als significantly affects the ultrasonic waves travelling
through the rocks [53]. In addition [53], found out that
high clay content leads to change in mechanical and elastic
properties of rocks due to specific mineral changes as a
result of changes in water content.
210 N. Madhubabu et al. / Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213
Fig. 12. Plot showing (a) predicted UCS versus Measured UCS and (b) predicted Young’s modulus versus measured Young’s modulus from MVRA.
For all the parameters, a normal distribution function is
assumed, which also fits well over the scatter plot as can be
seen from Fig. 11. Normal distribution is mostly used in
geotechnical engineering unless there are reasons valid
enough for selecting other types and also because most
random variables confirm to this distribution [25]. The
mean in all cases is above the median which shows that
the data is skewed. Also, there are several data points
which lie between inner and outer fence (Eqs. (1) and
(2)) showing the existence of mild outlier (outer fence is
not shown in Fig. 11) and only few data points lie outside
outer fence indicating minor presence of extreme outliers.
Outliers are supposed to show discrepancy in data estima-
tion or measurement and is commonly observed while
comparing two or more samples. In this case, a prediction
model was the desired result by comparing test data from
several different locations, although of the same rock type.
Outlier in this case is not a result of measurement error, it
simply shows that carbonate rocks from different environ-
ment may have variable strength, porosity and elastic
modulus which is also observed from Fig. 8. In cases of
porosity, there are two trends observed in scatter plot
(Fig. 8) and mean is much greater than mode which results
in more number of outliers unlike other properties
(Fig. 11).
For prediction of both UCS and E, the input parameters
considered here are Porosity, Density, P-wave velocity,
Poisson’s ratio and Point load index. The stepwise regres-
sion procedure is used for analysis. The equations proposed
for the prediction of Young’s modulus and UCS from the
input parameters using MVRA are
E ¼ 43:214  2:867  £ þ 1:384  Is  127:411  l
þ 18:251  q  0:0162  V p
UCS ¼ 11:813  2:572  £ þ 23:665  Is þ 41:654  l
þ 12:197  q  0:001  V p
where E = Young’s modulus (GPa), UCS = uniaxial compres-
sive strength (MPa), £ = Porosity (%), Is = Point load index
(MPa), l = Poisson’s ratio, q = Density (gm/cc) and V p = P-
wave velocity (m/s)
The relationship between measured and predicted E
and UCS and the correlation coefficient (R2) obtained
from multiple linear regression are illustrated in Fig. 12.
From MVRA, the data predicted shows high degree of
randomness for E as well as in UCS, higher in case of E.
A total of 176 data sets were subjected to modeling, out
of which, a first set of 163 data points were used to train
and validate the network for prediction. Later, the second
set of 13 new data points from present work were used
to check the efficiency of prediction and accuracy of the
trained model. The input parameters consists of Porosity
(£), Density (q), P-wave velocity (V p ), Poisson’s ratio (l)
and Point load index (Is ) while the output of the model is
to predict UCS and E. The validation curve of the neural
network generated is given in Fig. 13.
The graph shows that the root mean squared error for
the training curve decreases gradually with increasing
epochs. The validation line is almost close to the best
representing line throughout the 1000 epochs (Fig. 13).
Regression plot for the training, testing and validation of
the model is shown in Fig. 14. In each graph, the higher
correlation coefficient shows that the model is accurate
in predicting the output.
The results of the ANN model can be plotted on a scatter
plot showing the measured output versus predicted
output. Plotting the data points for the predicted versus
measured output against a 1:1 line is a best way of finding
out the prediction capacity of the model. Point that lies on
the 1:1 line shows the exact prediction of the output by the
model and closer a point to the 1:1 line, the better is the
prediction.
ð5Þ The measured versus predicted plots were constructed
for UCS and Young’s modulus. For both the output param-
eters, the plotted points lie close to the 1:1 line implying a
good prediction of ANN model, which is independent of the
ð6Þ simplified assumptions like linear behavior or exponential
behavior (Fig. 15).
The results obtained from ANN and multiple linear
regression analysis were compared on the basis of
N. Madhubabu et al. / Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213 211

Fig. 13. Validation plot of ANN analysis.

Fig. 14. Regression plot for ANN analysis.

212 N. Madhubabu et al. / Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213
Fig. 15. Plot showing (a) predicted Young’s modulus versus measured Young’s modulus and (b) predicted UCS versus measured UCS from ANN.
Table 3
Comparison of result from different models.
Output Parameter Prediction model
Young’s modulus Multiple linear regression
ANN
UCS Multiple linear regression
ANN
correlation coefficient (R2) and root mean square error
(RMSE). The following Table 3 shows the correlation
coefficient and RMSE belonging to each output parameter
given by different models.
A significant reduction in RMSE, a measure of accuracy,
for both the parameters in case of ANN indicates better
predictive capacity over multiple linear regression analysis
in predicting the data. The observation of ANN’s superiority
over MVRA were also made by previous researchers [32];
[54]; [55].
6. Conclusion
In the present study, an attempt was made to establish
a correlation between several index parameters with
ultrasonic velocity. The aim was to predict the uniaxial
compressive strength (UCS) and modulus of elasticity (E)
of carbonate rocks. ANN and MVRA were employed in
order to find suitable equations for the prediction of UCS
and E from easily determinable parameters like Porosity,
Density, P-wave velocity, Poisson’s ratio and Point load
index. However, a good correlation was not observed for
UCS and Point load index with P-wave velocity indicating
complex nature of geological setting of carbonate rocks,
while Young’s modulus and Porosity showed linear
relationship with two distinct trends. The result of MVRA
shows high correlation coefficient for uniaxial compressive
strength, while the correlation coefficient was found to be
lower for Young’s modulus. RMSE, when compared for
Correlation coefficient (R2) RMSE
0.70 9.4
0.96 3.8
0.91 11.4
0.97 6.6
both predictive models, show significant reduction in case
of ANN for both the parameters. Out of two prediction
models, ANN proves to be a more competent model for
estimation of even complex rock properties. ANN has the
capability of solving a non-linear problem without even
going into the complexity of dealing with high precession
sample preparation.
References
[1] A. Abdlmutalib, O. Andullatif, G. Korvin, A. Abdulraheem, The
Relationship Between Lithological and Geomechanical Properties of
Tight Carbonate Rocks from Upper Jubaila and Arab-D member
Outcrop Analog, Saudi Society for Geosciences, Central Saudi Arabia,
2015.
[2] S. Lai, M. Serra, Concrete strength prediction by means of neural
network, Constr. Build. Mater. 11 (1997) 93–98.
[3] R. Altindag, Correlation between P-wave velocity and some
mechanical properties for sedimentary rocks, J. South. Afr. Inst.
Min. Metall. (2012) 229–237.
[4] ASTM D 2845-08, Standard test method for laboratory Determination
of Pulse Velocities and Ultrasonic Elastic Constants of Rock,
2005.
[5] ASTM D 5731-08, Standard Test Method for Determination of the
Point Load Strength Index of Rock and Application to Rock Strength
Classifications, 2008.
[6] ASTM D 7012-10, Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength
and Elastic Moduli of Intact Rock Core Specimens under Varying
States of Stress and Temperatures, 2010.
[7] A. Basu, D.A. Mishra, K. Roychowdhury, Rock failure modes under
uniaxial compression, Brazilian, and point load tests, Bull. Eng. Geol.
Environ. 72 (3–4) (2013) 457–475.
[8] A. Baykasoglu, H. Gullu, H. Canakci, L. Ozbakır, Predicting of
compressive and tensile strength of limestone via genetic
programming, Expert Syst. Appl. 35 (2008) 111–123.
 N. Madhubabu et al. / Measurement 88 (2016) 202–213
[9] S.K. Biswas, Tertiary stratigraphy of the Kutch, J. Paleontol. Soc. India
37 (1992) 1–29.
[10] S. Boggs, Principles of Sedimentology and Stratigraphy, Springer,
2006, p. 662.
[11] T.P. Burchette, Carbonate Rocks and Petroleum Reservoirs: A
Geological Perspective from the Industry, Geological Society,
London, Special Publications., 2012, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/
SP370.14.
[12] N. Ceryan, U. Okkan, A. Kesimal, Prediction of unconfined
compressive strength of carbonate rocks using artificial neural
networks, Environ. Earth Sci. 68 (2013) 807–819.
[13] S. Ceryan, S. Tudes, N. Ceryan, A new quantitative weathering
classification for igneous rocks, Environ. Geol. 55 (2008) 1319–1336.
[14] C. Chang, M.D. Zoback, A. Khaksar, Empirical relations between rock
strength and physical properties in sedimentary rocks, J. Petrol. Sci.
Eng. 51 (2006) 223–237.
[15] R. Dawson, How significant is a boxplot outlier?, J Stat. Ed. 19 (2)
(2011) 1–13.
[16] S. Dehghan, G.H. Sattari, C.S. Chehreh, M.A. Aliabadi, Prediction of
unconfined compressive strength and modulus of elasticity for
Travertine samples using regression and artificial neural Networks,
Min. Sci. Technol. 20 (2010) 41–46.
[17] H. Ersoy, D. Kanik, Multicriteria decision-making analysis based
methodology for predicting carbonate rocks uniaxial compressive
strength, Earth Sci. Res. SJ. 16 (1) (2012) 65–74.
[18] Flavio S. Anselmetti, Gregor P. Eberli, Controls on sonic velocity in
carbonates, PAGEOPH 141 (2/3/4) (1993).
[19] J. Ghabousi, J.H. Garret, X. Wu, Knowledge based modeling of
material behavior with neural networks, ASCE J. Eng. Mech. 171 (1)
(1991) 132–153.
[20] C. Gokceoglu, A fuzzy triangular chart to predict the uniaxial
compressive strength of Ankara agglomerates from their
petrographic composition, Eng. Geol. 66 (2002) 39.
[21] T. Gregor, Baechle, R. Weger, P. Gregor, Eberli, A. Colpaert, Pore size
and pore type effects on velocity – implication for carbonate rock
physic models, Workshop Sound of Geology 26th-28th April Norway
Bergen (2006).
[22] M.A. Grima, R. Babuska, Fuzzy model for the prediction of
unconfined compressive strength of rock samples, Int. J. Rock
Mech. Min. Sci. 36 (1999) 339–349.
[23] F. Ham, I. Kostanic, Principles of neuro computing for science and
engineering, Mcgraw-Hill, USA, 2001.
[24] D.H. Han, A. Nur, D. Morgan, Effects of porosity and clay content on
wave velocities in sandstones, Geophysics 51 (1986) 2093–2107.
[25] E. Hoek, P.K. Kaiser, WF. Bawden, Support of Underground
Excavations in Hard Rock, CRC Press, 2000, p. 300.
[26] ISRM, Suggested method for determining sound velocity, Int. J. Rock
Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 15 (1978) 53–58.
[27] ISRM, Suggested methods for determining the uniaxial compressive
strength and deformability of rock materials, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min.
Sci. 16 (1979) 135–140.
[28] ISRM, Suggested method for determining point load strength, Int. J.
Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 22 (1985) 53–60.
[29] S. Kahraman, Evaluation of simple methods for assessing the
unconfined compressive strength of rock, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min.
Sci. 38 (2001) 981–984.
[30] S. Kahraman, The correlations between the saturated and dry P-
wave velocity of rocks, Ultrasonics 46 (4) (2007) 341–348.
[31] S. Kahraman, M. Alber, Estimating the unconfined compressive
strength and elastic modulus of a fault breccia mixture of weak rocks
and strong matrix, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 43 (2006) 1277–1287.
[32] S. Kahraman, M. Alber, M. Fener, O. Gunaydin, The usability of
cerchar abrasivity index for the prediction of UCS and E of Misis fault
breccia: regression and artificial neural networks analysis, Expert
Syst. Appl. 37 (2010) 8750–8756.
[33] S. Kahraman, Yeken Tekin, Determination of physical properties of
carbonate rocks from P-wave velocity, Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 67
(2008) 277–281.
[34] A. Kainthola, P.K. Singh, D. Verma, R. Singh, K. Sarkar, T.N. Singh,
Prediction of strength parameters of Himalayan rocks – a statistical
and ANFIS approach, Geotech. Geol. Eng. 33 (5) (2015) 1255–1278.
[35] A. Kainthola, T.N. Singh, A. Venkatesh, Correlation between point
load index and uniaxial compressive strength for different rock
types, Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 45 (2) (2012) 259–264.
[37] O. Kilic, Application of ultrasonic velocity measurement and thermal
analysis for determination of limestone quality, Physicochem. Probl.
Miner. Process. 50 (2) (2014) 525–533.
213
[38] S.C. Lee, Prediction of concrete strength using artificial neural
networks, Eng. Struct. 25 (2003) 849–857.
[39] F. Meulenkamp, Improving the prediction of the UCS by Equotip
readings using statistical and neural network models, Memoirs
Centre Eng. Geol. Netherlands (1997). pp. 162:127.
[40] F. Meulenkamp, M.A. Grima, Application of neural networks for the
prediction of the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) from
Equotip hardness, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 36 (1999) 29–39.
[41] P. Miscevic, G. Vlastelica, Impact of weathering on slope stability in
soft rock mass, J. Rock Mech. Geotech. Eng. 6 (3) (2014) 240–250.
[42] D.C. Montgomery, E.A. Peck, G.G. Vining, Introduction to Linear
Regression Analysis, John Wiley & Sons Inc, Hoboken, New Jersey,
2012.
[43] Z.A. Moradian, M. Behnia, Predicting the uniaxial compressive
strength and static Young’s modulus of intact sedimentary rocks
using the ultrasonic test, Int. J. Geomech. 9 (1(14)) (2009) 1532–
3641.
[44] A.R. Najibi, M. Ghafoori, G.R. Lashkaripour, M.R. Asef, Empirical
relations between strength and static and dynamic elastic properties
of Asmari and Sarvak limestones, two main oil reservoirs in Iran, J.
Petrol. Sci. Eng. 126 (2015) 78–82.
[46] X. Nie, Q. Zhang, Prediction of rock mechanical behaviour by
artificial neural network. A comparison with traditional method.
In: IV CSMR, Integral Approach to Applied Rock Mechanics, Santiago,
Chile, 1994.
[47] D.C. Oyler, C. Mark, G.M. Melinda, In situ estimation of roof rock
strength using sonic logging, Int. J. Coal Geol. 83 (2010) 484–490.
[48] M.Y. Rafiq, G. Bugmann, D.J. Easterbrook, Neural network design for
engineering applications, Comput. Struct. 79 (2001) 1541–1552.
[49] A. Rahmouni, A. Boulanouar, M. Boukalouch, Y. Geraud, A.
Samaouali, M. Harnafi, J. Sebbani, Prediction of porosity and
density of calcarenite rocks from P-wave velocity measurements,
Int. J. Geosci. 4 (2013) 1292–1299.
[50] J. Rusnak, C. Mark, Using the point load test to determine the
uniaxial compressive strength of coal measure rock, in: Colin
Conference on Ground Control in Mining, Morgantown, WV, 1998,
pp 221–230.
[51] K. Sarkar, A. Tiwary, T.N. Singh, Estimation of strength parameters of
rock using artificial neural networks, Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 69 (4)
(2010) 599–606.
[53] J. Schön, Physical properties of rocks, Handbook of Geophysical
Exploration, Pergamon, Oxford, New York, 1996.
[54] T.N. Singh, R. Kanchan, K. Saigal, A.K. Verma, Prediction of P-wave
velocity and anisotropic property of rock using artificial neural
network technique, J. Sci. Ind. Res. 63 (2004) 32–38.
[55] V.K. Singh, D. Singh, T.N. Singh, Prediction of strength properties of
some schistose rocks from petrographic properties using artificial
neural networks, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 38 (2001) 269–284.
[56] B. Tiryaki, Predicting intact rock strength for mechanical excavation
using multivariate statistics, artificial neural networks and
regression trees, Eng. Geol. 99 (1–2) (2008) 51–60.
[57] A. Tripathy, T.N. Singh, J. Kundu, Prediction of abrasiveness index of
some Indian rocks using soft computing methods, Measurement 68
(2015) 302–309.
[58] R.R. Trippi, E. Turban, Neural Networks in Finance and Investing-
Using Artificial Intelligence to Improve Real-World Performance,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1996.
[59] G. Trtnik, F. Kavci, G. Turk, Prediction of concrete strength using
ultrasonic pulse velocity and artificial neural networks, Ultrasonics
49 (2009) 53–60.
[60] E. Tucker, V.P. Wright, Carbonate Sedimentology, Blackwell, London,
2009, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781444314175.
[61] J.W. Tukey, Exploratory Data Analysis, Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company, 1977, p. 688.
[62] S. Yagiz, E.A. Sezer, C. Gokceoglu, Artificial neural Networks and
nonlinear regression techniques to assess the influence of slake
durability cycles on the prediction of uniaxial compressive strength
and modulus of elasticity for carbonate rocks, Int. J. Numer. Anal.
Methods Geomech. (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.002/nag.1066.
[63] E. Yasar, Y. Erdogan, Correlating sound velocity with the density,
compressive strength and Young’s modulus of carbonate rocks, Int. J.
Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 41 (2004) 871.
[64] I. Yilmaz, A.G. Yuksek, Prediction of the strength and elasticity
modulus of gypsum using multiple regression, ANN and ANFIS
models, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 46 (4) (2009) 803–810.