@ Crovm Copyrights roserved

Available by mail from the Queen's Printer, Ottawa,

and at the following Canadian Government bookshops:

OTTAWA
Daly Building, Corner Mackenzie and Rideau
TORONTO
221 Yonge Street
TAONTREAL
"Eterna-Vie Building, 1182 St. Catherine St. West
WINNIPEG
Mall Center Building, 499 Portage Avenue
VANCOUVER
657 Granville Avenue
HALIFAX
1737 Barrington Street

or through your bookseller

A deposit copy of this publication is also available

for reference in public li braries across Canada

Price 25 cents Catalogue No. M 3 8- 8/6 7

Price subject to change without notice

ROGER DUHAMEL, F.R.S.C.

Queen's Printer and Controller of Stationery
Ottawa, Canada
1968
 D. F. Coates' and M. Gyengel

't
Plate-Load Testing on Rock for
Deformation and Strength Properties

REFERENCE: D. F. Coates and M. Gyenge, "Plate-Load Testing on

Rock for Deformation and Strength Properties," Testing Techniques for
Rock Mechanics, ASTM STP 402, Am. Soc. Testing Mats., 1966, p. 19.

ABSTRACT: Plate-load tests were conducted underground on rock to

determine in situ strength and deformation properties. The plate-load
test provides information on the rock mass properties as opposed to the
strength of the rock substance. When a plate is placed on the surface of
the material to be tested and the contact pressure increased, the plate
deflects as the material deforms, and shear failure of the material ulti-
mately occurs.
Tests were conducted on three different materials: iron ore, paint rock,
and ash rock. The results were compared, in some cases, with the results
of laboratory testing and, in other cases, with the results of analyzing fail-
ures of the rock mass. Moderately good agreement was obtained between
these independent methods of determining the material properties. How-
ever, the principal aspect that emerges is the dispersion of strength values
that must be expected in testing geological materials.
Suggested specifications are given for plate-load testing, conventional
uniaxial compression testing, and classification uniaxial compression test-
ing.

KEY WORDS: plate-load tests, rock mechanics, rock (material), strength,

deformation, shear strength, bearing strength, brittle fracture, specifica-
tions

The mechanical properties of a rock mass depend on the nature of the

rock substance, stratigraphy, and structural features. Laboratory tests
are generally conducted on specimens of the rock substance, which
therefore give no information on the effects of stratigraphy or structural
features. Special laboratory studies have been made in the past on these
other factors, but no substantiation has been obtained that the mass
properties can be predicted from such testing. Consequently, the purpose
of the testing described in this paper was to determine the deformation
^14
'Head, Rock Mechanics Laboratory, Fuels and Mining Practice Div., Mines
Branch, Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, Ottawa, Canada.
2
Scientific officer, Rock Mechanics Laboratory, Fuels and Mining Practice Div.,
Mines Branch, Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, Ottawa, Canada.
19
20 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR ROCK MECHANICS

and strength properties of the rock mass in various formations in which

instability was being experienced.

Theory

Deformability
Uniform Pressure—The basis of the plate-load test is that if a plate
is placed on an extensive surface, equivalent to a semiinfinite half space,
and the contact pressure is increased, the resulting settlement is a func-
tion of the effective modulus of deformation of the subgrade. The settle-
ment of a bearing area on which a uniformly distributed pressure is act-
ing has been solved in the form of the general Eq 1:
q B I/E (1)
where:
= deflection of corner of loaded area,
q = uniformly distributed pressure,
B --- width of loaded area,
I = influence value varying with ratio of length to breadth of bearing
area as well as Poisson's ratio of the subgrade, and
E = modulus of deformation of ground.
For a square area the settlement of the center point, do , is twicc that of
the corner settlement.
If Poisson's ratio, ,u, is 0.3, the settlement of the center point of a
square bearing area is approximately
q B/E (1 )
For values of Poisson's ratio other than 0.3, the adjustment can be made
by knowing that the settlement varies directly as (1 — ,a2).
With the above equations, providing all the appropriate conditions are
fulfilled, it is then possible to determine E of a rock mass by measuring
the deflection at either the center or corner of a square area loaded with
uniformly distributed pressure on the rock surface.
Rigid Bearing—For a rigid foundation resting on a semiinfinite elastic
body, the equation for a rigid circular bearing can be used [1]: 3

d— (3)
2RE
where:
Q = load on the foundation and
R = radius of the bearing area.

'The italic numbers in brackets refer to the list of references appended to this
paper.
 COATES AND GYENGE ON PI ATE-10AD TESTING 21

The contact pressure for this rigid, circular bearing area would be
[1 ]:
Q/(7rR2 )
cry (4)
2(1 — (r/R) 2)"2

where r = distance from center of bearing area.

A similar equation for a long, rigid foundation of width B has been
derived as follows [/]:

Q/B
ai, — (5)
r(0.25 — (x/B) 2)112
where x = distance from center of foundation. Figure 1 shows the
pattern of pressure variation.
Using a square bearing area for the prediction of settlement or for

I f (73 =0 f
cr
y I x 7,Tx Ty

hJ
--
—
,

X
I ex
% , ,e
‘1 cry "e

FIG. 1—Wedge analysis of stresses.

the determination of the modulus of deformation of the subgrade, it is

probable that the practical device of replacing R with a B that represents
a square of equal area to the circle would be satisfactory.

Strength
Yielding Ground—An alternate function of the plate-load test is
based on the assumption that, if the contact pressure of a plate on an ex-
tensive surface of a material to be tested is increased, shear failure of the
material will ultimately occur. The results of such tests must then be
interpreted, using a bearing capacity theory to calculate fundamental
strength parameters. With such fundamental strength parameters it is
then assumed that the test data can, in effect, be extrapolated to other
geometry and other loading conditions for the prediction of failure
pressures.
For yielding ground the bearing capacity theory developed and sub-
stantiated in soil mechanics can be used [2]. The bearing pressure at
failure, Cif is related to the fundamental strength parameters through tho
,

following equation:
22 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR ROCK MECHANICS

qf= 0 . 57BA r-y cAre PiVp (6)

where: •
'y = density of ground,
B = width of a long footing,
c = cohesion, as in Mohr's strength theory,
p = surcharge pressure on ground surface adjacent to bearing pres-
sure, and •
N. , N,, Np = bearing capacity factors, functions of internal friction
angle (/) [2].
Equation 6 could be used for a plate-load test which was performed
on a horizontal surface with a long plate. If the test is ru' n on a wall or a
vertical ground surface, then the first and third terms no longer contribute
to the ultimate bearing capacity. In addition, if the plate is square the
coefficient of c must be increased from 1 to 1.3 [2]. Consequently, the
equation for a square plate on a vertical surface is as follows:
qf = 1.3 cN, (7)
Brittle Grow-di—Mohr% strength theory used in the case of yielding
ground might not be applicable to rocks. A theory that may be found to
be a good representation of the strength of brittle rocks is Griffith's
theory [3]. This theory postulates the presence of microscopic cracks
within the material, whose effect is to produce concentrations of stress
around their boundaries.
If the principal stress in the rock is tension and normal to the crack,
then a tensile stress many times this average stress will be created at the
ends of the cracks. If the principal stress is compression, then tension
can be produced in a direction at right angles to the direction of the
compressive strength.
When the stress concentrations .are equal to the tensile strength of
the material, cracks will be propagated. As the length of the crack trans-
verse to the field stress increases, the stress concentrations become
greater; consequently, it is visualized that once initiated, the propagation
of the crack will lead to failure of the material.
By assuming that the cracks are elliptical in shape and that they are
randomly oriented, the following criteria for failure have been established
[4]:
cr3 = —T a when .0-1 30-3 < 0 (8)

+Π3
8n when cri 30•3 > 0 • • • ..... (9)

and
0-1 — as
cos 20 — ( 10)
• 2(Œ1 + as) '
 COATES AND GYENGE ON PLATE-LOAD TESTING 23

where:
Ts = uniaxial tensile strength of rock substance and
0= angle between minor principal plane and plane of failure.
By combining Eqs 9 and 10, a failure equation can be obtained for
comparison with Mohr's strength equation:
Tf = 2 (T8v + T82)1t2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (11)
where:
Tf = shear stress on plane of failure and
= normal stress on plane of failure.
By plotting such an equation, a curve is obtained indicating a much

1
r 8

01-V

FIG. 2-Stress concentration in brittle rock under rigid bearing.

lower tensile strength than would be deduced from a linear envelope,

such as might be extrapolated from compression tests using Mohr's
strength theory. It also provides an envelope on the compression side
of the origin with a decreasing slope starting at 45 deg at the Y axis.
Both of these aspects are in general agreement with the results of triaxial
testing on rocks.
If a wedge analysis, as shown in Fig. 1, is made using Griffith's strength
theory, an equation can be obtained for the bearing capacity of rock. As
such an equation would only be applicable to brittle and, hence, generally
strong rocks, it has been assumed that the contribution to the resistance
to failure of the force of gravity on the ground itself is negligible. With
this assumption the simple resultant expression for a long load is
Q «. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .(12)
where Q.,^ = uniaxial compressive strength of the rock.
24 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR ROCK MECHANICS

The end effects for a square bearing arca and the effect of any sur-
charge, p, have not been analyzed.
The above equations are based on the assumption that the strength of
the rock will be mobilized at the sanie time along the entire failure
surface. When more is known about the failure of brittle materials, it is
probable that we shall find that failure is initiated at a point duc to a
concentration of stress and propagates into a progressive failure. Fur-
thermore, although experimental work on glass has substantiated
Griffith's theory very well, insufficient work lias been done on rocks to
determine whether this theory would predict compression or bearing
failures.
Rigid Bearing—For tests conducted on brittle rock s. it is improbable
that there will be sufficient yielding, so that average stresses along sur-
faces of impending failure can be used in the analysis as opposed to local
stress concentrations which will cause failure of the rock at a point.
For brittle rocks under a rigid foundation the stress concentration, as
shown in Fig. 2, at the edge of the bearing area could be significant.
Using Eq 5, the average bearing pressure at failure would be as follows:
qf = QIB = rev(YIB) 1" ( 1 YIB)1" (13)
where y = distance in from edge of foundation.
From Eq 12 we can postulate that failure will occur when the
stress in the rock, ff„ , is equal to , three times the uniaxial com-
pressive strength. Also, we can assume that towards the edge of the
foundation the lack of confinement together with the high stress level
would cause some plastic reaction in a bearing medium, such as con-,
crete, so that the theoretically infinite stress would not occur; con-
sequently, the maximum stresses would be equal to that which would
be calculated at some distance y in from the edge of the foundation.
Using these assumptions Eq 13 is modified:
q = 3R-Q1 (y/B) 1 /2 (1 — y/B)0 2 (14)
l'his equation is based on the concept that failure will be initiated at a
point under the foundation at a distance y in from the edge, and, because
the foundation rock is brittle, a progressive breakdown would then occur.
Conceivably this equation could have the more general form:
qf K Q 1/B' (15)
where K and n are pararneters and possibly constant for certain range's
of conditions.
• The above equations for bearing capacity suggest that the effect cif
the width of the bearing area, B, varies with the type of material. For a
yielding rock that approaches the properties of a soil with the bearing
plate on a horizontal surface, Eq 6 shows that the bearing capacity wdl
 COATES AND GYENGE ON PIATE-LOAD TESTING 25

increase with the width of the bearing area. If the subgrade material
can be considered as frictionless (for example, a shale with a high posi-
tive pore water pressure might behave this way) or where the bearing
? is occurring on a vertical surface, the bearing capacity is independent

• of the width of the bearing area. Also, for brittle rocks under a flexible
loading or a uniform bearing pressure, the bearing capacity is likely to
be independent of the width of the foundation. Then for a rigid footing
on a brittle rock the bearing capacity is likely to vary inversely with the
width of the foundation.
Furthermore, there is an additional case that can occur where a rigid

FIG. 3-Plate-load test on the wall of a drift .

footing bears on a hard rock which is overlying a softer stratum [5]. Here
the stress concentrations under the edges of the footing would be even
greater than represented above. In this case, it is probable that the bearing
capacity would vary inversely with the width of the bearing area raised
to some greater power of n as expressed by Eq 15.

The Tests

Method
These plate load tests were conducted on the walls of drifts, as shown
in Fig. 3. A hydraulic prop was used to apply the load on a circular steel
plate. The load was obtained from the calibrated hydraulic gage. Three
1/i 000 -in. dial gages were used to measure the deflection of the plate.
26 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR ROCK MECHANICS

The load was applied in increments, and the deflection was read for each
increment of load.
Besides simply applying a load to the plate, certain time limitations
were observed. It is important for static problems to control the rate of
application to ensure that all viscous components of deformation are
obtained for each increment of load. Failure in some materials can be
by continuous plastic flow at a relatively slow rate. In this case, if a fast
rate of load application were used, the test results would overstate the
actual strength of the material. The test specifications that were used are
included in the Appendix.
In addition, one or more ioad increments were cycle d. to determine the

TABLE 1-Plate-load test result.s on iron ore.

Plate Bearing Deflection Modulus of
Test No. Diameter, Pressure at Cohesion,a
psi
Moisture
Content, % at Failure, Recovery,b
in. Failure, psi In. psi

11 6.5 685 7.5 12.2 0.52 20 000

12 5.0 1555 17.1 ' 4.0 0.24 78 200
13 5.0 1580 17.4 3.90.40 40 300
14 5.0 1500 16.5 7.9 . 0.65 33 700
15 .4.0 2000 22.0 4.0 0:33 46 400
16 4.0 2400 26.4 5.2 0.12 164 000
17 5.0 1500 16.5 10.2 0.19 58 500
26 - 5.0 924 10.1 13.7 0.32 38 300
27 5.0 689 . 7.6 19.7 . 0.75 ..
.

28 6.5 851 9.4 12.9 . 0.60 41 800

29 6.5 851 9.4 12.4 0.42 42 700
30 4.0 2155 23.6 5.4 0.35 99 900
31 4.0 1806 19.9 3.9 0.60 • 43 400
a Cohesion was calculated assuming (i) = 37 deg, obtained from the laboratory
testing of the recompacted ore.
b This modulus was determined from the recovery of deformation during
an Unloading cycle using Eq 3.

modulus of deformation from the recovery curve. This modulus is con-

sidered to be a better measure of the rock properties unaffected by any
surface loosening or expansion.
The purpose of testing was to determine the deformation and strength
properties of three sedimentary rock formations of Proterozoic age: an
iron ore, a so-called paint rock, and an ash rock.

Iron Ore Results

Thirteen tests were run in two drifts in iron ore. The structure of the
rock was that of hard grains set in a fine-grained, usually soft matrix. It
could be classified as a weak to strong, plastic, massive, blocky to solid
rock [6]. The maximum particle size varied between 3/4 and 13/4 in.
The results of these tests are shown in Table 1. The mean bearing
 COATES AND GYENGE ON PI ATE-LOAD TESTING 27

pressure at failure was 1423 psi, and the coefficient of variation was 39.0
per cent. The mean modulus of deformation (or recovery) was 3.76 X
101 psi with a coefficient of variation of 63.8 per cent.
The nature of failure was not the same for all the tests. For Test 11
failure was by sudden yielding with circumferential cracks appearing on
the surface of the rock about 1 in. beyond the edge of the plate. For
Test 12 brittle cracking noises preceded the ultimate bearing failure.
These noises started at a bearing pressure of 923 psi, and pieces of rock
started to fly off the surface at pressures greater than 1000 psi with
failure ultimately occurring at 1555 psi. In Tests 13, 14, 16, and 17

'500
loo .01

0•75

ô 0•50
E Bearing Pressure
92 3•5 psi
CL 1000 ô 025

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Time, min

1
m

0 0-20 0•40 .0.60 0•80 0•100 0•120 0•140 0•160

Deformation, inches

FIG. 4-Typical bearing pressure versus deformation and deformation versus

time curves for iro>a ore.

failure occurred suddenly in a brittle manner without any noise preced-

ing failure. In Test 15 failure was by plastic yielding; however, pieces of
ore started flying off the face at a bearing pressure of 1889 psi. The
other tests had a similar scatter of failure patterns.
Typical bearing pressure versus deformation and deformation versus
time curves for the iron ore are shown in Fig. 4. These show that the rock
exhibited little viscosity but produced considerable plastic, or irrecover-
-'d able, strain.
Field density tests showed that the void ratio of the ore varied between
0.16 and 0.54. Furthermore, it was obvious from experience that the
strength of the ore varied considerably, which, together with the diffi-
culty of sampling a material essentially composed of hard rock in a
relatively soft matrix, militated against laboratory testing which might
28 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR ROCK MECHANICS •

have been used for comparing theoretical relations between bearing

pressure at failure and either uniaxial compressive strength or
parameters.
As it was thought that the bearing failures could have been the result
of yielding and shear failures, the results were interpreted, as shown in
Table 1, using Terzaghi's bearing capacity theory. An angle of internal
friction of 37 deg was assumed to be applicable to the ore, as this angle had

38

37 ......,
ODE,

3.6 .......e
-,... .....
35

After Jenkins
34 .. 0/?/)..2..

< \\
3-3
5
0.
0 --■.......,,...
(-) 32

o
3 I
aJ

-J 30 %Z
o
0 13
ÇA
29

28

27
03 04 05 .06 0.7 08 0-9
- Log. Base Diameter, ins.

FIG. 5—Correlation between bearing capacity and diameter of bearing plate.

been obtained from triaxial testing on recompacted specimens at similar

void ratios that were being studied for other problems.
On the other hand, there ,was evidence that the ground involved in
the bearing failure behaved like a brittle material. By examining the test
results, it can be seen that the bearing capacity has decreased with an
increase in size of plate. This suggests that the material properties ,should
be evaluated using Eq 15.
By plotting the bearing pressure at failure against the size of plate on
a log-log graph and also « , by assuming that the stress concentration
mechanism is valid only when the size of the plate is greater than the
 COATES AND GYENGE ON PLATE-LOAD TESTING 29

width of two of the component blocks of the ground, then it might be

logical to extrapolate the curve back to, in this case, approximately 21/2
in., to obtain a measure of the uniaxial compressive strength of the rock
mass.
In Fig. 5 the log-log graph of mean bearing capacity against diameter
of bearing plate is shown for this rock as well as for some tests by others
[5]. The dependence of bearing capacity on diameter suggests that
brittle failure was itivolved in these tests. Extrapolating back to twice the
average particle size gives a bearing capacity of 5300 psi, which should
represent the strength of material unaffected by stress concentrations.
Using Eq 12, this bearing capacity would be equivalent to a uniaxial
compressive strength of 1770 psi. Owing to the wide 'variation in test
results on core specimens, no independent check on the validity of these
deductions can be made. This strength seems a little high compared to
calculated pillar stresses of from 450 to 675 psi, which sometimes caused
failure [7].
Also, from Table 1 it can be seen that the modulus of deformation
calculated from the recovery deflection curve varies with the ultimate
bearing capacity. In other words, these tests provide some substantiation
for assuming that the modulus of deformation of rock is an indirect
measure of its strength.

Paint Rock Results

The so-called paint rock is a fine-grained mass of quartz, pyrolusite,
and kaolin with subangular fragments of chert, hematite, and geothite.
It could be classified as a weak, plastic, layered, solid rock [6]. The
formation is generally made up of laminations less than 1/2 in. thick.
When first examined it was not known whether or not this material
would have strength that was predominantly due to cohesion strength
with little contribution from friction. Consequently, recompacted labora-
tory specimens were used to obtain some measure of the basic strength
parameters. Drained triaxial compression tests were used for this pur-
pose.
Field density tests showed that the void ratio of the undisturbed
rock varied between 0.4 and 0.7. The laboratory specimens were com-
pacted to different void ratios within this range.
The results of one series of tests run on saturated specimens with a
void ratio of 0.56 showed the material to have an effective angle of
internal friction of 36 deg. Another series of tests run on saturated speci-
mens with a void ratio of 0.49 produced an effective angle of internal
friction of 38 deg. Creep tests and tests varying the rate of strain indicated,
contrary to expectations, that the rock properties were not sensitive to
duration of loading.
30 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR ROCK MECHANICS

TA13LE 2--Plate-locrcl test results on paint rock,

l'late 13o,u•ing 1)cflcclion" i^^foclulus of

Cohesion,,^ Moistu re
Test No. Diameter, l'resscu•c at at L^^iilw•c, Reco^^ery,^,
psi Conlcnt, /o psi
in. Yailure, psi in.

18 ............... 8.0 560 6.15 10.6 1.06 19 7(X)

19 ............... 8.0 93 1.02 14.3 0.86
20 ............... 8.0 135 1.48 27.1 0.70
21 ............... -8.0 135 1.48 13.1 0.40
22 ............... 6.5 175 1.92 25.4 0.20 15 5(X)
23 ............... 6.5 108 1.18 13.3 0.22 ...
24 ............... 6.5 205 2.25 13.7 0.37 36 :500
25 ............... 8.0 268 2.94 7.6 0.37 47,500

u Cohesion was calculated assuming (p= 37 deg, based on, laboratory testing
of the recompacted fôotwall paint rock.
L This modulus was determined from the recovery of deformation during an
unloading cycle using Eq 3.

250 W 0•050 - -- --
U

200 0 - 025
0 Bearing Pressure
51•7 psi
N ^ •
d

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time, minutes

50

0 0•10 0•20 .0•30 0•40 0•50 0•60 0•70 0•90

Deformation, inches

FIG. 6-Typical bearing pressure versus deformation and defa•mation versus

time curves for paint. rock.

In Table 2 the results of eight plate-load tests are shown. Test 19 was
run on an area that contained some cracks in the face. These niight have
been influential in producing a low-bearing capacity at this location.
From the moisture content of the material at Tests 20 and 22 and know-
ing the average specific gravity to be 3.00, it can be seen that in these
cases the void ratio could have been greater than 0.8. Relaxation and
expansion of the ground at the sides of the drifts might have occurred,
which would produce higher than normal void ratios and, hence, lower
than normal bearing capacities. The mean bearing pressure at failure
 COATES AND GYENGE ON PLATE-LOAD TESTING 31

was 210 psi with a coefficient of variation of 65.7 per cent. The mean
modulus of deformation (in recovery) was 1.29 X 10'1 psi with a coeffi-
cient of variation of 43.3 per cent.
Typical bearing pressure versus deformation and deformation versus
time curves for paint rock are shown in Fig. 6. These show that the rock
exhibited little viscosity but produced considerable plastic, or irrecover-
able, strain.
As there was no visual or audible evidence of brittle failure, it was
assumed that a yielding failure occurred in the paint rock, which would
be most appropriately interpreted using Terzaghi's bearing capacity theory
for soils. Using this theory, Table 2 shows the calculated values of cohe-
sion. These values have an average of about 1.8 psi With a maximum
value of 6.2 psi. For purposes of comparison the results on recompacted

TABLE 3-Plate-load test results on ash rock.

Plate Moisture Deflection Modulus of
Test No. Bearin gat
Diameter, Pressure Cohesion,". at Failure, Recovery,b
in. Failure, psi psi Content, % in. psi

32 4.0 1070 8.3 21.3 0.52

33 5.0 2075 16.0 20.2 0.3190 300
34 5.0 689 5.3 19.6 0.59 ...
35 5.0 924 7.1 22.1 0.31 67 900
36 4.0 1071 8.3 21.3 0.25 112 000
37 4.0 1254 9.6 23.7 0.34 108 000

a Cohesion was calculated assuming 0 40 deg, which was based partially

on judgment and partially on the failure planes obtained in the triaxial tests on
the massive ash rock.
b This modulus was determined from the recovery of deformation during an
unloading cycle using Eq 3.

laboratory specimens can be used. In these cases the effect of cohesion

was found to vary from 6 to 13 psi. Also, from the results of analyzing
slope failures in this formation [8], an average cohesion of 7.6 psi was
obtained with a coefficient of variation of 22 per cent from nine slides.
From these tests there is a rough correlation between the modulus of
deformation and the bearing pressure at failure for Tests 22, 24, and
25; however, the results of Test 18 are not consistent with this correla-
tion.

Ash Rock Results

Six tests were conducted in a pyroclastic rock of an unusually basic
type, called locally ash rock. Typical specimens of this rock contain dark
green to black, lenticular, aphanatic, serpentinized fragments generally
less than 1/2 in. in size in a greenish schistose matrix. The rock varies
from a weak, slightly viscous, plastic altered material to a relatively
strong, brittle schistose rock. Tests were conducted in the altered rock.
32 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR ROCK MECHANICS

Table 3 contains the results of the plate-load tests on the ash rock.
Typically, the vertical rock face at failure included several radial cracks:
extending out from the plate in the, vertical direction, the direction of
schistosity, for a distance. of about 5 in. It was difficult to judge whether
failure was by a brittle or yielding mechanism. However, in view. of the
high moisture content and, consequently, high void ratios, it is probable
that a yielding failure occurred. The mean bearing pressure at failure was
1181 psi with a coefficient of variation of 36.8 per cent. The mean
modulus of deformation (on recovery) was 3.45 X. 104 psi with a co-
efficient of variation of 36.8 per cent.

35

al 30

U
C 25

O 20
1000
C3
E 15
Beorinq Pressure
793•7 psi
ÿ 10
a
5

O
O . 5 10 15
Time, minutes

O•10 0•20 0•30 0•40 0•50 0•60 0-70 0•80 ,

Deformotion, inches.
FIG. 7-Typical bearing pressure versus deformation and deformation versus.
time curves for ash roçk. .

In Fig. 7 bearing pressure versus deformation and deformation versus

time curves are shown for ash rock. These curves show that -this rock
has some viscosity, or creep characteristics, and also produces consider-
able plastic strain. . .
Assuming a yielding failure, the cohesion of the rock has been cal-
culated from the bearing pressure at failure for the various tests. The
average cohesion thus obtained was 9 psi with -a maximum value of 16
psi.
Although laboratory tests were conducted on core specimens of the
relatively unaltered rock and also on recompacted pulverizcd" specimens,
it was not considered that the results of these tests should bear any
necessary relationship to those of the plate-loâd tests.
Slope failures in the exposed formation were analyzed. From the
 COATES AND GYENGE ON PLATE-LOAD TESTING 33

results of seven slides an average cohesion of 5.3 psi was calculated with
a coefficient of variation of 33 per cent. These slides were also in the
altered material and could have been more affected by exposure than the
material underground at the sites of the drift, thus accounting for the
lower average strength. Cohesion values obtained from the two sources
overlapped to a large extent.
It is interesting to compare the modulus of deformation, as obtained
from the redovery curves on these plate-load tests, with a compilation
that has been made in terms of an alteration index which is obtained by
multiplying the void ratio by 100 and dividing by the specific gravity of
the solid [9]. The alteration index of the ash rock, therefore, would be
about 3.7. Previous tests indicate that for this alteration index a range
in modulus of deformation could be expected of from 80,000 to 110,000
psi [9], which is remarkably close to those obtained from these tests.

Conclusions
1. Some useful corroborative information was obtained on the in situ
strength and deformation properties of the three different rock types sub-
jected to plate-load tests. However, the principal aspect that emerges is
the disposition of strength values which occurs in testing geological
materials.
2. The testing of rocks that are brittle is complicated by the impor-
tance of stress concentrations and the importance of recognising the
mechanics of failure, so that the results can be properly interpreted or
extrapolated through strength parameters to prototype geometry and
loadings. In tests on iron ore, the combination of brittle failure and
stress concentrations under the plate seemingly produced a bearing
capacity that varied inversely with the diameter of the plate, contrary to
what one would expect on yielding materials such as soils.
3. Except for soft rock in tunnels or drifts, plate-load testing is an
expensive method for determining rock mass properties. Large forces
are required for loading, and, on the ground surface, equally large reac-
tions must be supplied similar to those used for pile-load testing.
4. It is probable that the most favorable situation for plate-load test-
ing is when the test requires little extrapolation to the prototype case.
For example, for predicting prop penetration into weak floors under-
ground, the plate-load test has demonstrated its usefulness; similarly, it
could be useful in favorable circumstances for predicting settlement of
foundations.

Acknowledgment
It is a pleasure to acknowledge the important contributions to this
work of J. R. Helliwell and K. L. McRorie of Steep Rock Iron Mines
Ltd. and R. C. Parsons of the Rock Mechanics Laboratory in Ottawa.
 34 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR ROCK MECHANICS

APPENDIX
Suggested Test Specifications

Plate-Load Tes•ting

1. Three to six tests should be done at each location; individual tests are
to be separated by five plate diameters or approximately 3 ft center-to-center.
2. Apply à seating load of approximately 500 lb; record the magnitude
of the seating load accurately; allow plate to become stationary.
3. Use load increments of one-fifth or less of the estimated ultimate
capacity; record times and deformations immediately before and after load
application, and immediately before and after load release. '
4. Apply three load increments (25, 50, and 75 per cent of the estimated
failure load), maintaining each increment constant and taking deformation
readings every minute until the rate of deflection becomes equal to or less
than 0.001 in./min; then noting deformations at 5-min intervals until the
rate of deformation becomes equal to or less than 0.001 in./5-min; then
noting deformations at 15-min intervals until the rate becomes less than 0.001
in./15-min. This specification can be modified for subsequent tests as a result
of experience with a particular material.
5. After the third load increment, release the load to the seating load, and
record the deflection to the same time rate specification as in Item 4. Reapply
the previous load, and read deformations again to the same rate specification.
6. For special testing repeat Item 5.
7. Load to failure if possible.

Conventional Uniaxial Compression Testing

1. A suite of at least ten specimen s. of the same rock substance should

be tested to obtain a significant mean and a measure of the dispersion of
strength values.
2. Roller lap the specimens, if necessary, so that the maximum difference
in diameter over the length of the specimen is less than 0.001 in. Lap the
ends of the specimens on a wheel so that they are parallel within 0.001 in.
A standard length-diameter ratio is 2:1, but a ratio down to a minimum of
1 :1 is acceptable. After lapping, allow the specimens to dry at room tern-
- perature for at least. 24 hr.
3. Measure the specimen to 0.001 in. at three points for the lengths and
at three points for the diameter. Weigh specimens to the nearest 0.01 g.
Measure strain either with two strain gages cemented at the midheight of the
specimen and on opposite sides or with a compressometer that measures the
change in length over a 1-in , gage length.
4. Apply the load at a rate of approximately 1000 psi/sec until failure
occurs. Record the Maximum load and the duration of the test. Describe
qualitatively the type of failure as indicated by the noise produced, for ex-
ample, very violent, violent, and quiet. Describe the orientation of the frac-
tures, for example, top cone, bottom cone, longitudinal, diagonal, irregular,
along with a description of the fragment size, for example, powdered, highly
fragmented, quarter inch with slivers. Where possible determine the fracture
angle.
 COATES AND GYENGE ON PLATE-LOAD TESTING 35

Classification Uniaxial Compression Testing

1. Unless otherwise stated the specifications for conventional uniaxial
compression testing apply. The rock substance can be classified with respect
to strength as weak for Q,, less than 5000 psi, strong for Q,, between 5000 and
25,000 psi, and very strong for Q,, greater than 25,000 psi [6].
2. Apply the load in increments equal to approximately 0.25 Q,, , where
Q,, is the assumed uniaxial compressive strength of the rock substance at a
rate of loading of approximately 1000 psi/sec.
3. When the load has been established at the increment value, keep it
constant for 30 min, and record strain readings at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, and
30 min.
4. After maintaining the load increment for 30 min, unload the specimen.
Maintain the specimen at zero stress for 10 min, recording intermediate
strain.
5. Apply an increment of load equal to 0.5 Q,, to the specimen and main-
tain for 30 min with the same requirements for strain readings as for the
first increment of load. Cycle the load to zero as for the first increment and
then increase to 0.75 Q,, and subsequently to 1.0 Q,, .
6. The prefailure deformation characteristics of the rock substance are
then classified as elastic if the strain rate at a stress of 50 per cent of the
conventional uniaxial compressive strength is less than 2 microstrain per hr,
and viscous if it is greater than this rate. The strain rate is determined by
plotting the strain obtained during the 30 min period at a load of 0.5 Q,,
0 against the logarithm of time and extrapolated to obtain the average rate
applicable for the first hour [6].
1 7. The failure characteristics of the rock substance are classified as brittle
if less than 25 per cent of the total strain before failure is permanent and plastic
if it is more than this quantity [6]. -

References
R. J. Roark, Formulas for Stress and Strain, McGraw Hill Book Co., New
York, 1943.
K. Terzaghi, Theoretical Soil Mechanics, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New
York, 1943.
A. A. Griffith, Royal Soc., London, Philosophical Transaction A., Vol 221,
1920.
D. P. Clausing, "Comparison of Griffith's Theory with Mohr's Failure Criteria,"
Quarterly, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colo., Vol 54, No. 3, 1959.
J. D. Jenkins, "Laboratory and Underground Study of the Bearing Capacity
of Mine Floors," International Conference on Strata Control, 1960.
D. F. Coates, "Classification of Rocks for Rock Mechanics," International
Journal Rock Mechanics and Mining Science, Vol 1, 1964.
D. F. Coates and K. L. McRorie, "Earth Pressure on Multiple Tunnels," Pro-
ceedings, 15th Canadian Soil Mechanics Conference, 1961.
rl
D. F. Coates, K. L. McRorie, and J. B. Stubbins, "Analysis of Pit Slides in
Some Incompetent Rocks," Transactions, Am. Institute Mining, Metallurgical,
and Petroleum Engrs., March, 1963.
J. L. Serafim, "Rock Mechanics Considerations in the Design of Concrete
Dams," International Conference on State of Stress in the Earth's Crust, May,
1963.
36 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR ROCK ME-CHANICS

DISCUSSION

B. Ladanyil and D. Nguyen 2.—The authors should be congratulated

for their very interesting analysis of the plate-load test as a means for
determining the deformation and strength properties of the rock mass.
The discussers were particularly interested in the part of the paper
dealing with the problem of the bearing capacity of rocks. They agree
completely with the statement of the authors that "The most favorable
situation for plate-load testing is when the test requires little extrapolation
to the prototype case." On the other hand, if there is no model similitude
between the test and the prototype, the results of the test can be used in
design only if the phenomenon produced is well understood, so that
general strength parameters of the tested material can be properly deter-
mined.
The determination of the strength parameters of the rock from a plate-
loading test will require, therefore, a proper understanding of the mecha-
nism of rock failure under a plate load. While the behavior of soils and
yielding materials under a plate load at the surface is actually rather well
known as a result of a number of experimental and theoretical investiga-
tions carried out during the last 40 years, in brittle materials the same
problem up to now has been relatively little investigated. The analysis
and observations presented by the authors on this subject are, therefore,
particularly welcome.
As the mechanism of failure is concerned, the observations made by
the authors in their tests performed on the walls of drifts are most in-
teresting. The mode of failure observed in different tests was described as
follows:
Test 11—"Sudden yielding with circumferential cracks."
Test 12—"Brittle cracking noises started at a bearing pressure af 923
psi, and pieces of rock started to fly off the surface at pressures greater
than 1000 psi with failure ultimately occurring at 1555 psi."
,

Tests 13 to 17—"Failure was by plastic yielding (at 2000 psi); how-

ever, pieces of ore started flying off the face at a bearing pressure of 1889
psi."
In the tests on the ash rock, "at failure several radial cracks [were ob-
served] extending out from the plate."
From these observations, which are in agreement with those made by

Associate professor, Civil Engineering Dept., Laval University, Quebec,

Canada.
Graduate student, Department of Mining and Metallurgy, Laval. University,
Quebec, Canada.
 DISCUSSION ON PLATE-LOAD TESTING 37

other investigators in similar tests, it can be concluded that, depending

mostly on the type of rock, a plate-load test can produce: (1) an instanta-
neous brittle failure, (2) a brittle failure preceded by internal fracturing,
or (3) a plastic failure.
In the first case it can be postulated that the failure of the rock will
take place as soon as the condition for brittle failure is satisfied at a
single point. The first crack will propagate immediately and lead to an
instantaneous fracturing of a limited zone beneath and around the plate
accompanied with eventual rock- bursting.
In the second case the behavior of rock is similar to that observed
during indentation of brittle materials by a shallow pyramidal indenter."
It seems that in this case, after starting at a point, the failure englobes
quickly a hemispherical region beneath the plate. In this region the rock is
fractured and has lost most of its cohesion; however, its shearing strength
is still high due to internal friction and high compressive stresses. The
fractured hemispherical zone transmits the pressure radially to the
surrounding material, similarly as in the case of the expansion of a
spherical hole under pressure. Under this radial pressure the rock sur-
rounding the plate will be fractured showing radial cracks at the sur-
face. The radial pressure may eventually lead to rockbursts if the rock
is brittle or to a wedge failure if the rock is more plastic.
The third case of failure is typical for yielding and incompressible
materials but can also be observed as an ultimate state of failure in certain
brittle rocks.
It can be seen, therefore, that no single theory will be able to describe
properly the complete phenomenon of failure under a plate for different
types of rocks. In fact, there are actually three different theories available
which may be found useful in interpreting the failure phenomenon
occurring in the rock under a plate load. The theories are: (1) incipient
failure theory, (2) theory of the expansion of a spherical hole under
pressure, and (3) wedge theory.
The first theory has the object of giving the conditions for the begin-
ning of failure at a single point or in a limited region. One approach to
this problem has been shown by the authors for a rigid plate on a Griffith
material (Eq 14). Another approach will be shown herea ft er, for a
flexible load both on a Griffith and on a Coulomb material.
The second theory has already been used in the interpretation of hard-
ness test (see footnote 3) and can be useful for studying the second phase
of failure in Case 2, where a fractured hemispherical zone is formed
beneath the plate before a general failure.
The third theory, which is well known for a Coulomb material in soil

" W. F. Brace, ".Behayior of Rock Salt, Limestone, and Anhydrite During

Indentation," Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol 65, No. 6, June, 1960, pp.
1773-1788.
38 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR ROCK MECHANICS

mechanics and which has been applied to a Griffith material by the

authors (Eq 12), is able to describe successfully either the complète
in a yielding material or the ultimate state of phenomfailur
failure in brittle and intermediate materials.
From the above considerations it can be concluded that the deter-
mination of strength parameters from plate-load test results may present
considerable difficulties. In order to be able to obtain results close to
reality, the investigator should make correct assumptions on the follow-
ing problems: (1) Which failure criterion is applicable to the rocks
tested? (2) To which phenomenon or to which phase of the total phenome-
non of failure under a plate does the load adopted in the test as the failure
load correspond? Only with this knowledge a correet theory can be
chosen and the strength parameters properly determined. Finally, it may
be interesting to show an alternate approach to the problem of incipient
failure under a plate load. ,
It is known from a similar analysis in soil mechanics 4 that the condi-
tion for incipient failure under a uniformly loaded strip can be determined
from stress distribution in an elastic half space according to Boussinesq.
In soils, owing to their yielding character, the approach has not been
very successful. However, for strong and brittle rocks, whose elastic
properties remain practically unchanged up to failure, this approach may
be of more interest.
The concept consists simply in finding the minimum load at which the
failure condition is satisfied in the ground, at least in a single point.
As in the case of a plate-load test the influence of gravity forces on the
stress distribution is negligible, the problem becomes very simplified.
If, for example, a uniformly loaded strip is assumed, the principal stresses
are given by

0-1 =— ( tpo + sin 1P0)

(16)
-q upo
(A
— sin lb)

where q is the uniform pressure applied on the strip, and ipo is the angle
between two straight lines drawn from the considered point across both
ends of the strip.
Substituting the stresses according to Eq 16 in the original Griffith's
equation (Eq 10) and differentiating with respect to (pH , it is found that
the lowest value of the load for which the failure condition is satisfied, at
least in one point, is
2.18 Q,,, (17)
where Qu is the uniaxial compressive strength. •

1
0. K. Fri-A -Well. Druckvertallung liii Bartgrulide, J. Springer, ,Berlin, 1934.
 DISCUSSION ON PLATE-LOAD TESTING 39

If, on the other hand, it is assumed that the modified Griffith failure
theory is valid, which in the most part of compression region does not
differ from the Coulomb theory, it is found from a similar analysis that
the value of qf for incipient failure is not a constant but is a function of
the slope angle 0 of the failure envelope; as expected.
The ratio qf/Q.,, is found to vary with 0 from 2.30 at 30 deg, over
2.74 at (p = 40 deg, to 3.43 at 0 = 50 deg.
A similar 'analysis can be made for a uniform circular loading; how-
ever, in this case the analysis was limited to the points located on the
vertical axis only for which the following simple expressions for principal
stresses are valid:

01 = q 1- cos' 2°
............(18)
0-3=2 (2 - 3 cos 2°-
' + -cos3°

where ^o , as before, denotes the angle between two straight lines drawn
from the considered point across two diametrically opposite points on the
edge of the loaded circular surface.
Following the same procedure as before it is found that, in the
I
vertical axis, the failure will be initiated, when

qr = 2.715 Q.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (19)

if the original Griffith theory is assumed. For the modified Griffith theory,
on the other hand, it is found that the ratio q f/Q„ , corresponding to
incipient failure, will have values of 3.12 at 30 deg, 4.09 at 40
deg, and 6.25 at (p = 50 deg.
It is interesting to compare the above values of incipient failure loads
with those corresponding to more advanced phases of failure.
For a Griffith material the above incipient load, q1 = 2.18 Q„ , should
be compared with the load qf = 3Q, (Eq 12) obtained by the authors for
a wedge failure. (In fact, a slightly greater value of the load may be ex-
pected in the last case when a kinematically admissible solution will be
found.) For a circular loading the greater incipient failure load of 2.715
-, Q.,, suggests that a wedge failure may be attained at about 4 Q„ .
For a modified Griffith (or Coulomb) material the ultimate failure load
.4 for a strip can be calculated by using Prandtl's theory. The values found
for the ratio q f/Q.,, in this case are as follows:

cp = 30 deg 40 deg 50 cleg

qf/Q,, = 8.7 17.6 48.6

The values should be compared with those obtained above for the
40 TESTING TECHNIQUES FOR ROCK MECHANICS

incipient failure in the same material. It will be seen that in such a

material there is a large difference between the incipient and the ultimate
failure loads, respectively. The region of loading between the incipient
and ultimate failure is thought to correspond to the intermediate phase of
failure during which . the local fractured zone beneath the plate is acting
on the surrounding material as an expanding spherical bulb.
D. F. Coates and M. Gyenge (authors)—The discussion that has been
submitted by B. Ladanyi and D. Nguyen is a very good review of the
possible mechanisms of rock failure under bearing pressure. Even though
their theoretical comparisons are made with the assumption of a uniform
bearing pressure, the differences between the bearing pressures to pro-
duce the start of failure as opposed to a general and complète failure is
instructive. However, for the majority of cases of bearing pressure on
rock, significantly nonuniform loading probably exists; in other words,
the structure applying the load has some rigidity. Consequently, it would
be interesting to have similar analyses made taking into account the rela-
tive stiffness or rigidity of the structure applying the pressure with respect
to the foundation material.