The Influence of Testing Procedures on Uniaxial Compressive Strength Prediction of Carbonate Rocks from Equotip Hardness Tester (EHT) and Proposal of a New Testing Methodology: Hybrid Dynamic Hardness (HDH)

Yılmaz, N. Günes

doi:10.1007/s00603-012-0261-y

Cited by 49 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For statistical analysis RStudio (version 0.97.551) was used. Adapting Yilmaz’ () approach for porous limestone this study combined SIM and RIM based on median hardness to calculate the deformation ratio (DR) and HDH (see Equations and ).

{DR}_{robust} = {HLDL}_{normalS . med} true/ {HLDL}_{normalR . med}

…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast, with the repeated impact method (RIM) repeated measurements on one point are taken, which reflects the elastic and plastic properties of the surface and subsurface of the stone. Yilmaz () and Aoki and Matsukura () combined both methods to gain deeper insight in stone surface and subsurface characteristics. Aoki and Matsukura () introduced the k ‐value, whereas Yilmaz () calculated the hybrid dynamic hardness (HDH) measure.…”

Section: Challenges For Using Equotip Devices On Rock and Stone Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yilmaz () and Aoki and Matsukura () combined both methods to gain deeper insight in stone surface and subsurface characteristics. Aoki and Matsukura () introduced the k ‐value, whereas Yilmaz () calculated the hybrid dynamic hardness (HDH) measure. For both porosity characteristics of the stone are taken into account and thus, natural stone variations are better reflected.…”

Section: Challenges For Using Equotip Devices On Rock and Stone Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At present there is no consensus on methodology for the use of Equotip devices in the field or laboratory, nor in the evaluation of the data obtained (Viles et al , ; Yilmaz, ). This is a major limitation if reliable and comparable data are to be collected by different studies.…”

Section: Challenges For Using Equotip Devices On Rock and Stone Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…SIM = single impact method, RIM = repeated impact method with combinations of the two (SIM and RIM) being k‐value and HDH = hybrid dynamic hardness, Y = Yes, N = No (table modified after Yilmaz ()).…”

Section: Challenges For Using Equotip Devices On Rock and Stone Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Low impact surface hardness testing (Equotip) on porous surfaces – advances in methodology with implications for rock weathering and stone deterioration research

Wilhelm

Viles

Burke

2016

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Equotip surface hardness tester is becoming a popular method for rock and stone weathering research. In order to improve the reliability of Equotip for on‐site application this study tested four porous limestones under laboratory conditions. The range of stone porosity was chosen to represent likely porosities found in weathered limestones in the field. We consider several key issues: (i) its suitability for soft and porous stones; (ii) the type of probe required for specific on‐site applications; (iii) appropriate (non‐parametrical) statistical methods for Equotip data; (iv) sufficient sampling size. This study shows that the Equotip is suitable for soft and porous rock and stone. From the two tested probes the DL probe has some advantages over the D probe as it correlates slightly better with open porosity and allows for more controlled sampling in recessed areas and rough or curved areas. We show that appropriate sampling sizes and robust non‐parametric methods for subsequent data evaluation can produce meaningful measures of rock surface hardness derived from the Equotip. The novel Hybrid dynamic hardness, a combination of two measuring procedures [single impact method (SIM) and repeated impact method (RIM)], has been adapted and is based on median values to provide a more robust data evaluation. For the tested stones in this study we propose a sample size of 45 readings (for a confidence level of 95%). This approach can certainly be transferred to stone and rock with similar porosities and hardness. Our approach also allows for consistent comparisons to be made across a wide variety of studies in the fields of rock weathering and stone deterioration research. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

{DR}_{robust} = {HLDL}_{normalS . med} true/ {HLDL}_{normalR . med}

…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Challenges For Using Equotip Devices On Rock and Stone Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Challenges For Using Equotip Devices On Rock and Stone Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Challenges For Using Equotip Devices On Rock and Stone Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Challenges For Using Equotip Devices On Rock and Stone Surfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Low impact surface hardness testing (Equotip) on porous surfaces – advances in methodology with implications for rock weathering and stone deterioration research

Wilhelm

Viles

Burke

2016

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Use of the Acoustic Energy Meter (AEM) for rapid geomorphological field assessment of rock hardness: comparison with Schmidt hammer R‐value

Brook

Winkler

2016

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapid, field-based assessments of rock hardness are required in a broad range of geomorphological investigations where rock intact strength is important. Several different methods are now available for taking such measurements, in particular the Schmidt hammer, which has seen increasing use in geomorphology in recent decades. This is despite caution from within the engineering literature regarding choice of Schmidt hammer type, normalization of rebound (R-) values, surface micro-roughness, weathering degree and moisture content, and data reduction/analysis procedures. We present a pilot study of the use of an Acoustic Energy Meter (AEM), originally produced, tested and developed within the field of underground mining engineering as a rapid measure of rock surface hardness, and compare it with results from a mechanical N-Type Schmidt hammer. We assess its capabilities across six lithological study sites in southeast Queensland, Australia, in the Greater Brisbane area. Each rock exposure has been recently exposed in the 20th/21st century. Using a 'paired' sampling approach, the AEM G-value shows an inverse relationship with Schmidt hammer R-value. While both devices show variability with lithology, the AEM G-values show less scatter than the Schmidt hammer. We conclude that each device can contribute to useful rock hardness testing in geomorphological research, but the AEM requires further field testing in a range of environments, and in particular on older and naturally-exposed rock surfaces. Future evaluations can extend this pilot study by focusing on sampling procedures, energy sources, and data reduction protocols, within the framework of a comparison study with other rock hardness testing apparatus.

show abstract

The influence of structural organization of epilithic and endolithic lichens on limestone weathering

Morando

Wilhelm

Matteucci

et al. 2017

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Influence of Testing Procedures on Uniaxial Compressive Strength Prediction of Carbonate Rocks from Equotip Hardness Tester (EHT) and Proposal of a New Testing Methodology: Hybrid Dynamic Hardness (HDH)

Cited by 49 publications

References 20 publications

Low impact surface hardness testing (Equotip) on porous surfaces – advances in methodology with implications for rock weathering and stone deterioration research

Low impact surface hardness testing (Equotip) on porous surfaces – advances in methodology with implications for rock weathering and stone deterioration research

Use of the Acoustic Energy Meter (AEM) for rapid geomorphological field assessment of rock hardness: comparison with Schmidt hammer R‐value

The influence of structural organization of epilithic and endolithic lichens on limestone weathering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About