Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr. Vol. 12, pp. 277-282. Pergamon Press 1975.

Printed in Great Britain

Strength and Deformation of Rock

Subject to Multiaxial
Compressive Stresses
C. M. SANGHA*
R. K. DHIR'I'
The reported investigation is primarily devoted to a study of the influence
of confinement on the time-dependent strength of rock and the development
of a simple construction for predictin# the multiaxial compressive strength
of rock from its triaxial behaviour. These results show that confinement
reduces the effect of rate of loadin# and with the possible exception of very
low confinin(t pressures the relative strem2th-time relationship is independent
of confinin 0 pressure.
Percentage strength-instantaneous Poisson's ratio relationships have been
used to show that an increase in confinement produces a greater resistance
against lateral deformation. A method, using measuren~ents of axial strain
at low stress levels, is tentatively suggested for determining the confining
pressure at which the transition of the failure from brittle to ductile takes
place.

INTRODUCTION tionship since in-situ rock is generally subjected to such

A number of experimental techniques are presently a state of stress. From results available in literature
available for studying the relationships between princi- it is not possible to confidently evaluate this effect since
pal stresses at failure. The most popular of these are frequently either only one test has been performed for
the testing of plates in biaxial compression [1], solid a given combination of confining pressure and loading
and hollow cylinders under torsion and axial loading rate [10] or both confining pressure and loading rate
[2, 3], axially loaded hollow cylinders subjected to in- have been simultaneously varied [2]. Tests were thus
ternal and external pressure [4, 5], and prisms in mul- also performed to study the effect of confinement on
tiaxial compression [6, 7]. Although it is possible to strength.
determine the complete relationship in principal stress
space by testing hollow cylinders a serious disadvan- MATERIAL
tage of the first three methods is that failure is signifi-
cantly influenced by specimen dimensions. A distinct All of the experimental work was carried out using
advantage of triaxial testing is that with the exception Laurencekirk sandstone. Earlier publications have
of the unconfined condition strength is unaffected by reported the effect of time, specimen size and shape
specimen size and shape [8, 9]; furthermore such tests on strength, deformation and fracture of this material
are comparatively simpler to perform. However, the when subjected to uniaxial loading [11-13]. A detailed
major limitation of this method is that two of the prin- description of this sandstone is given in [11].
cipal stresses are equal. In this paper a construction
is proposed for extending the utility of the triaxial test TESTING TECHNIQUE
by means of a simple construction in order to predict
strength for the case in which all three principal stresses The triaxial cell and the lateral pressure controller
are different. were specially designed by Wykeham Farrance
Rate of loading is another important parameter in Engineering Limited, U.K., for the University of Dun-
determining the strength of rock. It has been widely dee in 1970. Design requirements for the cell were that
reported that unconfined strength is dependent on rate it should (i) accommodate specimens 50 m m dia, (ii)
of loading; however, it is important to understand the withstand axial thrusts up to 2 MN, (iii) have provi-
significance of confinement on the time-strength rela- sions for the use of strain gauges, and (iv) permit load-
ing in either compression or extension such that the
controller should be able to apply confining pressures
* Research Fellow, The Department of Civil Engineering, The Uni-
versity, Dundee, Scotland. up to 138N/mm 2 (20,0001b/in 2) and automatically
I Lecturer, The Department of Civil Engineering, The University, maintain the confining pressure within +_0"35 N/mm 2.
Dundee, Scotland. The set up for a typical test in the 5"88 M N (600 MP)
277
278 C . M . Sangha and R. K. Dhir

Fig. 1. Typical set up for triaxial testing using a Losenhausenwerk compression testing machine.

Losenhausenwerk compression machine is illustrated in comparison of the results for two sandstones [11, 14]
Fig. 1. and a number of concretes [15] indicates that the rate
Details of the preparation of the 50mm dia by of decrease increases as the strength of the rock in-
125 mm length specimens have been given elsewhere creases. Figure 2 illustrates the strength-confining pres-
[11]. These specimens were protected from the oil in sure relationships of Laurencekirk sandstone at strain
the cell by means of a sheath made from liquid ureth- rates of 2.5 x 10 -3, 2"5 x 10-5 and 2.5 x 10-7/sec. It
ane polymer (ADIPRENE L-100) cured with MOCA. can be seen that at all confining pressures the decrease
The wall thickness of the sheath was 1.5 mm and the
clearance between sheath and specimen was varied ~sF I I I I t I
between 1.0-2-5 mm depending on the confining pres-
sure employed and whether strain gauges were to be ~00
utilised. Hi-Torque stainless steel clamps were used for
securing the sheath to the pedestal at the base of the 3s0
cell and a steel platen and spherical seating unit resting
on top of the specimen in order to prevent oil leakage
into the sheath. The diameter of the pedestal and the 300
platen and spherical seating unit was the same as that E
of the test specimens. ~ ~so
High yield electrical resistance strain gauges having ~
a length and width of 8.0 and 2-1 mm respectively were SANDSTONE __
employed. Strains, using a set of 2 axial and 2 lateral ~
Q~
20~
gauges, were recorded 'only at 2"5 x 10-5/sec strain b
rate although tests were also conducted at 2.5 x 10-3 150
and 2-5 x 1 0 - 7 / s e e strain rates. Five confining pres-
sures were used, namely, 17.2 (2500), 37-2 (5400), 68-9 100
(10,000), 103.4 (15,000) and 137"9 N/ram z (20,000 lbf/in2).
Three specimens were tested for each combination of CONCRETE
confining pressure and strain rate. 5o 2.s* lo~ Sec

MULTIAXIAL COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH 0 ~

0 20 LO 60 80 100 120 140
Effect of rate of loadi~u3 CONFfNING PRESSURE (~3} N/ram2
The strength of rock in uniaxial compression is Fig. 2. Influence of strain rate on the strength of Laurencekirksand-
known to decrease with decreasing rate of loading. A stone loaded in triaxial compression.
 Strength and Deformation of Rock
TABLE 1. EFFECT OF STRAIN RATE ON THE RELATIVE STRENGTH OF SANDSTONE AT DIFFERENT CONFINING
PRESSURES
RELATIVE
STRAIN RATE
per sec
Confining Pressure - N/nm 2
0 17.2
2.5 x l O -3 15.6 ~.4
2.5 x ~ -5 5.o 0.3
2 . 5 x 1 0 -7 1.0 1.O
in strength below a strain rate of 2-5 10-5/sec is of
a much smaller magnitude than above it. The percent-
age increases in strength, with respect to the 2"5 x 10- 7
values, due to change in the rate of straining are given
in Table 1. An important conclusion to be drawn from
these results is that the effects of loading rate are most
significant under uniaxial loading and under confine-
ment the relative strength-strain rate relationship is in-
dependent of confining pressure. The authors were un-
able to find any comparative data in literature for other
rocks. However, tests on concrete [15] suggest that rate
of loading has a greater effect on strength in the pres-
ence of pore water pressure.
Effect of material
A material which is comparatively weaker in uniaxial
compression may become relatively stronger when sub-
jected to multiaxial stresses. This point is clearly illus-
trated in Fig. 1 which shows that although Laurence-
kirk sandstone was almost 70 per cent stronger than
concrete it is weaker for confining pressures exceeding
32 N/mm 2. The results of Hoskins I-5] show that both
the principal minimum and intermediate compressive
stresses have a significantly greater effect on quartz
dolomite than on limestone. Mogi [16] has concluded
that the strength of the more brittle rocks shows a
greater dependence on the intermediate principal stress
(and hence confinement in general). However this con-
clusion does not satisfy the behaviour of the two mater-
ials illustrated in Fig. 2 since (a) sandstone was
observed to show a more linear behaviour up to maxi-
mum stress and (b) although the uniaxial Young's
modulus of the two materials was approximately equal
the slope of the post-failure curve for sandstone was
much steeper.
An important parameter governing the rate of in-
crease in strength with increasing confinement is the
tensile strength of the material. It is well known that
under uniaxial loading failure results from tensile
stresses and that there is a greater tendency for inter-
granular failure. With increasing confinement the ten-
sile strength of the material plays a less important role
and intragranular failure a more prominent role in
determining strength._Research work on concrete has
279
STRENGTH
37.2 68.9 103.4 137.9
7.9 4.6 5.3 ~.2
0.8 o,k 0.4 o.5
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.O
shown that the strength of the aggregate-matrix inter-
face (bond) decreases as the maximum size of its aggre-
gate increases [17]; thus it is not surprising that the
rate of increase in strength with confining pressure was
found to increase as the maximum aggregate size of
the concrete was increased [18] since internal micro-
cracking primarily results from bond failure [19]. There
is also some evidence to suggest that a similar beha-
viour is exhibited by rock; the strength-confining pres-
sure plots for coarse, medium and fine grained grey-
wackes of similar strength were found to have slopes
of 6"5, 5.9 and 5"5 respectively [20].
At present there is no theory which can satisfactorily
predict, from a knowledge of its unconfined strength
(o.c), the strength of rock subjected to multiaxial
stresses. The Griffith theory [21,22] has been most
widely used for such purposes. Since Griffith's theory
was applicable to open cracks, McClintock and Walsh
[23] introduced a frictional parameter # such that for
a confining pressure o3 the strength of the material
is given by:
+ #(1 + #)
at --- o'3 _/~ + x/(1 + p2) + o'c-
A study of triaxial data in literature, Table 2, clearly
shows that the coefficient of internal friction varies
from material to material and that it, in general, varies
significantly with confining pressure.
Prediction of multiaxial compressive strength
Using the results for the rocks listed in Table 2 the
following relationships were derived:
t71
-- 1 + 3"20(tr3~ '7 (1)
coefficient of correlation = 0.87
rm _ 0"10 + 0"697 - -
(OmV6" (2)
~ \ o'~/
coefficient of correlation = 0-966.
Although in the absence of any relevant data equation
(1) may be utilized to predict strength, the estimation
can result in serious errors and furthermore the effects
280 C.M. Sangha and R. K. Dhir

TABLE 2. DEPENDENCE OF THE COEFFICIENT OF INTERNAL FRICT:,ON ON CONFINING PRESSURE

AND ROCK TYPE

Confining
Investigator Rock Pressures
Investigated Varation in
. . . . (%1%)
Aldrich Jr. (2h) Berea S a n d s t o n e O.iO - O.81 1.18 - 0 . 6 9
Brace (25) Webatuek Dolomite 0.ii - 0 . 7 2 0.88 - 0.60
" Blair D o l o m i t e 0.09 - 0.69 1.13 - 0 . 5 3
" Frederick Diabase O . i O - 0.65 1.O8 - 0.89
" Cheshire Quartzite O . 1 3 - 0.35 1.58 - 1.47
" Westerly Granite 0.36 - 0 . 6 6 1.30 - 1.25
Bredthaver (26) Anhydrite O.h2 - 1.67 0.89 - 0.65
" Coarse Chico Limestone 0 . 6 5 - 1.65 0.73 - 0.45
" Quartzite O . h 3 - 0.65 0.78 - 0 . 7 2
" White D o l o m i t e 0.95 - l.h3 0.90 - O.71
Payed (27) Slate, i. a n i s o t r o p y O.O1 - O.18 3.26 - 1.O6
" Slate, ii. a n i s o t r o p y 0.02 - 0.20 1.82 - 1.O8
" Slate, i. anisotropy 0 . 2 6 - O.71 approx, constant at 0.30
" Slate, ii. a n i s o t r o p y 0,60 - 0.97 0.51 - 0.44
" Siltstone, 1. a n i s o t r o p y 0.29 - 0.68 approx, constant at 0.50
" Siltstone, ll. anisotropy O,14 - 0.69 approx, constant at 0.60

Handin et al (2) Darley D a l e S a n d s t o n e 0.05 - 0.25 0.83 - O.hh

Heard (28) Darley Dale Sandstone 0 . 2 2 - 0.4h 0.51 - 0.37

Hock (29) Quartzite o.oh - 0.08 1.32 - 1.28

Hoek (30) - CSIR Chert Dyke (granite) O,lO - O.12 1.29 - 1.h8

" - MIT Chert Dyke (granite) 0.13 - 0 . 5 3 approx, constant at i.O0

Murrell (31) Darley D a l e S a n d s t o n e O.Oh - 2.h3 1.29 - 0.61

Ramez (32) Darley D a l e Sandstone 0.24 - 1.43 1.O5 - 0 . 5 6

Robertson (33) Darley Dale Sandstone O.i0 - 1.43 0.69 - 0.hO
Serdengecti a n d
Boozer (34) Darley Dale S a n d s t o n e O . 1 3 - O.51 0.72 - 0.45
Smith et al (35) Granite 0 . 2 2 - 1.47 1.00 - 0.80

" Marble 0.39 - 1 , 8 2 approx, constant at 0.50

" Sandstone 0.88 - 3.98 approx, constant at 0.50

of the intermediate principal stress are neglected. The recommended because of their insensitivity to large
magnitude of the error which may result is highlighted changes in one of the principal stresses [4].
by the results of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation [20] Since considerable uncertainty is involved in predict-
who showed that the slope of the a~/tr c vs a3/trc curve ing the multiaxial compressive strength of rock from
may vary from 2-9 to 22-5 depending upon the type existing failure criteria the authors propose that the
of rock used. Although equation (2) appears to be a simple construction illustrated in Fig. 3 be used. The
satisfactory fit to the experimental data pertaining to advantages in using triaxial strength data for the pre-
a wide range of rock types such relationships are not diction of multiaxial compressive strength are that (i)

3./. I i 1 I ' ,,.....---I v

f

3.0

2"6
%=%
etc.

~/o~=0 2
2-2
15- o-3 / O-c = 0.1
I
%/o'c :0
1-8

1-/.

ao"I la o-2 : 0
1"0 I
0"2 04 0"6 0"8 1"0 1"2
cr21~

Fig. 3. A construction for estimating multiaxial compressive strength from triaxial tests.
 Strength and Deformation of Rock 281

300 I I I I I I I I I I /

LATERAL ~ F ~ ~E

~2oo . . . . 0 --

iso .... C __

,oo
ING

II/ I _

50
A

il
B 17.2

~" I I I I I I I I I I
0.2 04 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1-/. $6 $8 2.0 2.2
STRAIN - o/Q
Fig. 4. Influence of confining pressure on the stress-strain behaviour of Laurencekirk sandstone.

unlike the direct methods I-1-7] strength is independent 2"5 x 10-5/sec. It can be seen that for confining pres-
of specimen size and shape [8,9], (ii) the tests are rela- sures between 68-9 and 137.9 N/n'ln] 2 the axial stress--
tively simpler to perform and (iii) a complete solution strain curve follows the same locus up to a stress level
(Fig. 3) may be estimated from four or five points. close to its strength value. This coincidence of the
The basic assumption for the proposed construction curves is thought to be related to the transition of the
is that the rate of increase of the major principal stress failure from brittle to ductile; for confining presstires
is related to the increase in the intermediate principal exceeding 68"9 N/mm 2 there was very little change in
stress by the following linear relationships: stress for strains between 2-10 per cent. There are axial
Aa~ = Aa2 for 0 < a2/~rc < 0-5 stress~strain curves which have been presented by a
number of research workers (e.g. [37, 38]) which show
Aal = 0"5 Aa2 for 0"5 < tr2/a < 1-0
that the curves initially follow the same locus for all
Aal = 0 for 1"0 < tr2/ac. confining pressures and deviate only near the failure
This construction utilises the well observed fact that stress. The physical interpretation of this behaviour,
the effect of confinement decreases with increasing con- namely, no increase in material stiffness due to confine-
finement. The assumption that Ao-i = 0 for 1-0 < a2/a ~ ment appears difficult to accept; thus it is possible that
is in good agreement with the results of Krishnaswamy either the selected scales were insensitive to illustrate
[36]; associated errors in this region are likely to be differences or that the curves were incorrectly idealized.
small and of a conservative nature. The results of The percentage maximum stress-instantaneous Pois-
Bieniawski [7] show good agreement with the pro- son's ratio relationships illustrated in Fig. 5 show that
posed construction for Aat = Aa2 in the range (a) the resistance to lateral deformation with increasing
0"15 < a2/ac < 0.5 and the construction over the range confinement is greater than the corresponding resis-
0 < a2/ac < 1-0 is supported by Bellamy's [5] general tance to axial deformation and (b) for confining pres-
conclusion that the effect of the intermediate principal sures equal to or greater than 37-2 N/mm 2 the Pois-
stress is to increase the major principal stress by not son's ratio at low stress levels becomes independent
less than 0-75 a2. There is considerable conflict in litera-
ture concerning the biaxial compressive strength of a Too I I I I ....
material; expressed in terms of the uniaxial compressive
strength most of the values are in the range 1"16 [1]
to 2.69 [5]. For this special case, o 3 0 and a~ = tr2,
=

the proposed construction gives a value of 1"75; an

extrapolation of the results presented by Hoskin's [5] x
.<
and Bieniawski [7] give values of approximately 2-1-3-0
and 1-65 respectively. In general, these results confirm
that the proposed construction can be reliably used for
the prediction of the multiaxial compressive strength
kLI
of rock.
o
DEFORMATION BEHAVIOUR 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.t. 0.5
INSTANTANEOUS POISSONSRATIO
Figures 4 and 5 illustrate the stress-strain and stress-
Fig. 5. Influence of confining pressure on the percentage m a x i m u m
Poisson's ratio relationships for varying degrees of con- stress-instantaneous Poisson's ratio relationship of Laurencekirk
finement; the rate of straining was kept constant at sandstone.
282 Strength and Deformation of Rock
of confining pressure. Another interesting feature to be
noted from this figure is that dilation stress (instan-
taneous Poisson's ratio equal to 0-50) varies from ap-
proximately 80 per cent of the maximum stress in the
unconfined state to 95 per cent at a confining pressure
of 137.9 N/mm 2. If dilation stress is assumed to be an
index of critical stress then these results imply that the
long-term strength of sandstone approaches its short-
term strength as the degree of confinement increases.
Such a trend is also to be expected from the strength
results which show that the effect of rate of loading
on strength diminishes under confinement.
CONCLUSIONS
(1) Changes in the rate of straining were found to
have the greatest effect on strength for unconfined load-
ing. For confining pressures in the range 17"2 to
137"9 N/mm 2 the relative strength-strain rate relation-
ship was independent of confining pressure.
(2) In the absence of any reliable criterion a simple
construction has been proposed for predicting the
multiaxial compressive strength of rock from its
triaxial behaviour.
(3) The transition of the failure from brittle to ductile
appears to be indicated at low stress levels by coinci-
dence of the axial stress-strain curve for confining pres-
sures equal to or exceeding this value.
(4) Percentage maximum stres~instantaneous Pois-
son's ratio plots indicate that confinement produces a
greater resistance against lateral deformation and that
the ratio of short/long-term strength of rock increases
with increasing confinement.
Acknowledgement---The authors express gratitude to Professor A.
R. Cusens, Civil Engineering Department, Dundee University, for
his general help and encouragement.
Received 24January 1975.
REFERENCES
I. Kupfer H., Hilsdorf H. K. and Rusch H. Behaviour of concrete
under biaxial stress, d. Am. Concr. Inst. 66, 656-666 (1969).
2. Handin J., Heard H. C. and Magouirk J. N. Effects of the inter-
mediate principal stress on the failure of limestone, dolomite and
glass at different temperatures and strain rates. J. Geophys. Res.
72, 611-639 (1967).
3. Goode C. and Helmy M. A. The strength of concrete under com-
bined shear and direct stress. Mag. Concr. Res. 19, 105-112
(1967).
4. Bellamy C. J. Strength of concrete under combined stresses. J.
Concr. Inst. 58, 367-380 (1961).
5. Hoskins E. R. The failure of thick-walled hollow cylinders of
isotropic rock. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 6, 99-125 (1969).
6. Niwa Y. and Kobayashi S. Failure criterion of cement mortar
under triaxial compression. Mere. Fac. Engng Kyoto Univ. 29,
Part 1, 1-15 (1967).
7. Bieniawski Z. T. Deformational behaviour of fractured rock un-
der multiaxial compression. The Proceedings of the Southampton
1969 Civil Engineering Materials Conference (ed. M. Te'Eni).
Wiley, New York (1971).
8. Mogi K. Some precise measurements of fracture strength of rocks
under uniform compressive stress. Rock Mech. Engrq4~ Geol. 4,
41-55 (1966).
9. Habib P. and Vouille G. Sur la disparition de l'effect d'echelle
aux hautes pressions. C.r. hehd. Sdanc. .4cad. Sci., Paris
(1966).
10. Heard H. G. Effect of large changes in strain rate on the exper-
imental deformation of Yule marble. J. Geol. 71, 162-195 (1963).
11. Sangha C. M. and Dhir R. K. Influence of time on the strength,
deformation and fracture properties of a Lower Devonian sand-
stone. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 9, 343-354 (1972).
12. Dhir R. K. and Sangha C. M. Relationships between size, defor-
mation and strength for cylindrical specimens loaded in uniaxial
compression. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 10, 699-712 (1973).
13. Sangha C. M., Talbot C. J. and Dhir R. K. Microfracturing of
a sandstone in uniaxial compression. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min.
Sci. & Geomech. Abstr. 11, 107-113 (1974).
14. Bieniawski Z. T. Time-dependent behaviour of fractured rock.
Rock Mech. 2, 123-137 (1970).
15. Dhir R. K. and Sangha C. M, A study of the relationships
between time, strength, deformation and fracture of plain con-
crete. Mag. Concr. Res. 24, 197-208 (1972).
16. Mogi K. Effect of the intermediate principal stress on rock fai-
lure. J. Geophys. Res. 72, 5117-5131 (1967).
17. Alexander K. M. and Wardlaw J. Dependence of cement-aggre-
gate bond-strength on size of aggregate. Nature, Lond. 187, 2 3 ~
231 (1960).
18. Smee D. J. The effect of aggregate size and concrete strength
on the failure of concrete under triaxial compression. Cir. Engng
Trans. Enyrs Aust. Vol. CE9, 339-344 (1967).
19. Dhir R. K. and Sangha C. M. Development and propagation
of microcracks in plain concrete. Materials and Structures 7,
17-23 (1974).
20. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Physical properties of some typical
foundation rocks: Concrete Lab. Rep., SP 39 (1953).
21. Griffith A. A. The phenomena of rupture and flow of solids.
Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A221, 163-198 (1921).
22. Griffith A. A. The theory of rupture. Proc. First Int. Cong. App.
Mech. (eds C. B. Bienzieno and Burgers), pp. 53-63. Waltman,
Delft (1925).
23. McClintoek F. A. and Walsh J. B. Friction on Griffith cracks
under pressure. Proc. Fourth U.S. Nat. Cong. App. Mech. 10t5
1021 (1962).
24. Aldrich Jr., M. J. Pore pressure effects on Berea Sandstone sub-
jected to experimental deformation. Bull. Am. Geol. Soc. 80, 1577
1586 (1969).
25. Brace W. F. Brittle fracture of rock. State of Stress in the Earth's
Crust (ed. W. R. Judd), pp. I11-174. Elsevier, New York (1964).
26. Bredthauer R. O. Strength characteristics of rock samples under
hydrostatic stress. Trans. Am. Soc. Mech. Enyrs 79, 69:%706
(1957).
27. Fayed L. A. Shear strength of some argilaceons rocks. Int. d.
Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 5, 79-85 (1968).
28. Heard H. C. Transition from brittle to ductile flow in Solenhofen
Limestone as a function of temperature, confining pressure and
interstitial fluid pressure, in Rock Deformation, Mere. Geol. Soc.
Am. 79, 193 226 (1960).
29. Hoek E. Brittle failure of rock. Rock Mechanics in E)Tgineering
Practice (eds. K. G. Stagg and O, C. Zieniewicz), pp. 99-124.
Wiley, London (1968).
30. Hoek E. Rock failure under static stress conditions. CSIR Report
MEG 383, Pretoria (1965).
31. Murrell S. A. F. The effect of triaxial stress systems on the
strength of rocks at atmospheric temperatures. Geophys..I.R.
astr. Soc. 10, 231-281 (1965).
32. Ramez M. R. H. Fractures and the strength of a sandstone under
triaxial compression. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 4, 257-268
(1967).
33. Robertson E. C. Experimental study of the strength of rocks.
Bull. geol. Soc. Am. 66, 1275-1314 (1955).
34. Serdengecti S. and Boozer G. D. The effects of strain rate and
temperature on the behaviour of rocks subjected to triaxial com-
pression. Proc. Fourth Syrup. Rock Mech. Pennsylvania, pp. 83-97
(1961).
35. Smith J. L., D~vries K. L., Bushnell D. J. and Brown W. S.
Fracture data and stress-strain behaviour of rocks in triaxial
compression. Experimental Mechanics, 348 355, August (1969).
36. Krishnaswamy K. T. Strength and microcracking of plain con-
crete under triaxial compression. J. Am. Concr. Inst. 65, 856-862
(1968).
37. Paterson M. S. Experimental deformation and faulting in Wom-
beyan marble. Bull. geol. Soc. Am. 69, 46,%-475 (1958).
38. Hobbs D. W. Strength of concrete under combined stress. Cem.
Concr. Res. 1, 41 56 (1971).