Pure Appl. Geophys.

170 (2013), 507514

2012 Springer Basel AG
DOI 10.1007/s00024-012-0556-7

Pure and Applied Geophysics

Correlating P-wave Velocity with the Physico-Mechanical Properties of Different Rocks

MANOJ KHANDELWAL1
AbstractIn mining and civil engineering projects, physicomechanical properties of the rock affect both the project design and
the construction operation. Determination of various physicomechanical properties of rocks is expensive and time consuming,
and sometimes it is very difficult to get cores to perform direct tests
to evaluate the rock mass. The purpose of this work is to investigate
the relationships between the different physico-mechanical properties of the various rock types with the P-wave velocity.
Measurement of P-wave velocity is relatively cheap, non-destructive and easy to carry out. In this study, representative rock mass
samples of igneous, sedimentary, and metamorphic rocks were
collected from the different locations of India to obtain an empirical relation between P-wave velocity and uniaxial compressive
strength, tensile strength, punch shear, density, slake durability
index, Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio, impact strength index and
Schmidt hammer rebound number. A very strong correlation
was found between the P-wave velocity and different physicomechanical properties of various rock types with very high coefficients of determination. To check the sensitivity of the empirical
equations, Students t test was also performed, which confirmed the
validity of the proposed correlations.
Key words: Physico-mechanical properties, P-wave velocity,
igneous rocks, sedimentary rocks, metamorphic rocks.

1. Introduction
Physico-mechanical properties of intact rocks are
very important in mining and civil engineering works
that interact with rock such as underground structures, dams, foundations on rock, rock slopes,
tunnels, dams, deep trenches, caverns, etc. They are
also very important for the study of rock bursts and
bumps in underground mines, pillar design, prediction of failure of rock mass, etc. Determination of
physico-mechanical properties in the laboratory as

Department of Mining Engineering, College of Technology

and Engineering, Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and
Technology, Udaipur 313 001, India. E-mail: mkhandelwal1
@gmail.com

well as in in situ condition to characterize rock mass

is mostly expensive and requires considerable time
and expertise, especially the preparation of rock
samples for testing (SHALABI et al., 2007).
Measurement of P-wave velocity is an easy and
simple task, and it can be employed in both the site
and laboratory to characterize and determine the
dynamic properties of rocks. It is non-destructive and
easy to apply, which is why it has been used for many
years in geotechnical practice, mining sciences and
petroleum engineering (KHANDELWAL and RANJITH
2010). The P-wave velocity in a solid material
depends on the density and elastic properties of that
material. Because the P-wave velocity depends on
density and elastic properties, there is an infinite
number of value sets resulting for the same P-wave
velocity. Thus, the mechanical laboratory testing of
density and elastic properties of the intact rock
material significantly improves the accuracy of
interpretation of P-wave measurements, especially in
in situ conditions.
A number of researchers (SMORODINOV et al., 1970;
INOUE and OHOMI 1981; GAVIGLIO 1989; BOADU 2000;
KAHRAMAN 2001a, b; OZKAHRAMAN et al., 2004; YASAR
and ERDOGAN 2004; KHANDELWAL and SINGH, 2009;
KHANDELWAL and RANJITH 2010) have studied the
relations between rock properties and P-wave velocity,
and found that it is closely related with the different
rock properties. There are a number of factors that
influence the P-wave velocity in rocks, such as rock
type, density, grain size and shape, porosity, anisotropy, pore-water, confining pressure and temperature,
weathering and alteration zones, bedding planes, and
joint properties (roughness, filling material, water, dip
and strike, etc.) (KAHRAMAN 2001a).
The quality of some materials is sometimes related to their elastic stiffness so that measurement of
P-wave velocity in such materials can often be used

508

M. Khandelwal

to indicate their quality as well as to determine elastic

properties (KAHRAMAN 2002; SHARMA and SINGH
2008). INOUE and OHOMI (1981) investigated the
relation between uniaxial compressive strength and
P-wave velocity of soft rocks and reported very poor
correlation between them. The relation between
density and P- wave velocity was given by GAVIGLIO
(1989). BOADU (2000) predicted the transport properties of fractured rocks from seismic waves.
KAHRAMAN (2001a) correlated P-wave velocity with
the number of joints and Schmidt rebound number,
and found a strong influence on P-wave velocity with
the number of joints. KAHRAMAN (2001b) evaluated
uniaxial compressive strength using Schmidt rebound
number, point load index, impact strength index, and
P-wave velocity. He used 48 different rocks to
establish the correlation between their physicomechanical properties and found a non-linear relation
between the P-wave velocity and uniaxial compressive strength. OZKAHRAMAN et al. (2004) determined
the thermal conductivity of rocks from the P-wave
velocity. YASAR and ERDOGAN (2004) studied carbonate rocks of different origin and established a
linear relation among density, Youngs modulus, and
uniaxial compressive strength with P-wave velocity.
They found a higher error between measured and
estimated values of uniaxial compressive strength and
Youngs modulus than in density. KHANDELWAL and
SINGH (2009) correlated the different physicomechanical properties of coal measures rocks of India
with the P-wave velocity and found very good results.
KHANDELWAL and RANJITH (2010) correlated the various index properties of various rock types with
P-wave velocity with obtained empirical equations
with very high coefficient of determination.
In this article, an attempt was made to correlate
different physico-mechanical properties of various
rock types with the P-wave velocity.
2. Location and Type of Samples Collected
Rock mass samples were collected from different
locations in India to fulfill the aim of this research.
Thirteen rock types were used, two of which were
igneous, eight were sedimentary, and three were
metamorphic (see Table 1).

Pure Appl. Geophys.

Table 1
List of rock types with class and location
Rock type

Rock class

Location (in India)

Quartzite
Granite
Dolomite
Sandstone 1
Sandstone 2
Sandstone 3
Limestone 1
Limestone 2
Shale
Kota stone
Marble (white)
Marble (pink)
Marble (green)

Igneous
Igneous
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
Metamorphic
Metamorphic
Metamorphic

Rampur (H.P.)
Jalore (Raj)
Jodhpur (Raj)
Jodhpur (Raj)
Bijoliyan (Raj)
Bundi (Raj)
Satna (M.P.)
Amreli (Guj)
Jharia (Jharkhand)
Ramganjmandi (Raj)
Makrana (Raj)
Babarmal (Raj)
Kesariyaji (Raj)

3. Laboratory Investigation
Core specimens of different rock types were cored
in NX size by a coring machine, and the ends were
trimmed as required and further smoothened by a
lathe in order to avoid end effects. The specimens
were then prepared in the laboratory as per the ISRM
(1981) standards designed to determine different
physico-mechanical properties. Before testing, the
specimens were dried at 105 C for 24 h to remove
any moisture.

3.1. Determination of P-wave Velocity

The P-wave velocity of rock was determined
using a Portable Ultrasonic Non-destructive Digital
Indicating Tester (PUNDIT) as per ISRM (1978a)
standards. In this, a mechanical pulse is generated on
prepared specimens by piezo-electric transducers. A
high electric voltage pulse of short duration is
generated by piezo-electric transducer, which converts into mechanical pulse. In this system, the pulses
are transmitted from one end and received at another
end of the specimen. The velocity (V) can be
determined by the time elapsed (t) in traveling the
distance (S) by the wave pulse from the emitter to
receiver end transducer in the rock sample using
Eq. (1).
V S=tm=s

93.8
91.8
90.8
87.3
88.9
86.7
84.3
92.4
87.3
85.1
85.2
86.2
0.010
0.013
0.014
0.023
0.021
0.014
0.016
0.022
0.018
0.017
0.011
0.015

0.3
0.29
0.26
0.24
0.24
0.25
0.22
0.29
0.23
0.21
0.21
0.2
5.74
8.15
7.59
5.53
4.79
6.38
2.70
8.69
7.34
3.43
5.23
7.06

94.7
87.2
58
41.6
47.5
44.08
18.5
81.34
64.87
59.63
55.57
51.39
70 99.82 1.02
110 99.26 1.56
80
98.3 1.47
80
97.1 1.68
130 97.8 1.06
90
97.5 1.11
70
96.8 1.76
60
98.7 1.74
120 97.9 1.95
90
97.6 1.22
100 97.3 1.67
60
96.8 1.19

2,740
2,670
2,580
2,360
2,370
2,330
2,070
2,580
2,560
2,410
2,280
2,160
1.57
2.06
1.43
1.28
1.03
1.62
0.89
2.34
1.89
1.53
2.07
0.94

25.4
20.63
13.29
9.44
12.79
11.55
7.69
22.57
16.61
14.63
10.29
11.41
0.71
0.72
.86
0.74
0.77
0.24
0.36
0.88
0.79
0.49
0.60
0.51

8.69
9
6.93
4.99
6.35
5.2
4.64
9.27
7.56
5.01
4.73
4.4
197 133.48 10.21
153 121.45 7.84
132 89.45 6.34
159 44.96 5.82
143 59.92 10.35
178
47.2 8.20
107 32.51 7.17
177 99.23 9.63
119 64.72 5.71
137 46.69 4.68
141 42.27 3.89
99
48.34 8.40

Tensile strength Punch shear

Density
(MPa)
strength (MPa) (kg/m3)

4,657
4,350
3,283
2,384
3,108
3,016
1,682
4,375
3,239
2,844
2,370
2,146

where P is the failure load, D, the diameter of the

disc, and T is the thickness of the disc.
In the punch shear test (PST), the shear strength of
a rock specimen is evaluated by punching shear. The
sample is taken in the disc form of thickness T. The
test equipment consists of a piston-shaped cylindrical
jig having a projected end. This cylindrical jig fits in
a hollow cylindrical block. The disc-shaped sample is
placed at the bottom of the cylindrical block and the

Quartz
Granite
Dolerite
Sandstone, Bundi
Limestone
Limestone 2
Shale
Kota stone
Marble (white)
Marble (pink)
Marble (green)
Sandstone, Jodhpur

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

TS 2P=p  D  T

UCS (MPa)

where P is the failure load, and A is the cross-sectional area of the cylindrical specimen.
Tensile strength (TS) is determined in the laboratory by the Brazilian test. It is an indirect and easy
method for determination of tensile strength. This test
is based on the experimental fact that most rocks in
biaxial stress fields fail in tension at their uniaxial
tensile strength when one principal stress is tensile
and the other finite principal stress is compressive
with a magnitude not exceeding three times that of
the tensile principal stress (JAEGER 1967). Rock
specimens of a 2:1 diameter-to-thickness ratio were
prepared for the Brazilian tests. They were loaded
diametrically between the loading platens of UTM as
per ISRM (1978b) standards. Tensile strength can be
calculated with the help of the following formula:

Vp (m/s)

Table 2

UCS P=A

S. no. Rock type

In this investigation, determination of uniaxial

compressive strength (UCS) involves the use of an
NX size (54 mm diameter) cylindrical specimen with
a length to diameter ratio of 2.5, loaded axially
between the loading platens of the Universal Testing
Machine (UTM) as per ISRM (1979a) standard. The
stress value at failure is defined as the compressive
strength of the specimen. A uniform stress rate of
1.0 MPa/s was applied till the rock sample failure.
Compressive strength can be calculated with the help
of the following formula:

Physico-mechanical properties of different rock types

3.2. Determination of Different Physico-mechanical

Properties

Slake durability Youngs modulus Poissons

index
(GPa)
ratio

ISI

3.8
5.3
5.4
4.9
4.1
5.8
4.7
3.2
3.7
5.3
2.1
4.4

SHRN

Table 2 shows the P-wave values determined for

different rock types from various locations based on
the average value of 35 samples.

509
3
4
7
5
3
8
6
4
8
7
4
6

Correlating P-wave Velocity

64
62
49
36
45
42
28
56
43
40
37
31

Vol. 170, (2013)

510

M. Khandelwal

piston is put over the sample. Then the whole

arrangement is put between the platens of a loading
machine and the load applied. The load P to punch
the sample is noted. The punch shear test was carried
out by following the IS: 1121 (Part-IV) (1974) and
ULUSAY et al. (2001) method.
The punching shear strength s is calculated with
the following equation:
s P=A P=p  D  T

where P is the failure load, A, the circumferential

shear area, T, the thickness of the disc, and D, the
diameter of the puncher.
Density (q) is defined as the mass per volume. In
rocks, it is a function of the densities of the individual
grains, the porosity, and the fluid filling the voids.
There are three types of density in rocks: dry density,
wet density, and grain density. Here, dry densities of
different rock types were determined.
The main purpose of the slake-durability index
(SDI) is to evaluate the water resistance of rock
samples. The slake durability of rocks is closely
related to their mineralogical composition and its
relation with water. This test measures the resistance
of a rock sample to weakening and disintegration
resulting from a standard cycle of drying and wetting.
The test was carried out according to standards
suggested by the International Society for Rock
Mechanics (ISRM 1979b). A sample comprising ten
rock lumps of a particular rock of roughly spherical
in shape, each 50 10 g for a total mass of
500 50 g, had been taken and placed in a perforated drum to dry until a constant mass was obtained
in an oven at 105 C for a duration of 45 h. For the
slake durability test, the drum was mounted on the
trough and was coupled to the motor. The trough was
then filled with water to a level of 20 mm below the
drum axis and the temperature maintained at 25 C.
The drum had been rotated at 20 rpm for a period of
10 min, and the drum was removed from the trough,
placed in an oven, and dried out at a temperature of
105 C for 4 h to drain out the remaining moisture in
the samples. During the test, the finer products of
slaking pass through the mesh and into the water
bath. The slake-durability index (SDI) is the percentage ratio of final to initial dry mass of rock in the
drum.

Pure Appl. Geophys.

Slake durability index SDI

C  E=A  E  100 %

where A is the initial mass of sample and drum; C is

the mass of the sample and drum after the second
cycle of rotation; E is the mass of the empty drum.
Youngs modulus (YM) is an extremely important
characteristic of rock. It is the numerical evaluation
of Hookes Law, namely the ratio of stress to strain
(the measure of resistance to elastic deformation). To
calculate, Youngs modulus, stress (at any point)
below the proportional limit is divided by corresponding strain. It can also be calculated as the slope
of the straight line portion of the stressstrain curve.
The Youngs modulus of the rock was determined
with the help of the stress-strain curve obtained by
the UTM as per the ISRM (1979a) standard. Here,
tangent Youngs modulus was determined at a stress
level equal to 50 % of ultimate uniaxial compressive
strength with the help of the stress-strain curve.
The Poissons ratio (PR) of the rock under
compression was also determined using strain gauges,
which were pasted in lateral and longitudinal directions to measure the strain in respective directions.
The impact strength test was first developed by
Protodyakonov, and then it was used by EVANS and
POMEROY (1966) for the classification of coal seams in the
former USSR and in the UK. The test was then modified
by PAONE et al. (1969), TANDANAND and UNGER (1975),
and RABIA and BROOK (1980). TANDANAND and UNGER
(1975) obtained a simple relation between the strength
coefficient and compressive strength. RABIA and BROOK
(1980) used the modified test apparatus to determine the
rock impact hardness number and developed an empirical equation for predicting drilling rates for both DTH
and drifter drills. HOBBS (1964) applied this test to various
rocks and established the following equation:
UCS 53  ISI  2; 509  0:0981
6
where UCS is the uniaxial compressive strength (MPa)
and ISI is the impact strength index. To carry out the
impact strength test (ISI), fragments of rocks were
impacted 20 times by a 1.81-kg plunger falling from
30 cm height. The number of fines below 0.3175 cm is
used as the strength index. The results of the impact
strength test of different rocks are given in Table 2.
Schmidt hammer tests (SHRN) were performed
on intact rock mass to determine the rebound

Vol. 170, (2013)

Correlating P-wave Velocity

numbers. Representative rock mass samples were

collected from the site to carry out other tests in the
laboratory. During sample collection, each block was
inspected for macroscopic defects so that it would
provide test specimens free from fractures and joints.
Tests were performed with an N-type hammer having
an impact energy of 2.207 J. All tests were performed
with the hammer held vertically downwards and at
right angles to the horizontal rock faces. To get the
Schmidt hammer rebound number, initially ten
readings were taken, and then the mean of five
higher values were used for the analysis. Schmidt
hammer rebound numbers were determined as per
GOKTAN and AYDAY (1993).
Table 2 shows the values of the P-wave, uniaxial
compressive strength, tensile strength, punch shear
strength, density, slake durability index, Youngs
modulus, Poissons ratio, impact strength index, and
Schmidt hammer rebound number.

Table 3
Regression analysis results

The P-wave velocity values of the rocks tested

were correlated with the uniaxial compressive
strength, tensile strength, punch shear strength, density, slake durability index, Youngs modulus,
Poissons ratio, impact strength index, and Schmidt
hammer rebound number using the method of least
squares. The equation of the best-fit line and the
coefficient of determination (R2) were determined for
each regression. In all of the cases, linear relations
were seen between different physico-mechanical
properties and the P-wave velocities of the rocks,
except in Poissons ratio, where a higher coefficient
of determination was obtained by polynomial relation. Good relations were found between P-wave
velocity and different physico-mechanical properties
of the rocks. The results of regression equations and
the coefficients of determination are given in Table 3.
The graphs of the mean values of the test results
between P-wave velocity values and uniaxial compressive strength, tensile strength, punch shear
strength, density, slake durability index, Youngs
modulus, Poissons ratio, impact strength index, and
Schmidt hammer rebound number of different rocks
are shown in Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9.

R2
value

S. no. Parameters
to be related

Regression equation

1.

UCS = 0.033 9 Vp - 34.83 0.871

2.

3.

4.

5.
6.

7.

8.

4. Statistical Analysis of Test Results

511

9.

UCS (in MPa)Vp

(in m/s)
Tensile strength
(in MPa)Vp
(in m/s)
Punch shear strength
(in MPa)Vp
(in m/s)
Slake durability
indexVp
(in m/s)
Density (in kg/m3)
Vp (in m/s)
Youngs modulus
(in GPa)Vp
(in m/s)
Poissons ratioVp
(in m/s)
Impact strength
indexVp
(in m/s)
Schmidt hammer
rebound number
Vp (in m/s)

TS = 0.001 9 Vp ? 0.662

0.882

PST = 0.005 9 Vp - 2.83

0.904

SDI = 0.001 9 Vp ? 94.84

0.931

q = 0.202 9 Vp ? 1,794.7

0.863

YM = 0.020 9 Vp - 5.881

0.835

PR = 8 9 10-09 9 (Vp)2
2 9 10-05 9 (Vp)
? 0.222
ISI = 0.003 9 Vp ? 78.63

0.849

SHRN = 0.012 9 Vp
? 6.849

0.843

0.968

Figure 1
Correlation between P-wave velocity and uniaxial compressive
strength

5. Students t test
The significance of R values can be determined by
the t test, assuming that both variables are normally
distributed and the observations are chosen randomly.
The test compares the computed t value with a tabulated t value using the null hypothesis. It is done for
comparing the means of two variables, even if they

512

M. Khandelwal

Figure 2
Correlation between P-wave velocity and tensile strength

Figure 3
Correlation between P-wave velocity and punch shear strength

Pure Appl. Geophys.

Figure 5
Correlation between P-wave velocity and slake durability index

Figure 6
Correlation between P-wave velocity and Youngs modulus

Figure 4
Correlation between P-wave velocity and density

Figure 7
Correlation between P-wave velocity and Poissons ratio

have different numbers of replicates. In simple terms,

the t test compares the actual difference between two
means in relation to the variation in the data
(expressed as the standard deviation of the difference
between the means).

The formula for the t test is a ratio in which the

numerator is just the difference between the two
means or averages and the denominator is a measure
of the variability or dispersion of the scores. The
numerator of the formula is easy to compute: just find

Vol. 170, (2013)

Correlating P-wave Velocity

513

Table 4
Tabulated results of the t test
Rock tests

t test
Calculated Tabulated
value
value

Figure 8
Correlation between P-wave velocity and impact strength index

Figure 9
Correlation between P-wave velocity and Schmidt hammer
rebound number

the difference between the means. The denominator

is called the standard error of the difference. To
compute it, the variance for each group has been
taken and divided by the population number in that
group. These two values are then added, and their
square root is taken. The formula for the t test is
_
xC
xT _
t r
7


VarC
VarT
nT nC
xC are the tabulated and computed
where _
xT and _
mean, respectively, VarT and VarC are the tabulated
and computed variance, respectively, and n is the
number of samples.
Once the t value is computed, it is then compared
with the tabulated value. If the computed value is larger
than the tabulated one, then it indicates a strong and
significant correlation. To test the significance, one
needs to set a risk level, also called the alpha level. In
most cases, the rule of thumb is to set it at 0.05,

1. Uniaxial compressive strength and

P-wave velocity
2. Tensile strength and P-wave velocity
3. Punch shear strength and P-wave
velocity
4. Density and P-wave velocity
5. Slake durability index and P-wave
velocity
6. Youngs modulus and P-wave velocity
7. Poissons ratio and P-wave velocity
8. Impact strength index and P-wave
velocity
9. Schmidt hammer rebound number and
P-wave velocity

11.3

2.18

11.5
11.5

2.18
2.18

11.5
11.2

2.18
2.18

11.3
11.5
11.2

2.18
2.18
2.18

11.3

2.18

i.e., the 95 % confidence interval. Since a 95 % confidence level was chosen in this test, a corresponding
critical t value of 2.18 was obtained. As is seen in
Table 4, the two computed t values remain in the upper
critical region. Therefore, it is concluded that there is a
real correlation between the P-wave velocity and uniaxial compressive strength, tensile strength, shear
strength, density, Youngs modulus, and Poissons
ratio, supporting the engineering use of correlations.
In all the above ten cases, the calculated value of
the t test is much higher than the tabulated value;
hence, they all have significantly strong correlation
among themselves, and this can be used for the prediction of these parameters using P-wave velocity.

6. Conclusions
This study indicates that the uniaxial compressive
strength, tensile strength, punch shear strength, density,
slake durability index, Youngs modulus, Poissons
ratio, impact strength index, and Schmidt hammer
rebound number of various rock types can be estimated
from their P-wave velocity values by using simple
empirical equations under the specified limits without
extrapolation. All these properties showed a linear
relationship with the P-wave velocity except Poissons
ratio where a higher coefficient of determination was
obtained by the polynomial relation. It can be inferred

514

M. Khandelwal

that P-wave velocity shows a good statistical relationship in the range of 1,6824,657 m/s with the different
physico-mechanical properties of rocks. This implies
that rocks having the above range of P-wave velocities
could be ideal sources for the determination of the
index properties of those mentioned above.
A strong coefficient of determination was found
between P-wave velocity and different physicomechanical properties of the tested rocks. This was also
verified by Students t test, which showed higher calculated values for each relation rather than tabulated
values. These equations are practical, simple, and
accurate enough to apply for the use in general practice
to obtain important static physico-mechanical properties of the different rocks for the design and planning of
excavation with greater safety and stability.
The P-wave velocity measurements cannot completely replace the mechanical testing of rock
specimens in demanding applications. For delineating
the volume of rock mass where one can interpolate or
extrapolate the measured rock properties, using the
laboratory and field measurements of P-wave velocities is a fast and cost effective tool.

REFERENCES
BOADU, F.K., 2000. Predicting the transport properties of fractured
rocks from seismic information: numerical experiments. J. App.
Geophysics 44, 103113.
EVANS I, POMEROY C.D., 1966. The strength, fracture and workability of coal. Pergamon Press, London.
GAVIGLIO, P., 1989. Longitudinal waves propagation in a limestone:
the relationship between velocity and density. Rock Mech Rock
Eng 22, 299306.
GOKTAN, R.M. and AYDAY, C., 1993. A suggested improvement to
the Schmidt rebound hardness ISRM suggested method with
particular reference to rock machineability, Int. J. Rock Mech.
Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr., 30(3): 321322.
HOBBS, D.W., 1964. Rock compressive strength. Colliery Eng,
41:287292.
INOUE, M., OHOMI M., 1981. Relation between uniaxial compressive
strength and elastic wave velocity of soft rock, Proceedings of
the Int. Symp. Weak Rock, Tokyo, 913.
IS 1121, 1974. Methods of test for determination of strength
properties of natural building stones: Part IV Shear strength.
ISRM, 1978a. Suggested method for determining sound velocity.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 15(2), 5358.

Pure Appl. Geophys.

ISRM, 1978b. Suggested methods for determining tensile strength of
rock materials. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr 15,
101103.
ISRM, 1979a. Suggested methods for determining the uniaxial
compressive strength and deformability of rock materials. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 16, 135140.
ISRM, 1979b. Suggested method for determining water content,
porosity, density, absorption and related properties and swelling
and slake durability index properties. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
Geomech Abstr 16, 141156.
ISRM, 1981. Suggested method for rock characterization, testing
and monitoring, ISRM Commission on Testing Methods: Brown
ET (ed), Oxford: Pergamon Press, 211.
JAEGER, J.C., 1967. Failure of rocks under tensile strength. Int.
J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 4, 219227.
KAHRAMAN, S., 2001a. A correlation between P-wave velocity,
number of joints and Schmidt hammer rebound number. Int.
J. Rock Mech. Min Sci 38, 729733.
KAHRAMAN, S., 2001b. Evaluation of simple methods for assessing
the uniaxial compressive strength of rock. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min
Sci 38, 981994.
KAHRAMAN, S., 2002. Estimating the direct P-wave velocity value of
intact rock from indirect laboratory measurements. Int. J. Rock
Mech. Min Sci 39, 101104.
KHANDELWAL, M., RANJITH, P.G., 2010, Correlating index properties of rocks with P-wave measurements. Journal of Applied
Geophysics. 71, 15.
KHANDELWAL, M., SINGH, T.N., 2009, Correlating static properties
of coal measures rocks with P-wave velocity. International
Journal of Coal Geology. 79, 5560.
OZKAHRAMAN, H.T., SELVER, R., ISK, E.C, 2004. Determination of
the thermal conductivity of rock from P-wave velocity. Int.
J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 41, 703708.
PAONE J, MADSON D, BRUCE W.E., 1969. Drillability studies: laboratory percussive drilling. USBM RI, 7300.
RABIA H, BROOK W., 1980. An empirical equation for drill performance prediction. Proceedings of the 21st US Symposium on
Rock Mechanics. Univ. Missouri-Rolla, 103.
SHALABI F.I., CORDING E.J., AL-HATTAMLEH O.H., 2007, Estimation
of rock engineering properties using hardness tests, Engineering
Geology. 90, 138147.
SHARMA, P.K., SINGH, T.N., 2008. A correlation between P-wave
velocity, impact strength index, slake durability index and uniaxial compressive strength. Bull Eng Geol Environ 67, 1722.
SMORODINOV, M.I., MOTOVILOV, E.A., VOLKOV, V.A., 1970. Determinations of correlation relationships between strength and some
physical characteristics of rocks. Proc. of the Second Congress of
the Int. Society for Rock Mechanics, Vol. 2. Belgrade, 3537.
TANDANAND S, UNGER, H.F., 1975. Drillability determination: A
drillability index of percussive drills. USBM RI, 8073.
ULUSAY, R., GOKCEOGLU, C., SULUKCU, S., 2001. Draft ISRM suggested method for determining block punch strength index (BPI).
Int. J. Rock Mech. Min Sci 38, 11131119.
YASAR, E., ERDOGAN, Y., 2004. Correlating sound velocity with the
density, compressive strength and Youngs modulus of carbonate
rocks. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min Sci 41, 871875.

(Received November 15, 2010, revised July 9, 2012, accepted July 10, 2012, Published online July 29, 2012)