JournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3,2014www.mwejournal.

org
doi:10.14355/mwe.2014.03.008

InvestigationsofWeatheringEffectson
EngineeringPropertiesofSupare
GraniteGneiss
Saliu,M.A.and2Lawal,A.I.

DepartmentofMiningEngineering,FederalUniversityofTechnology,Akure,Nigeria
*1

saliuma4u@yahoo.com;abiodunismail18@yahoo.com

Received18February2014;Accepted21May2014;Published16June2014
2014ScienceandEngineeringPublishingCompany

Abstract
Weathering and alteration in granitegneiss has a deep
impactonboththephysicalandmechanicalpropertiesofthe
rock. To investigate the impacts of weathering on
engineeringpropertiesofgranitegneiss,threesampleseach
of weathered and unweathered granite gneiss were
collectedfromSupare.Thecollectedsampleswereprepared
in the laboratory for the determination of physico
mechanicalpropertiesofweatheredandunweatheredrock
samples.Fromtheresultsoftheanalysis,weatheredsample
has average uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) value of
128 MPa while the Unweathered indicated a UCS of 166
MPa. The Water Absorption for the weathered sample is
0.19 % while the Unweathered is 0.11 %. The deformation
characteristics of the rock sample for weathered and fresh
rockwerestudiedandresultshowedthatthepeakstrainat
failure is 5.11 103 for the weathered sample and the Un
weathered is 4.53103. The result of the testing confirm that
the degree of weathering and the associated changes in the
physicomechanical properties of the granitegneiss is
directly related to the reduction in Uniaxial Compressive
Strength, Point Load Index, Abrassion Resistance and
Absorptionoftheweatheredsamples.Themodeoffailureof
the rock has been found to be influenced by weathering
extent in the rocks. The Unweathered sample showed a
brittle fracture at failure while the weathered showed a
ductile behaviour. The study revealed that deformation
characteristicsareimportantcharacteristicsforassessmentof
thebehaviourofweatheredgranitegneissrockandthusfor
itssuitabilityforengineeringapplications.
Keywords
Weathering; Alteration; UCS; Water Absorbtion; Deformation
Characteristics;AbrasionRessistance;PointLoadIndex

Introduction
Weathering is a diverse process that has implications
forawiderangeofearthandsurfaceprocesses.These

processes include the formation of clay minerals and

economic resources, reduction in rock strength,
increase in deformability, the deterioration of stone
monuments and buildings, and the occurrence of
hazardous events e.g. slope failure due to weathered
slope material and the presence of clay minerals.
Although weathering consists of chemical, physical
andbiologicalcomponents,theprocessdoesnothave
a system in which the three components are assessed
asasingleunit(Monjezietal.,2011;Singhetal.,2009).
Weathering is generally defined as the process of
alteration and breakdown of rocks at and near the
earthssurfacebyphysical,chemicalandbioticeffects
(Selby,1993),andthusleadstoanumberofalterations
in the rocks. Rocks become more porous, individual
mineral grains are weakened and bonding between
grainsarelost.Weatheringproductsmaybedeposited
within the pores, at grain boundaries and along
fractures and/or removed. Permeability may change
depending upon the stage of weathering indicating
thepresenceandtypeofweatheringproductsandthe
chemical leaching. Due to these changes of the index
properties, rock material becomes weaker and more
deformable(Singhetal.,2007).
Weathering and alteration in granite has a deep
impact on both geotechnical properties of the rock as
well as of the rock mass. The changes of mineral
content and the increase of pore volume promote the
action of mechanical disintegration and chemical
decomposition(ThuroandScholz,2003).
Severalstudies conducted on the effect of weathering
ontheengineeringpropertiesofrock(e.gLumb,1983;
Tugrul, 2004; Sharma et al., 2007) revealed that
weathering is an important process for the formation

53

www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3,2014

ofmanytypesofrock.Variationsinweatheringgrade
usually result in varying engineering properties of
rock.Thus,itisimportanttorecognizetheroleplayed
by weathering process in the performance of rock in
engineeringapplication.

2005).
Weathering has been an important topic since the
middle of twentieth century for the rock mechanics
researchers. Numerous studies have been performed
onmanydifferentrocktypestorevealthechangesin
chemical, physical, and mechanical properties after
weathering.

Granite rocks are used extensively as engineering

materials, including aggregates for road construction,
concrete and railway ballast as well as dimension
stone for production of slabs, tiles, ornaments and
furnitureetc(SharmaandSingh,2006).

Weathering may be defined as the chemical or

physicalalterationofrockatitssurfacebyitsreaction
with atmospheric gas and aqueous solutions. The
process is analogous to corrosion effects on
conventional materials. The engineering interest in
weathering arises because of its influence on the
mechanicalpropertiesoftheintactmaterial,aswellas
thepotentialforsignificanteffectonthecoefficientof
friction of the rock surface. It appears that whereas
weathering causes a steady reduction in rock
properties, the coefficient of friction of a surface may
suffer a step reduction (Boyd, 1975; Singh and Singh,
2013).

Generally,Unweatheredgraniterockshavesufficient
strength to meet any engineering requirement.
However, the effect of alteration on this rock type
variouslychangesitsphysicomechanicalproperties.
Weathering of rocks alters their chemical,
mineralogical,andphysicalpropertiesinoftenpoorly
understood ways, creating difficulties for engineering
inthesematerials(IrfanandDearman,1978;Begonha
andSequeira,2002;Sousaetal.,2005;SinghandVerma,

Variablemigmatite
BasicSchist
Peliticschist
Graniticgneiss
Hormblend
biotitegranite
Charnockitic
metaintrusive
Bauchite
Augen gneiss
Abeokuta
formation
Porphyritic
gneiss

Ilaroformation
Ewekoro
formation
Biotiteandbiotite
hornblendegrano
diorite

600E

200E

FIG.1GENERALIZEDGEOLOGICALMAPOFSOUTHWESTNIGERIA(AFTERNGSA,2004)

54

JournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3,2014www.mwejournal.org

The aim of this study is to carry out physical and

mechanical tests to study the effect of weathering on
theengineeringpropertiesofgranitegneiss.

representative sample of rock. The size of the

specimens was such that the minimum specimen
dimension was at least ten times the maximum grain
sizeoftherock.

GeologyoftheStudyArea

The volumeofirregular samples weredetermined by

measurementofthesaturatedsubmergedmass(Msub)
and the saturated mass (Msat) of the samples. The
procedure followed the standard suggested by ISRM
1981.

ThestudyarealiesinsouthwesternNigeriaasshown
inFIG.1.Thegraniterocksunderstudyarelocatedin
Supare Akoko, northern district of Ondo State. The
NigerianBasementcomplexextendswestwardsandis
continuous with the Dahomeyan of the Dahomey
TogoGhana region. To the east and the south the
basementcomplexiscoveredbytheMesozoicRecent
sedimentsoftheDahomeyandNigerCoastalBasins.

Calculation
Drydensity:

According to Kogbe (1979), the Basement Complex

rocks of Nigeria are composed predominantly of
migmatitic and granitic gneiss; quartzites; slightly
migmatisedtounmigmatisedmetasedimentaryschists
and metaigneous rocks; charnockitic, gabbroic and
dioriticrocks;andthemembersoftheOlderGranites,
granodioriteandsyenites.Migmatitesarefoundtobe
abundant in southwestern Nigeria. Supare granite
outcrop is described as granite gneiss, where the
granitic material takes the form of indefinite
impregnations.

and

M sat M sub

water

(2)

Bulkdensity,

Dryunitweight

Material and Methods

Mass
Volume (3)

d 9.8(kN / m 3 ) (4)

DeterminationofSpecificGravityofRockMaterial

SampleCollectionandPreparation

The objective of the test is to determine the Specific

Gravityoftherockspecimen.

Three(3)sampleseachofunweatheredandweathered
granitegneisswerecollectedfromSupareAkokoarea
of Ondo State. The weathered samples were taken
between depths 0 to 1 m while the unweathered
samplesweretakenfrom1mdown.Theresearchwas
conductedthroughfieldworkandlaboratoryanalyses
of samples collected from the granitegneiss outcrop.
Global Positioning System (GPS) was used to locate
the coordinates of the study area (approximately
Northings 0702025 Eastings 00301550). Blocks sizes
of weathered and unweathered samples were taken
fromtheoutcrop.Samplepreparationwhichinvolved
rock coring and machining for mechanical properties
and cutting to sizes for physical properties was in
accordance with the procedure given in ISRM (1981)
wasstrictlyfollowed.

Specificgravity,ingeneral,istheratiooftheweightin
air of a given volume of material at a stated
temperature to the weight of the same volume of
water(orotherreference)atastatedtemperature.
Three samples of irregular form were prepared. The
massofsampleMwasrecorded.
Thesamplewasthenimmersedinwaterandthemass
of water displaced by the sample Mw was recorded.
The procedure followed the standard suggested by
ISRM 1981. The specific gravity is then calculated as
presentedinEquation5:
SpecificGravity,

DeterminationofRockDryDensity/BulkDensity

M
M w

(5)

DeterminationofMoistureContentofRockMaterial

Theobjectiveofthetestistomeasurethedrydensity
andbulkdensityofsamples(irregularform).Thedry
densityandbulkdensityisexpressedinunitsofmass
(kgorg)perunitofvolume(morcmormm).Three
specimen of irregular form were prepared from a

Drymass C A
(kg / m 3 , g / cm 3 ) (1)

Volume
V

The objective of the test is to determine the natural

moisture content of the rock material as it was
retrievedinthefield.Fortheaccuratedeterminationof
the insitu water content, the sampling, storage,

55

www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3,2014

transport and handling precautions should be such

thatthewatercontentremainswithin1%oftheinsitu
value.Representativesampleswhichconsistofatleast
10 lumps were prepared, fulfilling the following
conditions:

percentage of dry mass is already considered one of

the most significant parameters for determining, in
laboratotry, the weathering of rocks. In fact, this
property can be considered one of the more suitable,
among routine test, to reveal the presence of
microcrackings connected with weathering increase.
Moreover, the direct connection between water
absorption and porosity involves also a strict
dependence of compression resistance to the capacity
ofarocktoabsorbwater.

themassofeachlumpwasatleast50g
theminimumlumpdimensionwasatleasttentimes
the maximum grain size of the rock. The procedure
followedthesuggestedstandardbyISRM,1981.
Calculation

The specimen (in the open container) is dried in an

oven to constant mass (generally 24 hours is enough)
at a temperature of 105C. After closure of the
container and cooling in a desiccator for 30 minutes,
themass(C)ofthedrysamplewiththecontainer(and
lid)isdeterminedwithanaccuracyof0.01g.

MoistureContent:

pwm
BC
100%
100% (6)
gm
CA

Where pwm is the pore water mass in g, g m is the

Thespecimenwasthensaturatedbywaterimmersion
inavacuumoflessthan800Paforaperiodofatleast
24hour.

grain mass in g, A is the mass of the dried container

and the lid, B is the mass of the container plus the
lump and the lid, and C is mass of the container and
thelumpsafterovendrying.

The water absorption was then calculated as the

percentageofthedrymassasfollows:

DeterminationofPorosityofRockMaterial
The objective of the test is to measure the porosity of
rock specimens of irregular form. The porosity is the
volume of the pores in the rock expressed as a
percentageofthetotalvolumeoftherock.

(10)
DeterminationofHardness(SchmidtHammerMethod)
TheSchmidthammerwasdevelopedinthelate1940s
as an index apparatus for non destructive testing of
concrete in situ. It has been used in rock mechanics
practice since the early 1960s, mainly for estimating
the uniaxial compressivestrength (UCS) and Youngs
modulus(Et)ofrockmaterials(AydinandBasu,2005).

Three specimens of irregular form from a

representative sample of rock was prepared. The size
of the specimens was made be such that both
followingconditionsarefulfilled:
thespecimenmassshouldbeatleast50gofirregular
form.

The standard method for the Schmidt hammer test is

as described in ISRM (1985) and ASTM (2001). When
theSchmidthammerispressedorthogonallyagainsta
rocksurface,apistonisautomaticallyreleasedontoa
plunger. Part of the energy is consumed largely by
absorption and transformation, while the remaining
energyrepresentstheimpactpenetrationresistance(or
hardness) of the surface and thus enable the piston
rebound (Aydin, 2008). The distance travelled by the
pistonafterreboundisrecordedasthereboundvalue.

theminimumspecimendimensionshouldbeatleast
tentimesthemaximumgrainsizeoftherock.
The specimen bulk volume (V) was determined by
measurementofthesaturatedsubmergedmass(Msub)
and the saturated mass (Msat) of the samples for each
dimensionofthespecimen.
Volume;

(7)

PointLoadTest

DeterminationofWaterAbsorptionWA

The apparatus for the test consists of a rigid frame,

two point load platens, a hydraulically activated ram
with pressure gauge and a device for measuring the
distance between the loading points. The procedures
conformtoISRM(1985).

The water absorption which is defined as the

The point load test allows for determination of the

(8)
(9)

56

JournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3,2014www.mwejournal.org

uncorrectedpointloadstrengthindex(Is).Itmustbe
corrected to standard equivalent diameter (De) of
50mm.

theratioofAxialstraintolateralstrain.
The strength of the rock is given by ISRM (1981) as
follows:

Is(50)=P/De2(MPa)(11)

c=

,(MPa)(13)

P=FailureLoad(kN)
De = Equivalent core diameter (mm) (Hudson and
Harrison,1997)

Where
c is the uniaxial compressive strength (UCS)

oftherock(MPa), Pmaxisthepeakload(kN)andAis
theinitialcrosssectionalareaofspecimen(m2).

But if there is a significant difference, the result is

reported as uncorrected strength and can be
multiplied by a correction factor F, to obtain the
correctedstrength(HudsonandHarrison,1997)

DeterminationofDeformationsinUnconfined
Compression
The objective of this test is to determine stress strain
curves. The modulus of elasticity (Youngs modulus),
Tangent Modulus Et50 and Poisson ratio of the rock
sampleswerecalculatedfromthestressstraincurve.

UncorrectedstrengthIs=P/D2(MPa)(11.1)
CorrectedstrengthIs(50)=FP/D2(MPa)(11.2)
F=(D/50)0.45(11.3)

Apparatus used consists of a testing machine of

sufficient capacity and capable of applying axial load
at a rate conforming to the requirements describedin
thetestprocedurebyISRM(1981)andASTM(1994).

F=correctionfactor
D=diameter(mm)
The actual UCS value is obtained using the equation
below:

The measurements of load and axial deformation

made during the various stages of the test are
converted to values for stress and strain in the
followingway:

UCS=kIs(50)=24Is(50)(MPa)(12)
WhereUCSistheUniaxialcompressivestrength(MPa)
ofthetestedsampleand

CompressiveStress=P/A
AxialStrain=dL/L0

Is(50) is the point load strength (MPa) of the specimen

andkistheconversionfactor.

(MPa) (14)

(Dimensionless)(15)

Where;

UniAxialCompressiveStrengthTest

Pistheaxialload(Newton),

Theaimofthistestistodeterminetheunconfined(or
uniaxial) compressive strength of rock specimens of
cylindricalform.

A0 is the cross sectional area of the specimen at the

startofthetest,
dL is the axial deformation of the specimen (m, and
positiveforadecreaseoflength),

TheprocedureforthetestisasstatedinISRM(1981).
Uniaxial compressive strength test is typically
characterized by loading a cylindrical sample with a
diameter of approximately 50mm and length to
diameterratioof2.5:1axiallyuntilthespecimenfails.

L0istheoriginallengthofthespecimen(m).
Thecompressivestressandaxialstrainareplottedina
diagram of stress versus strain. Such curves give the
bestpossibledescriptionofthedeformationbehaviour
of the rock from zero stress up to failure, in the case
thattherockshowsnonlinearstressstrainbehaviour
atlowandhighstresslevels.

Uniaxial compression tests on the Unweathered

(unaltered) and weathered (altered) granite gneiss
have been carried out on a MTS servo controlled
hydraulic testing machine in accordance with ISRM
guidelines (ISRM, 1981). In addition, axial and lateral
micromeasurement N2A series electric resistance
strain gauges were secured to each sample to record
straindevelopmentonloading.

The Strain gauges attached o the rock sample during

loading measured the Axial and Lateral deformation.
ThevolumetricStrainiscalculatedasfollows:
v=a+2r

The result of the axial and lateral strain are recorded

on the PC attached to the machine in an Microsoft
Exceltextfile.TheVolumetricstrainiscalculatedfrom

(16)

where;
a=AxialStrain
r=LateralStrain

57

www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3,2014

The slake durability index is calculated after the

secondcycle,usingthisformula:

ThePoissonratiocanbecalculatedfromthefollowing
formula:
PoissonRatio,

S AS sc
(17)
S Ds sc

(18)
where:

Where S AS istheSlopeofAxialStress, sc isthestrain

ID2=slakedurabilityindex(secondcycle),(%)

curve, S Ds istheSlopeofDiametricstress.

B = mass of drum plus ovendried sample before the

firstcycle,(g)

SlakeDurabilityIndexTest

WF = mass of drum plus ovendried sample retained

afterthesecondcycle,(g)

Thistestisintendedtoassesstheresistanceofferedby
a rock sample to weakening and disintegration when
subjected to cycles of drying and wetting. The ISRM
standardisbasedontwocyclesofdryingandwetting.
Four or five cycles of drying and wetting are
recommended when evaluating rocks of higher
durability.

C=massofdrum,(g).
Results
TABLE 1 shows the results of the physical properties
of the weathered and unweathered rock obtained
fromthelaboratory.Themeanofthevaluesobtained
for the three samples is presented for each physical
properties.

Foreachslakedurabilitytest,arepresentativesample
wasselectedcontaining10rockpieces,eachweighing
between40and60g,providingatotalsampleweight
rangingfrom450to550g.Thesamplewasplacedina
screen drum and both the drum and the sample are
ovendried at a temperature of 110 5 C to a
constant weight. After the sample cools to room
temperature, the drum was coupled to motor and
rotated immersed in distilled water at a speed of 20
rpmfor10min.Thesamplewasagainovendriedata
temperature of 110 5 C to a constant weight. The
samplewassubmittedtoasecondwettinganddrying
cycle.

TABLE 2 shows the results of the point load strength

indexandslakedurabilityindexoftheweatheredand
unweathered rock samples. The average value is
presentedintheTABLE2.
TABLE 3 shows the average uniaxial compressive
strengthobtainedfromthelaboratory.
TABLE 4 shows the average elastic properties of
Suparegranitegneissobtainedfromthelaboratory.

TABLE1RESULTSOFPHYSICALPROPERTIESOFSUPAREGRANITEGNEISS

DryDensity,

Specific
Gravity,

Sample

Porosity,n
(%)

Weathered

1.41

2.69

Unweathered

1.01

2.72

(kg/m3)
d

Water
NaturalMoisture
Absorption,
content,w(%)
Wa(%)

BulkDensity,
B
(kg/m3)

2699.2

2700.1

1.84

5.74

24.37

45

2710.7

1.06

1.59

26.48

51

Average
Is(50)
failureLoad
(MPa)
(kN)

Equivalent
UCS(MPa)

SlakeDuability
Index(SDI)(%)

Weathered

10

5.33

128

97.22

Unweathered

13

7.46

166

97.85

TABLE3AVERAGEUCSVALUEFORSUPAREGRANITEGNEISS

58

Schmidt
Hammer

2709.7

TABLE2PLTANDSDITESTRESULTSOFSUPAREGRANITEGNEISS

Sample

Abrasion
Resistance,
Abr(Ha)

Samples

UniaxialCompressive
Strength(UCS)MPa

ModeofFailure

Weathered

128

Ductilefailure

Unweathered

166

Brittlefailure

JournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3,2014www.mwejournal.org

TABLE4ELASTICPROPERTIESOFSUPAREGRANITEGNEISS

Sample
Weathered
Unweathered

Crackclosure(cc)
(MPa)
10
40

Crackinitiation(ci)
(MPa)
70
100

Crackdamage(cd)
(MPa)
90
132

5.11103
4.53103

Et50=Eav
(GPa)
32
45

PoissonsRatiov
0.13
0.26

obtainedareshowninTable2.

Discussion

The results of the pointloadindex were converted to

uniaxialcompressivestrengthusingrelationshipafter
Bieniawiski (1975) and Broch and Francklin (1972) as
discussedeelierandareshowninTABLE2.

Important physical properties such as porosity,

specific gravity, bulk density, dry density, natural
moisture content, water absorption, abrasion and
Schmidthammerhardnesswereevaluated.Generally,
for each physical index of the Unweathered and
weatheredsamplesthevaluequotedisthemeanfrom
thethree(3)testspecimenandisgiveninTABLE1.

From these results, it can be observed that Un

weathered samples though exhibit equigranular
textureastheweatheredsamplebuthavehigherpoint
loadindexvaluesthantheweatheredsample.Thiscan
be attributed to the degree of weathering undergone
byweatheredsample.

Theporosityfortheweatheredsampleis1.41%which
is higher than Unweathered sample with average
porosity of 1.01%. The dry density and bulk density
alsoshowsaslightdecreaseasshowninTABLE1.The
increase in porosity and decrease in dry and bulk
densities of Unweathered and weathered sample
agreedwiththeworkofThuroandScholz(2003).Also
the Specific gravity of the Unweathered sample is
slightlyhigherthantheweatheredsample.

Uniaxial compressive strength tests were carried out

on Supare granitesgneiss using MTS machine with
two different capacity load cells. For the weathered
samplesa200kNloadcellwasused,whilefortheUn
weathered samples a 1000kN load cell was used
because of the differences in the strengths observed
frompointloadindextests.

ThenaturalmoisturecontentandWaterAbsorptionis
significantlyhigherfortheweatheredsamplethanthe
Unweathered. The higher percentage of Absorption
can be deduced to the increase in porosity of the
weathered sample as well as high percentage of k
feldsparwhichhaveaffinityforwater.

TheaverageUCSvalueforUnweatheredsamplewas
166MPawhiletheweatheredsampleindicatedaUCS
value of 128 as shown in TABLE 3. There is a
significant reduction in the strength of the weathered
granitegneiss sample which suggested that
weatheringhaseffectontherockunderstudy.

The results of abrasion resistance testing of Supare

granitegneiss is as shown in TABLE 1. From the
results of this test as shown in TABLE 1, it can be
observed that the weathering reduced the abrasion
valuefrom26.48HaforUnweatheredsampleto24.37
Hafor weathered. This indicated thatweathering has
significantly affected the abrasion resistance of the
rocks.

Theductilebehaviourexhibitedbyweatheredsample
as indicated by the failure mode can be said to be
caused by the higher moisture content and higher
porosity. Moreso, the brittle behaviour of the Un
weathered sample is as a result of the significant
higher compressive strength compared to the
weatheredsample.
The stressstrain curves in unconfined state are
plottedandpresentedinFIG.2andFIG.3.Theelastic
properties are shown in Table4 and ThresholdStress
atvariousstageofloadinginunconfinedcompression
for Unweathered and weathered samples are shown
inTable18,respectively.

Theresultofslakedurabilityindextext(SDI)asshown
in TABLE 2. The slake durability index value
indicatedbytheweatheredandUnweatheredsample
is high which showed that both the weathered and
Unweathered granite is highly durable and can be
used for engineering applications such as dimension
stones.

Youngs Modulus is modulus of elasticity measuring

of the stiffness of a rock material. The Tangent
modulus (Et50) or Average Modulus of Elasticity, at
50% of the failure strength is higher for the Un
weathered sample than the weathered as shown in
TABLE4.

TheresultsofthepointloadtestsonSuparegranites
gneiss are as presented in Table 2. Because the
diametersofthecoresamplesusedforthesetestwere
less than the 50mm specified by ASTM and ISRM, it
was recorded as a nominal point load index. The
corrected point load index was obtained using
relationship after Bieniawiski (1975) and the results

PeakStrainf

The Poissons ratio (v), ratio of lateral to axial strain

hasbeenmeasuredat50%ofthefailurestrength.The

59

www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3,2014

Unweathered sample had higher Poisson ratio

compare to the weathered. The lower Poissons ratio
of the weathered sample is associated to the ductile
behavior while the Unweathered sample which
indicatedhigherPoissonsratiovalueisasaresultof
the brittle response of the rock material during
deformation.

clearly that significant distinct pre and postpeak

compressivebehaviourisaddressedforUnweathered
and weathered granitegneiss. Besides the higher
values of the compressive strength, the slope of the
ascending branch of the stressstrain diagrams is
considerably higher in Unweathered granites, in
comparison with the slope exhibited by weathered
granites.

The modulus of elasticity of weathered and Un

weathered samples is shown in Table 4. From these
results, it was observed that the modulusof elasticity
of Unweathered samples is higher than that of the
weathered samples. This agreed with observation of
BegonhaandSequeriaBraga(2002),thatthehigherthe
modulus of elasticity, the higher the Uniaxial
compressivestrengthoftherock.

The deformation capacity until peak load is

significantlylargerinweatheredgranites.
Unweathered granitesgneiss sample exhibit very
brittle response, associated to a steep and often
discontinuous softening branch, whereas for
weathered granites the descending branch is mostly
continuousandsmooth.

The ultimate deformation, f (Strain at failure) is

considerable higher in weathered granitegneiss,
which appears as an outcome of a more ductile
behaviourofthematerial.

Stressvolumetric and stresslateral strain diagrams

are dependent on the physicomechanical properties
of the granitegneiss under study. The Unweathered
sample which has high strength exhibit longer initial
linearstretch,whereasnonlinearvariationonvolume
is evident at early stages of stress in the weathered
samplewithreductioninstrengthascomparedtothe
Unweathered. This agreed with the work of
Vasconcelosetal.(2007)andBasuetal.(2009).
Conclusion
The research work investigated the effects of
weatheringonengineeringpropertiesofgranitegneiss.
From the results obtained on the analysis of the rock
samples,thefollowingconclusionswerereached;

(1) Thestrengthofweatheredsampleislowerthanthe
freshsampleasindicatedbytheUCSvalueof166
MPa for the fresh and 128 MPa for the weathered
and Point Load index value of 5.33MPa for the
weathered and 7.46 MPa for the Unweathered
sample,

FIG.2STRESSSTRAINCURVEFORWEATHEREDSUPARE
GRANITEGNEISS

(2) The abrasion resistance value of the weathered

sampleislowerthantheUnweathered,
(3) The rate of water absorption of the weathered
sample is higher than the Unweathered sample
which suggested that if the rock is to be used for
dimensionstoneitshouldnotbeusedforexternal
cladding,
(4) The weathered and Unweathered sample are
highly durable rocks as the result of the SDI
showed a slight decrease from 95.85 for the
weatheredsampleto97.22%fortheUnweathered,

FIG3.STRESSSTRAINCURVEFORUNWEATHERED
SUPAREGRANITEGNEISS

The shape of the stressstrain diagrams shows also

60

JournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3,2014www.mwejournal.org

(5) Unweatheredrocksampleshowedbrittlefailureat
fracture while weathered rock sample showed
ductilebehaviourandthepeakStrainishigherfor
the weathered sample than the fresh rock sample,
and

mechanics: An Introduction to the Principles. Elsevier

oxford,p.444.1997
Irfan, T.Y, and Dearman, W. R. Engineering Classification
and Index Properties of a Weathered Granite. Bull. Int
AssocEng.Geol.Vol.32,pp.6780.1978.

(6) The strength index and stressstrain analysis in

unconfined compression are the most important
measurement to assess the weathering of granite
gneiss.

ISRM. Suggested Method for Determining Point Load

Strength. Int. J. Rock Mechanics & Mining Science
GeomechAbstr22(2),pp.5160.1985.
ISRM.RockCharacterization,TestingandMonitoring.In:

References

Brown,E.T.(ed.).ISRMsuggestedmethods.Commission

ASTM. Annual Book of ASTM Standards construction:

on Testing Methods, International Society for Rock

SoilandRock.ASTMPublication,Vol.04.08,978.,1994.

Mechanics (ISRM), pp. 75105., 1981, Pergamon Press,

ASTM.AmericanSocietyforTestingandMaterials,D4644,

Oxford,UK.

Standard test method for slake durability of shales and

Lumb, P. (1983). Engineering Properties of Fresh and

similarweakrocks,87:747749.1992,ASTMPublication

Decomposed Igneous Rock From Hong Kong.

ASTM D7348 08e1 Standard Test Methods for Loss on

EngineeringGeologyVol.19,pp.8194,1983.

Ignition (LOI) of Solid Combustion Residues www.

Monjezi,M.,H.R.Nourali,H.R.,andSingh,T.N.Studyof

astm.orgaccessedon6thJune2010.

the effect of rainfall on slope stability a numerical

Aydin,A.ISRMSuggestedmethodfordeterminationofthe

approach,Indianlanslides,4(1):1318.2001

Schmidt hammer rebound hardness: Revised version.

NGSA: The Nigeria Geological Survey Agency, Geological

International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining

MapofNigeria,p.1.,2004

Sciences,doi:10.1016/j.ijrmms.2008.01.020.2008.

Singh,T.N.,Jadhav,V.B.andSingh,S.AFuzzyApproach

Aydin, A. and Basu, A. The Schmidt hammer in rock

to Classify Physicomechanical Rock Property with

material characterization. Journal of Engineering

Varying

Geology,Vol.81,pp.114.2005.

EnvironmentalGeology,56:13831387,2009.

pH

of

the

Surrounding

Medium,

Basu,A.Celestino,T.B.andBortolucci,A.A.Evaluationof

Sharma, P.K.,Khandelwal,M., and Singh, T.N. Variation

rock mechanical behaviors under uniaxial compression

on Physicomechanical Properties of Kota Stone under

withreferencetoassessedweatheringgrades.Journalof

different

RockMechanicsandRockEngineeringVol.42,Number1

Environment,4(12):41174123.2007.

pp.7393.,2009.

Waterly

Environment,

Building

and

Sharma, P. K. and Singh, T. N. Effect of Saline Water on

Begonha, A. and Sequira Braga, M. A. Weathering of the

StrengthandDurabilityofGraniteRockACasestudy,

Oporto Granite; geotechnical and Physical Properties.

MiningEngg.Jl.,8(3):2026.,2006

Catena49:5776.2002.

Singh, T. N., Sharma, P. K. and Khandelwal, M. Effect of

Boyd, J. M. The Interpretation of Geological Structure for

pH on Physicomechanical Properties of Marble,

Engineering Design in Rock. PhD Thesis, 1975,

Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment,

UniversityofLondon,unpublished.

66:8187.2007

Bieniawski, Z. T. The Point Load Test in Geotechnical

Singh, T. N. and Verma, A. K. Prediction of Rock Strength

Practice.JournalofEngineeringGeology,Vol.5401,pp.

using Simple Field Parameters by Fuzzy and

111.1975.

Multivariate Regression Snalysis, Mining Engineers

Broch,E.andFranklin,J.A.ThePointloadStrengthTest.

Journal,7(5):1522.2005

Int. J. Rock Mechanics & Mining Science Vol. 9(6), pp.

Singh, A. K. and Singh, T. N. Simulation of Frictional

66997.,1972.

StrengthandSteadyRelaxationUsingtheRateandState

Hudson, J. A. and Harrison J. P. Engineering Rock

Dependent

Friction

Model,

Pure

and

Applied

61

www.mwejournal.orgJournalofMiningWorldExpressVolume3,2014

Geophysics,170:247257DOI:10.1007/s0002401204935.

inGranitesAProductofCoupledProcesses.GeoProc

2013

2003 international conference on Coupled THMC

Selby, M. J. Hillslope Materials and Processes. 2 edition.

processes in Geosystems. Royal Institute of Technology

nd

OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford,U.Kpp.1415.1993

(KTH),

Singh, T. N., Sharma, P. K. and Khandelwal, M. Effect of

Sweden,

13

15,

2003,

www.geopro.org

pH on Physicomechanical Properties of Marble,

Tugrul,A.TheEffectofWeatheringonPoreGeometryand

Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment,

Compressive Strength of Selected Rock Types From

66:8187.2007

Turkey.JournalofEngineeringGeologyVol.75Issues3

Sousa, L.M.O., Suarez del Rio, L.M., Calleja, L., Ruiz de

4,pp215227,2004.

Argandona, V.G and Rey, A.R. Influence of

Vasconcelos, G. Loureno, P.B., Alves, C.A.S., Pamplona, J.,

Microfractures and Porosity on the Physico mechanical

(2007). Analysis of the Weathering and Internal

Properties and Weathering of Ornamental Granites.

Structure on the Engineering Properties of Granites,

Journal of Engineering Geology Vol. 77, pp. 153 168.

ISRM, International Workshop W3 Preservation of

2005

Natural Stone and Rock Weathering, Estaire & Ollala

eds,Mrida,Spain,pp.7584.

Thuro,K.,andScholz,M.DeepWeatheringandAlteration

62

Stockholm,