KAYA YÜZEY PÜRÜZLÜLÜĞÜNÜN SCHMİDT SERTLİĞİ ÖLÇÜMLERİNE ETKİSİ

Yıl 2020, , 15 - 24, 01.03.2020

Kadir Karaman

https://doi.org/10.30797/madencilik.705488

Cited By: 1

Öz

Schmidt çekici ile sertlik tayini maden, jeoloji ve inşaat mühendislerince uygulanan disiplinler
arası bir deney yöntemidir. Yüzey pürüzlülüğü Schmidt sertliğini etkileyen önemli bir parametredir.
Bu çalışmada doğal, taşlama yapılmış ve kesilmiş yüzeylerin olduğu blok numunelerde ve karot
örneklerde ölçümler yapılmış ve sonuçları karşılaştırılmıştır. Ayrıca her yüzeyin pürüzlülük
özellikleri belirlenmiş ve sertlik değerleri ile ilişkisi araştırılmıştır. En yüksek sertlik değeri ve
en düşük standart sapma kesilmiş yüzeylerde, en düşük sertlik değeri ve en yüksek standart
sapma ise doğal yüzeylerden elde edilmiştir. Bu çalışmada, yüzey pürüzlülüğü azaldıkça sertlik
değerlerinin arttığı ve standart sapma değerlerinin azaldığı görülmüştür. Sonuç olarak, Schmidt
çekicinin uygulanacağı yüzeyin pürüzlülüğü giderilmeli ve standart sapmanın yüksek olması
durumunda test yüzeyi gözden geçirilmelidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Schmidt çekici, Sertlik, Yüzey pürüzlülüğü, Taşlanmış yüzey, Kesilmiş yüzey

Kaynakça

• ASTM., 2001. Standard Test Method for Determination of Rock Hardness by Rebound Hammer Method. 04.09, D 5873-00.
• Aydın, A., 2009. ISRM Suggested Method for Determination of the Schmidt Hammer Rebound Hardness: Revised Version. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 46:627–634.
• Aydın, A., Basu, A., 2005. The Schmidt Hammer in Rock Material Characterization. Engineering Geology, 81:1–14.
• Barton, N., Choubey, V., 1977. The Shear Strength of Rock Joints in Theory and Practice, Rock Mechanics, 10, 1-2, 1-54.
• Bilgin, N., Seyrek, T., Shahriar, K., 1990. Roadheaders Glean Valuable Tips for Istanbul Metro Tunnels. Tunnelling, Oct. 29–32.
• Büyüksağış, I.S., Göktan, R.M., 2007. The Effect of Schmidt Hammer Type on Uniaxial Compressive Strength Prediction of Rock. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 44:299–307.
• Cerna, B., Engel, Z., 2011. Surface and Sub-Surface Schmidt Hammer Rebound Value Variation for A Granite Outcrop, Earth Surf. Process. Landforms 36, 170–179.
• Dabski, M., 2009. Early Stages of Weathering of Glacially-Abraded Limestone Surfaces as Determined by Various Schmidt Hammer Tests: Biferten glacier forefield, Glarner Alps (Switzerland), Landform Analysis, 11, 11–15.
• Dabski, M., 2014. Rock Surface Micro−Roughness, Schmidt Hammer Rebound and Weathering Rind Thickness Within LIA Skálafellsjökull Foreland, SE Iceland, Pol. Polar Res. 35, 1, 99–114.
• Deere, D.U., Miller, R.P., 1966. Engineering Classifications and İndex Properties of İntact rock. Technical report no. AFWL-TR 65-116, University of Illinois: p 300.
• Demirdağ, S., Yavuz, H., Altındağ, R., 2009. the Effect of Sample Size on Schmidt Rebound Hardness Value of Rocks. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 46:725–730.
• Goudie, A.S., 2006. The Schmidt Hammer in Geomorphological Research. Progr. Phys. Geogr. 30, 6, 703–718 .
• Göktan, R.M., Ayday, C.A., 1993. Suggested İmprovement to the Schmidt Rebound Hardness Isrm Suggested Method With Particular Reference to Rock Machineability. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 30:321–322.
• Gökçeoğlu, C., Aksoy, H., 2000. New Approaches to the Characterization of Clay-Bearing, Densely Jointed and weak rock masses. Engineering Geology, 58, 1–23.
• Haramy, K.Y., De Marco, M.J., 1985. Use of Schmidt Hammer for Rock and Coal Testing. In: Proceedings 26Th Us Symposium Rock Mechanics, 26–28 June, Rapid City, SD. Rotterdam: Balkema p 549–555.
• Hsiung, S.M., Ghosh, A., Chowdhury, A.H., 1995. On Natural Rock Joint Profile Characterization Using Self- Affine Fractal Approach, the 35th U.S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics (USRMS), 5-7 June, Reno, Nevada, 681-687.
• Hucka, V., 1965. A Rapid Method for Determining the Strength of Rocks in Situ. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 2:127–134.
• ISRM., 1981. ISRM Suggested Methods Rock Characterization, Testing and Monitoring. E. T. Brown (ed.), Pergamon Press, London, 211 s.
• ISRM., 2007. The Complete ISRM Suggested Methods for rock Characterization, Testing and Monitoring: 1974– 2006. In: Ulusay, Hudson (Eds.), Suggested Methods Prepared by the Commission on Testing Methods, International Society for Rock Mechanics. ISRM Turkish National Group, Ankara, Turkey p 628.
• Kahraman, S., 2001. Evaluation of Simple Methods for Assessing the Uniaxial Compressive Strength of rock. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 38, 981–94.
• Kahraman, S., Fener, M., Gunaydın, O., 2002. Predicting the Schmidt Hammer Values of in–Situ Intact Rock From Core Sample Values. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 39, 395–399.
• Karaman, K., Kesimal, A., 2015a. A Comparative Study of Schmidt Hammer Test Methods for Estimating the Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Rocks. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 74, 507-520.
• Karaman K., Kesimal A., 2015b. Correlation of Schmidt Rebound Hardness With Uniaxial Compressive Strength and P-Wave Velocity of Rock Materials. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 40, 1897-1906.
• Karpuz, C., 1990. A classification System for Excavation of Surface Coal Measures. Mining Science and Technology, 11:157–163.
• Karpuz, C., Paşamehmetoğlu, A.G., 1977. Field Characterization of Weathered Ankara Andezites. Engineering Geology, 46:1–17.
• Katz, O., Reches, Z., Roegiers, J.C., 2000. Evaluation of Mechanical Rock Properties Using a Schmidt Hammer. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 37:723–728.
• Li, Y., Huang, R., 2015. Relationship Between Joint Roughness Coefficient and Fractal Dimension of Rock Fracture Surfaces. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 75, 15–22.
• McCarroll, D., 1989. Potential and Limitations of the Schmidt Hammer for Relative-Age Dating: Field Tests on Neoglacial Moraines, Jotunheimen, Southern Norway, Arctic and Alpine Research, 21,3, 268-275.
• Poole, R.W., Farmer, I.W., 1978. Geotechnical Factors Affecting Tunneling Machine Performance in Coal Measures Rock. Tunnels tunnelling Dec. 27–30.
• Poole, R.W., Farmer, I.W., 1980. Consistency and Repeatability of Schmidt Hammer Rebound Data During Field Testing. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, Geomech Abstr. 17:167–171.
• Schmidt, E., 1951. a Non-Destructive Concrete Tester. Concrete, 59(8):34–35.
• Soiltest, Inc., 1976. Operating İnstructions—Concrete Test Hammer. Soiltest Inc, Evanston
• Sumner, P., Nel, W., 2002. The Effect of Rock Moisture on Schmidt Hammer Rebound: Tests on Rock Samples From Marion Island and South Africa. Earth Surf Process Landf 27:1137–1142.
• USBR., 1998. Engineering Geology Field Manual. Field I˙ndex Tests, 1:111–112.
• Williams, R.B.G., Robinson, D.A., 1983. The Effect of Surface Texture on the Determination of the Surface Hardness of Rock Using Schmidt Hammer. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 8, 289-292.
• Yağız, S., 2009. Predicting Uniaxial Compressive Strength, Modulus of Elasticity and Index Properties of Rocks Using the Schmidt hammer. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 68:55–63.