Comparison of sensitivity to erosion and resistance of Asmari limestone, Mishan lime, Aghajari limy sandstone and Gachsaran anhydrite using Los Angeles abrasion method

Document Type : Complete scientific research article


Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources


Background and Objectives: Investigating the resistance of stone units to erosion is important in erosion and sediment studies; Because scientific and experimental recognition of the resistance of stones in the region and their ranking relative to each other as well as their resistance to erosion factors Can be of great help in assessing the resistance of stones and suggesting management solutions for controlling the amount of erosion and sediment production in the catchment area. For this reason, this study was with the goal resistance classification of stone mass formation in Fars group including Mishan marl limestone, Aghajari limestone, Gachsaran anhydrite and Asmari limestone using the Los Angeles abrasion test method, comparing the resistance average of 84 samples.
Materials and methods: In this study, four stone samples were analyzed using Los Angeles abrasion method, and for each stone, seven selection range and in each range was sampled at three levels. A total of 21 times were sampled per stone. According to the geological structure of the study area and the fact that the studied formations are not concentrated in a particular region, using geological maps and using Google Earth software, it was decided to select specific regions where access to those areas was possible; then using field observations, roadside trenches that were suitable for sampling were selected. Sample was collected from each measurement level and transferred to the laboratory; then Los Angeles test was done on these samples.To analyze the results of descriptive statistics methods such as averages, variances, standard deviations, minima and maximum were used. For illative analysis of the results, ANOVA methods were used to compare the averages of different stones and Tukey post hoc analysis was used to compare the averages of the stones. In the final stage, the study and interpretation of the results and, finally, the classification of the stones and formations in the study area were done.
Results: The results of Tukey post hoc analysis at a significant level of 0.05% showed that there is a significant difference between Asmari limestone and Mishan marl limestone with Aghajari limestone and Gachsaran anhydrite stone, There was no significant difference between the two groups relative to each other. Also, according to ANOVA variance analysis results at a significant level of 0.05%, there is a significant difference between the abrasion resistance of the studied stones.
Conclusion: In general, Asmari Limestone with the average highest at a confidence level of 95% is the most resistant stone, and the resistance rating after that is respectively Mishan marl limestone, Aghajari limestone and Gachsaran anydrite.


1.Ahmadi, L., Khanleri, Gh., and Mohammadi, D. 2007. Geological survey of calcareous stones engineering (case study). The 5th Iranian Engineering and Environmental Geology Conference,P 721-726, (In Persian)
2.Ahmadi Nejad, M., Ameri, M., and Shabani, Sh. 2010. Correlation study between glossy value and other physical and mechanical properties of wearing road aggregates. J. Transport. 7: 1.(In Persian)
3.Brandes, H.G., and Robinson, C.E. 2006. Correlation of aggregate test parameters to hot mix asphalt pavement performance in Hawaii. J. Transport. Engin. 132: 1.
4.Fakhri, M., and Hosseini, A. 2008. Evaluation of the slip resistance of stone materials and their relationship with the hardness of materials. Fourth National Congress on Civil Engineering, University of Tehran. 185p. (In Persian)
5.Fowler, D.W., Allen, J.J., Lange, A., and Range P. 2006. The prediction of coarse aggregate performance by micro - deval and other aggregate tests. 14th Annual Symposium, International Center for Aggregate Research, Texas.
6.Feyznia, S. 1995. Resistance to erosion of rocks in different climates of iran.J. Natur. Resour. Iran. Faculty of natural resources, University of Tehran. (In Persian)  
7.Feyznia, S. 2001. Evaluation of  sedimentation of formations. Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Tehran. (In Persian)
8.Farji, M. et al. 2006. Affecting erosion factors and sedimentation of Baba Ahmadi Khuzestan basin using experimental models MPSIAC and EPM. J. Natur. Resour. Iran. Faculty of natural resources, University of Tehran. 4: 59.(In Persian)
9.Goodarzi, Z., and Mahdiani, A. 2015. Study of geomechanical properties of in Sarvak formatin limestones as aggregat  (limestone of Dorud-Khorramabad railway stone mining mine). Second national conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Qom university of technology. (In Persian)
10.Ghahramani, N., Ghafouri M., Lashkari, Gh., and Hafezi Moghadas, N. 2015. Investigation of the engineering characteristics of the Mozdouran formation as a mountain material (Mashhad metropolis). (In Persian)
11.Hosseini, M., and Nazari, N. 2014. Estimating the amount of abrasion of stones using the mechanical and physical properties. First national conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Shahid Rajaee teacher training university of Tehran.(In Persian)
12.Komakpanah, A., and Agha Majidi, M. 2010. Creep of rock fill material in large scale odometer with considering particle breakage in Loss Angeles test. Modares Civil Engin. J. 10: 1. (In Persian)
13.Moarefvand, P., and Azizi, F.2014. Measuring the amount of abrasion of stones using the Los Angeles and Laval machine and comparing them. The 5th Iranian Rock Mechanics Conference. Iranian Rock Mechanics Association and Tarbiat Modares University. (In Persian)
14.Pelasi, M., and Danesh, A. 2013. Investigating the relationship of Los Angeles test results with the impact of aggregates test. 1st National geotechnical engineering conference of iran. Technical Engineering Faculty, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili. (In Persian)
15.Rangaraju, P.R., Edlinski, J., and Amikhanian, S. 2005. Evaluation of South Carolina aggregate durability properties. South Carolina Department of Transportation. 57p.
16.Shariat Jafari, P. 2013. Providing a comprehensive method to determine the erosion of lithology units with an attitude to iran's geology. J. Water. Engin. Manage. 5: 3. 199-213. (In Persian)
17.Wu, Y., Parker, F., and Kandhal, K. 1998. Aggregate toughness/abrasion resistance and durability/soundness tests related to asphalt concrete performance in pavements. National Center for Asphalt Technology. 26p.