## 3 Results and Discussion
### Intact Rock Properties
#### 3.1.2 Traverine  
Analogously to limestone, a total of 29 dry specimens of 31 mm of \(d\) and the same \(H/d\) ratio of 2 were tested, whose results for compressive strength (with the dry specimen), density, and porosity are presented in Table 6. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Specimen** & \(d\) **(mm)** & \(H\) **(mm)** & \(n_{\mathit{eff}}\) (\%)** & \(\rho_{sat}\) (g\(\cdot\)cm\({}^{-3}\)) & \(\sigma_{c}\) **(MPa)** \\ \hline Limestone 1 & 30.830 & 60.548 & 2.46 & 2.66 & 76.30 \\ Limestone 2 & 30.853 & 60.335 & 3.15 & 2.62 & 41.37 \\ Limestone 3 & 30.968 & 60.135 & 2.26 & 2.63 & 77.59 \\ Limestone 4 & 30.860 & 60.588 & 1.95 & 2.64 & 106.19 \\ Limestone 5 & 30.923 & 60.345 & 2.55 & 2.61 & 77.10 \\ Limestone 6 & 30.858 & 60.718 & 2.46 & 2.65 & 91.43 \\ Limestone 7 & 30.933 & 60.395 & 2.43 & 2.62 & 55.93 \\ Limestone 8 & 30.193 & 60.650 & 2.29 & 2.64 & 73.14 \\ Limestone 9 & 30.843 & 59.855 & 3.27 & 2.60 & 49.24 \\ Limestone 10 & 30.853 & 60.518 & 2.95 & 2.61 & 42.15 \\ Limestone 11 & 30.975 & 60.155 & 2.26 & 2.68 & 61.24 \\ Limestone 12 & 30.808 & 60.223 & 2.32 & 2.63 & 94.32 \\ Limestone 13 & 30.915 & 60.458 & 2.77 & 2.62 & 50.80 \\ \hline Mean & 30.832 & 60.379 & 2.55 & 2.63 & 68.99 \\ SD & 0.199 & 0.241 & 0.384 & 0.02 & 20.77 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Results of the uniaxial compressive strength, density, and porosity tests on limestone. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Slump** & \(D\) **(mm)** & \(W\) **(mm)** & \(d_{e}\) **(mm)** & \(P\) **(kN)** & \(I_{s}\) **(MPa)** & \(I_{s(50)}\) **(MPa)** \\ \hline Limestone 1 & 18 & 55.38 & 35.6 & 3.598 & 2.83 & 2.55 \\ Limestone 2 & 22 & 57.4 & 40.1 & 7.135 & 4.44 & 4.14 \\ Limestone 3 & 22 & 64.18 & 42.4 & 5.175 & 2.88 & 2.73 \\ Limestone 4 & 22 & 57.95 & 40.3 & 5.49 & 3.38 & 3.16 \\ Limestone 5 & 30 & 32 & 35.0 & 5.459 & 4.47 & 3.99 \\ Limestone 6 & 29 & 56.3 & 45.6 & 9.376 & 4.51 & 4.38 \\ Limestone 7 & 30 & 49.75 & 43.6 & 9.459 & 4.98 & 4.77 \\ Limestone 8 & 42 & 69.28 & 60.9 & 14.423 & 3.89 & 4.14 \\ Limestone 9 & 38 & 67.13 & 57.0 & 15.2 & 4.68 & 4.88 \\ Limestone 10 & 40 & 52.35 & 51.6 & 12.662 & 4.75 & 4.80 \\ Limestone 11 & 39 & 55.9 & 52.7 & 12.845 & 4.63 & 4.70 \\ Limestone 12 & 30 & 53.48 & 45.2 & 7.235 & 3.54 & 3.43 \\ Limestone 13 & 22 & 48.05 & 36.7 & 6.614 & 4.91 & 4.46 \\ Limestone 14 & 39 & 43.1 & 46.3 & 9.152 & 4.28 & 4.17 \\ Limestone 15 & 42 & 43.15 & 48.0 & 5.776 & 2.50 & 2.47 \\ Limestone 16 & 23 & 47.18 & 37.2 & 3.512 & 2.54 & 2.32 \\ Limestone 17 & 31 & 39.43 & 39.5 & 3.848 & 2.47 & 2.30 \\ Limestone 18 & 21 & 42.03 & 33.5 & 4.492 & 4.00 & 3.53 \\ Limestone 19 & 27 & 41.65 & 37.8 & 6.514 & 4.55 & 4.17 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Results of the point load test on limestone. Figure 2: Scale effect for the point load index of the limestone: (**a**) quadratic fit of \(P\)–\(d_{e}\) and (**b**) potential fit of \(I_{s}\)–\(d_{e}\), to determine the referential value of \(I_{s(50)}\); (**c**) potential fit of \(I_{s}/I_{s(50)}\)–\(50/d_{e}\) and (**d**) \(I_{s}/I_{s(50)}\)–\(d_{e}\) to determine \(k_{2}\). Table 6 shows an average value for \(\rho_{dry}\) of 2.43 g\(\cdot\)cm\({}^{-3}\), within the range between 2.34 and 2.51 g\(\cdot\)cm\({}^{-3}\) found by authors such as [PERSON] et al. [57]. The mean value of \(n_{\mathit{eff}}\) was 4.05%, within the range of 2.8-34.7% obtained by [PERSON] et al. [58] for \"plugs\" of 3.81 cm in diameter, which, on the one hand, is very wide due to the irregularity of the distribution of the pores in this type of rock. On the other hand, it is close to the lower limit of the range obtained by [PERSON] et al. [57] for 4 \(\times\) 4 \(\times\) 4 cm\({}^{3}\) cubes, whose experimental range was 5.18-24.99%. The \(n_{\mathit{eff}}\) value (3.47%) is considered low, according to IAEG [54]. Above 91.72 MPa of \(\sigma_{c}\), it does not fall within a generalized range, as in the case of limestone, since traverting is not a very common rock.