## 5 Discussions
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Rock Type**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\sigma_{5}\)**/MPa**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Test Value/MPa**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Calculated Value/MPa**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & & **M-C** & **D-P** & **E-D** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Chlorite} & 0 & 34.57 & 38.31 & 29.36 & 34.57 \\  & 5 & 51.51 & 48.06 & 37.89 & 46.97 \\  & 20 & 78.67 & 77.31 & 63.48 & 78.83 \\  & 30 & 97.36 & 96.81 & 80.54 & 97.78 \\  & 40 & 115.11 & 116.31 & 97.60 & 115.68 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Hengda sandstone} & 0 & 76.07 & 81.66 & 60.66 & 76.07 \\  & 10 & 108.23 & 104.26 & 80.26 & 103.32 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 20 & 132.95 & 126.86 & 99.87 & 127.84 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 30 & 148.19 & 149.46 & 119.47 & 150.63 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 40 & 169.31 & 172.06 & 139.07 & 172.18 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Argillaceous dolomite} & 0 & 20.20 & 26.54 & 11.53 & 20.2 \\  & 5 & 67.80 & 63.14 & 30.66 & 77.29 \\  & 10 & 107.50 & 99.74 & 49.78 & 110.21 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 15 & 132.00 & 136.34 & 68.91 & 136.90 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 20 & 171.00 & 172.94 & 88.03 & 160.27 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Jinping greenschist} & 0 & 39.87 & 57.08 & 38.74 & 39.87 \\  & 4 & 65.63 & 68.48 & 47.75 & 61.09 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 88 & 88.79 & 79.88 & 56.75 & 78.20 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 20 & 133.92 & 114.08 & 83.78 & 119.69 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 40 & 173.03 & 171.08 & 128.82 & 175.22 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 50 & 188.68 & 199.58 & 151.34 & 199.86 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Huashan granite} & 0 & 140.36 & 151.76 & 70.31 & 140.36 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 15 & 272.36 & 250.91 & 124.84 & 261.79 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 25 & 313.82 & 317.01 & 161.20 & 322.27 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 35 & 376.00 & 383.11 & 197.55 & 375.35 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Jinping marble} & 0 & 82.31 & 110.28 & 54.20 & 82.31 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 5 & 146.12 & 139.93 & 71.49 & 136.30 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 10 & 187.21 & 169.58 & 88.78 & 176.45 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 20 & 246.34 & 228.88 & 123.36 & 240.54 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 30 & 290.78 & 288.18 & 157.93 & 293.76 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 40 & 331.74 & 347.48 & 192.51 & 340.83 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Granodiorite} & 0 & 164.62 & 174.11 & 64.80 & 164.62 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 1 & 176.79 & 183.30 & 68.83 & 177.90 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 2.5 & 203.88 & 197.09 & 74.87 & 196.37 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 5 & 217.59 & 220.06 & 84.94 & 224.25 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 10 & 289.88 & 266.01 & 105.08 & 272.76 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 15 & 310.43 & 311.96 & 125.21 & 315.03 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 20 & 347.14 & 357.91 & 145.35 & 353.15 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Comparison results of the strengths of seven different rocks. Figure 10: Comparison of experimental and calculated values for seven types of rocks. (**a**) Chlorite schist. (**b**) Hengda sandstone. (**c**) Argillaceous dolomite. (**d**) Jinping greenschist. (**e**) Huashan granite. (**f**) Jinping marble. (**g**) Granodiorite. As shown in Figure 11, the average relative errors of the seven types of rocks calculated using the energy density criterion were 1.99%, 2.34%, 5.30%, 6.11%, 1.69%, 3.10%, and 2.36%, and the root mean square errors were 1.88, 3.28, 6.28, 8.80, 5.53, 7.50, and 8.68 MPa, respectively. Except for muddy dolomite, the average relative errors and root mean square errors of the other six types of rocks were the smallest, indicating that the E-D criterion had a higher accuracy than the M-C criterion and D-P criterion. The error analysis further demonstrates the applicability and accuracy of the rock energy density failure criterion.