MINE 324

ROCK FRAGMENTATION
CHAPTER1 ROCK BIT INTERACTIONS
 Rock Bit Interactions

Rock Excavation

By Explosives
Mechanical Cutting Tools
(By Blasting)

Penetration of
Wedges

Indenters Drag Bits

2
 Indenters

Breaks the rocks by applying forces

normal to surface (Fig.1)
Majority of cutting tools indenters
• Roller cutters-disc cutters
• Rolling cone bits
• All percussive tools
– Percussion drill bits
– DTH drill bits
– High energy impact bits

3
 Indenters
• Indenters are more widely used than drag bits, but they
are less efficient due to more energy consumption for the
same volume of rock excavation.
• Why are still used widely ?
– Because drag bit induces bending and tensile stresses in
the bit cutting edge. Since bit is made of brittle material
and hence catastrophic bit failure may be seen. However
tool strength is maximum in the case of indenters.

4
 Drag Bits
Main force is parallel to
rock surface (Fig.2)
• Rotary drill bits
• Picks

• Drag bits have higher efficiency.

• Most rocks behave as brittle materials, lower σt.
• Energy spent by drag bits will be low because the normal
force (FN) acting on the tool is small,
• Only a small amount of work is done in rock compression
by this tool.
5
 Indenter and Drag Bits
• Mode of crack propagation is the same in both method as
tensile fractures.
– Drag bits initiates a tensile fracture in a fairly direct
manner,
– An indenter generates tensile stress in the rock by
crushing a portion of the rock mass beneath the tool.

• Mining machines, BWE, raise borer, roadheader, rotary

drills, continuous miner employ both parallel and normal
forces.

6
 Indentation
1. Indentation: ( 10 mm- meters ) F normal to surface
a. Flat Bottomed Punches: (Indenter)
i. Rock deforms elastically σ𝑖 is
low
ii. Hertzian cracks initiated σ𝑖𝑖

iii. Intense comminution

(crushing) beneath the tool σ𝑖𝑖𝑖
iv. Major fractures initiated
from the zone beneath tool,
propagate to surface to
form chips σ𝑖𝑣 σ𝑖 > σ𝑖𝑖 > σ𝑖𝑖𝑖 > σ𝑖𝑣 7
 Indentation
b. Wedge Indenters:
• Most indenters are wedge shaped.
• For each subsequent loading, indenter force increases.
Because, in the first loading drill bit repeatedly indents the
bottom of the hole until the desired hole depth is achieved.
• For the subsequent loadings, the stress is transmitted to
through a zone of crushed rock produced from previous
loadings.
• Figure 4 illustrating the physical representation of breaking
process

8
 Indentation
The model assumes that failure along the fracture surface
takes place when the Coulomb criterion is exceeded:
𝝉 = 𝑺𝟎 + 𝝁𝝈
The stresses transmitted by wedge is calculated along
fracture plane and;

P*i+1 : is the wedge force at the formation of the 1+ith chip,

d*i+1 : wedge penetration at the formation of 1+ith chip,
C0 : uniaxial compressive strength of the rock,
θ : half-angle of the wedge,
 : angle of internal friction of the rock
K* : slope of the locus describing the upper bound of
9
chipping force
 Indentation
Since θ, , UCS are constant, K* is also
constant means it is a straight line.

Also substitute

Hence, k and d*i can be determined from one loading cycle,

and K as well as loads and displacements at all the
succeeding points where chipping occurs.
10
 Indentation
c. Disc Cutters:
Evans (1974) used the same argument of Paul & Sikaskie
and derived the following equation;

where
is thrust force, d
is depth of cut,
is friction angle between
the wedge and rock,

11
 Indentation
Some investigation considered thrust force 𝐹𝑇 ,
𝐴 𝑥 𝐷 𝑥 σ𝑐 (Contact area x given depth x indentation strength)

Thrust force required to penetrate the rock to a depth d is:

Roxborough (1978) noted that for a free rolling disc, the

resultant force must pass through center of rotation in which

12
Indentation

13
Indentation

14
Indentation

15
 Indentation
𝐹𝑇 depends on
- indentation strength of the rock
- shear component of this force

Model based on tensile failure,

- only a small fraction of 𝐹𝑇 directed laterally,
- most of 𝐹𝑇 directed normally (similar to bottom punch)
16
 Indentation

where,
𝑇0 : rock tensile strength
: Poisson’s Ratio
t : chip thickness

17
 Indentation
• Spacing is strongly influenced by chip thickness (groove
depth)
• The disc thrust force 𝐹𝑇 required for breakage between
parallel groves arises from:
1. A component 𝐹𝑁 corresponds to the buoyancy of the disc
moving through fragma (mass broken materials in the
vicinity of disc edge).

2. A shear component corresponds to initial phase of the

breakage process that generates the "Vee" profile of the
disk groove.
18
 Indentation
3. A tensile component causing rupture of the rib of rock
between adjacent rib grooves

In addition, they calculated the Rolling Force acting on the

cutter using;

The theory is developed by assuming the crushed zone to

be circular shape. Its center is at the disc edge and its
radius is taken to be constant fraction q of the penetration
depth d.
19
 Indentation
Sanio (1985) introduces a
critical stress intensity factor, or
fracture toughness, Kc (Fig 8),

where,
is the hydrostatic pressure
in the crushed zone,
r is the radius of the crushed
zone,
is the crack length.

20
 Indentation
It is assumed that “a “ increases from zero at the leading edge
of the disc to maximum value of S where a chip is formed.

Cutter Rolling Force:

a cutting constant that depends on,

- strength and defect structure of the rock
- number of radial cracks
- geometry of the crushed zone 21
 Indentation Summary
• Shear force is responsible for inducing rock failure
• 𝐹𝑇 is the function of the wedge included angle
• Mohr-Coulomb criterion

• Flat bottom punch

- Hertzian cracks
- Intense crushing of the rock beneath
- Cracks to form rock chips

• Dilatation that causes tensile stresses

• Crack that forms the rock chip is initiated
22
 Indentation Summary
• Rock failure mechanism, if θ is smaller

• Rock chips produced by wedge-shaped disc cutters are

not shear cracks

• Paul and Sikarskie’s model,

– Shear stress,
– Mohr-Coulomb criteria seems adequate,
– Tensile fracture is initiated and propagated

• Combined loading: first tensile, second tensile stresses

23
 Drag Bits
• Shear force applied
– Rock breaks by
tensile crack

• Drag bit forces

where,
α: tool rake angle,
w: tool width
24
 Drag Bits
1. Linear increase in drag bit forces with depth of cut
2. Monotonic decrease in forces with increasing rake angle
3. Drag bit forces to increase linearly with rock strength

Symmetric wedge;
• Failure is essentially tensile
• Considered the limit equilibrium of the chip
• Assumed a circular area
• Under the action of three principle forces
• Invoking minimum work hypothesis

where Fc: tool cutting force 25

 Drag Bits
• For asymmetric geometry;

• Variation of cutting force with wedge angle

– Further studies with different rocks

• Chip formation not always curved, could be flat

• As the rake angle of a drag bit is reduced, rock chips

pushed off
26
 Drag Bits
Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion for drag bit force F
(Nishimatsu,1972):

where n is the stress distribution factor

The cutting (𝐹𝐶 ) and normal (𝐹𝑁 ) components are given as;

All models predict:

1. Linear increase in 𝐹𝐶 with cutting depth, and
2. Strength,
3. Monotonic reduction with increasing rake angle 27
 Drag Bits
• Evans’ model for pointed drag bits,
circular hole under internal pressure

• Radial compressive stresses,

cracks open up when tensile strength is reached

• Breakage pattern,
a major crack will propagate at θ

• θ where breakage occurs minimizes the energy of radial

displacement produced by a compressive stress
– Calculated as 60°, conforms to practice 28
 Drag Bits
• Effect of blunting on drag bit forces,
where 𝑟1 𝑖𝑠 the radius of wedge tip

• Adaptation of tensile theory for wedge action,

– Wedge having with included angle 2θ and wear flat 2b,
– Compressive force needed to initiate a tensile crack
where M is a constant

29
 Effect of the Principal Cutting Var.
• Pick performances are defined in terms of 𝐹𝐶 and 𝐹𝑁
– Spec.en. work done per unit volume of excavated rock

By shape By attendant angle

Chisel Rake
Round bottom Bottom clearance
V-front Side clearance
V-bottom Attack
Pointed V-front / V-bottom

30
Generalities about Pick Performance

1. Both 𝐹𝐶 and 𝐹𝑁 increases 2. Specific energy varies

with cutting depth for all pick inversely with depth of cut for
shapes. all pick shapes

31
Generalities about Pick Performance

3. 𝐹𝐶 and 𝐹𝑁 decrease with 4. Increasing back clearance

increasing angle, 20° optimal angle reduces peak pick
forces up to about 5°

32
Generalities about Pick Performance
5. Cutting speeds up to 5 m/s have no discernible effect on
pick forces and specific energy
6. Speed has no direct effect on pick forces and cutting
efficiency improves with cutting depth
7. For chisel shaped picks 𝐹𝐶 8. Pick forces increases app.
and 𝐹𝑁 increase linearly with linearly with strength
pick width

33
 Generalities about Pick Performance
9. Pick forces increase in saturated rock
10.1. Chisel picks 10.2. Pointed pick
- larger vol. rock - better pen.cap.,
- lowest spec.en. - larger depth of cut
- most efficient shape - more efficient than chisel bit

34
 Generalities about Pick Performance
11. Coarseness broken rock 12. Effects of pick rigidity
during cutting increases with • stiff but compressible backing
cutting efficiency • effect on pick damage

35
 Drag Bit Interaction
Lateral breakage induced by both chisel and pointed drag
bits
• breakout starts from the corners of the cut and
propagates towards the surface,
• lines of breakage, angle γ

Maximum separation between drag bits

Since this is significantly larger than practical values,
for pointed and chisel-shaped drag bits

Breakage pattern is the same both for chisel and pointed

drag bits
36
Interaction Between Parallel Picks
1. Each pick passes through the rock in sequence
– Each pick has the opportunity to exploit the relief
2. Optimum spacing of adjacent picks for min.spec. energy
Optimum spacing is twice of d

37
Interaction Between Parallel Picks
3. Optimum s/d for pointed picks 1.5 - 3.0
– Chisel picks, s-w for pointed bits, s

4. If (s-w/d) ≤ 2 tan γ, interaction btw adjacent picks ends

5. Optimum spacing is usually one-half (i.e. tan γ) the limit

of peak interaction 38
Interaction Between Parallel Picks
6. At spacing less than the optimum, specific energy
increases rapidly and reaches a maximum at zero spacing.

7. Pick forces, min. for s = 0,

increase linearly
max. equal for s ≥ 2 d tan γ

8. In practice, following pick cutting deeper

– variable cutting depth
– cutting through generated surfaces 39
Interaction Between Parallel Picks
9. Excavation corner, boundary of the cutting area,
– cutting force for corner cutting is 2-3 times higher
– normal force 1-2 times higher
– specific energy 3-4 times higher

10. Achievable depth of cut > req. for eff. pick interaction
groove deepening
– progressive loss of breakout

11. Cutting sequence of an array

– first pick exploit any available force surface
– following exploits the relief of the pick preceding 40
 Comments on Drag Bit Theory
• Most common methods

• Serious limitations
– 2D vs 3D

• Variation in drag bit forces,

– Rock strength
– Drag bit geometry
– Cutting depth
– Drag bit interaction
– Wear
41
 Practical Implications
• More Efficient
• Low energy requirement

• Main problems
– The development of new drag bit materials of
substantially better wear resistance and strength

– The ability of machines to provide sufficient thrust

force to keep drag bits at an effective depth of cut as
drag bit wear proceeds

42