27.07.2021 Views

The Delft Sand, Clay & Rock Cutting Model, 2019a

The Delft Sand, Clay & Rock Cutting Model, 2019a

The Delft Sand, Clay & Rock Cutting Model, 2019a

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

8.3. <strong>Cutting</strong> <strong>Model</strong>s.<br />

<strong>Rock</strong> <strong>Cutting</strong>: Atmospheric Conditions.<br />

Figure 8-18: <strong>The</strong> Crushed Type.<br />

Figure 8-19: <strong>The</strong> Chip Type.<br />

When cutting rock with a pick point, usually a crushed zone will occur in front of and under the tip of the pick<br />

point. If the cutting depth is small, this crushed zone may reach the surface and a sand like cutting process may<br />

occur. If the cutting depth is larger, the crushed material cannot escape and the stresses in the crushed zone increase<br />

strongly. According to Fairhurst (1964) the cutting forces are transmitted through particle-particle contacts. <strong>The</strong><br />

stresses are transmitted to the intact rock as discrete point loads this way, causing micro shear cracks and finally a<br />

tensile crack. Figure 8-18 and Figure 8-19 sho this cutting mechanism.<br />

As mentioned the type of failure depends on the UCS/BTS ratio. Geking (1987) stated that below a ratio of 9<br />

ductile failure will occur, while above a ratio of 15 brittle failure will occur. In between these limits there is a<br />

transition between ductile and brittle failure, which is also in accordance with the findings of Fairhurst (1964).<br />

<strong>The</strong> mechanism as described above is difficult to model. Still a method is desired to predict the cutting forces in<br />

rock cutting in order to estimate forces, power and production. In literature some models exist, like the Evans<br />

(1964) model based on tensile failure and the Nishimatsu (1972) model based on shear failure. From steel cutting<br />

also the Merchant (1944) model is known, based on plastic shear failure. <strong>The</strong> Evans (1964) model assumes a<br />

maximum tensile stress on the entire failure plane, which could match the peak forces, but overestimates the<br />

average forces. Nishimatsu (1972) build in a factor for the shear stress distribution on the failure plane, enabling<br />

the model to take into account that failure may start when the shear stress is not at a maximum everywhere in the<br />

shear plane. Both models are discussed in this chapter.<br />

Based on the Merchant (1944) model for steel cutting and the Miedema (1987 September) model for sand cutting,<br />

a new model is developed, both for ductile cutting, ductile cataclastic cutting, brittle shear cutting and brittle tensile<br />

cutting. First a model is derived for the Flow Type, which is either ductile shear failure or brittle shear failure. In<br />

the case of brittle shear failure, the maximum cutting forces are calculated. For the average cutting forces the<br />

maximum cutting forces have to be reduced by 30% to 50%. Based on the Flow Type and the Mohr circle, the<br />

shear stress in the shear plane is determined where, on another plane (direction), tensile stresses occur equal to the<br />

tensile strength. An equivalent or mobilized shear strength is determined giving this tensile stress, leading to the<br />

Tear Type of failure. This approach does not require the tensile stress to be equal to the tensile strength on the<br />

whole failure plane, instead it predicts the cutting forces at the start of tensile failure.<br />

This method can also be used for predicting the cutting forces in frozen clay, permafrost.<br />

Roxborough (1987) derived a simple expression for the specific energy based on many experiments in different<br />

types of rock. <strong>The</strong> dimension of this equation is MPa. <strong>The</strong> two constants in the equation may vary a bit depending<br />

on the type of rock. <strong>The</strong> 0.11 is important at small UCS values, the 0.25 at large values.<br />

Esp<br />

0.25 U.C.S. 0.11<br />

(8-40)<br />

<strong>The</strong> fact that cutting rock is irreversible, compared to the cutting of sand and clay, also means that the 4 standard<br />

cutting mechanisms cannot be applied on cutting rock. In fact the Flow Type looks like cataclastic ductile failure<br />

from a macroscopic point of view, but the Flow Type (also the Curling Type) are supposed to be real plastic<br />

deformation after which the material (clay) is still in tact, while cataclastic ductile failure is much more the crushing<br />

of the rock with shear falure in the crushed rock. We will name this the Crushed Type. When the layer cut is<br />

thicker, a crushed zone exists but not to the free surface. From the crushed zone first a shear plane is formed from<br />

which a tensile crack goes to the free surface. We will name this the Chip Type.<br />

Copyright © Dr.ir. S.A. Miedema TOC Page 261 of 454

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!