You are on page 1of 12

Geol Rundsch (1997) 86: 426 - 438, Offprint

with Contributions to "Prediction in geology", Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, February, 22nd-24th 1996

426

Original Paper

K. Thuro

Drillability prediction - geological influences in hard rock drill and
blast tunnelling

Abstract* Usually the main subject in preliminary site investigations prior to tunnelling projects is the prediction of tunnel stability. During the last years in
conventional drill and blast tunnelling, problems have
occured also connected to the accurate prediction of
drillability in hard rock. The drillability is not only decisive for the wear of tools and equipment but is - along with the drilling velocity - a standard factor for
the progress of excavation works. The estimation of
drillability in predicted rock conditions might bear an
extensive risk of costs. Therefore an improved prediction of drilling velocity and bit wear would be desireable. The drillability of a rock mass is determined
by various geological and mechanical parameters. In
this report some major correlations of specific rock
properties and especially geological factors with measured bit wear and drilling velocity are shown.
Drilling velocity is dependent on a lot of geological
parameters: Those principal parameters include jointing of rock mass, orientation of schistosity (rock anisotropy), degree of interlocking of microstructures,
porosity and quality of cementation in clastic rock, degree of hydrothermal decomposition and weathering of
a rock mass. Drilling bit wear increases with the equivalent quartz content. The equivalent quartz content
builds the main property for the content of wear-relevant minerals. For various groups of rock types different connections with the equivalent quartz content
could be detected. In sandstone bit wear is also dependent on porosity or the quality of the cementation. Finally an investigation program is submitted, which
helps to improve the estimation of rock drillability in
planning future tunnel projects.

Key words: Drillability ⋅ Drilling rate, Bit wear,
Destruction work, Anisotropy, Joint spacing,
Equivalent quartz content, Porosity
Drilling equipment - technical introduction
For drilling blastholes in hard rock, today the rotary
percussive drilling is standard in underground mining
and tunnelling, providing maximum performance under most circumstances (Cohrs 1988). The hydraulic
drill hammer is a combination of a rotary drilling machine and a percussive drill and uses a separate rotary
and percussive mechanism.
Whereas percussive drilling is controlled by jerkily
moving of the drilling rod with only a loose contact of
the drilling bit to the bottom of the borehole, rotary
percussive drilling is characterized by continuous rotation - comparable to rotary drilling. By means of
high feed pressure (12 - 20 kN), lying more than a decade above those in percussive drilling, the drilling bit
is always tight to the bottom of the borehole. Since the
torques are much stronger, crushing work is carried
out also by shearing between the impacts.

Fig. 1 Operation of rotary percussive drilling and the main machine parameters

K. Thuro
Lehrstuhl für Allgemeine, Angewandte und Ingenieur-Geologie,
Technische Universität München
D-85747 Garching, Germany
Fax: +49 89 289 14382
e-mail: thuro@ mineral.min.chemie.tu-muenchen.de

Regarding just the procedure, the rotary percussive
drilling is superior to the rotary drilling and the percussive drilling (Feistkorn 1987). The hydraulics facilitate an optimum energy transfer from the percussive
mechanism to the drilling rod. Parameters are the

The bit consists of a carrier holding the actual drilling tools: buttons of hard metal (wolfram carbide with a cobalt binder. and rock drills (Fig. The range comprises units for hydraulic drilling with a selection of of different carriers.and 9-button bits. eight and nine buttons and different flushing systems mainly used in hard rock Fig. flushing system and the design of the drilling bit (Fig. feeds. 4 Typical button drill bits with six. a maximum penetration performance has been obtained in (tough) quartz phyllite of the Innsbruck area. 3. booms. 3 Hydraulic boom BUT 35 of the AC-Rocket Boomer H 175. seven. In Fig. The shape of the button and the design of the bit (geometry and arrangement of buttons. . 4 shows typical button bits used in underground excavation in rotary percussive drill rigs. which makes it possible to position the feed vertically on both sides of the boom. 5 Button types of drilling bits used for rotary percussive drilling and their main characteristics Fig. with accurate parallel holding. carrying up to three booms with hydraulic drifter feeds and rock drills. 6 drilling rates relative to the average of the quickest bit type are plotted comparing 6-. The drilling bit is the part of the rig which carries out the crushing work. 8. For example. roof drilling and cross-cuts For example the COP 1440 hammer (20 kW impact power) mounted on the AC Rocket Boomer H 175 is the most popular hydraulic rock drill presently in use. 2). 1). 5. flush holes and draining channels) have a strong influence on bit wear and drilling performance. giving an optimum between button stress and button area in brittle rock. 7-. The highest drilling rates in this limestone have been archieved using an 8-button bit. Centre-mounted feed with double rotation devices. Fig. MOHS´ hardness 9½). Possible sorts of button types and their main characteristics are shown in Fig. 2 Drilling rig: Atlas Copco Rocket Boomer H 175 with 3 booms and service platform Typical tunnelling rigs consist of a diesel-hydraulic rubber-wheeled tramming carrier.427 technical specifications of the drill hammer. Fig. Features such as rapid and exact boom positioning with roof drilling and cross-cuts are performed with the BUT 35 boom shown in Fig. Button Types spherical (semi-) ballistic conical (ballistic) Characteristics ! "non aggressive" shape ! minimum drilling rates ! low bit wear ! excavation mainly by impact ! "aggressive" shape ! moderate drilling rates ! moderate bit wear ! excavation mainly by shearing / cutting ! "very aggressive" shape ! maximum drilling rates ! high bit wear ! excavation mainly by shearing / cutting Fig. using ballistic 9-button bits. This impression is less distinctive in brittle rock types as can be seen in limestone from the German Muschelkalk.

rock type .in calculation (left side) and during final construction (rigth side. only tunnel projects with the same drilling equipment can be used for drillability studies (Thuro 1996). hydrothermal decomposition and the structure of discontinuities. Firstly. As can be seen from the drilling segment.influenced by the machine parameters of the chosen drilling rig.first of all . Therefore. But rock mass conditions also highly depend on the geological history. Thuro 1996). The specific characteristics of rock material and rock mass may be at least partly put into figures with the help of mechanical rock properties. Secondly. performance drilling velocity power transfer. Apart from technical parameters. The interaction of the main factors is illustrated in Fig. Finally. Therefore. a high penetration rate at the tunnel face does not automatically lead to a high performance of the tunnel heading (Thuro and Spaun 1996a). it is a matter of understanding the entire excavation system before applying expertise to the investigation of drillability. conditions drilling bit 85 Drillability 80 wear of drilling tools drilling bit wear 75 Working Process 70 6 x 45 s 7 x 45 s 8 x 45 s 8 x 45 b 9 x 45 s 9 x 45 b excavation system & logistics. The time for charging of the explosives during construction has increased five times as compared with calculation. 95 drilling rate [%] Geological Parameters drill hammer. As an example. operation & maintenance of the tunnelling rig button bit type limestone (Muschelkalk) 105 Fig. drillability is . one has to go through three levels of investigation: mineral . the time for excavating one entire round has be- . 8 Geological parameters: General view of the characteristics of mineral. 7 Illustration of the term "drillability" and the main influencing parameters. 9 x 45 b = 9 button type. s spherical Parameters of Drillability Drillability is a term used in construction to describe the influence of a number of parameters on the drilling rate (drilling velocity) and the tool wear of the drilling rig. 7. smooth operation and permanent maintenance of the tunnelling rig contributes to a successful drilling performance. Therefore. the entire drilling time of one round has increased nearly three times from calculation to final construction. 6 Drilling rates in quartz phyllite and limestone depending on the button type and drilling bit. ∅ 45 mm. b ballistic. rock and rock mass The last important factor influencing drillability is the working process itself. As could be seen in the technical introduction.and rock mass . The necessity of drillability studies But why is prediction of drillability necessary? The following figures will show the effects of increased drilling time on the performance of the tunnel heading. 8).meaning also three levels of dimension! Fig. 100 drilling rate [%] 95 mineral mineral composition micro fabric equivalent quartz content porosity / cementation rock elastic/plastic behaviour mechanical rock properties destruction work compressive strength Young's modulus tensile strength ratio of compressive and tensile strength rock density 90 85 80 75 rock mass 70 6 x 45 s 7 x 45 s 8 x 45 s 8 x 45 b 9 x 45 s 9 x 45 b rock mass conditions discontinuities anisotropy spacing of discontinuities status of weathering hydrothermal decomposition button bit type Fig. 9 . especially the geological parameters will basically influence the drilling performance and the wear of the drilling rig (Fig.428 quartz phyllite (Innsbrucker Quarzphyllit) 105 100 Machine Parameters Rock & Rock Mass Drilling Rig mechanical rock mass 90 percussive tunnelling rock properties. the excavation works of the Altenberg Tunnel in Idar-Oberstein are presented as circle diagrams in Fig. weathering conditions.

drilling progress and bit wear could be connected with some of the main rock parameters. Furthermore. contributing up-to-date experience. measuring drilling rates periodically during running excavation works. mean values of 25 different rock types or homogeneous areas were taken for correlation analysis. as can bee seen by the bigger diameter of the construction circle. decomposed volcanic material Monitoring and classification of drilling rates and bit wear To get information on the correlation between drilling rate.a standard factor for the progress of excavation works. extensive field studies and laboratory work was carried out. rock samples have been analysed to get mechanical rock properties of representative sections (Thuro 1996). This was the reason for stucked drilling rods.bad drilling and blasting conditions during running excavation That is why works.5 m/min 60 sec 4. The range of the compressive strength of the components ranges from over 250 MPa (quartzite) to nearly zero (completely weathered volcanic rock). collapsed boreholes and . compressive strength of the components and swelling ability of the weathered. a drill- . blocked water flushing.3 m/day 7. vein quartz and schist of the Hunsrück range and volcanic rock of the Idar-Oberstein volcanic area. a classification of drillability is given. The estimation of drillability in predicted rock conditions might bear an extensive risk of costs. 0% equivalent Ca-montmorillonit content 25% 36% very high high moderate low no swellability 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 swelling time [h] Fig.along with the drilling velocity . Firstly. But about one half of the volcanic rock has already been deeply weathered and decomposed to a clay-siltstone with swelling minerals ranging from high to very high swellability. Rotliegend) coming up along the entire length of the tunnel. Before going into a detailed analysis of drillability parameters.429 been doubled.above all . 10: The composition of the fanglomerate (Waderner formation. 9 Working round in the Altenberg Tunnel in calculation and final construction.6 m/day Fig. Until now.4 h swelling [%] drilling rate 30% 30 20% 20 10% 5% 10 heading performance 13. The fanglomerate is composed of quarzite.3 m/min 121 sec 8. Austria and North India have been followed more or less extensively. drillability is not only decisive for the wear of tools and equipment but is . mechanical rock properties and geological parameters. nine tunnel projects in Germany. 10 Composition of the fanglomerate (Waderner formation). Effects of increased drilling time on the performance of the tunnel heading The reason for this fatal fault in prediction is evident in Fig. Based on engineering geological mapping of the tunnels. and heading performance has been cut in half. Fanglomerate composition quartzite support 67 min weathered volcanic rock 40% Calculation 18% 27% drilling 62 min 22% 10% 8% mucking 90 min support 157 min charging 20 min 10% volcanic rock vein quartz schist compressive strength [MPa] 31% Construction 0 20% mucking 79 min drilling 167 min vein quartz charging 102 min Comparison: 200 quartzite 33% 33% 16% 100 volcanic rock Calculation Construction swellability swellability of the weathered volcanic rock 40 net drilling time round length 2. Therefore an improved prediction of drilling velocity and bit wear would be desireable.2 h 1. In this way. bit wear.

ISRM 1985) to gain representative mean values of the properties of the drilled rock types. drilling velocity drilling rate = total boremeters meters bit life-span = number of drill bits bits Formula 1 Determination of drilling velocity and drilling bit wear low moderate high very high extremely high The drilling performance is taken as the drilling velocity or drilling of one simple borehole. As a derived rock property. which means the total of boremeters drilled with one bit (Formula 1). Blindheim 1979. net drilling time minutes Mechanical rock properties ability classification should rely on values easily obtained on the site. Austria and overseas (North India) were plotted into the chart in Fig. The drilling bit wear is taken as the bit life.2000 m/bit) should be described as "fair" drillability. The matrix was based on the experience.4 m/min) and low bit wear (1500 . Thus extensive rock testing has been carried out based on the ISRM suggested methods (Brown 1981. Secondly. The investigations were carried out using a 20 kW borehammer (Atlas Copco COP 1440).000 meters per bit. Habenicht & Gehring 1976. Many authors tend to take one or more of those properties as main parameters of drillability (Schimazek & Knatz 1970. Regarding the drilling rig. measured at the tunnel face and drilling bit wear recorded as the bit lifespan. 11. Therefore drillability ranges in our classification from extremely poor to easy. The bit life-span ranges from 50 meters to over 2. that high drilling rates (3 . mean values of different rock types or homogeneous areas derived from 25 Bit Wear The most frequently used rock properties are the unconfined compressive strength. the ratio of unconfined compressive strength and tensile strength often is designated as toughness (or brittleness) of a rock material. The system proposed here is based on net drilling velocity. The drilling rates range from 1 meter per minute to about 5 meters per minute. 11 Classification diagram enclosing 25 case studies of different rock types or homogeneous areas derived from 9 tunnel projects . Movinkel & Johannessen 1986). Wanner 1975. To get an impression of how wide values of bit wear and drilling rates may vary. the drilling process is fundamental for the choice of the investigation pa- y ilit b illa Dr very low drilling bit wear 5 no no ea sy rm al very high drilling rate [m/min] high 3 po o 2 ve ry ex tr po eme or ly 1 po r medium et dy e in bta to o n or low percussive drill COP 1440 .430 borehole depth meters case studies in 9 tunnel projects in Germany.20 kW Drilling Velocity 4 et dy e n i bta to very low 0 0 500 sandstones conglomerate & fanglomerate 1000 1500 limestone & marl quartzite marble 2000 2500 [m/bit] phyllites & gneiss quartz-mica-schist amphibolite Fig. the parameters should be expressive and provide a good resolution of drilling rate and wear characteristic. the Young´s modulus and the tensile strength.

that besides compressive and tensile strength (percussive process) and shear strength (bit rotation) the elastic characteristics of rock material is of crucial importance. where four important destruction mechanisms can be distinguished: 1) Under the bit button a crushed zone of fine rock powder is formed (impact).& claystone conglomerate & fanglomerate limestone & marl silicic dolomite phyllite & gneiss marble Fig. three main destruction mechanisms could be detected (Ozdemir et al. Examining the drilling mechanism it is obvious.destruction work represents the work of shape altering including the post failure section (Fig. UCS unconfined compressive strength button 1 3 2 2 2 10 mm 1 crushed rock powder 2 radial cracks 3 detached fragments Fig. The chart indicates the close correlation between drilling velocity and destruction work. correlated with destruction work of 23 rock types.in other words . conglomerate. Coming from studies by high-speed photography and analysis of thin sections of rock below the area of disc cutter tools of tunnel boring machines. 12 the crushing mechanism is illustrated. 1977.28m/min n=23 R2=89% 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 destruction work [kJ/m3] sand. marble. In Fig. 13 Estimation of the specific destruction work Wz from the stress-strain curve of a rock sample under unconfined compression.stress and strain .b).the work.60·ln x yσ(n-1)=0. marl.and limestone. Wang et al. As a product of both . correlations between the conventional mechanical rock properties (unconfined compressive and tensile strength. 3 2 1 y=5. required for destruction of a rock sample or . necessary to build new surfaces (or cracks) in rock. 14 Drilling rates. The destruction work proved to be a highly significant parameter for correlation with the drilling performance. as a measurement for the quantity of energy. Therefore the so-called specific destruction work Wz has been introduced (Thuro 1996. Destruction mechanism under the bit buttons Around the contact of the button a new state of stress is induced in the rock. Thuro & Spaun 1996a. the bit always drills through pre-cracked rock (see Müller-Salzburg 1963: 104). sand. . 5 standard deviation 4 drilling rate [m/min] rotation post-failure-section pre-failure-section penetration rameters. 1978. Young's modulus and the ratio of unconfined compressive strength and tensile strength "toughness") and drilling rates show less significance (see Thuro and Spaun 1996 b). larger fragments of the rock can be sheared off between the button grooves (shear stress). 12 Crushing process in rotary percussive drilling. 14 drilling rates of the previously mentioned rock material is plotted against destruction work including clay-siltstone. schist and different cristalline rock. 3) When stress in the rock is high enough (if enough cracks exist ± parallel to the bottom of the borehole). radial cracks are developed (induced tensile stress). Blindheim 1979). The correlation is very good In contrast to the described connection. 13).431 failure point UCS stress σ unconfined compression test destruction work Wz= σ d ε drilling bit button 3 strain ε rotation Fig. 2) Starting from the crushed powder zone.49-0. In Fig. Those results can be generalised and transferred on the crushing process below the buttons of a drilling bit. To be precise. 4) In addition to the mechanisms above stress is induced periodically (dynamic process).

if the tunnel axis is parallel to the main foliation. high tensile stress low tensile stress 100 100 75 75 50 50 25 graph equation y = a + b·cos x 90 75 drilling rate [%] drilling rate indirect tensile strength [%] Anisotropy Of course. 17 the influence of discontinuities is not visible. may be rendered useless very soon. mineral composition . As a further result of anisotropy. drilling and blasting conditions are supposed to be very poor. When the joints get closer. This has been discussed in detail by Thuro & Spaun (1996. Drilling is controlled by the tensile strength parallel to the foliation producing small-sized fragments and a minimum drilling performance (Fig. tensile strength 25 60 45 30 dip angle of foliation 15 0 Fig.432 compressive/tensile stress Geological parameters testing arrangements UCS TS TS UCS Fig. The spacing of joints could also be described as "joints per meter" and is another parameter for the precracking of rock. 16 Drilling rate and tensile strength plotted against the orientation of foliation Spacing of discontinuities Of course. In the chart of Fig. In addition. blasting conditions are often related to drilling. rock properties and drilling rates are also highly dependent on the orientation of weakness planes related to the direction of testing or drilling. Thus. compression also is parallel but shear stress is at right angles. 15. There are several geological influences though only some can be mentioned here: 1.thus MüllerSalzburg (1963) talks about rock mass as "broken rock". right side). causing hole collapses and timeconsuming scaling of the established blasthole. because of the favourable schist orientation. . rock material is compressed at right angles but sheared parallel to it.porosity of the micro fabric Hydrothermal decomposition of rock material very often shows the same effects as the status of weathering. drifter rods are deviated into the dip direction of foliation. spacing of discontinuities 3. into the normal direction of foliation. the cracks parallel to the bottom of the borehole will be used for chipping.orientation of discontinuities related to the direction of testing or drilling 2. especially in fault zones. left side). if the spacing is large against the dimensions of the borehole. the drilling velocity increases up to the double. pore volume . weakness planes in rock mass . anisotropy . By this means. 16). Drilling is controlled by the shear strength of the foliated rock material. shear stress shear stress Although mechanical properties allow prediction of drilling performance to be more precise.equivalent quartz content 4. 16). the efforts of fast drilling. if obtuse-angled. drilling rates are also dependent on spacing of discontinuities in rock mass. Although cracks will develop radial to compression. It should be clear. Some of the possibly connected problems have already been discussed in this paper. rock properties are the highest and drilling rates are low. In any case. Discontinuities are. drill tracks may be seen as curves and produce distinct borehole deviation and a “geologically caused” overbreak. also see Spaun and Thuro 1994). as a law. It is certain. But the connected problem is borehole instability. 15. problems may occure when drilling direction is diagonal to the tunnel axis: When the angle between drilling and tunnel axis is acute-angled. If the drilling axis is oriented parallel to foliation (Fig. that in the parallel case. geological influences are even more decisive for drilling velocity as well as for the bit life. Usually in this case the highest drilling velocities are obtained. that fewer cracks will develop for reasons of higher strength at right angles to foliation. When the direction of drilling is at right angles to the orientation of foliation (Fig. 15 Drilling process according to different orientations of foliation (after Spaun and Thuro 1994). The minimum destruction work causes large sized chips and a maximum drilling performance (Fig.

the wear of drilling bits has been examined in different rock types. 18. parameters for predicting the drilling bit wear are now mentioned. couplings and shank adapters have a life-span on average ten times the one of button bits and thus are not suitable. It is visible . The point is. there is no single physical property in existence to quantify and describe ´´hardness’’ as if it is the uniaxial compressive strength for stress. It is clear. West 1989.433 limestone (middle Muschelkalk) % 5 200 spacing large against dimension of borehole equivalent quartz content 140 120 collapse of boreholes common equ = 100 Σ A ⋅R i i i=1 80 20 cm 63 cm 200 cm A . Nelson 1993). To include all minerals of a rock sample. 19 Bit life of different rock types correlated with the equivalent quartz content enclosing 42 case studies in 8 tunnel projects The method of determining the equivalent quartz content is wide-spread among tool manufacturers. Brook 1993. 19 the bit life of different rock types is correlated with its equivalent quartz contents. 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 equivalent quartz content [%] sandstone fanglomerate & conglomerate limestone & marl crystalline rock phyllite & gneiss marble hydrothermaly decomposed Fig.Rosiwal abrasiveness [%] n . the equivalent quartz content has been determined in thin sections by modal analysis .meaning the entire mineral content refering to the abrasiveness or hardness of quartz (Formula 2). 5. Suana and Peters 1982). In Fig.number of minerals very widely 6. porosity hydrothermal decomposition low 1500 moderate 1000 high main graph 500 very high extremely h.5). Rosiwal 1896. enclosing 24 different minerals (excluding diamond) Bit Wear 2500 very low 2000 bit life-span [m/bit] Equivalent quartz content Having discussed some factors influencing drilling rates. Only few have gained international attention such as the drilling rate index DRI (Selmer-Olsen and Blindheim 1970) or the Cerchar abrasivity index CAI (Valantin 1973. joint spacing Formula 2 Determination of the equivalent quartz content Fig. As a leading parameter. Much of them have been introduced for a special purpose and have not been developed further. Technical parameters are not really suitable for drillability studies though there are about 200 hardness tests for rock characterization (Atkinson 1993. But the performed structural methods are very time consuming and thus have not been applied in practice.12 + 1.mineral amount [%] R . Also a lot of petrographic parameters such as rock texture and mineral fabric have been discussed to be used for predicting tool wear and drillability (Howarth and Rowlands 1987). An appropriate correlation between Mohs hardness and Rosiwal abrasiveness is given in Fig. Other tools such as drifter rods. engineers and engineering geologists for preliminary site investigations prior to tool wear problems.3 cm widely 2 cm medium extreme closely fault zone 0. the abrasiveness of minerals can be estimated by this chart with satisfactory accuracy (within a half degree of Mohs hardness). 18 Correlation between Rosiwal abrasiveness and Mohs hardness. When defects of binder.6 cm closely 2 160 n 3 very closely drilling rate [m/min] 180 4 the Mohs hardness is known. especially quartz (Mohs hardness of 7). that tool wear is predominantly a result of the mineral content harder than steel (Mohs hardness ca. 17 Correlation between drilling rate and joint spacing in limestone of the middle Muschelkalk 9 8 quartz Mohs hardness 7 6 5 4 3 2 y = 2. Therefore each mineral amount is multiplied with its relative Rosiwal abrasiveness to quartz (with quartz being 100%.05·ln x yσ(n-1)= ½ 1 n=24 R2=95% 0 1 10 100 1000 Rosiwal abrasiveness Fig. 1916).

y=174+60?x yσ =136m/bit n=8 R =90% extremely h.20 kW very high 4 high 3 moderate 2 low 1 very high extremely h. 21). 22) and .6 quartz content. 21). for purposes of prediction.4 2. Fig. conglomerates. where mainly rock of the middle und upper Bunter sandstone has been encountered and in the Achberg Tunnel nearby Unken in the Werfen sandstone formation. 20 a rock family very high something like a "normal facies" .Fig. Therer high por easin g osi ty fore. In Fig. 21 Correlation of bit life-span and porosity (dry density) in sandstones se and may be used for a forecast of bit wear. phyllites.5 2.5 2. 29) and destruction work (Fig. marl. 0 conglomerates.12·x yσ(n-1)=0. 30).12m/bit n=8 R2=98% very low 0 25 20 15 10 porosity [%] 5 0 equivalent quartz content [%] Fig.naturally mechanical rock properties such as unconfined compressive strength (Fig. often corresponding with a defect in 1500 the silicic cementation. marl. But obviously some kinds of rock have 2000 their own curves: (a) sandstones.83+0. 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 y=1. together with phyllites and marbles has 25 20 15 10 5 0 been built to be described by a logarithmic regression porosity [%] curve.1 2. The data were collected in the Schönrain Tunnel near Würzburg.2 2.434 3 bit life-span [m/bit] dry density [g/cm ] that bit wear raises mainly with increasing equivalent Bit Wear 2 2.1 2. The expected connection is also detected when plotting the porosity of sandstones instead of the equivalent quartz content into the diagram (Fig. when the equivalent quartz content is determined by a thin secdry density [g/cm ] Drilling velocity tion modal analysis. 2 2. Porosity is measured here as a function of dry density of rock material and ranges from a compact (dense) to a totally decomposed silicic binder-free fabric. such as bit wear (Fig.3 2. 22 Correlation of drilling rates and and porosity (dry density) in sandstones .6 2 (n-1) 3 7-button bits limestone. 20 Bit life-span of limestone. and (b) hydrothermally demoderate composed crystalline rock. defect binder In each of those special rock types the interlocking 1000 inc of the grains in the microfabric is "disturbed". There seems to be a correlation between the porosity of the rock and technical parameters. drilling rates (Fig. the good correlation coefficient suggests a close connection. especially those with hydrothermally low decomposed higher porosity.2 2. Although the number of cases in each chart is quite low. each rock type must compact 500 be discussed individually.of limestone. conglomerates. marl.3 2.4 2. together with phyllites and marbles and corresponding equivalent quartz content Porosity and binder defects For sandstones and decomposed rock other relationships must be discussed. marbles Bit Wear 6 very low 5 clay-silt-stone y=3131-624·ln x yσ(n-1)=144m/bit n=22 R2 =95% bit life-span [m/bit] 2000 low 1500 standard deviation moderate 1000 high 500 drilling rate [m/min] 2500 COP 1440 . For the chosen rock family the relation is very clo.

28 In the grain gaps. 0. 5 mm) Fig. 25 Hydrothermally decomposed Bunter sandstone. 0.14 mm) . 1 mm) Fig. 27 Clayey binder of the decomposed Bunter sandstone showing kaolinite crystals growing in the twinning lamellae of a plagioclase crystal (picture length approx. picture length approx. small calcite rhombohedrons are growing as secondary binder (picture length approx. quartzitic Bunter sandstone with a very dense and compact fabric. 1 mm) Fig.435 Fig.1 mm) Fig.1 mm) Fig. silicic cement (picture length approx. 24 Hard Bunter sandstone with a less dense fabric. 23 Hard. Larger hexahedric quartz crystals growing on grains are developing out of small granules of silicic binder (picture length approx. 0. characterised by a porous fabric with a clayey binder in replacement of the original. Fracturing is dominated by intergranular (grain-to-grain) failure. 26 Small hexahedric granules of silicic cement growing on quartz grains (picture length approx. No pores can be seen and the fracture runs through each individual quartz grain ("intragranular failure".

24. suggesting a fabric less dense than before. a hard Bunter sandstone with a higher porosity is visible.4 2.1 2. 28). out of an investigation tunnel destruction work compressive strength Young's modulus tensile strength ratio of compressive / tensile strength rock density / porosity " influence of anisotropy or other factors petrographic description mineral composition micro fabric equivalent quartz content degree of interlocking Fig. with the discovered correlation charts for Investigation Program preliminary site investigations engineering geological mapping rock & soil description and classification quantitative description of discontinuities on basis of IAEG and ISRM standardization anisotropy spacing of discontinuities status of weathering hydrothermal decomposition mechanical rock properties sampling out of drilling cores if possible. thus indicating hydrothermal activity dating from a fault zone ("Harrbacher Sprung") in the Schönberg Tunnel. quartzitic Bunter sandstone is After all these observations.6 compressive strength after ISRM unconfined compressive strength [MPa] 120 y=168-53⋅ln x yσ(n-1)=8. The small flakes probably are fed into the grain gaps by circulating ground water.In Fig.2 2. Clay has replaced the original silicic cement. nor experience alone and equipment design and operation expertise alone can lead to the point where drillability is anything like a clearly defined formula. 0 Conclusion Fig.5 2. 27 the clayey binder of the decomposed Bunter sandstone is visible. geology alone. In Fig. The rock has changed its colour from originally red to a flat whitish-grey.4 2. Firstly. it is clear. The hydrothermally decomposed Bunter sandstone of Fig.436 dry density [g/cm3] 2 2. as can bee seen by increased enlargement in Fig. The small granules of silicic cement are also hexahedric. 31 Proposal of an investigation program for preliminary site investigations . The silicic cement does not fill every gap between the quartz grains but the cementation is more than just a grain-to-grain binding (intergranular failure). 30: Correlation of destruction work and porosity (dry density) in sandstones The fabric of the different stages of porosity (or dry density) can be visualized by raster electron microscope photography. showing kaolinite crystals growing in the twinning lamellae of a plagioclase crystal. small calcite rhombohedrons grow as secondary binder (Fig.5 2. 26.1 2.2 2. In the grain gaps.3 2. that neither laboratory and field testing alone. It looks like the silicic binder has been removed from the sandstone together with the red colour.3 2. leaving behind some clayey material and calcitic cement. The contact of the grains is not solid anymore but only weakly cemented and the surface of the grains looks "dirty". 23 a very dense and compact fabric of a hard. In Fig.6 250 destruction work [kJ/m3] y=327-103⋅ln x yσ(n-1)=30kJ/m3 n=8 R2=83% 200 150 100 50 clay-silt-stone 0 25 20 15 10 porosity [%] 5 shown where fracture is characterized by intragranular failure. 25 is characterised by a porous fabric with a clayey binder.1MPa n=8 R2=95% very high 100 80 high 60 40 20 moderate clay-silt-stone low very low 0 25 20 15 10 porosity [%] 5 0 Fig. 29 Correlation of unconfined compressive strength and porosity (dry density) in sandstones dry density [g/cm3] 2 2.

Bohrwagen für den Tunnel. Dtsch Gesellschaft für Erd. Howarth DF. 4. Selmer-Olsen R. Rotterdam. Rowlands JC (1987) Quantitative assessement of rock texture and correlation with drillability and strength properties. Berg.und Hüttenmännische Monatshefte 121: 506-514. Peters T (1982) The cherchar abrasivity index and its relation to rock mineralogy and petrography. (ed) Eurock ´96.und Stollenbau. Proc 2nd Cong of the Int Soc for Rock Mech. Vol.und Grundbau e. pp 65-70 Spaun G. Blindheim OT (1970) On the drillability of rock by percussive drilling. BD Baumaschinendienst 24: 344-350 West G (1989) Rock abrasiveness testing for tunneling. But besides rock properties. which should help to improve the estimation of rock drillability in planning future tunnel projects. In: Hudson J (ed) Comprehensive rock engineering. Annexe de l´exposée présenté aux Journées de Information “Techniques de creusement“. Glückauf 106: 274-278. Nevertheless in preliminary site investigation the most important thing to do is simple and basic geological mapping. Basel. 12. it is very important to prepare all rock and soil descriptions in a way engineers are able to understand.. Bd. Pergamon. Theoretischer Teil. Working Group on Revision of the Point Load Test Method. CSM APR 7307776-A03 Rosiwal A (1896) Neue Untersuchungsergebnisse über die Härte von Mineralien und Gesteinen. pp 261-291 . Principles. Stuttgart 1-624 Nelson PP (1993) TBM performance analysis with reference to rock properties. Ein absolutes Maß für die Härte spröder Körper Verhandlg d kk geol R-A Wien: 117-147. prediction and machine design. trying to integrate all discussed knowledge bases. Secondly. Spaun G (1996a) Drillability in hard rock drill and blast tunnelling. Essen. In: Barla G. 1. Annual report.437 mechanical and petrographic rock properties. practice & projects.V. Felsbau 14: 103-109 Thuro K. Pergamon. vol. pp 707-713 Valantin A (1973) Test Cerchar por la mesure de la dureté et de l´abrasivité des roches. 31 an investigation program for preliminary site investigations is presented. 2. Pergamon. Belgrade. ISRM suggested methods. Thuro K (1994): Untersuchungen zur Bohrbarkeit und Zähigkeit des Innsbrucker Quarzphyllits. Verhandlg d kk geol R-A Wien: 475-491. 4: 1-44 Brown ET. References Atkinson H (1993) Hardness tests for rock characterization. pp 217-273. In: Hudson J (ed) Comprehensive rock engineering. Gehring K (1976) Gebirgseigenschaften und maschineller Tunnelvortrieb. Tunnels Tunneling 4: 45-48. which cannot be put into figures and rock properties. testing and monitoring. Bull Int Ass Eng Geol 12: 21-28. Oxford. In: Taschenbuch für den Tunnelbau 1988. Rock Mech 15: 1-7 Thuro K. it should be possible to predict drilling rates and bit wear for the examined rock types in a satisfactory manner. Balkema. Principles. This sounds simple. ed (1981) Rock characterization. Schimazek J. Wang FD (1977) Mechanical tunnel boring. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 22: 51-60 Movinkel T & Johannessen O (1986) Geological parameters for hard rock tunnel boring. 3: Rock testing and site characterization. practice & projects. Knatz H (1970) Der Einfluß des Gesteinsaufbaus auf die Schnittgeschwindigkeit und den Meißelverschleiß von Streckenvortriebsmaschinen.and blast tunnelling. pp 1-221 Wanner H (1975) On the influence of geological conditions at the application of tunnel boring machines. Snyder L (1978) Prediction and experimental verification of disk cutter forces in hard rock.I. Münchner Geologische Hefte Reihe B Angewandte Geologie B1: 1-145 Thuro K. Ozdemir L. Principles. Miller R. Prediction and performance in rock mechanics and rock engineering. Excavation. Louxembourg Wang FD. vol. Oxford. Habenicht H. pp 41-81 Ozdemir L. Cohrs HH (1988): Untergrundkämpfer. Teil A: Bohrtechnik. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 26: 151-160 Feistkorn E (1987) Bohr.und Sprengtechnik. Rosiwal A (1916) Neuere Ergebnisse der Härtebestimmung von Mineralien und Gesteinen. In: Hudson J (ed) Comprehensive rock engineering. Müller-Salzburg L (1963) Der Felsbau. Eurotunnel conference. Geologisch-felsmechanische Untersuchungen anhand sieben ausgewählter Tunnelprojekte. the main problem is the variety of geological phenomena. But it is extremely necessary to keep in mind all the parameters possibly influencing drilling performance. Enke. Oxford. Vol. Tunnelling 284-289 Brook N (1993) The measurement and estimation of basic rock strength. Teil. Support and Monitoring. Felsbau über Tage. Rock Mech Rock Eng 20: 57-85 ISRM (1985) Suggested method for determining point load strength. pp 105-117 Blindheim OT (1979) Drillability predictions in hard rock tunnelling. Oxford. and the entire excavation system must be understood before applying geological expertise to the solution of expected or developing drillability problems In Fig. Felsbau 12: 111-122 Suana M. (1996) Bohrbarkeit beim konventionellen Sprengvortrieb. 3: Rock testing and site characterization. Spaun G (1996b) Introducing `destruction work´ as a new rock property of toughness refering to drillability in conventional drill. Pergamon. ISRM Commission on Testing Methods. Only in such a manner is it possible to raise the level of geological contribution to underground construction. practice & projects.