Proceedings of the ASME 2014 33rd International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering
OMAE2014
June 8-13, 2014, San Francisco, California, USA
A NEW APPROACH TO MODEL HYPERBARIC ROCK CUTTING PROCESSES
Rudy L.J. Helmons∗
Offshore and Dredging Engineering
Delft University of Technology
Delft, The Netherlands
Email: r.l.j.helmons@tudelft.nl
ABSTRACT
In deep sea mining processes, rock is being cut in a hy-
perbaric pressure environment. The effect of such a high
pressure environment is of major influence on the cutting
process. Due to deformation of the rock matrix, local fluid
pressure differences will occur. This can result in a higher
apparent strength of the rock, but also in a higher (loading)
rate dependency.
Our new modeling approach aims at combining both rock
mechanics and fluid dynamics to model the high defor-
mation (rate) behavior experienced in seabed excavations.
This new approach is based on the Discrete Element
Method to simulate the rock mechanics, combined with the
use of Smoothed Particle Methods to model the influence
of the fluid (pressure) on and in the rock. In this paper,
emphasis is put on estimating the local (volumetric) de-
formation rate with the new approach. Eventually, the new
technique will be validated with experiments and data avail-
able in literature. The new approach will give more insight
in the physical processes that occur during cutting.
INTRODUCTION
In the last decade metal prices have continued to
rise, leading to an increased interest in deep sea mining,
especially near (in)active volcanic areas. These volcanic
areas in the deep sea create mineral deposits with a high
∗ Address all correspondence to this author.
1 Copyright © 2014 by ASME
OMAE2014-23671
Sape A. Miedema
Cees van Rhee
Offshore and Dredging Engineering
Delft University of Technology
Delft, The Netherlands
metal content. Resource deposits of interest are e.g.
cobalt-rich manganese crusts covering ocean seamounts at
1.000-2.500 m deep and seafloor massive sulfides (SMS)
depositing along seafloor spreading axes at 600-2.000 m
deep. A large amount of these deposits are made up of
cohesive materials [1, 2].
Several challenges, like the cutting and the transporta-
tion of the desired materials, will need to be solved for
deep sea mining to become successful. This paper focuses
on the excavation process. One of the issues within the
excavation process is that the forces required to cut the
material increase with larger water depths. This effect is
caused by the higher hydrostatic pressure that can act
as a confining pressure on the rock, which results in an
increased apparent strength.
Recent research focuses on the effect that the higher
hydrostatic pressure can have on the rock cutting process.
It is noted that at deep sea locations the cutting forces
increase [3–5] . Various rock cutting experiments are
performed in which it is noted that the cutting process
changes when cutting in a high pressure environment (>20
MPa) [4–6] .
It is necessary to understand how fluid pressure
(both in the pores and surrounding the rock) affects the
mechanical behavior of rocks in order to investigate how
the cutting process changes. This paper starts with an
overview of what implications fluid has on rock mechanics
and what the implications are for the excavation process
itself. The authors suggest a new approach to deal with
the more complex rock mechanics to further investigate
the rock cutting process of fully submerged and saturated
rock. Finally, preliminary results of the new approach are
presented.
2. Bulk compaction
During dilation due to the creation of new and the exten-
sion of existing microcracks, the porosity increases and the
pore pressure of an effectively undrained sample locally
drops. This results in an increase of the effective stress and
thus an increase in strength (often referred to as dilatancy
hardening, [10]).

Bulk compaction is related to the collapse of the rock

matrix, which causes a reduction in pore volume. This
reduction leads to an increase in pore pressure and that
FLUID SATURATED ROCK MECHANICS
then can lead to a decrease in effective stress, resulting in
Pore fluids affect the mechanical characteristics of
a reduction in strength. This effect is associated with the
rocks by two classes of mechanisms: (1) physico-chemical
rearrangement of the fine fragments in the pre-existing pore
interactions between solids and fluids affecting the stress
space. The latter mechanism is responsible for stabilizing
at which a rock can sustain permanent deformation, (2)
the distribution of the deformation within the rock and
mechanisms controlling the effective stress of a rock.
inhibiting strain localization [11]. More interestingly, both
Physico-chemical interactions often result in weakening
type of effects are noted in the drilling of Pierre shale
effects due to subcritical crack growth phenomena, [7], and
(compaction weakening) and Mancos shale (dilatancy
a reduction of the friction coefficient, [8]. These kind of
hardening) [6].
effects are especially of interest when one wants to compare
behavior of dry and (partially) saturated rock, and are of
The effect of dilatancy hardening is associated with
little relevance to the submerged excavation process, i.e. as
a critical strain rate ˙cr [10] which strongly depends on
long as the researched materials are kept fully saturated at
the hydraulic properties of the sample. At strain rates
all times. Hence, physico-chemical effects are beyond the
above ˙cr , the apparent strength of a rock increases more
scope of this research.
compared to that of a drained or dry sample. However,
there is a limitation to this strengthening effect, i.e.
Poro-elastic mechanisms or drainage mechanisms are
the pore pressure gradient that can be achieved can be
the main phenomena that control the effective stress in
limited by cavitation of the pore fluid. In such a case, the
a rock. These mechanisms have long been recognized
compressive strength increases to a value that corresponds
to cause the difference in strain-rate dependency of the
to the strength of the applied confining pressure when
rock strength for dry and saturated rock samples. Pore
the pore pressure drops to zero. At even higher strain
pressures work as a counteracting effect on normal stress
rates the strength of the samples exhibit a similar rate
in a rock, which is expressed by Terzaghi’s law of ef-
dependency as for dry samples, which is often associated
fective stress [9]. Terzaghi’s law applies to macroscopic
with cavitation as the pore pressure drops to the vapour
mechanical properties, provided that the characteristic
pressure of the fluid. In contrast, samples that are loaded
time for pore pressure diffusion is sufficiently small to
below ˙cr are effectively drained. Under such conditions
ensure effective drainage, i.e. the pore pressure can
the differences in strength that occur are most likely due
be assumed to be constant throughout the entire pore
to physico-chemical effects that are related to the presence
volume of the specimen. In such a case the effective stress
or absence of a fluid phase. A schematic overview of the
theory can be used to determine the strength of the sample.
strain rate dependent behavior is presented in figure 1.
However, when the characteristic time of the pore pres-
The critical strain rate can be assessed by evaluating
sure diffusion is larger, spatial variations in pore pressure
the ratio of the characteristic time of hydraulic diffusion tc
are present. These variations affect the local effective stress
to the characteristic time of deformation tdef .
state and hence the bulk properties of the rock sample
showing a pressure sensitivity in the strength of the sam-
ple. When a sample is effectively undrained, the apparent tc
N= (1)
strength of the sample can either increase or decrease, de- tdef
pendent on what phenomena on microscopic scale occur.
1. Dilation In case of uni-axial material tests, the critical strain can

2 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

 Strength
Capped by
cavitation
Increasing
hydrostatic
Dilatancy pressure
ϵcr hardening
Strain rate
FIGURE 1. STRAIN RATE DEPENCDENCY OF SATU-
RATED ROCK, BASED ON BRACE AND MARTIN [10].
then be estimated, as in Duda [12], as
Ncr f Dhyd
˙cr ∼ 0.1
l2
with critical ratio Ncr ∼ 1, the failure strain f , the
hydraulic diffusion coefficient Dhyd and the characteristic
length scale l (which is the axial length of a sample in
uni-axial tests).
In Van Kesteren [13] cone penetration tests in sat-
urated and submerged St. Leu sandstone, with varying
penetration speeds, are described. In these experiments
three different regimes are observed. For low penetration
velocity the process corresponds with fully drained behav-
ior. In this case the cone compressed the rock skeleton
and the pores, while the increase of pore pressure was
allowed to dissipate and the pore fluid could flow. At
intermediate velocities, the penetrated volume cannot
be balanced anymore by pore compaction alone. The
changes in pore pressure can still dissipate to some extent,
resulting in shearing towards the free surface where chips
are formed. This regime corresponds with the undrained
regime. At even higher velocities, the pore pressure cannot
dissipate into the rock anymore and liquefied crushed rock
is squeezed out along the cone. These regimes are depicted
in figure 2.
To conclude, the apparent strength of a rock is depen-
dent on multiple factors. The most relevant factors that are
distinguished are
1. Deformation rate: Drainage effects of pore fluid.
2. Hydrostatic pressure: Limitation on the magnitude of
the drainage effects.
25 mm/s Drained
100 mm/s Chipforming
1000 mm/s Liquefaction
(2)
FIGURE 2. FAILURE MECHANISM IN CONE PENETRA-
TION TESTS, AS IN VAN KESTEREN [13].
ROCK CUTTING PROCESS
It is useful to review the rock cutting process from a
phenomenological point of view in order to estimate what
the effects of a high pressure environment might be. In Van
Kesteren [13], it is stated that during a single cut, failure
mechanisms occur along the whole Mohr envelope. A cut
starts with an indention of the cutter tool. Because of the
strength of the overburden, the indention is contained and
as a result the zone near the indention fails cataclastically,
generating a crushed zone (see figure 3). With a larger
indention, the size of the crushed zone also increases, until
the stress state near the boundary of the crushed zone
changes (i.e. the overburden cannot give sufficient support
to keep the increasing crushed zone confined). As a result
a shear crack starts to occur. When getting closer to the
surface, this shear failure will bifurcate into a tensile crack,
which results in chip formation.
The phenomenological model of Van Kesteren [13] helps
in estimating what changes to the rock cutting process
might be expected with increasing water depths. It is ex-
pected that with increasing fluid pressure, the size of the
crushed zone will increase due to the enhanced apparent
strength of the overburden. As a result the failure starts
closer to the surface. Bifurcation towards tensile failure
is also postponed and the size of the tensile failure will
also decrease. Thus the high hydrostatic pressure results
3 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

Chip
Tensile crack
Shear crack
Tool Shear zone
Shear plane
Plastic deformation
Brittle-ductile transition
Crushed zone
Failure modes during cutting
FIGURE 3. GENERAL CUTTING MODEL, BASED ON VAN
KESTEREN [13].
in a higher apparent material strength, resulting in smaller
chips. The effects of a hydrostatic pressure on the cutting
process are depicted in figure 4.
Low hydrostatic
pressure
High hydrostatic
pressure
FIGURE 4. EFFECT OF HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE.
Miedema and Zijsling [3] give a quantitative analysis of
the hyperbaric effect on the cutting process. In the cutting
force model of Miedema and Zijsling, a distinction is made
between brittle (tearing, tensile failure) cutting and ductile
(flowing, shear failure) cutting. That distinction is based on
the so-called pseudo tensile strength, which is a correction
tensile strength to directly compare cutting regime that is
dominated by tensile failure to those dominated by shear
failure. Which of the two failure modes occurs is then
analyzed based on the minimum force (and thus energy)
required to cut the rock at that cutting depth. In their
paper the effect of a high pressure on the specific energy
of the cutting process is discussed. Their model describes
how to deal with both cavitating and non-cavitating
cutting processes. However, in their model it is not yet
possible to determine a priori to what extent the local pore
pressure will drop (and thus the velocity dependency of the
4 Copyright © 2014 by ASME
cutting force, e.g. cutting in cavitating or non-cavitating
conditions).
In this research it is chosen to use a more fundamen-
tal approach towards the rock cutting process. Besides the
interests in the hydrostatic pressure and drainage related ef-
fects on the cutting process, the authors are also interested
in e.g. shape and size of the cuttings, the pattern of the
virgin rock after the cutting tool has passed, the effect of
tool spacing, etc. Therefore a more fundamental approach,
which can simulate the whole cutting process, is suggested.
Ultimately, such a new technique can reduce the amount of
experiments that are needed.
MODELLING APPROACH
The numerical model that allows us to simulate (satu-
rated) rock deformation processes is based on the combined
framework of the discrete element method (DEM) and a
meshless method based on Smoothed Particle Methods
(SPH/SPAM). The DEM has already proven its suitability
for modeling geomaterials with discontinuities, e.g. [14–17],
while the SPH is often used for fluid flows [18, 19], heat
diffusion [20] and for applied mechanics (SPAM) [21]. In
this study, the rock skeleton and grains will be modeled
using the DEM and the effects of the pore pressure and
other continuum properties will be modeled using the
SPH. The bodies that are exerting forces on the specimens
are considered to be rigid. The numerical model is devel-
oped for computations on a GPU developed in a CUDA
environment. In this research, thus far two dimensional
calculations are considered. Extension to three dimensional
simulations is straightforward.
In DEM, the solid material is represented as a collec-
tion of particles (these can be any arbitrarily shape, but
here spheres/discs are used for the sake of simplicity) that
have mutual interactions in normal and tangential direc-
tions. The translational and rotational motion of a particle
is governed by the standard equations of rigid body me-
chanics.
mi~ai = F~i (3)
~ i = T~i
Ii α (4)
F~ and T~ are the sums of all forces and moments applied to
the particle i due to external loading, contact interactions
with neighboring objects and from damping in the system.
Due to the high computational effort that is needed to cal-
culate the forces acting on the particles, the equations of
motion are integrated with an explicit multi-step time inte- TABLE 1. INTERACTION MODELS.
gration scheme, i.e. the velocity Verlet scheme.
Model Criteria Description
1
~rin+1 = ~rin + ~vin ∆t + ~ani ∆t2 (5) Fn = kn un Fn < Tn Normal force bond
2
n+1/2 n 1 n Fs = ks us |Fs | < Ts Tangential force bond
~vi = ~vi + ~ai ∆t (6)
2
1 X ~ n+1 Fn = kn un Fn < 0 Normal force collision
n+1
~ai = Fi (7)
mi Fs = ks us |Fs | < µFn Tangential force collision
n+1/2 1
~vin+1 = ~vi + ~an+1 (8) (static friction)
2 i
Fs = µFn |Fs | ≥ µFn Tangential force collision
It needs mentioning that F~ n+1 is actually a function of (dynamic friction)
~rn+1 and ~v n+1/2 . Because of the use of an explicit scheme,
there is a limitation on the size of the time step to ensure a
stable solution, meaning ∆t ≤ ∆tcr . ∆tcr is approximated
by the highest of natural frequencies of a contact pair. diffusion equation, as in Coussy [22]. This equation is based
on the combination of mass conservation, Darcy flow and
The interaction force between a pair of particles can a constitutive equation for the compressibility of the pore
either consist of a collision type or a bond type of interac- fluid, given respectively by
tion. In both cases the force is decomposed into normal and
tangential components, with Dζ
+ qi,i = γ (11)
Dt
F~ = F~n + F~t = ~nFn + ~tFt (9) qi = −κ (p,i − fi ) (12)
p = M (ζ − α) (13)
where ~n is the unit vector normal to the particle surface
at the point of interaction. The contact forces Fn and which through substitution results in the pore pressure dif-
Ft are determined with a constitutive model for the fusion equation given by
contact. At the beginning of each simulation, a bond
is installed between neighboring particles. These bonds Dp D
are defined by a perfectly brittle model, meaning that a − M ∇ · (κ∇p) = −αM + M (γ − κfi,i ) (14)
Dt Dt
bond breaks when its strength is exceeded. Note that a
bond can break either in normal (tension) or in tangential with pressure p, Biot Modulus M , permeability κ, effective
(shear) direction and after it is broken, the bond will stress coefficient α, volumetric strain , fluid source/sink γ
be removed from the simulation. Besides bonds, there and force f .
are also collisional interactions. In these interactions the
normal force is only active in compressive direction and Because of the use of DEM, the application of the pore
the tangential force can be either static or dynamic friction. pressure diffusion equation is not straightforward. This is
due to the particulate behavior of the DEM, which somehow
To reach a quasi-static equilibrium, it is necessary that needs to be converted to a continuum field in order to apply
the kinetic energy dissipates. Especially since the DEM is equation 14. This can be achieved by using an interpolation
a highly dynamic approach, damping is required. This is technique based on smooth particle approach (SPH). The
done by application of numerical damping, as in Potyondy SPH has the advantage that the algorithm shows the same
and Cundall [16] and is often used in DEM-applications for structure as the DEM algorithm. In figure 5 the flowchart
rock. The damping force is in the form of of algorithm is shown. In order to apply the SPH in our
X problem, several assumptions have to be made, i.e.
F~d = −αd || F~ ||sign (~v ) (10)
- The interpolation points in the smoothed particle ap-
proach is at the exact DEM particle center.
with damping coefficient αd . The effect of a rapidly chang- - The spatial poredistribution can be considered to be
ing effective stress is modeled with the use of a pore pressure continuous.

5 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

 - Advection of the interpolation points is enforced An arbitrary kernel function can be used, as long as it meets
through the DEM structure, i.e. the fluid is ’trapped’ several requirements like
within a region close to the DEM particle.
- The kernel and its first derivative need to be continuous.
In a smooth particle approach, particles are influenced - The kernel must have compact support, i.e. meaning
by close by neighbouring particles. The contribution of that W (~r − ~ri ) = 0 if ||~r −~ri || > ah, with a user defined
a neighbouring particle is determined with a kernel function. constant a and smoothing length h.
- In case of zero smoothing length, the kernel function
becomes a dirac function.
- It needs to be positive within its smoothing length.
START - The first derivative is monotonically decreasing with
increasing distance.
- The kernel must comply to rotational symmetry.
Calculate   ,   / (DEM) - RThe kernel is normalized to unity, i.e.
V
W (~
r − ~
ri , h) d~ri = 1
The kernel function that is used is the Lucy kernel [18]
Neighbour detection (Staged, DEM/SPH)

5 3
W = (1 − R) (3R + 1) if R ≤ 1 (18)
Calculate ,  , ∇ (SPH) πh2
0 if R > 1 (19)

Calculate ∑ =    ,   , ∇  ()
where
 →+1
Calculate   ,  (DEM) ||~r − ~ri ||
R= (20)
h

FINISH
Equation 14 is calculated with a forward Euler scheme and
needs to be solved in the velocity Verlet time integration
between equations 7 and 8. The effect of the pore pressure
FIGURE 5. FLOWCHART OF CODE. on the DEM particles is then calculated based on the local
pressure gradient. Since ∇p ∼ F~ , the pressure gradient
force times the projected area of the particle is added to the
The kernel interpolation of a field quantity A (which net sum of forces acting on a particle. Results concerning
can be any arbitrary parameter) is calculated by the volumetric strain rate are presented in the next section.
X
A(~ri ) = Aj Vj W (~r − ~rj , h) (15)
j
RESULTS
One of the disadvantages of the DEM is that there
In a similar fashion, the first order derivative of a function
is no direct relation between the micro-parameter input
A can be determined by
and the macro-parameter results. Therefore it is neces-
X sary to calibrate the micro-parameters to match the desired
∇i A(~ri ) = Aj Vj ∇i W (~r − ~rj ) (16) macroscopic rock parameters, e.g. Young’s modulus, UCS,
j BTS, etc. A similar calibration procedure like Huang’s ap-
proach [23] has been used. Figure 6 shows the result of a
where ∇i is the gradient with respect to particle i. The first UCS test with parameters as defined in table 2 with a uni-
derivative is necessary to determine the volumetric strain form particle size distribution of 30.000 particles, the left
rate given by column contains the input parameters and the right column
the output parameters. Since there is no direct relation be-
∂vx ∂vy tween the input of the micro-parameters and the output
˙v = ∇ · ~v = + (17) of the macro-parameters, the micro-parameters need to be
∂x ∂y

6 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

calibrated to match the desired rock properties before ex- TABLE 2. MICRO-MACRO PARAMETERS.
periments can be performed on the numerical rock.
Micro Value Macro Value
Rmin 0.0002 [m] n 0.188 [-]
Rmax 0.0004 [m] E 13.9 [GPa]
kn 2e10 [N/m] U CS 35.3 [MPa]
ks 2e10 [N/m] BT S 4.9 [MPa]
Tn 4e4 [N]
Ts 2e4 [N]
α 0.7 [-]
µ 0.839 [-]
H 0.15 [m]
W 0.07 [m]

change in such a zone is negligible, which also corresponds

FIGURE 6. COMPRESSION TEST IN DEM. NOTE THE
START OF FRAGMENTATION DUE TO BRANCHING OF
THE CRACK.
Calculation of the volumetric strain rate has been
tested for its accuracy. This is done by using SPH to
determine the gradient of a known function applied to
the particles, e.g. f = x3 with x obtained from it spatial
coordinate. In such a case, the exact gradient is known
and it can be compared with the gradient calculated by
SPH. It must be noted that this is tested in the most
severe situations that will be noticed in this research, i.e.
particle positions are disordered and their radii and masses
are non-uniform. In such a case, the R2 of the calculated
gradient compared with the exact gradient is 0.9998. The
spatial SPH discretization is second order accurate. Based
on this it is concluded that the SPH approach is suitable
to calculate a field gradient of a DEM structure.
Through application of the volumetric strain rate
calculation it becomes clear that the type of failure, i.e.
mode I or mode II failure, is also visible. In case of a
UCS test, see figure 7, where shear failure is the dominant
failure mechanism, locally large gradients can be noted.
On a micro-scale it shows regions with a high compacting
rate close to a high expansion rate. The total net volume
with what one might expect from a mode II failure. Hence,
in the case of a BTS test, see figure 8 where a tensile
failure is the dominant mechanism, one can see that the
volumetric strain near the tensile crack is dominated by
expanding volume, as should be the case in a mode I failure.
When looking in more detail, when a crack propagates,
soundwaves seem to propagate from the tip of the crack
further into the rock material, such an effect is depicted in
figure 9. However, the propagation velocity of these numer-
ical sound-waves are one order of magnitude smaller than
the speed of sound of a comparable rock. The reduction
in the speed of sound might be caused by the numerical
damping that is needed to assure a stable solution of the
DEM-SPH approach. Since the velocity scales that are of
interest in mechanical cutting are still several orders of mag-
nitude smaller, these higher order effects are considered to
be negligible. It must also be noted that the magnitude of
the volumetric strain rate depends on the smoothing length
that is applied in the SPH approach.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The forces required to cut rock increase with increasing
hydrostatic pressures, see Zijsling [6]. An additional effect
is that this increase in force is also rate dependent due to
drainage. These effects are unsufficiently treated in the ex-
isting rock cutting models.
The Discrete Element Method has proven its applicability
to the cutting of rock in dry conditions. In order to extend

7 Copyright © 2014 by ASME

 FIGURE 8. VOLUMETRIC STRAIN RATE IN BTS TEST.
BLUE IS COMPACTION, RED IS EXPANSION.

Ft Tangential force
H Height
FIGURE 7. VOLUMETRIC STRAIN RATE IN UCS TEST.
BLUE IS COMPACTION, RED IS EXPANSION.
h Smoothing length
I Moment of inertia
kn Normal stiffness
these simulations to be able to treat the increased hydro- ks Shear stiffness
static pressure, a Smoothed Particle approach is applied. l Characteristic length scale
The Smoothed Particle technique is proven to be useful in m Mass
converting the DEM discontinuum properties to a contin- M Biot modulus
uum scale, as far as it concerns the volumetric strain rate. N Time scale ratio
The combination of the DEM and SPH will be further de- ~n Normal vector
veloped. Results will be published soon. q Fluid flux
p Pressure
R Dimensionless distance
ACKNOWLEDGMENT ~r Position vector
This research is part of the PhD-research of EX- T Moment
HADERO (Excavation of Hard Deposits and Rock), which Tn Normal bond strength
is performed with support of Delft University of Technology, Ts Shear bond strength
Agentschap NL, Royal Dutch Shell, Royal Boskalis West- ~t Tangential vector (normalized)
minster NV, Van Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors tc Characteristic time of hydraulic diffusion
BV and IHC Merwede. The authors are grateful for their tdef Time of observation
support. un Normal displacement
us Shear displacement
V Volume
NOMENCLATURE ~v Velocity vector
~a Acceleration W Kernel function
Dhyd Hydraulic diffusion coefficient W Width
F~ Force α Angular acceleration
f Body force α Effective stress coefficient
Fn Normal force αd Numerical damping coefficient

8 Copyright © 2014 by ASME


FIGURE 9. VOLUMETRIC STRAIN RATE WHILE CUT-
TING, SOME SOUNDWAVES PROPAGATE FROM THE
BLADE TIP INTO THE ROCK. RED IS COMPACTION,
BLUE IS EXPANSION.
γ Fluid source/sink
∆t Time increment
 Strain
˙cr Critical strain rate
f Failure strain
κ Permeability
µ Dynamic friction coefficient
ζ Fluid volume content
REFERENCES
[1] Tivey, M., 2007. “Generation of seafloor hydrothermal
vent fluids and associated mineral deposits”. Oceanog-
raphy, 20(1), pp. 50–65.
[2] Scott, S., 2001. “Deep ocean mining”. Geoscience
Canada, 2001(2), pp. 87–96.
[3] Miedema, S., and Zijsling, D., 2012. “Hyperbaric rock
cutting”. In Proceedings of the ASME 2012 31th In-
ternational Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic
Engineering OMAE 2012. Paper number 83249.
[4] Kuiper, R., Frumau, J., and Miedema, S., 2013. “In-
fluence of the hyperbaric effect on apparent material
strength of fully saturated porous rock for low strain
rates”. In Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Con-
ference 2013. Paper number 23956.
9 Copyright © 2014 by ASME
[5] Alvarez Grima, M., Boomsma, W., Hofstra, F., and
Lotman, R., 2012. “A linear rock cutting test set-up for
3 dimensional tests under hyperbaric pressure”. In Pro-
ceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference 2012.
Paper number 23592-MS.
[6] Zijsling, D., 1987. “Single cutter testing, a key for pdc
bit development (spe 16529)”. Offshore Europe 87.
[7] Atkinson, B., 1984. “Subcritical crack growth in ge-
ological materials”. Journal of Geophysical Research,
89(B6), pp. 4077–4114.
[8] Kato, N., Yamamoto, K., Yamamoto, H., and Hira-
sawa, T., 1993. “A stress corrosion model for strain
rate dependence of the frictional strengths of rocks”.
International Journal of Rock Mechanics, Mining Sci-
ences and Geomechanical Abstracts, 30(5), pp. 551–
554.
[9] Terzaghi, K., 1943. Theoretical Soil Mechanics. John
Wiley and Sons, New York.
[10] Brace, W., and Martin, R., 1968. “A test of the law
of effective stress for crystalline rocks of low porosity”.
International Journal of Rock Mechanics, Mining Sci-
ences and Geomechanics, 5, pp. 415–426.
[11] Bernabe, Y., and Brace, W. “Deformation and fracture
of berea sandstone”. In The Brittle-Ductile transition
in Rocks. The Heard Volume, A. Duba, W. Durham,
J. Handin, and H. Wang, eds.
[12] Duda, M., and Renner, J., 2013. “The weakening effect
of water on the brittle failure strength of sandstone”.
Gephysical Journal International, 192, pp. 1091–
1108.
[13] van Kesteren, W., 2001. “Numerical simulations of
crack bifurcatio in the chip forming cutting process in
rock”. Fracture of Brittle Disordered Materials: Con-
crete, Rock and Ceramics, 26(1-2), pp. 21–25.
[14] Cundall, P., and Strack, O., 1979. “A discrete nu-
merical method for granular assemblies”. International
Journal for Rock Mechanics, Mining Sciences and Ge-
omechanics Abstracts, 29, pp. 47–65.
[15] Huang, H., 1999. “Discrete Element Modeling of Tool-
Rock Interactions”. PhD Thesis, University of Min-
nesota.
[16] Potyondy, D., and Cundall, P., 2004. “A bonded-
particle model for rock”. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 41, pp. 1329–1364.
[17] Helmons, R., and Miedema, S., 2013. “Cutting through
hard rock-like materials, a review of the process”. In
WODCON XX: The art of dredging, WODA.
[18] Lucy, L., 1977. “A numerical approach to the testing
of the fission hypothesis”. The Astronomical Journal,
82(12), pp. 1013–1024.
[19] Liu, G., and Liu, M., 2003. Smoothed Particle Hydrody-
namics, a Meshfree Particle Method. World Scientific
 Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
[20] Cleary, P.W. Monaghan, J., 1999. “Conduction mod-
elling using smoothed particle hydrodynamics”. Jour-
nal of Computational Physics, 148, pp. 227–264.
[21] Hoover, W., 2006. Smooth Particle Applied Mechan-
ics, the state of the art, Vol. 25 of Advanced Series in
Nonlinear Dynamics. World Scientific Publishing Co.
Pte. Ltd.
[22] Coussy, O., 2004. Poromechanics. John Wiley and
Sons.
[23] Huang, H., 1999. “Discrete element modeling of tool-
rock interactions”. PhD thesis, University of Min-
nesota.

10 Copyright © 2014 by ASME