Journal Pre-proofs

Performance analysis of rotary blast-hole drills through machine vibration and

coarseness index mapping- A novel approach

Rakesh Kumar, V.M.S.R. Murthy, L.A. Kumaraswamidhas

PII: S0263-2241(20)30686-2
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2020.108148
Reference: MEASUR 108148

To appear in: Measurement

Received Date: 5 February 2020

Revised Date: 13 June 2020
Accepted Date: 23 June 2020

Please cite this article as: R. Kumar, V.M.S.R. Murthy, L.A. Kumaraswamidhas, Performance analysis of rotary
blast-hole drills through machine vibration and coarseness index mapping- A novel approach, Measurement
(2020), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2020.108148

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover
page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version
will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are
providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors
may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

 Performance analysis of rotary blast-hole drills through
machine vibration and coarseness index mapping- A novel
approach

Rakesh Kumar 1, V.M.S.R Murthy2, L.A.Kumaraswamidhas3,

1,3Department of Mining Machinery Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (ISM),
Dhanbad, India
2Department of Mining Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (ISM), Dhanbad, India

Abstract: The performance of rotary drill machines commonly used in open-pit mines is
measured based on the rate of penetration (ROP) and the bit wear. This paper develops a novel
performance evaluation technique to obtain optimal drill operating regime through machine
vibration and coarseness index mapping. The vibration levels of blast-hole drilling machines in
axial and lateral directions were determined using accelerometers placed at the mast. The mean
particle size (d) and characteristic particle size distribution curves for the drilled hole were plotted
using sieve analysis and Rosin Rammler diagram. ROP showed an increasing trend with Mean
particle size (d) with a correlation of R2=0.61 and a decreasing trend with vibration for varied
pulldown force and torque at a different rotational speed. A drill vibration index (DVI) is
introduced as an indicator of vibration severity of the drill machine, and its relationship was
studied with ROP and average mean particle size.

Keywords: ROP, sieve analysis, mean particle size (d), blast-hole drill machine and drill vibration
index (DVI)
1. Introduction
A steep demand for coal production to meet the growing energy requirements has led to
intense mining activities in India, particularly in the surface mines. Surface mines contribute close
to 92% of the total coal production (650MT) and involve drilling, blasting, ore handling, and
hauling as significant operations. Blast-hole drills used in open-pit coal mines play a primary role
in overburden excavation. During rock-bit interaction in the process of drilling, the drill string
undergoes severe vibration resulting in bit wear and ultimately leading to a lower rate of
penetration (ROP). Hence, it is essential to evaluate drill machine performance in a given
geological condition and propose appropriate measures for enhancing ROP. For evaluation of
drill machine performance, it is useful to correlate ROP with vibration as well as drill cuttings
obtained. Various researchers proposed a few models for drilling performance assessment in a
given geological condition. However, very few have focused on drilling performance considering
vibration and drill cuttings analysis along with machine operating parameters.
Richard et al. (2004) and Reyes (2016) researched bit-rock interaction, including modes of
vibrations, and reported that bit-rock interaction causes severe drill string vibration [1, 2]. In
rotary drilling, torque, pulldown force, and rotational speed contribute to rock breakage. In
addition, the whole system undergoes vibration during the drilling process and consumes part of
the energy. Machine vibration is the result of elastic energy that gets generated with cutting and
is stored as tension in mechanical parts of the drilling machine. Vibration is more severe when
hard, brittle, and jointed rocks are drilled [3].
 Reyes et al. (2015), has utilized the drill cuttings obtained while drilling to evaluate the
penetration mechanism by relating the shape and size of cuttings to the fracturing mechanism [4].
The drilling performance was found to be affected by vibration generation during rock-bit
interaction as it results in imbalance, bit-bounce, and damage to the drilling components [5].
Yingjian et al. (2018) carried out laboratory investigations on bit vibration and the penetration
mechanism during drilling and established a relation between penetration rate, weight-on-bit, and
the drill cuttings. It was observed that the larger the size of drill cuttings, the higher the penetration
rate [6]. Patrik et al. (2019) performed investigations by processing of vibro-acoustic signal
during rock-bit interaction and used it to enhance drill performance [7].
Limited research work has been reported relating machine vibration and size of drill cuttings
with that of the penetration rate. Pfleider and Blake (1953) correlated ROP with the size of drill
cuttings and established a relationship suggesting that ROP increases with the size of drill cuttings
[8]. Omid et al. (2014) used non-linear multiple regression and principal component analysis
(PCA) to propose a model for predicting penetration rate (PR) by using parameters as given
below:
W 0.6  N 1.28  JD 0.27
PR  0.57 (1)
D1.7  UCS 0.47  JS 0.14
where, PR= penetration rate (m/min), W = weight on bit (kg), N= rotational speed (rpm), JD=
joint dipping relative to the drilling direction (in degree), D= bit diameter (m), UCS= Uniaxial
compressive strength (MPa) and JS= joint spacing(cm) [9].
S.Kahraman et al. (2000) developed a model to predict penetration rate using the drillability index
for conical and spherical bit tooth in different rock formations as formulated below:
N W
PR  k (2)
0.08    n  D
where k and n are constants, and α is the drillability index. The proposed model is valid for the
rock type having a compressive strength of 40 MPa. This study concluded that rotational speed,
thrust force, and drill bit diameter could be used as parameters to predict PR. [10].
Altindag (2004) considered the drill cutting parameters, i.e., coarseness index (CI), mean chip
size (d) and specific surface area (SSA). Their investigation suggested that PR is directly
correlated to CI, ‘d’ and it is inversely correlated to the SSA. A relationship between the PR and
drill cutting parameters, was established using regression analysis as expressed below:
PR  0.5222e0.002CI ; r  0.778 (3)
PR  0.3711 d  0.8868 ; r  0.809 (4)
PR  2.2448  SSA0.0524 ; r  0.563 (5)
The author concluded that energy transmission to drill bit is efficiently utilized in rock
disintegration [11].The concept of specific energy in rock drilling is one of the important aspects
of higher drilling efficiency [12-13].
Yaneng et al. (2017) studied the relationship between mechanical specific energy and
penetration rate, including, bit wear [14]. Relations between the penetration rate, rock properties,
and drill operating parameters were studied and established by several researchers, who have
developed a number of penetration rate models [15-22]. A brief account of key models on
drillability assessment is given in Table 1:
Table 1. Summary of previous research work
References Method Input Output/Findings Limitation(s)
variables
Shangxin, Experimental W, N ROP, SE Experiment results show the
Feng, et al. relation of drilling performance
(2020) [15] with thrust at a different
rotational speed. The effect of
other drilling parameters, i.e.,
torque on ROP and SE are not
discussed.
Soares, ML technique W, N, ROP An experimental study is based
Cesar, and on a machine learning technique
Kenneth to develop ROP model based on
Gray (2019) operating parameters. The effect
[16] of controlled and uncontrolled
parameters on ROP is not
discussed.
Flegner, Experimental Fp, N Identifying the type The experiment was carried out
Patrik, et al. of rock using vibro- in a selected rock with only two
(2019) acoustic signal drilling parameters, i.e., Fp and N

Hegde, ML technique W,N ROP The study is based on previous

Chiranth, et analytical models. Effect of other
al (2019) drilling parameters on ROP not
[17] discussed.
Xiao, Experimental W ROP, Va, d Lack of field investigation data
Yingjian, et
al. (2018)

Shad, Statistical and UCS, Ts, PPR Only two drilling parameters,
Hossein Regression E, υ, Vp, i.e., feed and rotation speed, were
Inanloo Process Vs, f, N, used in the experiment.
Arabi, et al. RMi
(2018) [18]
Krúpa, Experimental N, W, Ld PD Proposed a mathematical model
Víťazoslav, and of penetration depth based on
et al. (2018) mathematical thrust force and drilled length.
[19] modeling Other rock-drilling parameters,
such as torque, specific-energy,
and vibrations, were not
considered.
Kumar Suraj Experimental CI, d, SSA PR, DEUI Drilling in sandstone having a
et al. (2017) higher abrasion capacity on the
[20] cutting tool can quickly alter the
button or tool configuration
through wear. This leads to more
grinding than cutting and can
have a severe impact on the drill
penetration rate needing further
investigation.
 Saeidi, PCA, NLMR, UCS, W, PR The effect of air pressure and
Omid, et al. MC N, JD, JS rotational pressure of the
(2014) machine was not taken into
account while developing the
proposed model. An in-depth
study is required to develop a
comprehensive model.
Karakus, Experimental W,T,DOC Studied relationship The relationship between AE
Murat, and , AE between AE signal signals and drilling parameters
S. Perez. and bit wear for are based on a laboratory
(2014) [21] improved drill experiment, while in real field
performance condition result may vary
depending upon geological
feature. More comprehensive
investigations are needed at both
and lab and field scale.
Cheniany, Statistical UCS, SH, SRMD The model developed included
Alireza, et al. Analysis Q, d, A, more of rock mass parameters as
(2012) [22] JD, W, N compared to operational
parameters. Machine operating
parameters not taken into
cognizance.

Altindag, Laboratory CI, d SSA, PR Investigation lacks the effect of

Raşİt. (2004) experiment drilling parameters on PR

Richard, Discrete Ho, Ω, M, Self-excited stick- The study focusses on the self-
Thomas et al. modeling of I, C, W, T, slip oscillation of excited stick-slip oscillation of
(2004) drill string. V, U, ф drilling system rotary drilling with drag bit,
taking into based on a few assumptions i.e.,
consideration the constant upward force, constant
axial and torsional angular velocity, the borehole is
vibration modes of vertical and that there are no
bit spurious lateral motions of a bit.
Kahraman, Field W, N, D, PR, DI The proposed model is valid for
S., et al. experiment UCS, Ts, rocks having uniaxial
(2000) and laboratory SH, Is, Vp, compressive strength over
experiment E, ρ 40MPa.
Fp = pressure force; N = rotational speed; W = weight on bit / thrust; ROP/PR = rate of penetration /
penetration rate; Va = vibration amplitude; d = mean particle size; UCS = Uniaxial compressive strength; Ts
= Tensile strength; E = Elastic Modulus; υ = Poisson’s ratio; Vp = P-wave velocity; Vs = S-wave velocity; ,
f = Feed; RMi = Rock mass index; PPR = Potential of penetration rate; Ft = Thrust force (N); Ld = Drilled
length; PD = Penetration depth; PCA = Principle component analysis; NLMR = Non-linear multiple
regression; MC = Monte-carlo; JD = Joint Dipping; JS = Joint spacing; CI = Coarseness index; SSA =
Specific surface area (m2 /m3); DEUI = Drill energy utilization index; T = Torque; DOC = Depth of cut;
AE = Acoustic-emission signal; SH= Schmidt hammer hardness value, Q = Quartz content; A = alteration;
SRMD = specific rock mass drillablity; Ho= constant upward force, Ω = angular velocity; M = point mass;
I = moment of inertia; C = torsional stiffness; V = vertical bit velocity; U = vertical position of bit; ф =
angular position of bit; D = Bit dia; Is = Impact strength; ρ = density
 The research work relating drill performance with machine vibration are quite limited.
An effort was also made for characterizing the machine performance using drill cuttings analysis.
The drill cutting size analysis holds an important role in relation to machine vibration and
penetration rate. This research involves monitoring of both machine vibration and analysis of drill
cuttings during rotary drilling for evaluating their significance on ROP at a time, which is new.
The present investigation also aimed at developing a suitable operating regime for enhanced
drilling performance. Based on this objective, experiments were carried out in four steps. The
initial step was the field investigation where vibration measurement of the blast-hole drill was
measured based on the variation of operating parameters, namely rotational speed, pulldown
force, and torque. These parameters are controllable parameters and play a primary role in
disintegration rock during drilling operation. Drill cuttings obtained were collected for laboratory
investigations and mean particle size (d) calculation. Correlation of mean particle size and
operating parameters with the rate of penetration were studied to obtain drill vibration index
(DVI) and optimum operating range. The scheme of experiments is depicted in Fig 1. Parameters
chosen for the assessment of machine operation are presented in Table 2.

Fig.1 Scheme of experimental investigation

Table 2: Blast-hole drill machine design and operating parameters

Parameters Values
Rock type Sandstone, Shale
Make Ingersoll rand
Model DM-H
Blasthole dia (mm) 311
Air Pressure (MPa) 0-2.94
Rotational pressure (MPa) 0-39.23
Rotational speed (rpm) 0-200
Pull-down pressure (MPa) 0-27.5
2. Experimental Methodology
2.1 Machine Vibration Measurement
The study lays emphasis on the effect of machine vibration on drill penetration rate. The
drilling measurements were carried out in an open cast mine located on Central India. Parameters
measured included pulldown pressure, rotational speed, drilled depth, and drilling time. Pulldown
force and torque were obtained from the given operating parameters. The torque equation can be
obtained as:
N r  Tr
HPr  (6)
5.250
HPr  K  N r  D 2.5  W 1.5 (7)
Tr  5.250  K  D  W
2.5 1.5
(8)
where, HPr = Rotary power (HP), Nr = Rotary speed (rpm), D = Drilling diameter (inches), W =
Pulldown force (thousands of pounds per inch of diameter), Tr= torque (N-m)
In a rotary blast-hole drill, hydraulic or electric motors are the prime source for the
generation of rotary motion at the drill head. The drill bit attached to the drill rod is rotated by the
rotary head, which is pulled up and drawn by a feed mechanism powered by the hydraulic
actuators. By controlling the pulldown force and the torque, the penetration rate of the drill
machine is controlled. Under massive pulldown force applied on the bit, teeth of rotary drill bit
penetrate the rock mass. The torque applied on the bit leads to the shearing of a rock mass. Drill
cuttings generated during the drilling process are flushed out of borehole using compressed air,
keeping hole clean. Its failure leads to an increase in air pressure, thus causing vibration and poor
drill performance. The vibration of drill components also occurs due to resistance offered by rock
surface during rock-bit interaction while drilling. Vibration measurements were made on a drill
machine having a bit diameter of 311 mm. During each blast-hole drilling, vibration signal was
recorded using the B&K Photon+ measuring device by placing the accelerometer (B&K Model:
4508) at the mast along the axial and lateral direction. Accelerometers are the electric sensors
used to record the vibration signal during bit-rock interaction while drilling by varying operating
variables [23]. The signals recorded are transferred to the primary system through the data
acquisition system, as represented in Fig 2. The operating parameters are mentioned in Table 3.
 Fig.2. Schematic representation of vibration measurement on drill machine

Table 3: Parameters measured during rotary drilling

Detail Parameters Symbol S.I unit
Operating conditions Rotational speed N 1
𝑠
Pulldown force W N
Torque T Nm
Hole area/excavation area ah m2
Drill performance Rate of penetration (ROP) p m/s
Vibration severity (in terms of vib m/s2
acceleration)
Mean particle size d Mm
Specific surface area (SSA) as m2/m3

Geological and operating parameters significantly influence the drilling performance. While
geological parameters are uncontrollable, the operating parameters can be controlled as per
requirement. During a drilling operation, the disintegration of rock is a result of a combination of
pulldown force, torque and the rotational speed on the bit. The force applied on the bit results in
its penetration into the rock. During rock-bit interaction, resistance offered by the rock strata leads
to the vibration of drilling components. Vibration in excess results into bit wear and hence
inefficient energy utilization leading to poor drilling performance.
2.2 Drill cuttings measurement
During the present study, the net drilling time and the drill depth were recorded after each
drilling. The drill depth was measured using the steel tape, and the time taken for drilling was
measured using a stopwatch. The rate of penetration was calculated using equation 9.
D
ROP  (m/min) (9)
T
where D = drilled hole depth (m); T= total drilling time (min)
On completion of blast-hole drilling, the drill cuttings deposited near the blast-hole were collected
for laboratory analysis. The drill cuttings reveal how efficiently the power transmitted by the
motor to the drill bit is being utilized in cutting. Size of drill cuttings is related to penetration rate
and is of great importance in the estimation of penetration rate and also the machine vibration. In
a drilling operation, the drill cuttings produced have a graded size. At the initiation of drilling
during the rock-bit interaction, disintegration of rock occurs due to the combined effect of
pulldown force and torque acting on the drill bit. As the drilling progresses down the hole, cuttings
generated are removed through the passage between the drill rod and blast-hole wall by pneumatic
flushing, ensuring proper penetration of bit into the rock. During the process of removal of drill
cuttings, the coarser particles are also broken to fines. The finer chips are collected at the top of
blast-hole, as shown in Fig 3. In other words, coarser particles, due to their unevenness, settle at
the bottom, and the fine particles settle at the top with the progress of drilling.

Fig.3. Variation of size of drill cutting

Drill cuttings accumulated near the blast-hole drilling were collected using a hollow cylinder by
inserting it into the heap perpendicular to the surface of the pile to ensure that the drill cuttings
represent both finer and coarser fractions from the top to the bottom. As shown in Fig 4 (a), Fig
4 (b) and Fig 4 (c), drill cuttings, which were deposited after the drilling process, were collected
from eight different positions diametrically opposite to each other [20].
 Fig.4. Method of drill cutting collection method
3. Data Analysis and Interpretation
3.1 Drill machine vibration data analysis
As explained earlier, vibration is a significant factor in determining drilling performance.
Excess vibration results in failure of drill components and hence reduces the drilling performance.
It is also hazardous to operators’ health and comfort. While drilling, the increase in RPM results
in the increase in resistance of bit on the borehole wall. This increase in rpm and the bit resistance
on the borehole wall leads to an increase in vibration. The drill cuttings collected from each
borehole can be used as an indicator for evaluating how well the bit penetrated the rock and how
efficiently energy got transmitted for optimum utilization of the bit. The drill cuttings can also be
used in the estimation of vibration generation in blast-hole drill machine. In the present study,
vibration data, drill depth, drill time, drill penetration rate, and drill cuttings for each hole were
collected.
The vibration data were collected using accelerometers. Two sensors were used and placed
at the mast, one oriented to the axial direction and the other to the lateral direction. The signals
were recorded by a data acquisition system. The raw vibration magnitude recorded by the
vibration analyzer was studied using RMS (root mean square) method, which is represented by
equation 10.
t
1 2
T t1
VRMS  Vi (t ) 2 dt (m/s2) (10)

where, VRMS = Vibration RMS value, T = time period and Vi = Instantaneous acceleration value.
The RMS method is an effective way of analyzing the vibration signal [21, 23]. Fig 5 shows the
raw vibration signals and RMS signals collected during the vibration study at three different rpm,
i.e., 80, 85, and 90 rpm.
(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig 5. Blast-hole drill time-domain data for vibration (a) at 80 rpm (b) at 85 rpm and (c) at 90
rpm
The signal was recorded during the entire drilling process at each hole which was then normalized
for the period of 15 sec. The results obtained show the maximum acceleration of 0.07 m/sec2,
0.13 m/sec2, 0.19 m/sec2 along axial direction ( i.e Y-axis) and 0.05 m/sec2, 0.08 m/sec2, 0.09
m/sec2 along lateral direction (i.e X-axis) at 80,85 and 90 rpm. Acceleration obtained shows that
the vibration along the axial direction is more in comparison to the lateral direction. Vibration
increases with the variation of rock properties, changes in lithology, with boulders, and due to the
unsuitable drilling parameters for the rock type. An increase in the intensity of vibration varies
depending on the rpm and the resistance offered by the rock while cutting. As the drilling
progresses, there is an increase in vibration due to reduced bit penetration, bit stick-slip condition,
and inefficient borehole cleaning due to inadequate air pressure. Moreover, the hard surface
occurring at the bottom results in instability of the drill string, which leads to vibration.
To analyze vibration signals, Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) was utilized as an effective
way of computing the signal so obtained at different rpm ie, .80, 85, and 90 rpm. The processes
decompose the discrete signal into different components of frequencies [6-7, 23]. Fig 6 shows the
FFT graph obtained for three blast-hole with a peak amplitude of 0.022 m/s2 at 10 Hz along Y-
axis (axial direction) at 80 rpm, 0.06 m/s2 at 10 Hz along Y-axis at 85 rpm and 0.081 m/s2 at 10
Hz along Y-axis at 90 rpm. Conducting such an experiment at the mine site could be time-
consuming and extremely challenging. This experiment was carried out at the maximum
operating limit of 90 rpm as set by the operator according to the OEM, standard operating
practice.
(a) (b)

(c)

Fig. 6. FFT plot for vibration at rotational speed: (a) 80, (b) 85, and (c) 90 rpm
3.2 Laboratory Analysis
3.2.1 Drill cutting size distribution (DSD)
The drill cuttings collected from each blast-hole were analyzed using sieve analysis. The
sieving process involved sieve of sizes (in mm): 3.35, 2.36, 1.17, 1.18, 0.85, 0.6, 0.42, 0.3, and
0.15. The weight percentage of each size fraction of cuttings was aggregated as per the ASTM
standard under designation C 136-06 [24]. By using the coning and quartering method, the drill
cutting samples collected from each blast-hole were reduced to size according to the ASTM
standard. Then the samples were reduced to a minimum weight of 300-600 grams. The samples,
after division by coning and quartering method, were weighed, and the cumulative percentage
was calculated. The sieve analysis of the sample collected at different rpm is presented in Table
4 below.
Table 4: Sieve analysis of blast-hole drill cutting sample collected at different rpm

DRILL CUTTING SAMPLE @ 80rpm

S.No. Sieve Sizes Weight of cutting (in Weight Cumulative weight retained
(in mm) gms) (%age) (%age)
1. +3.35 6.5 1.30 1.30
2. -3.35 to +2.36 6 1.20 2.50
3. -2.36 to +1.17 8.5 1.70 4.21
4. -1.17 to 1.18 10.5 2.10 6.31
5. -1.18 to +0.85 31 6.21 12.52
6. -0.85 to +0.60 23.5 4.71 17.23
7. -0.60 to +0.42 103.5 20.74 37.97
8. -0.42 to +0.30 99.5 19.94 57.91
9. -0.30 to +0.15 188.5 37.78 95.69
10. -0.15 21.5 4.31 100.00
Total 499 C.I= 335.65
DRILL CUTTING SAMPLE @ 85rpm
S.No. Sieve Sizes (in Weight of cutting (in Weight Cumulative weight retained
mm) gms) (%age) (%age)
1. +3.35 21.5 3.97 3.97
2. -3.35 to +2.36 8 1.48 5.45
3. -2.36 to +1.17 18.5 3.42 8.86
4. -1.17 to 1.18 17.5 3.23 12.10
5. -1.18 to +0.85 47.5 8.77 20.87
6. -0.85 to +0.60 14 2.59 23.45
7. -0.60 to +0.42 98 18.10 41.55
8. -0.42 to +0.30 72.5 13.39 54.94
9. -0.30 to +0.15 210 38.78 93.72
10. -0.15 34 6.28 100.00
Total 541.50 C.I= 364.91
DRILL CUTTING SAMPLE @ 90rpm
S.No. Sieve Sizes (in Weight of cutting (in Weight Cumulative weight retained
mm) gms) (%age) (%age)
1. +3.35 49.5 13.62 13.62
2. -3.35 to +2.36 20 5.50 19.12
3. -2.36 to +1.17 29.5 8.12 27.24
4. -1.17 to 1.18 16 4.40 31.64
5. -1.18 to +0.85 27 7.43 39.06
6. -0.85 to +0.60 6.5 1.79 40.85
7. -0.60 to +0.42 33 9.08 49.93
8. -0.42 to +0.30 31 8.53 58.46
9. -0.30 to +0.15 110.5 30.40 88.86
10. -0.15 40.5 11.14 100.00
Total 363.5 C.I = 468.78
*C.I = Coarseness index
The weight of the fraction passing through sieve sizes was taken, and its corresponding
cumulative weight retained was obtained. The cumulative weight retained versus sieve sizes (in
mm) plot was drawn, as shown in Fig. 7(a). The curve line obtained followed a particular trend
showing that the majority of drill cuttings of coarser size is formed at the top. The particle size
decreases on moving to the top of the pile. The area under the curve plotted, as shown in Fig.
7(b),(c),(d) shows variation at different rpm.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Fig 7. Cumulative retained% vs sieve size curve
The transition line drawn at 0.85 mm sieve size shows fine particles to its left and coarser particle
towards its right. The area so obtained can be considered as to how the energy got dissipated in
the generation of drill cuttings. The area under the curve obtained at 80 rpm shows the generation
of more finer particles and loss of energy. While the energy utilization at 90 rpm is better as
compared to 80 rpm and 85 rpm as it results in the generation of higher coarser particles. The
drilling performance depends on the operating parameters, rock characteristics, and operator
experience. The drilling performance improves with an increase in rpm and pulldown force as it
causes a higher rate of penetration with a higher rate of coarser cuttings, as reported by the
researchers [25-27]. There is a loss of energy due to the vibration generation of mechanical
components of the drill machine and bit wear during rock-bit interaction, which results in a low
penetration rate and the generation of more fine cuttings.
Coarseness index, which is the sum of cumulative weight retained in percentage and an indicator
of coarse particle generation characterization and size distribution was calculated [11, 28]. The
trend so obtained between ROP and C.I is depicted in Fig 8, and it is seen that the ROP increases
with the coarseness index (C.I) linearly.

Fig 8. Correlation plot of ROP vs C.I

3.2.2 Mean particle size (d)
The mean particle size or ‘d’ is defined as the average size of drill cuttings being generated
in blast-hole drilling and is used as an indicator of drilling performance, i.e, rate of penetration
(ROP). It is determined by using Rosin Rammler (RR) or Rossin-Rammler Sperling-Bennet
(RRSB) graph, proposed from sieving analysis on powdered coal in 1933 [29]. Mean particle size
can be obtained from the two parametric functions, as given in equation 11.
d
R(d )  100e  ( ) n (11)
dm
where, R(d) = cumulative weight percentage retained
d = mesh or particle size (mm)
dm= mean particle size (mm) and
n= particle size distribution parameter.
dm and n are commonly calculated using linear regression of data represented as log-log
(cumulative weight retained) versus log ( sieve size or mesh size). In the present study, 36.79 %
cumulative weight got retained, and the corresponding mesh size was calculated using the Matlab
tool, and the RR plot was made [30]. In this investigation, RR diagram has been obtained using
the Matlab tool with a GUI designed and calculation of distribution parameters, i.e., ‘d’ and ‘n’
was based on experimental data. RR diagram and distribution parameters were calculated
following steps in Matlab, as shown in Fig.9 and the resultant RR plot made in Fig. 10(a).

Fig.9. Matlab steps for plotting R-R diagram and calculation of Rossin Rammler parameters
 (a)

Fig.10. (a) Rossin-Rammler plot, (b) ROP vs mean particle size “d” plot
The mean particle sizes obtained for different rotational speeds, i.e., 80, 85, and 90 rpm were 0.63
mm, 0.71 mm, and 1.04 mm, respectively. Similarly, the particle size was calculated for the rest
of the samples obtained after each blast-hole drilling. The Rossin-Rammler plot obtained using
the Matlab for the three samples at varying rotational speed of 80, 85, and 90 rpm is shown in Fig
10(a). During the investigation, the ROP was found to increase with an increase in d. With a
correlation of R2= 0.61, the correlation plot for the ROP and mean particle size (d) is shown in
Fig.10 (b).
3.2.3 Specific surface area and specific energy
Specific surface area (SSA) is the surface area per unit volume [11]. It can be considered as
one of the important parameters to identify the particle characteristic. The specific energy in the
drilling process is related to brittleness/toughness of the material and the operating variables i.e.,
pulldown force and rotational speed. It is calculated by assuming the particle size to be spherical.
The calculation is given below:
As   d 2 (12)
d 3
Av  (13)
6
As 6
as   (14)
Av d
where, As = surface area (m2), Av= volume (m3), and as = specific surface area (SSA) (m2/ m3)
The ROP, as obtained during the rock drilling process, is correlated with the SSA, as shown in
Fig 11.

Fig 11. Specific surface area vs rate of penetration (ROP) plot

The ROP was found to be inversely proportional to SSA with an index of determination, R2=0.67.
Specific energy is a new concept introduced by Teale as an indicator of the mechanical efficiency
of the rock drilling process [12, 31]. It is given as the sum of work done due to pulldown force,
the torque and the vibration as denoted by the equation 15 and 16 below:
W 2 NT vib
E   (15)
ah ah p ah p
E  ea as (16)
where, E= specific energy (N/m2), W= pulldown force (N), ah = area of hole (m2), as= specific
surface area (m2/m3)
4. Result and Discussions
Based on the data collected during the drilling process, the parameters for drilling
performance, i.e., ROP, vibration generated during rock drilling, and specific energy were
determined at different operating parameters, i.e., rotation speed, pulldown force, and torque. The
parameters for drilling performance were investigated by varying the operating parameters within
a practical range to obtain the optimal condition. Rotary drilling is being done at three different
rotational speeds of 80, 85, and 90 rpm by varying the pulldown force and the torque.
4.1 Correlation of ROP with operating parameters
Rate of penetration (ROP) is used as a primary indicator for drill performance and is
controlled by operating parameters, i.e., pulldown force, torque, and rotational speed. The
operating parameters are varied by the operator depending upon the rock strata encountered. Fig
12 depicts the variation in ROP with operating parameters. Relationships were found to be
significant, and a study carried out by S. Kahraman et al. (2000), Shangxin, Feng et al. (2020),
and B.G Fish (1961) also established a similar relationship. They concluded that a higher
penetration rate is achieved with higher pulldown force at different rotational speeds [10, 15, 27].
Shangxin, Feng, et al. (2020) proposed that ROP is a function of rotational speed and the thrust
(or pulldown), but the correlation of ROP with torque was not shown in these studies. However,
the investigation performed by H.Liu, K.KarenYin (2001) suggested that ROP and pulldown
force are negatively correlated to each other [3]. This was in contradiction to the investigations
performed by researchers, as there is a positive correlation between the ROP and pulldown forces.
The current research was conducted at three different rotational speeds, to study the effect of
operating variables, machine vibration, and chip size on ROP. The same is discussed in the
following sections.

Fig 12. Plot of ROP with pulldown force, torque and rotational speed
4.2 Correlation of specific energy with operating parameters
Specific energy is considered as one of the key parameters to indicate the efficiency of
drilling. Its accurate prediction is often difficult in field. Vibration, shocks, and friction
encountered during the drilling process are the primary factors that may distort the measurements
of specific energy. The most predictive way to study the trend of specific energy is to determine
the motor power consumption (P=VI) required during the drilling process by monitoring the
voltage (V) and current (I) signals. Specific energy and vibration increases as the drilling
resistance increases. Specific energy plots with variation in pulldown force, torque, and rotational
speed are shown in Fig 13. A linear relationship between specific energy and the operating
variables is seen.

Fig 13. Plot specific energy with pulldown force, torque and rotational speed
The energy required for rock breakage while drilling is a function of operating variables and
vibration generated due to rock-bit interaction. Higher vibration generation due to uncontrolled
operating parameters, bit wear, and grinding action (in place of cutting) while drilling leads to
loss of energy. Shangxin, Feng, et al. (2020) studied the relationship between specific energy and
pulldown force at a different rotational speed. The results obtained showed a linear relationship
between specific energy and pulldown force at varying rotational speed [15]. Optimizing
operating variables helped in improving the drilling performance by channelizing energy
transmission to the bit [32].
4.3 Correlation of vibration with operating parameters
Fig 14 depicts the vibration measurement data along the axial and the lateral direction with
the variation of operating parameters gathered during the drilling process. From the plot, a
decreasing trend is observed in both axial vibration and lateral vibration with increasing pulldown
force, torque, and rotational speed, while correlation data are unevenly distributed. This suggests
that machine vibration reduces as the ROP increases. This is due to proper engagement of the
drill bit in cutting rock thus reducing energy loss.
 Fig 14. Axial and lateral vibration vs pulldown force, torque and rotational speed plot
The resultant vibration magnitude, while drilling, is obtained to identify a more accurate trend
and also to obtain the optimal condition for the rock drilling. The resultant vibration can be
expressed as:
Vr  [(Va ) 2  (Vl ) 2 ] (17)
where, Vr = resultant vibration (m/s2), Va = axial vibration (m/s2) and Vl = lateral vibration (m/s2).
The resultant vibration magnitude is obtained using equation (17), and it is seen that lateral
vibration shows a linear relationship with axial vibration having a correlation coefficient R2=
0.51, as shown in Fig. 15.

Fig 15. Resultant vibration magnitude

It is observed from the analysis that ROP is clearly influenced by the operating parameters i.e.,
rotational speed, pulldown force, and torque. Excess vibration generated due to rock-bit
interaction also leads to a poor penetration rate. Choosing a proper operating range thus is crucial.
The vibration of 0.1g is considered unpleasant, while 0.5g is intolerable and drill experience
vibration upto 0.3g [33-34]. Hence during the rotary drilling process, it is essential to optimize
the operating parameters to reduce vibration generation and to improve drilling rate with less
damage to a drill bit. Fig 16 shows the variation of ROP and resultant acceleration with variation
in operating parameters. It is seen that the ROP is directly proportional to pulldown force and
torque, showing a good correlation of R2=0.75 at varying rotational speeds. The resultant
vibration decreases with an increase in the ROP, having a correlation of R2 = 0.25. The optimal
condition can be ensured with pulldown force in the range of 1560-1600 N and torque in the range
of 2470-2500 Nm with ROP at 0.89 m/min. The resultant vibration and RPM observed for these
conditions is 0.10 m/s2 and 85 rpm respectively.

Fig 16. ROP and resultant acceleration vs pulldown force, torque and roational speed plot
4.4 Developing Drill Vibration Index
A new term drill vibration index (DVI) is introduced here to define the vibration severity
more precisely and to explain its relationship with the rate of penetration (ROP) to enhance the
drill performance prediction. The drill vibration index can be obtained as:
V .M
DVI  (18)
V .M avg

where, V.M= vibration magnitude (m/s2)

V.Mavg.= average vibration magnitude (m/s2)
 Table 5 shows the average drill performance at various operating conditions with directional
vibration and resultant vibration. The new term drill vibration index (DVI) shows a good
correlation with ROP as depicted in Fig.17.
Table 5: Blast-hole drill (BHD) performance at varying operating parameters
Drill ID Rotational Pulldown Torque avg ROPavg davg Axial Lateral Resultant DVI
speed force avg Vibavg Vibavg Vibavg
rpm N Nm m/min mm m/s2 m/s2 m/s2
BHD-1 80 1489.39 2290.67 0.82 0.65 0.15 0.09 0.17 1.55
BHD-2 85 1567.14 2472.46 0.87 0.65 0.09 0.06 0.10 0.95
BHD-3 90 1645.99 2661.57 0.95 0.92 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.50

Fig 17. Correlation plot of ROPavg with DVI and d avg

This suggests that the machine penetration rate decreases with a higher drill vibration index. At
the same time, with a decrease in DVI, the average size of drill cuttings particle increases with an
increase in ROP. Therefore, it can be summarized that the blast-hole drill machine yielding higher
drill vibration index is more likely to give poor performance.
5. Conclusion
A systematic investigation was carried out with an intention to predict rotary drill
performance by analyzing the machine vibration and drill cuttings with its key parameters, i.e.,
C.I, SSA, and d. These parameters were correlated with the rate of penetration to study the drill
performance at varying pulldown force, torque, and rotational speed. The vibration generated
during the rock drilling was measured and studied in relation with the penetration rate to obtain a
drill vibration index and the optimal drill operating regime. The major conclusions drawn based
on the investigations and analysis are as follows:
 The particle size of drill cutting is a good indicator of drill performance. Particle size of
drilled rocks was found to increase with an increase in the rate of penetration. Mean particle
sizes of 0.63 mm, 0.71 mm, and 1.04 mm were found for the three increasing rotational speed
at 80, 85, and 90 rpm, respectively.
 The specific surface area obtained showed a decreasing trend with ROP having correlation
of 0.66. The mean particle size (d) obtained, increases with increasing pulldown force and
torque at varying rotational speed
 The generation of vibration during rotary blast-hole drilling along the axial direction was
observed to be higher in comparison to the lateral direction. Higher vibration generation
along axial direction was presumably due to the initial instability of drilling components
during bit-rock interaction and inept control of operating variables by the operator during the
drilling process. The maximum peak acceleration obtained was of the magnitude of 0.19 m/s2
at 90 rpm.
 Vibration generated showed a decreasing trend with an increase in pulldown force and torque
at varying rotational speeds along with the corresponding increase in the rate of penetration.
The average penetration rate varied from 0.82 to 0.95 m/min with resultant vibration
magnitude from 0.05 to 0.17 m/s2. The optimal operating condition was obtained at a
pulldown force of 1560-1600N, torque at 2470-2500 Nm, and rotational speed at 85 rpm.
 The drill vibration index (DVI) was found to vary from 0.50 to 1 with the average ROP
ranging from 0.82 to 0.95 m/min. The drill machine with DVI=1 or above is found to have
poor performance with higher vibration and production of more fine drill cuttings.

Acknowledgments
The on-site investigation was carried in two large open-pit coal mines, located in Central India.
Laboratory investigations were performed in Advanced Research Lab and Rock Excavation Lab,
IIT(ISM) Dhanbad. Authors acknowledge the mine management for giving permissions and field
support.
References
[1] T. Richard, C. Germay, E. Detournay, Self-excited stick–slip oscillations of drill bits,
Comptes rendus MECANIQUE 332 (8) (2004) 619-626.
[2] R. A. Reyes Nava, Bit-rock interaction in rotary drilling: numerical and experimental
study, PhD diss., Memorial University of Newfoundland, 2017.
[3] H. Liu, K. Karen Yin, Analysis and interpretation of monitored rotary blasthole drill
data, International Journal of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Environment 15 (3)
(2001) 177-203.
[4] R. Reyes, I. Kyzym, P. S. Rana, J. Molgaard, S. D. Butt, Cuttings analysis for rotary
drilling penetration mechanisms and performance evaluation, 49th US Rock
Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium, American Rock Mechanics Association, 2015.
[5] E.A. Branscombe, Investigation of Vibration Related Signals for Monitoring of Large
Open‐Pit Rotary Electric Blasthole Drills, PhD diss., 2010.
[6] Y. Xiao, C. Hurich, J. Molgaard, S. D. Butt, Investigation of active vibration drilling
using acoustic emission and cutting size analysis, Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering 10 (2) (2018) 390-401.
[7] P. Flegner, J. Kačur, M. Durdán, M. Laciak, Processing a measured vibroacoustic signal
for rock type recognition in rotary drilling technology, Measurement 134 (2019) 451-
467.
[8] E. P. Pfleider, R.L. Blake, Research on the cutting action of the diamond drill bit, Mining
Engng 5 (1953) 187-195.
[9] O. Saeidi, S. R. Torabi, M. Ataei, J. Rostami, A stochastic penetration rate model for
rotary drilling in surface mines, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining
Sciences 68 (2014) 55-65.
[10] S. Kahraman, C. Balcı, S. Yazıcı, N. Bilgin. Prediction of the penetration rate of rotary
blast hole drills using a new drillability index, International Journal of Rock Mechanics
and Mining Sciences 37 (5) (2000) 729-743.
[11] Rİ Altindag, Evaluation of drill cuttings in prediction of penetration rate by using
coarseness index and mean particle size in percussive drilling, Geotechnical &
Geological Engineering 22 (3) (2004) 417-425.
[12] R. Teale, The concept of specific energy in rock drilling, International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts 2 (1) (1965) 57-73
Pergamon.
[13] M. Mellor, Normalisation of specific energy values, International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts 9 (5) (1972) 661-3.
[14] Y. Zhou, W. Zhang, I. Gamwo, J.S Lin, Mechanical specific energy versus depth of cut
in rock cutting and drilling, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining
Sciences 100 (2017) 287-297.
[15] F. Shangxin, W. Yujie, Z. Guolai, Z. Yufei, W. Shanyong, C. Ruilang, X. Enshang,
Estimation of optimal drilling efficiency and rock strength by using controllable drilling
parameters in rotary non-percussive drilling, Journal of Petroleum Science and
Engineering 193 (2020) 107376.
[16] C. Soares, K. Gray, Real-time predictive capabilities of analytical and machine learning
rate of penetration (ROP) models, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 172
(2019) 934-959.
[17] C. Hegde, H. Millwater, M. Pyrcz, H. Daigle, K.Gray, Rate of penetration (ROP)
optimization in drilling with vibration control, Journal of Natural Gas Science and
Engineering 67 (2019) 71-81.
[18] H. I. A. Shad, F. Sereshki, M. Ataei, M. Karamoozian, Prediction of rotary drilling
penetration rate in iron ore oxides using rock engineering system, International Journal
of Mining Science and Technology 28 (3) (2018) 407-413.
[19] V. Krúpa, M. Kruľáková, E. Lazarová, Milan Labaš, K. Feriančiková, L. Ivaničová,
Measurement, modeling and prediction of penetration depth in rotary drilling of rocks,
Measurement 117 (2018) 165-175.
[20] S. Kumar, R. Talreja, V. Murthy, Development of a drill energy utilization index for
aiding selection of drill machines in surface mines, International Journal of Mining
Science and Technology 27 (3) (2017) 393-399.
[21] M. Karakus, S. Perez, Acoustic emission analysis for rock–bit interactions in
impregnated diamond core drilling, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Sciences 68 (2014) 36-43.
[22] A. Cheniany, K. S. Hasan, K. Shahriar, J. K Hamidi, An estimation of the penetration
rate of rotary drills using the Specific Rock Mass Drillability index, International Journal
of Mining Science and Technology 22 (2) (2012) 187-193.
[23] R. Kumar, L. A. Kumaraswamidhas, V. M. S. R Murthy, and S. C. Vettivel,
Experimental investigations on machine vibration in blast-hole drills and optimization
of operating parameters, Measurement 145 (2019) 803-819.
[24] ASTM, C., Standard test method for sieve analysis of fine and coarse aggregates, ASTM
C136-06 (2006).
 [25] A. Ersoy, M. D. Waller, Drilling detritus and the operating parameters of thermally
stable PDC core bits, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 34
(7) (1997) 1109-1123.
[26] H.R. Hardy, H. W. Shen, E. J. Kimble, Laboratory studies of acoustic emission during
coal cutting, proceedings-SPIE The International Society for Optical Engineering, SPIE
International Society for Optical 1995 1743-1743.
[27] B.G. Fish, The basic variables in rotary drilling, Mine and Quarry Engineering 27 (1)
(1961) 29-34.
[28] S. Kahraman, K. Develi, E. Yasar, Predicting the penetration rate of percussive blasthole
drills using coarseness index and median particle size, CIM Bulletin 97 (1083) (2004)
75.
[29] P. Rosin, Laws governing the fineness of powdered coal, Journal of Institute of Fuel 7
(1933) 29-36.
[30] I. Brezani, F. Zelenak, Improving the effectivity of work with Rosin-Rammler diagram
by using MATLAB (R) GUI tool, Acta Montanistica Slovaca 15 (2) (2010) 152-157.
[31] M. Z. A Bakar, I. A. Butt, Y. Majeed, Prediction Rate and Specific Energy Prediction of
Rotary-percussive Drills Using Drill Cuttings and Engineering Properties of Selected
Rock Units, Journal of Mining Science 54 (2) (2018) 270-284.
[32] M. B. Khorzoughi, R. Hall, Processing of measurement while drilling data for rock mass
characterization, International journal of mining science and technology 26 (6) (2016)
989-994.
[33] A.P. Christoforou, A. S. Yigit, Active control of stick-slip vibrations: The role of fully
coupled dynamics, SPE middle east oil show. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2001.
[34] V. Wowk, Machinery Vibration: Measurement and Analysis, McGraw-Hill, United
States of America, 1991.

List of Figures details

Fig. 1. Scheme of experimental investigation
Fig.2. Schematic representation of vibration measurement on drill machine

Fig.3. Variation of size of drill cutting

Fig.4. Method of drill cutting collection method

(a)
(b)

(c)
Fig 5. Blast-hole drill time-domain data for vibration (a) at 80 rpm (b) at 85 rpm
and (c) at 90 rpm
 (a) (b)

(c)

Fig. 6. FFT plot for vibration at rotational speed: (a) 80, (b) 85, and (c) 90 rpm
(a) (b)
 (c) (d)

Fig 7. Cumulative retained% vs sieve size curve

 Fig 8. Correlation plot of ROP vs C.I

Fig.9. Matlab steps for plotting R-R diagram and calculation of Rossin
Rammler parameters
 (a)

Fig.10. (a) Rossin-Rammler plot, (b) ROP vs mean particle size “d” plot
Fig 11. Specific surface area vs rate of penetration (ROP) plot
Fig 12. Plot of ROP with pulldown force, torque and rotational speed
Fig 13. Plot specific energy with pulldown force, torque and rotational speed
Fig 14. Axial and lateral vibration vs pulldown force, torque and rotational
speed plot
Fig 15. Resultant vibration magnitude
Fig 16. ROP and resultant acceleration vs pulldown force, torque and roational
speed plot

Fig 17. Correlation plot of ROPavg with DVI and d avg

List of Tables

Table 1. Summary of previous research work.

References Method Input Output/Findings Limitation(s)

variables
Shangxin, Experimental W, N ROP, SE Experiment results s
Feng, et al relation of drilling pe
(2020) [15] with thrust at different
speed. Effect of othe
parameters i.e., torque o
SE are not clearly discus

Soares, ML technique W,N, ROP Experimental study is

Cesar, and machine learning tech
Kenneth develop ROP model
Gray (2019) operating parameters.
[16] controlled and un
parameters on ROP
discussed.

Flegner, Experimental Fp, N Identifying the type Experiment was carried

Patrik, et al. of rock using vibro- selected rock with only t
(2019) acoustic signal parameters i.e., Fp and N

Hegde, ML technique W,N ROP Study is based on

Chiranth, et analytical models. Effec
al (2019) drilling parameters on
[17] discussed.

Xiao, Experimental W ROP, Va, d Lack of field investigatio

Yingjian, et
al. (2018)

Shad, Statistical and UCS, Ts, PPR Only two drilling param
Hossein Regression E, υ, Vp, feed and rotation speed
Inanloo Process Vs, f, N, in the experiment.
Arabi, et al. RMi
(2018) [18]

Krúpa, Experimental N, W, Ld PD Proposed a mathematica

Víťazoslav, and penetration depth based
et al. (2018) mathematical force and drilled leng
[19] modelling rock-drilling parameter
torque, specific-ener
vibrations were not cons

Kumar Suraj Experimental CI, d, SSA PR, DEUI Drilling in sandstone

et al. (2017) higher abrasion capacity
[20] tool can quickly alter the
tool configuration thro
This leads to more grin
cutting and can have seri
on drill penetration rat
further investigation.
 Saeidi, PCA, NLMR, UCS, W, PR Effect of air pressure and
Omid, et al. MC N, JD, JS pressure of machine was
(2014) into account while d
proposed model. In dep
required to dev
comprehensive model.

Karakus, Experimental W,T,DOC, Studied relationship The relationship betw

Murat, and AE between AE signal signals and drilling para
S. Perez. and bit wear for based on laboratory e
(2014) [21] improved drill while in real field cond
performance may vary dependin
geological feature.
comprehensive investig
needed at both and lab
scale.

Cheniany, Statistical UCS, SH, SRMD Model developed includ

Alireza, et Analysis Q, d, A, rock mass parameters as
al. (2012) JD, W, N to operational parameter
[22] operating parameters not
cognizance.

Altindag, Laboratory CI, d SSA, PR Investigation lacks effect

Raşİt.(2004) experiment parameters on PR

Richard, Discrete Ho, Ω, M, Self-excited stick- Study focusses on the s

Thomas et modelling of I, C, W, T, slip oscillation of stick-slip oscillation
al. (2004) drill string. V, U, ф drilling system taking drilling with drag bit, b
into consideration the few assumptions i.e.,
axial and torsional upward force, constan
vibration modes of velocity, borehole is ve
bit that there are no spuri
motions of bit.

Kahraman, Field W, N, D, PR, DI Proposed model is valid

S., et al. experiment UCS, Ts, having uniaxial co
(2000) and laboratory SH, Is, Vp, strength over 40MPa.
experiment E, ρ

Fp = pressure force; N = rotational speed; W = weight on bit / thrust; ROP/PR = rate of

penetration / penetration rate; Va = vibration amplitude; d = mean particle size; UCS =
Uniaxial compressive strength; Ts = Tensile strength; E = Elastic Modulus; υ =
Poisson’s ratio; Vp = P-wave velocity; Vs = S-wave velocity; , f = Feed; RMi = Rock
mass index; PPR = Potential of penetration rate; Ft = Thrust force (N); Ld = Drilled
length; PD = Penetration depth; PCA = Principle component analysis; NLMR = Non-
linear multiple regression; MC = Monte-carlo; JD = Joint Dipping; JS = Joint spacing;
CI = Coarseness index; SSA = Specific surface area (m2 /m3); DEUI = Drill energy
utilization index; T = Torque; DOC = Depth of cut; AE = Acoustic-emission signal;
 SH= Schmidt hammer hardness value, Q = Quartz content; A = alteration; SRMD =
specific rock mass drillablity; Ho= constant upward force, Ω = angular velocity; M =
point mass; I = moment of inertia; C = torsional stiffness; V = vertical bit velocity; U =
vertical position of bit; ф = angular position of bit; D = Bit dia; Is = Impact strength; ρ
= density

Table 2: Blast-hole drill machine design and operating parameters

Parameters Values
Rock type Sandstone, Shale
Make Ingersoll rand
Model DM-H
Blasthole dia (mm) 311
Air Pressure (MPa) 0-2.94
Rotational pressure (MPa) 0-39.23
Rotational speed (rpm) 0-200
Pull-down pressure (MPa) 0-27.5

Table 3: Parameters measured during rotary drilling

Detail Parameters Symbol S.I unit

Operating conditions Rotational speed N 1
𝑠
Pulldown force W N
Torque T Nm
Hole area/excavation area ah m2
Drill performance Rate of penetration (ROP) p m/s
Vibration severity (in terms of vib m/s2
acceleration)
Mean particle size d Mm
Specific surface area (SSA) as m2/m3

Table 4: Sieve analysis of blast-hole drill cutting sample collected at different rpm

DRILL CUTTING SAMPLE @ 80rpm

S.No. Sieve Sizes Weight of cutting Weight Cumulative weight
(in mm) (in gms) (%age) retained (%age)
1. +3.35 6.5 1.30 1.30
2. -3.35 to +2.36 6 1.20 2.50
3. -2.36 to +1.17 8.5 1.70 4.21
4. -1.17 to 1.18 10.5 2.10 6.31
5. -1.18 to +0.85 31 6.21 12.52
6. -0.85 to +0.60 23.5 4.71 17.23
7. -0.60 to +0.42 103.5 20.74 37.97
8. -0.42 to +0.30 99.5 19.94 57.91
9. -0.30 to +0.15 188.5 37.78 95.69
10. -0.15 21.5 4.31 100.00
Total 499 C.I= 335.65
DRILL CUTTING SAMPLE @ 85rpm
S.No. Sieve Sizes Weight of cutting Weight Cumulative weight
(in mm) (in gms) (%age) retained (%age)
1. +3.35 21.5 3.97 3.97
2. -3.35 to +2.36 8 1.48 5.45
3. -2.36 to +1.17 18.5 3.42 8.86
4. -1.17 to 1.18 17.5 3.23 12.10
5. -1.18 to +0.85 47.5 8.77 20.87
6. -0.85 to +0.60 14 2.59 23.45
7. -0.60 to +0.42 98 18.10 41.55
8. -0.42 to +0.30 72.5 13.39 54.94
9. -0.30 to +0.15 210 38.78 93.72
10. -0.15 34 6.28 100.00
Total 541.50 C.I= 364.91
DRILL CUTTING SAMPLE @ 90rpm
S.No. Sieve Sizes Weight of cutting Weight Cumulative weight
(in mm) (in gms) (%age) retained (%age)
1. +3.35 49.5 13.62 13.62
2. -3.35 to +2.36 20 5.50 19.12
3. -2.36 to +1.17 29.5 8.12 27.24
4. -1.17 to 1.18 16 4.40 31.64
5. -1.18 to +0.85 27 7.43 39.06
6. -0.85 to +0.60 6.5 1.79 40.85
7. -0.60 to +0.42 33 9.08 49.93
8. -0.42 to +0.30 31 8.53 58.46
9. -0.30 to +0.15 110.5 30.40 88.86
10. -0.15 40.5 11.14 100.00
Total 363.5 C.I = 468.78
*C.I = Coarseness index
 Table 5: Blast-hole drill (BHD) performance at varying operating parameters

Drill Rotational Pulldown Torque avg ROPavg davg Axial Lateral Resultant DVI
ID speed force avg Vibavg Vibavg Vibavg
rpm N Nm m/min mm m/s2 m/s2 m/s2
BHD-1 80 1489.39 2290.67 0.82 0.65 0.15 0.09 0.17 1.55
BHD-2 85 1567.14 2472.46 0.87 0.65 0.09 0.06 0.10 0.95
BHD-3 90 1645.99 2661.57 0.95 0.92 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.50

GRAPHICAL
ABSTRACT
Highlights
 A novel performance evaluation technique for rotary blast-hole drills
performance.
 Correlation of ofdrill
Fig. 1 Scheme performance
Experimental with machine-vibration and drill
Investigation
cuttings.

Fig. 4 Plot of ROPavg with DVI and d avg

 Drill cuttings collection and analysis as per ASTM standard.

 Determination of mean particle size using Rosin-Rammler Diagram.
 Obtaining Drill Vibration Index and the optimal drill operating regime.

Manuscript Title- Performance analysis of rotary blast-hole drills through

machine vibration and coarseness index mapping- A novel approach
Manuscript Number - MEAS-D-20-00569

CRediT author statement

Rakesh Kumar: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Formal analysis,
Investigation, Writing- Original draft. V.M.S.R Murthy: Conceptualization,
Supervision, Writing-Review & Editing, Resources. L.A.Kumaraswamidhas:
Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing-Review & Editing, Resources.

Declaration of interests

☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or
personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported
in this paper.

☐The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships

which may be considered as potential competing interests: