Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DRSTR-Drill Rod Comparison Ver 1.02 (2012-11-12)
DRSTR-Drill Rod Comparison Ver 1.02 (2012-11-12)
Presentation
November 2012
O Rings regularly end up in the assay sample or hooked over the O Ring Seals Push Out
cone splitter sampling cone biasing the sample or causing blockage During Coupling of Rods
Severe restrictions at Circlip and behind As 4 off lugs wear, the inner tube
Tool
protrudes outJoints
of theare not
tool hardened
joint
female end of Inner Tube – female end
steps out and tool joint steps in
Inner tube sagging occurs due to lugs swaging Female end not hardened. Grooves are created by the
over their location shoulder causing the female percussive action of the hammer causing O Ring failure
end to bottom out in the male, burring the end
and damaging surfaces
1.5 psi
3.2 psi
•Add up the total number of pressure drops associated with the tool joints
and consider the effect on the resulting pressure generated in the hammer?
• ARD™ Rods last 2.5 times longer than standard mild steel rods.
• ARD™ Rods are 35% lighter than standard RC rods – A saving of more
than 1 tonne for every 100m of 4.5” Rods.
• SnapLast™ Seals last the lifetime of an inner tube (approx 20,000m
drilling).
• O rings often require replacement after EVERY rod change!
• Replacing O rings costs time, money and is hazardous.
• Blowing O rings during drilling is extremely expensive – it takes
around 2 hours to pull 100m of rods from the hole, find the damaged
O ring, replace it and reset the rods back in the hole. This is
compounded two-fold when the lost time opportunity is factored in
and four-fold if samples have been lost as a result of the seal failure.
• ARD™ Rods only cost 7% more than standard mild steel rods.