5
ROCK EXCAVATION TOOLS

Introduction

Rock excavation tools disintegrate and remove the rock from boreholes and tunnels by four basic mechanisms: thermal spalling, fusion and vaporization, mechanical stresses, and chemical reactions, as shown in Figure 5.1. ''Novel" or "advanced" drilling tools utilize exotic systems such as lasers or electron beams to melt or vaporize rock or explosives, or electrohydraulic discharges, to impact and shatter rock.

FIGURE 5.1 Basic rock excavation mechanisms (Maurer, 1980).



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 63
5 ROCK EXCAVATION TOOLS Introduction Rock excavation tools disintegrate and remove the rock from boreholes and tunnels by four basic mechanisms: thermal spalling, fusion and vaporization, mechanical stresses, and chemical reactions, as shown in Figure 5.1. ''Novel" or "advanced" drilling tools utilize exotic systems such as lasers or electron beams to melt or vaporize rock or explosives, or electrohydraulic discharges, to impact and shatter rock. FIGURE 5.1 Basic rock excavation mechanisms (Maurer, 1980).

OCR for page 63
Status of the Field Novel Drilling Systems Thermal spalling drills such as jet-piercing and forced-flame drills heat rocks to 370 to 540°C (700 to 1000°F) to create thermal stresses that spall the rock (Figure 5.2). These devices have limited application because most rocks will not thermally spall (Maurer, 1968, 1980). Melting and vaporization drills utilize high-temperature devices such as lasers or electron beams to melt and vaporize rock (Figure 5.3). These devices have relatively low drilling rates because of the high energy requirements to melt and vaporize rock. Chemical drills utilize highly reactive chemicals such as fluorine to drill rock (Figure 5.4). These drills have found limited application due to high costs and safety problems associated with handling large volumes of highly reactive chemicals. Mechanical stress drills disintegrate the rock by inducing mechanical stresses (Figure 5.5). References for individual novel drills shown in Figures 5.2 to 5.5 (Maurer, 1970) are given at the end of this chapter. Because the cross-sectional area of a tunnel face is 10 to 100 times greater than a typical drillhole, it is very unlikely that thermal spalling, melting, or vaporization drills could be used as the sole rock removal process due to extremely high power requirements and very low penetration rates. Similarly, chemical drills would not be practical for tunneling because of the large volume of highly reactive chemicals required, safety problems, and problems associated with chemical treatment and disposal of contaminated spoils. Most of the advanced thermal and high-pressure jet drills require 10 to 100 times more energy to drill rock than conventional rotary bits (Table 5.1). Low drilling rates and excessive power requirements preclude using these advanced devices as the sole rock removal mechanism except in special applications. Additional R&D, which focuses on the physics of the rock removal process, is needed to reduce the overall energy requirements of these novel drilling techniques.

OCR for page 63
FIGURE 5.2 Thermal spalling drills (Maurer, 1970).

OCR for page 63
FIGURE 5.3 Melting and vaporization drills (Maurer, 1970).

OCR for page 63
TABLE 5.1 Specific Energy Requirements for Rock Drilling (Maurer, 1968) SYSTEM SPECIFIC ENERGY (joules/cm3) Rotary bit 100 High-pressure jets 1,000 Thermal spalling 1,500 Melting 5,000 Vaporization 12,000 FIGURE 5.4 Chemical drill (Maurer, 1970).

OCR for page 63
FIGURE 5.5 Mechanical stress drills (Maurer, 1970). Combined Novel/Mechanical Systems Because of the high power requirements of novel drilling techniques, advances are more likely to be made on combined novel-mechanical drill bits in which the novel devices (e.g., high-pressure water jets) cut narrow slots or "kerfs" in the rock face, thereby weakening the rock and allowing

OCR for page 63
it to be removed with a conventional bit. These combined systems could yield a two- to fourfold increase in drilling rates (Figure 5.6). A similar system could be used to speed up the advance rate of tunnel boring machines (TBMs; Figure 5.7). Cutting slots in the rock with a novel device weakens the rock and allows conventional cutters to break the rock into larger fragments (Figure 5.8). Figure 5.9 shows an example in which a single slot produced a sevenfold increase in the amount of rock removed by a 75-ft-lb impact. Initial attempts at developing combined novel-mechanical cutters are probably best focused on mining or oil field bits, which are relatively small and inexpensive. Once this technology is developed, it can be scaled up to tunneling and excavation application. FIGURE 5.6 Combined novel-mechanical drill bits (Maurer, 1980). FIGURE 5.7 Novel-mechanical tunnel boring machine (Maurer, 1980).

OCR for page 63
FIGURE 5.8 Combined rock fragmentation (Maurer, 1980). FIGURE 5.9 Effect of index distance on crater volume (Maurer, 1980).

OCR for page 63
Advanced Downhole Motors Most guided drilling systems utilize high-speed downhole turbine (Figure 5.10) or positive-displacement motors (200 to 1,000 revolutions per minute [rpm]; Figure 5.11) to obtain high drilling rates. Los Alamos National Laboratory developed geothermal turbodrills that operate effectively in hot-dry-rock geothermal wells at temperatures in excess of 315°C (600°F). These turbodrills accurately guided geothermal holes at drilling rates three to ten times higher than conventional rotary bits. The technology now exists to build downhole motors that will increase drilling rates two- to fourfold by increasing power delivered to the drill bit. Figure 5.12 shows an example (Cohen and others, 1994b) in which a slim-hole motor was overpowered by increasing the fluid flow rate and the differential pressure across the motor. The overpowered motor delivered 56 horsepower (hp) compared to 23 hp for normal operation. In laboratory tests, the overpowered motor drilled marble blocks at rates up to 550 ft/h, compared to 225 ft/h with normal motor operation. Special high-power bits that utilized oversize man-made thermally stable polycrystalline diamond (TSP) cutters were used on this overpowered motor. This example shows that there is significant potential for increasing drilling rates by developing improved motors. Additional R&D is needed on improved air drilling motors and higher-power motors for hard-rock drilling. FIGURE 5.10 Downhole turbodrill (Maurer and others, 1978).

OCR for page 63
FIGURE 5.11 Cutaway view of new positive displacement mud motor (Dempsey and Leonard, 1979). FIGURE 5.12 Overpowered slim-hole motor (Cohen and others, 1994b).

OCR for page 63
Advanced Drill Bits Conventional drill bits remove rock by impact or shearing processes (Figure 5.13). Impact or roller bits utilize steel or tungsten carbide cutters to impact and break the rock. New wear-resistant, diamond-coated cutters are finding increased use in hard abrasive rocks. Additional R&D is needed on these improved cutter materials and on improved high-speed bearings. Shear-type bits utilize polycrystalline or natural diamond cutters to remove rock by shearing processes. Polycrystalline diamond cutter (PDC) bits utilize cutters consisting of a thin layer of small synthetic diamonds bonded to a tungsten carbide substrate, as shown in Figures 5.14 and 5.15. These bits have potential for very high drilling rates because they can operate at much higher rotary speeds (800 to 1,000 rpm) and power levels than roller bits (100 to 200 rpm). In laboratory tests, these bits drill 9 to 14 times faster than conventional roller bits. Further work is needed to develop wear-resistant cutter materials and multipurpose bits that will effectively drill alternating layers of soft and hard rock. R&D is also needed on sensing tools to look ahead of the bit or a TBM so that potential problems (e.g., blowouts, lost circulation, or waterfilled fractures) can be detected early and appropriate remedial action can be taken. This information can also be used to optimize drilling variables such as the weight on the bit and the rotary speed. FIGURE 5.13 Drill bit cutting mechanisms.

OCR for page 63
FIGURE 5.17 Exxon high-pressure rig (Maurer and others, 1973). FIGURE 5.18 Exxon drilling data for high-pressure versus conventional bits (Maurer and others, 1973). Despite these high drilling rates, these systems have not been commercialized because of problems with the high-pressure equipment. These problems include erosion and leaks in the drill pipe caused by the abrasive drilling muds. A new concept being evaluated to eliminate these problems is the use of high-pressure downhole pumps powered by low-pressure pumps at the surface (Figure 5.21). Additional work on these systems is needed to develop improved pumps, drilling pipe, high-pressure motors, and jet bits.

OCR for page 63
FIGURE 5.19 FlowDril jet bit (Butler and others, 1990). FIGURE 5.20 FlowDril field test data for an east Texas oil field test (Kolle and others, 1991).

OCR for page 63
FIGURE 5.21 High-pressure downhole pump. Slim-Hole Drilling Tools Slim-hole drilling is finding increased use in the oil and gas industry, because it lowers well costs by 40 to 70% due to reduced materials (mud, cement, and casing), smaller rigs and crews, and faster drilling rates. Improved slim-hole drilling tools are needed because space constraints limit the strength and life of these tools. Guided Percussion Drills Percussion or hammer drills can penetrate many hard rocks two to four times faster than rotary drills because they apply high-impact loads that shatter the rock into large fragments. Although widely used in shallow blast-hole operations, percussion drills have found limited use for deep oil, gas, and geothermal drilling because of the inability to accurately guide

OCR for page 63
these drills in hard rock. Improved percussion drills that can be guided accurately in hard rock are needed for deeper drilling applications. Resonant Sonic Drills Resonant sonic drills (Volk and others, 1993) use eccentric rotating weights to vibrate the drill pipe at frequencies of 80 to 150 cycles per second to fluidize soil and other unconsolidated materials, thus allowing the pipe to be advanced into the ground with minimal friction. No fluid circulation is used with these drills, so the material ahead of the bit either is pushed aside into the surrounding formation or flows into the core barrel and is retrieved back to the surface. Sonic drills have been around since the 1950s but have never caught on owing to their relatively high cost and poor reliability (the tool is particularly susceptible to vibrational fatigue). Efforts are now under way at Hanford and Sandia Labs (Volk, 1992; Volk and others, 1993) to improve the reliability of this tool for use in environmental drilling and coring. Sonic drills are currently limited to drilling primarily unconsolidated materials to maximum depths of about 400 ft. Methods are needed to guide these drills directionally. Priorities for R&D As noted in Chapter 4, the fundamental rate-controlling process in drilling is the rate of rock breaking by the drilling tool. Significant improvements in rock breaking rates can be achieved through a better understanding of the physics of rock-tool interactions. Revolutionary advances in rates of rock breaking and rock removal are possible through the development of hybrid mechanical-novel drilling tools to break and remove rock. Evolutionary advancements in rock removal rates are likely through the development of stronger, wear-resistant cutters, bearings, and bits. R&D should be focused in the following areas: Physics of rock-tool interactions: The physical and mechanical characteristics of rocks are generally well known, but much less is known about the mechanics of rock removal, that is, the interaction between the rock and the drilling tool. Research that focuses on the physics of rock 

OCR for page 63
    removal processes is a prerequisite for designing improved drilling tools and should have a high priority for support. Improved cutter materials and bearings: Conventional drill bits utilize steel or carbide cutters to remove rock by shearing or impact. Wear-resistant, diamond-coated cutters are finding increased application in hard, abrasive rocks, particularly for shear-type bits. Additional R&D is needed on these wear-resistant cutter materials, and on these and other wear-resistant materials for high-speed bearings. Novel-hybrid drilling technologies: R&D on novel drilling technologies should focus on reducing energy requirements for drilling. The development of hybrid systems, in which novel drilling tools are used to lower the strength of the rock, and conventional mechanical drilling tools are used to break and remove it, are especially promising and should be pursued. R&D on novel systems should focus initially on mining and oil field bits, which are relatively small and inexpensive. Once this technology has been developed, it should be scaled up to tunneling and excavation applications. Improved mechanical drills: Significant improvements in rock removal rates can also be obtained through evolutionary advances in conventional mechanical drilling tools. R&D efforts should focus on the development of the following: high-speed, high-power downhole motors;   guided percussion drills; and   slim-hole drilling tools. References Agoshkin, M. I., and Vornyuk, A. S., 1960, Secondary breaking of iron ores by high-frequency current: Izvestiya Akademii Nauk USSR, no. 1, p. 138-144, English Translation No. 4857 by Henry Brutcher Technical Translations, P.O. Box 157, Altadena, Calif.

OCR for page 63
Angona, F. A., 1971, Method and Apparatus for Explosive Drilling Utilizing Spark Pumps for Detonating Explosives: U.S. Patent No. 3,576,219, April 27, 6 pp. Anon., 1961, New role for R-F energy: rock bursting: Electronics, September 22, p. 11. Anon., 1963, Drilling with radar: Mining and Engineering Journal, April, p. 24. Anon., 1973, New soviet rocket sinks wells, Industrial Research, October, p. 35. Avery, R. T., Keefe, D., Brekke, T. L., and Finnie, I., 1973, Shattering rock with intense bursts of energetic electrons: IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, v. NS-20 (3), p. 1010-1014. Baum, W., 1978, Burners for Flame Jet Drill: U.S. Patent 4,073,351, February 14, 8 pp. Benson, G. M., 1977, Thermocorer for rapid tunneling and excavation: Proceedings of the 1977 NSF Research in Excavation Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, April 26-28, Oakland, Calif., Energy Research and Generation, 125 pp. Bergstrom, B. H., 1961, The electrohydraulic crusher: Engineering and Mining Journal, v. 162 (2), p. 134-140. Black, W. L., 1974, Basic Understanding of Earth Tunneling by Melting: Report No. DOT-TSC-OST-74-6.1, prepared for the U.S. Department of Transportation by Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory, Pittsburgh, Pa. (2 volumes). Black, W. L., 1976, Development of Equipment for Explosive Drilling: AAI Corporation, Cockeysville, Md., Engineering Report ER-8724, DOD Contract DAAG56-76-C-0033, 37 pp. Bobo, R. A., 1969, Method of Drilling with High Velocity Jet Cutter Roller Bit: U.S. Patent 3,112,800, December 3, 7 pp. Brichkin, A. V., and Bolotov, A. V., 1966, Use of an electric arc for rock boring: Izvestiia Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Tsvetsnaya Metallurgiya USSR, May. Browning, J. A., 1961, Method and Apparatus for Impacting a Stream at High Velocity Against a Surface to be Treated: U.S. Patent No. 2,990,653, 9 pp. Browning, J. A., and Fitzgerald, E. M., 1969, Method of Flame Drilling with Abrasives: U.S. Patent No. 3,463,249, August 26, 5 pp. Butler, T., Fontana, P., and Otta, R., 1990, Method for combined jet and mechanical drilling: SPE 20460, Drilling Proceedings, SPE Annual

OCR for page 63
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Richardson, Tex., Society of Petroleum Engineers, v. delta, p. 561-565. Calaman, J. J., and Rolseth, H. C., 1962, Technical advances expand use of jet-piercing process in taconite industry: Mining Research, Oxford, Pergamon, p. 473-498. Carstens, J. P., Davison, W. R., Brown, C. A., McGarry, F. J., and Smith, A. R., 1970, Heat-Assisted Tunnel Boring Machines: United Aircraft Research Laboratories, East Hartford, Conn., September (NTIS-PB-197, 243), 335 pp. Carstens, J. P., and Brown, C. A., 1971, Rock Cutting by Laser: SPE 3529, 46th Annual Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, New Orleans, La., October 3-6, Richardson, Tex., SPE. Clark, I. E., and Shafto, G. R., 1987, Core drilling with SYNDAX3 PCD: Industrial Diamond Review, v. 47 (251), p. 169-173. Cohen, J. H., Maurer, W. C., and Westcott, P. A., 1994a, High-power TSP bits: Journal of Energy Resources Technology, v. 116 (Mar.), p. 33-37. Cohen, J. H., Maurer, W. C., and Westcott, P. A., 1994b, Improved high-power TSP bits: inDrilling Technology, Vonzia, J. P., ed., presented at Energy-Sources Technology Conference & Exhibition, New Orleans, La., January 23-26, v. 56, p. 139-144. Conn, A. F., and Radtke, R. P., 1977, Cavitating bit jets promise faster drilling for deep-hole operations: Oil and Gas Journal, v. 75 (Oct. 31), p. 129-146. Cooley, W. C., 1972, Rock breakage by pulsed high pressure liquid jets: 1st International Symposium on Jet Cutting Technology, BHRA Fluid Engineering, Cranfield, Bedford, England. Dardick, D., 1977, Ground Terra-Drill Processes and Apparatus: U.S. Patent No. 4,004,642, January 25, 9 pp. Dempsey, P., and Leonard, J., 1979, Mud motor is tested: Drilling Contractor, May, p. 54-57. Dodd, H. M., 1976, An Economic Analysis of Downhole Replaceable Drill Bit Systems: Sandia Laboratories Report No. SAND76-0301, Albuquerque, N. Mex. , 55 pp. Epperson, J. P., Dyer, W., and Grzywa, J. C., 1966, The laser now a production tool: Proceedings of the 8th Annual Electron and Laser Beam Symposium, Haddad, G. I., ed., Ann Arbor, University of Michigan, p. 187-205.

OCR for page 63
Epshteyn, E. F., Arsh, E. I., and Vitort, G. K., 1960, New methods of crushing rock: Gosud, Naushno-Tekh, Izad, Neft. i Gorno-Topliv Noi Literatery Moscow, Translation No. 62-11712, Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Technical Services, 85 pp. Frankle, H., and Baum, W., 1978, Flame Jet Tool for Drilling to Great Depths: U.S. Patent No. 4,099,584, July 11, 9 pp. Hartman, H. L., 1963, The simulation of percussion drilling in the laboratory by indexed-blow studies: SPE 500, Proceedings of the First Conference on Drilling and Rock Mechanics, University of Texas, Austin, Tex., January 23-24, Richardson, Tex., Society of Petroleum Engineers. Jurewicz, B. R., Carstens, J. P., and Banas, C. M., 1974, Rock-kerfing with high-power lasers: Proceedings of the 3rd Congress of the International Society of Rock Mechanics, Denver, Colo., September 1-7, National Academy of Sciences, v. 12, pt. B, p. 1434-1440. Jurewicz, B. R., Greenwald, L. E., and Brown, C. O., 1974, Focused Laser Beams to Assist Rock Excavation : United Aircraft Research Laboratories, East Hartford, Conn., DOT Contract No. FR-20021, 166 pp. Kolle, J. J., Otta, R., and Stang, D. L., 1991, Laboratory and Field Testing of an Ultra-High Pressure, Jet-Assisted Drilling System: SPE/IADC 22000, 1991 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference held in Amsterdam, March 11-14, Richardson, Tex., SPE, p. 847-856. Kravchenko, V. S., 1957, The search for new methods of breaking down hard rock: Gornyi Zhurnal USSR, no. 1, p. 36-43. Maroudas, N. E., Johnson, H. A., and Yigit, E., 1967, The mechanism of electrohydraulic crushing: Dechema-Monographien, v. 57, p. 551-582. Marovelli, R. L., Chen, T. S., and Veith, K. F., 1966, Thermal fragmentation of rock: Society of Mining Engineers, Transactions, v. 235 (1), p. 1-15. Maurer, W. C., 1968, Novel Drilling Techniques: Oxford, Pergamon Press, 114 pp. Maurer, W. C., 1969, Spark drilling: Proceedings of the 11th Symposium On Rock Mechanics, University of California, Berkeley, Calif., June 16-19, Houston, Tex., Society of Mining Engineers, AIME, p. 687-703. Maurer, W. C., 1970, Potential application of novel rock disintegration techniques in mining: presented at the 1970 Joint Minnesota Section,

OCR for page 63
AIME Annual Meeting and University of Minnesota Mining Conference , Duluth, Minn., January 12-14, New York, AIME, 45 pp. Maurer, W. C., 1980, Advanced Drilling Techniques: Tulsa, Oklahoma, Petroleum Publishing, 698 pp. Maurer, W. C., and Heilhecker, J. K., 1969, Hydraulic jet drilling: SPE 2434, Proceedings of 4th Conference on Drilling and Rock Mechanics, University of Texas, Austin, Tex., January 14-16, Richardson, Tex., SPE. Maurer, W. C., Heilhecker, J. K., and Love, W. W., 1973, High-pressure drilling: Journal of Petroleum Technology, v. 25 (7), p. 851-859. Maurer, W. C., Rowley, J. C., and Clifton, C., 1978, Advanced turbodrills for geothermal wells: Geothermal Resources Council, Transactions, v. 2, p. 411-414. Neppiras, E. A., 1959, Ultrasonic machining: Modern Workshop Technology, Part 2, London, Cleaver-Hume Press, p. 217-228. Newsom, M. M., 1975, Status Report—Drilling Research on the Electrical Detonation and Subsequent Cavitation in a Liquid Technique (Spark Drilling): Sandia Laboratories Report No. SAND-75-0417, Albuquerque, N. Mex., 59 pp. Ostrovskii, N. P., 1960, Deep-hole drilling with explosives: Gostoptekhia 'dat Moscow, Translation by Consultants Bureau Enterprises, Inc., New York. Peterson, C. R., 1973, Study of a Continuous Drill-and-Blast Tunneling Concept: Rapidex, Inc., Final Report of an Advanced Research Project Agency-Supported Study, Boxford, Mass., RAPIDEX, 55 leaves. Pols, A. C., 1977, Tests show jet-drilling hard-rock potential: Oil and Gas Journal, v. 75 (Jan. 31), p. 134-144. Robinson, L. H., Jr., 1962, Drilling Boreholes with Explosive Charges: U.S. Patent No. 3,070,010, December 25, 9 pp. Robinson, L. H., 1965, Experimental tests of a method for drilling with explosives: Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, June, p. 153-159. Rowley, J. C., 1974, Rock melting applied to excavation and tunneling: Proceedings of the 3rd ISRM Congress, Denver, Colo., September 1-7, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, p. 1447-1453. Sarapuu, E., 1963, Electrical disintegration drilling: inRock Mechanics, Fairhurst, C., ed., Oxford, Pergamon, p. 173-184.

OCR for page 63
Sarapuu, E., 1969, Breaking rocks with electric current: The Australian Miner, June 30. Schumacher, B. W., 1969, Electron beams apply an old principle to modern rock breaking: Engineering and Mining Journal, June, p. 116-120. Schumacher, B. W., and Holdbrook, R. G., 1972, Use of Electron Beam Gun for Hard Rock Excavation—Final Report: ARPA Contract No. H0110377, December 30 (NTIS-AD-761208), Sunnyvale, Calif., Westinghouse Electric. Singh, M. M., and Gregson, V. G., Jr., 1969, Rock Breakage by High Gas Gun Projectiles: Office of High Speed Ground Transportation, Department of Transportation Report (Under Contract DOT 3-0170), Chicago, ITT Research Institute, 129 pp. Stewart, A., Falter, F. X., and Tomlinson, P. N., 1988, Drilling reef quartzite with SYNDAX3: Industrial Diamond Review, v. 48 (526), p. 117-119. Summers, D. A., and Henry, R. L., 1972, Water jet cutting of sedimentary rock: Journal of Petroleum Technology, v. 24 (7), p. 797-802. Thirumalai, K., 1970, Rock Fragmentation by Creating a Thermal Inclusion with Dielectric Heating: Bureau of Mines RI 7424, 33 pp. Thorpe, M. L., 1960, The plasma jet and its uses: Research/Development, v. 11 (1), 15 pp. Titkov, N. I., and others, 1957, Drilling with electrical discharges in liquids: Neftyanoe Khozyaistvo USSR, English Translation by Associated Technical Services Inc., P.O. Box 271, East Orange, N.J . Volk, B. W., 1992, Results of Testing the Sonic Drilling System at the Hanford Site (September 1991 to May 1992): Report WHC-SD-ENTRP-002, prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy by Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Wash. Volk, B. W., McLellan, G. W., Moak, D. J., Lerch, R. E., Thompson, K. M., and Barrow, J. C., 1993, ResonantSonic Drilling: History, Progress and Advances in Environmental Restoration Programs: Report WHC-SA-1959-FP, prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy by Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Wash., 21 pp. Voytsekhovskiy, B. V., 1964, Some results of the destruction of rocks by means of a pulsed water jet: Izvestiya Sibirskogo Otdeleniya Akademii Nauk USSR, English Translation No. OTS: 64-21809, U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Technical Services, Washington, D.C. Roche, Tim1264 Olde Farm Rd, Schaumburg, IL 60173-6607 Phone: (847) 925-0413

OCR for page 63
Voytsekhovskiy, B. V., 1967, Jet Nozzle for Obtaining High Pulse Dynamic Pressure Heads: U.S. Patent 3,343,794, September 26, 4 pp. Watson, J. D., 1974, Applications of Military Guns to High Speed Drilling and Excavation in Rock—Project REAM: Physics International Report No. PIFR-551, prepared for the USBM, Physics International, 45 leaves. Wyllie, M. R. J., 1971, Jetted particle drilling: Proceedings of Eighth World Petroleum Congress, Moscow, USSR. Young, F. M., 1963, The secondary breaking effect of heat-frequency electric energy applied to rock fragments: inRock Mechanics, Fairhurst, C., ed., Oxford, Pergamon Press, p. 185-203. Yutkin, L. A., 1955, Electrohydraulic Effect: Moscow, Mashgiz (State Scientific Technical Press for Machine Construction Literature), Translation No. AD-267-722, Armed Services Technical Information Agency, Arlington Hall Station, Arlington, Va.