Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Crowd
(Drilling Resistance vs. Rock Strength)
BDV 31 977 20
Project Manager: David Horhota, Ph.D., P.E.
UF PI: Michael McVay, Ph.D.
Graduate Students: Michael Rodgers, M.E., Caitlin Tibbetts, M.E.,
Undergraduate Students: Stephen Crawford, Matt Andrews,
Shelby Brothers, Tim Copeland, Aaron Hendricks, Michael Ferguson
FDOT Geotechnical Research in Progress Report
Presented by: Michael Rodgers, M.E.
University of Florida
Department of Civil & Coastal Engineering
Presented August 1, 2014
Scope
From 5 Drillings Parameters
Torque, T
Crowd, F
Penetration rate, u
Rotational speed, N
Bit diameter, d
Field Drilling
Obtained drill rig monitoring equipment from Jean Lutz, N.A.
Sites: Little River (Quincy); Overland (Jacksonville); Kanapaha
(Gainesville) All Sites have load tests
2
C16400 Pressure
Transducer
(Torque)
C16400 Pressure
Transducer
(Crowd)
F82 Rotary
Encoder
(Penetration
rate)
VR28 Proximity
Sensor
(Rotational
speed)
Junction
Boxes
Drilling Process
Create large synthetic
limestone (Gatorock) blocks
(40 x 22.5 x 22.5)
Ds vs. qu
Ds = aF/aT2 = 64NT2/Fud3
Karasawa compared:
Drillability Strength of
rock, Ds
Unconfined Compressive
Strength, Sc or qu
Channel 2
(Uncalibrated)
-9.668798065
-62.5090573
-10.24806841
-144.6969158
-9.556484249
-241.3569253
-9.58861208
Channel 4
(Uncalibrated)
-4.093927414
-77.39515653
-4.69895825
-179.6609006
-4.968884207
-389.2261041
-5.496425149
Channel 2
(Calibrated)
Channel 4
(Calibrated)
Measured Load
(lbs)
% Difference
-52.55
-73
62.77
-37.23%
-134.79
-174.83
154.81
-38.08%
-231.78
-383.99
307.89
-38.42%
10
Loading Phase
baseline
100
baseline
250
baseline
500
baseline
Channel 2
(Uncalibrated)
-9.668798065
-62.5090573
-10.24806841
-144.6969158
-9.556484249
-241.3569253
-9.58861208
Channel 4
(Uncalibrated)
-4.093927414
-77.39515653
-4.69895825
-179.6609006
-4.968884207
-389.2261041
-5.496425149
Channel 2
(Calibrated)
Channel 4
(Calibrated)
Measured Load
(lbs)
% Difference
Adjusted Load
(lbs)
% Difference
-52.55
-73
62.77
-37.23%
101.77
-2.43%
-134.79
-174.83
154.81
-38.08%
250.99
-0.57%
-231.78
-383.99
307.89
-38.42%
499.17
0.22%
11
Ch-1
-141.34
-283.02
-423.09
-561.30
Ch-2
-55.20
-101.77
-145.16
-186.70
Ch-3
-143.87
-283.22
-422.82
-560.20
Ch-4
54.59
99.32
139.65
183.56
14
15
Original data
Final Results - 673psi - Wet
Description
T (in-lbs)
Average
521.5
Maximum
849.2
Minimum
211.6
Std. Deviation
131.3
CV
0.252
F (lbf)
124.8
245.9
36.4
52.4
0.420
Updated data
Final Results - 673psi - Wet
Description
T (in-lbs)
Average
421.0
Maximum
587.2
Minimum
209.0
Std. Deviation
73.5
CV
0.175
F (lbf)
109.4
230.1
45.7
38.4
0.351
16
17
Ds (psi)
60000
50000
30000
20000
10000
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
qu (psi)
18
Field Monitoring
First field monitoring trial took place November 2013
at the Little River Bridge Site (Quincy Florida)
Case Atlantic allowed monitoring of their IMT AF 250
Drill Rig in cooperation with RS&H
Successfully monitored a test shaft and a production
shaft Monitored Full Length of Shaft
Test shaft was instrumented with an Osterberg load
cell
Instrumented with Strain Gages, i.e. measured skin friction
Estimated Skin Friction from Ds qu, qt fs
19
IMT AF 250
21
Junction Box
Cable
running to
the cab
Junction
Box
22
DIALOG (DAQ)
DIALOG
23
24
25
26
27
28
0.0
0.26
Stratification is observed
from both sets of data
9.12
23.82
32.74
Depth (ft)
Monitoring Strengths
40.75
Core Strengths
49.08
58.07
66.4
76.12
30
Summary of Statistics
12.1% difference for the
average strength
6.9% difference for the
maximum strength
32.5% difference for the
minimum strength
Less difference in actual
strength than maximum
Description
Average
Max
Min
Std Dev
CV
Monitored Data
qu (psi)
727.77
3406.08
103.59
490.92
0.67
Core Data
qu (psi)
827.89
3658.65
78.21
998.21
1.21
Frequency distribution
displays a log-normal
distribution as expected
Majority of strengths fell
within planned Gatorock
strengths for lab drilling
140 1667 psi
Future Plans
Finish Laboratory Drilling
Develop final Ds vs. qu and Ds vs. qt curves
32
Citations
Questions?
33