ARMA 08-75

Rigid Impact – the Mechanism of Percussive Rock Drilling

Dongmin Niu1

Copyright 2008, ARMA, American Rock Mechanics Association

This paper was prepared for presentation at San Francisco 2008, the 42nd US Rock Mechanics Symposium and 2nd U.S.-Canada Rock Mechanics Symposium, held in San Francisco, June 29-
July 2, 2008.
This paper was selected for presentation by an ARMA Technical Program Committee following review of information contained in submitted earlier by the author(s). The material, as presented,
does not necessarily reflect any position of ARMA, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written
consent of ARMA is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgement of where and by whom the paper was presented.

ABSTRACT: Stress wave and its transmission has been the focus of the study of percussive rock drilling (PRD).
However, there are confusions from practical applications, such as the relationship of drilling efficiency with the
stress wave transmission and reflection. The paper introduced “rigid impact” theory based on the Impact Mechanics.
The relationship of PRD efficiency with drill system parameters was also discussed. The paper proposed that the rigid
impact work plays the key role in PRD. Stress wave generated in drill string by impact is actually an intermediate
process resulting in the mass body movement. The rock breaking process under indent impact was also discussed
based on the theory. The full understanding of the PRD mechanism would be significantly helpful to develop more
efficient drilling systems.

1. Introduction 2. Confusions from stress wave theory

Percussive drilling is one of the most original ways ever The one dimension stress wave transmission theory has
since people started to use the blasting method to obtain long been well accepted and widely used to explain the
minerals. It is still standard in the blasting holes drilling PRD so far [2, 3]. Take a typical top hammer drilling
of hard rock mining and construction in general. system for instance. It consists of a piston, a shank
Percussive rotary drilling gained more and more interests adapter and/or rods and a bit. Currently, the most
in oil and gas industries also since 1980’s because of its common description would be as below:
flexibility and higher efficiency in many applications,
especially in hard rock formations. Some special PRD The piston accelerates to a desired velocity and strikes
methods such as water and mud actuated hammers have the shank. Upon the impact, the drill rod particles
also been developed, while the traditional PRD achieve velocities, and therefore displacements in a
technologies are getting more sophisticated and direction away from the piston. The particles transmit
powerful. this motion to adjacent particles which then repeat the
process, creating a stress wave pulse. The same thing
Top hammer drilling and down the hole (DTH) or in the happens in piston. If the impact velocity is v , the
hole (ITH) drilling are the most commonly used PRD particles’ velocities associated with the compressive
methods. Both of them use the same drilling concept, waves going into the drill string and the piston are v / 2
with different drill string combination. and − v / 2 respectively. Therefore, when the latter wave
reaches the free end of the piston, the velocity of the
Researchers have been making great contributions so that piston has been reduced to v −v/ 2 = v/ 2. At the free end of
the drilling rate has been increased from 3-5m/hr in the piston, the compressive wave is reflected as a tensile
1900’s to 450m/hr now for underground small blast holes
wave with particle velocity −v/ 2 . When this wave
drilling, for either the drills or tools.
reaches the impact interface, the velocity of the piston
has been further reduced to v / 2 −v / 2 = 0 . Thus, from this
One of the most significant works was by Hustrulid. W.
A. and Fairhurst C. in early 1970’s [1]. Their time on, the piston is at rest and in the drill string there is
comprehensive experiments and the theoretical analysis a compressive wave with particle velocity v/2 and
were based on the prerequisite that stress wave length 2Lp . The energy of this wave equals to the impact
transmitted the impact energy into rock. However, there energy of the piston, transmitted into rock through the
are still many questions could not be answered. bit, causing the rock breakage.
Therefore, lack of full understanding of PRD mechanism
is still one of the key restrictions for the development of Based on the theory, the stress wave transmission is the
more efficient drilling technology. core of PRD. Therefore, the amount of stress wave
transmission and the reflection in a drilling system is
1
niu_dongmin@hotmail.com directly an indication of drilling efficiency or rate of

1
penetration and also determines the service life of the
drilling system accordingly.
However, the following questions and confusions are
difficult to be explained based on the stress wave
transmission theory (assuming that the contact areas and
the materials of piston and shank are the same):
• The piston is not likely at rest after striking if no
other external forces applied. Actually, it rebounds
and creates many vibration problems;
• The stress wave experiences reflection and/or
refraction during propagation along the drill string.
One dimension wave propagation theory is a
mathematical model, from which the wave
transmission is supposed to be along a slender bar
with uniform section and mediums are in full
contact on the interface [4]. We can derive from it
that the full contact of bit front face with rock will
result in the most efficient stress wave or impact
energy transmission. Obviously, such a conclusion
is completely contradictory with the fact that
sharper bits drill faster or penetrate deeper. But
they have less contact area with rock surface in
fact. For a normal button bit, we can estimate that
the practical contact area is only about 10-20% of
the bit front face area, and the sharper bits the less
contact area;
• From stress wave propagation theory, the drilling
efficiency would be no difference for drill strings
with different length, correspondingly different
body mass (assuming there are no couplings
involved);
• When a bar with chisel end directly impacts rock
surface with a significant speed, it causes rock
breaking because of its kinetic energy. There is no
stress wave within the bar before it hit the rock
surface. That is actually the most original way of
impact drilling. How the stress wave theory
explains the phenomenon?
Combining the aforementioned questions, less than 20%
of the total energy from an impact is used for breaking
rock in PRD even without considering other
consumptions such as frictions. The answer is really
questionable. It is definitely necessary to review our
understanding on PRD mechanism and to investigate the
impact drilling process from the energy generation of a
piston to the final dispersion of the energy in rock mass.
3. Review of percussive drilling process
The piston gains acceleration from high pressure
hydraulic oil or pressurized air and hit a shank at speed
Vp1. The process can be theoretically described by
Physics in different situations. In the following
discussion, the drilling string is static before impacted.
2
3.1 Perfectly rigid solid
The drill string will move in the impact direction upon
the impact of the piston. The energy transfer in the
system is described by principles of energy conservation
as:
1 1 1
MpVp12 = MpVp2 2 + MsVs12 (1)
2 2 2
Where Vp1 is the speed of piston before impact；Vp2 is
the speed of piston after impact (without the action force
of pressurized oil or air); Vs1 is the speed of drill string
after piston’s impact; Mp is the mass of piston; Ms is the
mass of drill string (including shank, couplings, rods and
bit).
From the principle of balance of linear momentum,
MpVp1=MpVp2 + MsVs1 (2)
Combine equation (1) and (2),
Mp − M s
Vp2=Vp1 × (3)
Mp+Ms
2 × Mp
Vs1=Vp1 × (4)
Mp+Ms
The drill string will start to move apart from the piston at
speed Vs1.
When the bit contacts rock surface as the movement of
the drill string, it creates an impact force Fi to rock
surface. The impact force can be described by equation
(5) from the principle of balance of linear momentum
Fi = Ms×Vs1/ Tb (5)
Where Tb is bit impact time.
If the bit is in contact with rock surface when the piston
hits the drill string, the bit impact work to rock surface
equals the kinetic energy of piston’s impact due to
perfect rigid assumption. The impact force to rock
surface is
Fi = Mp×Vp1 / Tb (6)
3.2 Ordinary elastic materials situation
Practically, there are elastic deformations in the collision
bodies, i.e. piston and drill string. Impact Mechanics
theory is introduced below to discuss the process.
Impact process can be, in general, literally described by
the Impact Mechanics as follows [5]. Upon the impact,
there is a large contact force on contact surfaces. It gives
a large contact stress and corresponding strains and
deformation. It has a resultant force of action or reaction
that acts in opposite directions on the two colliding
bodies and thereby resists interpenetration which would
otherwise develop after incidence if the bodies did not
deform. Initially the force increases with increasing
indentation and it reduces the speed at which the bodies
are approaching each other. At some instant during
impact the work done by the contact force is sufficient to
bring the speed of approach of the two bodies to zero. It
happens in a very small area because of the high impact
rate. It is like a short stiff spring which is compressed
between the two bodies during the period of contact.
Subsequently, the energy stored during compression
drives the two bodies apart until finally they separate
with velocities.
As compression restoring, the stresses generated by local
deformation cause the stress waves that radiate away
from the contact region. It will results in loss of a portion
of energy by lattice friction. This is the energy dissipated
in the collision [5]. It is only a few percent of the initial
kinetic energy [6]. Energy dissipation can also be due to
plastic deformation etc. It is defined by an energetic
coefficient of restitution (COR) e, 0 ≤ e≤ ≤ 1, where 0
implies a perfect plastic collision (i.e., no final
separation), while 1 implies a perfect elastic collision
(i.e., no loss of kinetic energy of impact). For a collision
of dissimilar materials, the composite COR e* is used.
For the convenience, we use E1 to represent the portion
of energy loss on the contact region of piston and drill
string. So the energy transformation at the impact surface
will be
1 1 1 drill system, a feeding force is applied to hold the bit in
MpVp12 = MpVp2 2 + MsVs12 + Ε1 (7)
2 2 2
The equation can be expressed literally as follows. Piston
1 bigger the e2*, the more severe the rebounding.
impacts the drill string with kinetic energy MpVp12 .
2
The energy is transformed into deformation energy, then
1 1
be restored to kinetic energy MpVp2 2 + MsVs12 with
2 2
some loss energy E1 after the impact. Therefore the drill
string impacts rock surface with kinetic energy (or
1 2
impact work) MsVs12 .
2 1
The separation velocity after collision is given by Impact
Mechanics as below [5, p28]:
(1+e1) × MsVp1
Vp2=Vp1 − (8a)
Mp+Ms
(1+e1) × MpVp1
Vs1= (8b)
Mp+Ms
Where e1 is the COR of piston/drill string collision.
When e1 =1 we have equation (3) and (4), the perfect
solid case.
The drill string gains kinetic and/or strain potential
energy. The energy then is transformed into impact work
3
to rock surface with the amount equal to the kinetic
energy Ms×Vs12/2 from deformation restoring. Similar to
the discussion of equation (7), on the contact surface of
bit and rock, the energy transformation is
1 1
MsVs12 = MsVs2 2 + E2 + Er (9)
2 2
Where Vs2 is the velocity of drill string after impacted by
piston. E2 is the deformation energy within bit contact
region. It is a negligible small part of the kinetic energy
due to very big hardness difference of bit and rock. The
bigger the hardness difference is, the less E2. Er is the
deformation energy of rock in the contact region. It is the
final effective energy causing rock breakage.
From equation (8a), when rock is in very big mass (i.e.
Mrock→∞), then
Vs2= − e2* × Vs1 (10a)
Where e2* is the composite COR of bit (tungsten carbide)
rock collision. Combining with equation (8b),
−e2* × (1+e1)MpVp1
Vs2= (10b)
Mp+Ms
Vs2 represents the rebounding of drill string after bit
impacts rock. It means that if the drill string is free of the
restriction, it will rebound at a velocity Vs2. In practical
contact with rock. So the rebounding creates a backward
impact work Ms×Vs22/2 on the feeding mechanism which
creates mechanical problems. The harder the rock is, the
From equation (9), the energy transmitted into rock and
therefore used for rock breaking is
1 1
Er = MsVs12 − MsVs2 2 − E2
2 2
1 (1+e1)2 (1 − e2*2 )MsMp
= MpVp12 × − E2
(Mp+Ms)2
= MpVp12 × Α − E2 (11a)
2
(1+e1) 2 (1 − e2* 2 )MsMp
A= (11b)
(Mp+Ms)2
A is an index indicating the efficiency of energy
transformation of the drill system which include the drill
string and rock properties. It can be used to evaluate the
design of drilling system.
3.3 The efficiency of percussive rock drilling
Fig 1 shows the relationship of index A with the mass
ratio Ms/Mp (assume E2=0). The maximum value is
achieved when Ms/Mp =1.
 80%
A e1=1
Ms/Mp =1
60%
40%
20%
0%
0 5 10 15 20
Fig. 1 The relationship of index A with the mass ratio Ms/Mp
(Assume E2=0; e2*=0.5)
In practical top hammer drilling system, the ratio is
above 5, the index is below 40%. It can even be less than
10% for long extension drilling. DTH hammer method is
more efficient from view point of Ms/Mp. However, the
current pneumatic DTH drilling efficiency is restricted
by low energy efficiency of air compressor and air
system. For the situation of Ms/Mp<1, more
investigations may be needed because Vs1 and Vp1 will
be in the same direction. However it seldom happens in a
practical application.
Fig. 2 shows the general relation of drilling efficiency
with material properties of the drill string and rock. The
efficiency index A increases with increasing drill string
rigidness (bigger e1) and decreasing rock hardness
(smaller e2*).
100%
A in the area. The test investigation done by Schormair N.
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
e1 /e2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Fig. 2 The relationship of index A with e1and e2* (Ms/Mp=1)
The above calculated relationship is supported by a field
test result of DTH drilling in Lac Des Iles Mine. Two
brand new bits had same front head and flushing design,
diameter 117mm. The masses were 9.4kg and 15kg
respectively. The piston mass was 7kg. The drilling was
during the same shift, same drill rig on same bench, holes
depth was around 27m. The average rate of penetration
(ROP) was 0.222m/min and 0.196m/min from 3 holes
respectively for each bit. The actual ROP difference is
12%. The calculated difference of index A from equation
(11b) is 11.3%, assuming e2*=0.5; e1=0.9.
In summary, the impact or percussive drilling utilizes the
much higher action force generated from the impact
e1=0.9 work (kinetic energy) to break rock. For a given impact
e1=0.8 system, the sharper the bit is, the smaller the contact area
e1=0.7 with rock surface, the higher stress in the rock contact
e1=0.5 region and easier to break the rock. The impact velocity,
the mass of piston and drill string, the elastic properties
of piston, drill string and bit determine the overall impact
efficiency. The friction happened with the impact was
not taken in consideration.
25
4. Rock breaking process under impact
The rock deformation energy Er is defined by equation
(11a). It causes the rock breakage. The principle of
interaction between bit front face and rock surface is
fundamentally the same as for piston and drill string.
However, the mechanical properties of rock and bit are
different from those of steels. The rock in the contact
region is compressed and the stress increases with the
increasing indentation to an instant when the work done
by the contact force is sufficient to bring the speed of
drill string to zero. The contact stresses in a very small
area of rock surface may exceed rock strength limit
during the process, causing breakage (the crushed zone,
refer to Fig. 3) when the impact speed Vs1, or the impact
force is high enough.
In the contact region of rock, the maximum stress
happens at a distance (=0.45a, [5]) beneath the dent
where the stress level would exceed the yield value of the
rock. Therefore, local failure happens and cracks initiate
e2=0.2
0.3
[9] indicated that most of the cracks beneath the bore
0.4
0.5
hole bottom surface run nearly parallel to the rock
0.6
surface. The restoring of the elastic deformation of
e1=1
compressed rock creates a tensile stress zone. The cracks
0.9 propagate by the tensile stress mainly in type I (opening)
0.8 causing the spalling of a mass of rock. The contact
region also generates stress waves and radiate away. The
0.7
0.5 pre-existing fissures in the stress wave field grow and
branch, potentially leading to a volume of rock broken. It
1
heavily relies on the size, the orientation and the amount
of pre-existing fissures. Big penetration rate can be
expected in highly fractured rocks.
The restoring of the compression drives the drill string
away at velocity Vs2, namely the rebounding of drill
string. The magnitude of Vs2 depends on the hardness of
rock and bit front head or e2* as well as other parameters
of the drill system, see equation (10). For very soft rock
like soil, e2*→0, therefore Vs2 →0, there will be almost
no rebounding. The harder the rock is, the bigger e2*, the
more severe the rebounding.
4

Fig. 3 Rock breaking process under indent impact
In summary, rock break process under indent impact is in
three zones: 1) crushed zone due to high contact stress;
2) spalling of a mass of rock from cracks propagation
with the compression restoring of the contact region; and
3) a potential volume rock breakage from the growth of
pre-existing fissures due to the influence of stress wave.
5. The role of elastic waves in PRD
The role of the stress wave in impact process was
discussed by Kaufman [7]. When a stress pulse (or an
impact force) applied on the face of a slender bar end, a
stress wave is formed and travels back and forth along
the bar. The reflection and refraction of the wave finally
causes the mass movement of the bar. The role of the
stress wave is to propagate the impact signal to all the
particles of the bar and results in the movement of the
whole body at speed V=δt/T υ0. Where δt and υ0 is the
period of time and the speed of applied stress pulse; T is
the period of time the wave travels through the bar.
The traveling of the stress wave causes lattice friction,
therefore heating the bar. It causes some energy loss.
However, it is only a few percent of the initial kinetic
energy for either elastic-only or elastic-plastic impact [6].
For a truly elastic impact hard sphere with a steel target,
the fraction of the initial kinetic energy of the sphere
3/5
which dissipates as elastic waves is λ≈1.04(V/C0) .
Where V is the velocity of impact and C0 is the velocity
of longitudinal elastic wave along a thin rod of the target
material.
The deformation in rock upon the bit impact also
generates stress waves. Its magnitude and frequency are
different from that in drill string due to different
properties of steels and rocks. The test results from G.
Han’s [8] illustrated the stresses waves caused by single
impact in drill rod and rock. The wave in rock was
explained conventionally as being transmitted from drill
string. Some of the elastic waves in drill string indeed
will be transmitted into rock via bit. However, the
amount of the transmission will be very limited as
previously discussed.
6. Conclusions
6.1 It is the rigid impact effect of the drill string that
transfers the kinetic energy of piston to rock and causes
the breakage. The piston’s impact is partially
transformed into the kinetic energy of drill string, further
transformed into impact work to break rock.
6.2 The impact drilling efficiency of a drilling process
depends on the impact rate Vp1, the mass Ms, Mp and the
material properties e1 of the piston and the drill string
and also rock properties e2*. Their relationship is defined
by equation (11).
6.3 The stress wave induced in drill string by elastic
deformation causes the energy loss in the rock drilling. It
is, however, only a few percent of the initial kinetic
energy. High rigid piston and drill string will give high
drilling efficiency.
6.4 The rock breaking process under indent impact is in
three zones: 1) crushed zone due to high contact stress;
2) spalling of a mass of rock from cracks propagation
due to compression restoring of the contact region; and
3) a volume rock break from preexisting fissures
propagation due to the influence of stress waves.
The paper proposed the “rigid impact theory” for
percussive rock drilling, discussed the relationship of the
parameters of drill system with drilling efficiency. It is
consistent with previous field test results. More work,
especially controlled laboratory experiments are
necessary to thoroughly accomplish the theory.
References
[1] Hustrulid. W. A. and Fairhurst C. (1971/1972). A
Theoretical and Experimental Study of the Percussive Drilling
of Rock, Part I-IV, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., Vol.8, p311-
333; p335-340; Vol.9, p417-429; p431-442
[2] Heinio, M., Rock Excavation Handbook, Sandvik Tamrock
Corp. 1999
[3] Nordbradt, A., Percussive rock drilling/ Experience and
knowledge, CD version, Atlas Copco, 2006
[4] Wasley, J. Richard (1973). Stress Wave Propagation in
Solids. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York 1973
[5] Stronge W. J. Impact Mechanics, Cambridge University
Press. 2000
[6] Hutchings I. M. 1979. Energy Absorbed by Elastic Waves
during Plastic Impact, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 12 1819-1824
[7] Kaufman, A.A; Levshin, A. (2004), the Role of Wave
Propagation in the Motion of an Elastic Body, Eur. J. Phys. 25,
257-268
[8] Han G., Bruno M. (2005). Lab Investigation of Percussion
Drilling: From Single Impact to Full Scale Fluid Hammer.
ARMA/USRMS 06-962.
[9] Schormair N. et al, (2006). The influence of anisotropy on
hard rock drilling and cutting, IAEG Paper number 491