4.6 Article

Study on the cuttability characteristics of granites under conical picks by indentation tests

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10064-022-02703-1

Keywords

Granite excavation; Conical picks; Cuttability; Cutting force; Indentation test

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study estimated the cutting force on granitic rocks through indentation tests and validated the results with theoretical models. It examined the effects of cutting parameters on cutting performance and described the relationships between rock properties and cutting parameters. The study also discussed the performance of theoretical models for predicting cutting force in granite cutting.
The purpose of this study is to estimate the cutting force from indentation tests on granitic rocks and validate the results by means of theoretical models. In this sense, eight granite samples from different sites were collected for indentation tests by the conical pick. Firstly, petrographic and physico-mechanical characteristics of the granites were determined. Then, rock cutting experiments by means of indentation of the pick, which was calibrated along with Evans' theory, were conducted. The effects of some cutting parameters on cutting performance were examined. In addition, the relationships between rock properties and cutting parameters of conical pick were described by simple regression analyses. Besides, the tests did not enable us to have an idea about the wear on the conical picks due to the limited test period and insufficient contact area of the pick. The performance of theoretical models of cutting force was discussed for granite cutting based on statistical analysis. Accordingly, it was found that Goktan's theoretical model was generally found to be relatively stable and close to experimental results. Thus, it is concluded that the cutting forces of conical pick can be predicted by indentation tests.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available