CA2253448C - Hammer device - Google Patents
Hammer device Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CA2253448C CA2253448C CA002253448A CA2253448A CA2253448C CA 2253448 C CA2253448 C CA 2253448C CA 002253448 A CA002253448 A CA 002253448A CA 2253448 A CA2253448 A CA 2253448A CA 2253448 C CA2253448 C CA 2253448C
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- drill bit
- piston
- impedance
- length
- range
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Expired - Fee Related
Links
Landscapes
- Earth Drilling (AREA)
Abstract
The present invention relates to a hammer device, preferably a down-the-hole hammer, including a drill bit (11) and a piston (10) reciprocating therebehind to periodically strike the drill bit. The drill bi t (11) includes front (11a) and rear (11b) portions of different impedance, and the piston (10) includes front (10b) and rear (10a) portions of different impedance. In the drill bit, the front portion (11a) has a larger impedance than the rear portion (11b). In the piston, the rear portion (10a) has a larger impedance than the front portion (10b). The length of the drill bit front portion (11a) is about twice the length of the drill bit rear portion (11b). The length of the piston rear portion (10a) is about twice the length of the piston front portion (10b). The invention further relates to a drill bit {11) and a piston (10), per se.</SD OAB>
Description
WO 97!42392 PCT/SE97/00754 HAMMER DEVICE
Background of the invention The present invention relates to a hammer device, preferably a down-the-hole hammer, including a casing, a piston, a drill bit and means for activating the piston to frequently strike the drill bit. The invention also relates to a piston and a drill bit per se.
in down-the-hole hammers the kinetic energy of the piston is transmitted by elastic waves through the drill bit and finally to the rock. However, said transmission is not carried out in an optimal way since the piston is not related to the drill bit in terms of length and mass. Also the drill bit does not cooperate with the rock in the best mode.
in prior art down-the-hole hammers very little attention has been paid to the adaptation of the piston to the drill bit when said drill bit has a mass concentration at the end directed towards the rock.
In applicants US-A-5,305,841, however, the importance of choosing appropriate impedance on the cooperating drill bit and piston, is discussed. The document discloses a down-the-hole hammer, wherein the drill bit includes front and rear portions of different impedance, and the piston includes front and rear portions of different impedance. In the drill bit, the front portion has a larger impedance than the rear portion. In the piston, the rear portion has a larger impedance than the front portion. However the rear portion of the drill bit and the front portion of the piston include relatively small masses, which negatively affects the degree of efficiency during drilling. Furthermore, the known hammer device has been complicated to manufacture due to the requirements for guiding the elongated portions of the bit and the piston.
The objects of the present invention are to further improve the energy transmission from the piston to the rock via the drill bit and to facilitate the manufacture of the hammer device. This is realized by paying attention also to the distribution of the impedance in the piston and the drill bit of a hammer device as defined in the appending claims.
coN~~r~~oN coy Brief descrirJtion of the drawing Below an embodiment of a down-the-hole hammer according to the present invention is described, reference being made to the accompanying drawings, where Fig. 1 schematically discloses the piston and the drill bit of a down-the-hole hammer according to the present invention; Fig. 2 discloses the relationship between the applied force versus the penetration for a drill bit working a rock surface; Fig. 3 discloses in a graph the relationship between the degree of efficiency versus the relationship ZM/ZT; Fig. 4 discloses in a graph the relationship between the degree of efficiency versus the relationship LM/LT or TMITT; Fig. 5 discloses in a graph the relationship between the degree of efficiency versus the parameter f3;
and Fig. 6 discloses a graph showing the compressive and tensile stresses in the piston and the dri I1 bit.
In Fig. 1 the piston 10 and the drill bit 1 1 are schematically shown. As is evident from Fig. 1 the piston 10 and the drill bit 11 have a substantially reversed design relative to each other.
The piston 10 has two portions 10a and 10b. The portion 10a has the length LM1 and the impedance ZM1 while the portion 10b has the length LT1 and the impedance ZT1. The dri I I bit 11 has two portions 1 1 a and 1 1 b. The portion 1 1 a, i.e. the head of the drill bit, has the length LM2 and the impedance ZM2 while the portion 11b, i.e. the shaft of the drill bit, has the length LT2 and the impedance When stress wave energy is transmitted through pistons and drill bits it has been found that the influence by variations in the cross-sectional area A, the Young's modules E and the density 8 can be summarized in a parameter Z named impedance. The impedance Z = AE/c, where c = (E/8)1/2, i.e. the elastic wave speed. Any combinations of A, E and 8 that corresponds to a certain value of the impedance Z gives the same result in respect of stress wave energy transmission.
It should be pointed out that the impedance Z is determined in a certain cross-section transverse to the axial direction of the piston 10 and the drill bit 11, i.e. the impedance Z is a function along the axial direction of the piston 10 and the drill bit 11.
Therefore, within the scope of the present invention it is of course possible that the impedances Z for the different portions 10a, 1 Ob, 11 a and 11 b may vary slightly, i.e. ZM1, ZT1~ ZT2 and ZM2 do not need to have a constant value within each portion but can vary in the axial direction of said portions 1 Oa, 10b, 1 1 a and 1 1 b.
In the practical design of the piston 10 and the drill bit 11 the provision of e.g.
circumferential grooves and/or splines are quite frequent. Also the provision of e.g.
a circumferential shoulder may be necessary.
It should also be pointed out that even if e.g. the portions 10a and 10b must have different impedances ZM1 and ZT1 respectively it is possible to design the piston 10 with a generally constant cross-sectional area by using different materials in the portions 10a and 10b.
It is also necessary to define a further parameter, namely a time parameter T.
The definition is T = L/c, where L is the length of the portion in question and c is the elastic wave speed in the portion in question. Thus for the portion 10a TM1 =
LM1/cM1, for the portion 11 a TM2 = LM2/cM2, for the portion 10b TT1 =
LT1/cT1 and for the portions 1 1 b TT2 = LT2/cT2~ The reason why it is necessary to have the time parameter T instead of the length L is that different portions may consist of different materials that have different values regarding the elastic wave speed c.
Within the scope of the present invention it is also possible that e.g. the portion 10a can consist of several sub-portions having different elastic wave speed c. In such a case the time parameter T is calculated for each sub-portion and the total value of the time parameter T for the entire portion 10a is the sum of the time parameters T
for each sub-portion.
Fig. 2 shows the relationship between the force F applied to the rock versus the - penetration a into the rock . The line k1 illustrates the relation between the force F
and the penetration a when a force F is loaded to the rock. Thus k1 = F/u during the loading sequence and k1 is a constant. The force F1 corresponds to the 'WO 97/42392 PCT/SE97/00754 penetration u1. The unloading of the force F is illustrated by the line k2.
Thus k2 =
Flu during the unloading sequence and k2 is a constant. When complete unloading has taken place there is a remaining penetration u2 which means that a certain , work has been carried out upon the rock, said work being illustrated by the triangular dotted area. The amount of work that said area represents is defined as .
W.
The kinetic energy of the piston 10 when moving towards the drill bit 11 is defined as Wk.
As stated above the aim of the present invention is to maximize the degree of efficiency, which is defined as the relationship W/Wk.
The present invention is based on the idea that the mass distribution of the piston 10 is such that initially a smaller mass, i.e. the portion 10b is contacting the drill bit 11. Subsequently, a larger mass, i.e. the portion 10a, follows. It has turned out that by such an arrangement almost ail of the kinetic energy of the piston is transmitted into the rock via the drill bit.
The most important parameter is the impedance ratios ZM1/ZT1 and ZM2/ZT2~
Said parameter should be in a certain interval. In order to have an optimum degree of efficiency it is also important that the time parameter ratios TM1/TT1 and TM2~T2 are in a certain interval.
In Fig. 3 a graph shows the relationship between the degree of efficiency W/Wk versus the impedance ratio ZM/ZT, said ratio being valid for both the piston 10 and the drill bit 1 1. When setting up the graph in Fig. 3, TMlTT = 2 and ~ = 0.5, see below concerning definition of f~. As can be learnt from Fig. 3 the efficiency peak is within the interval 3.5 - 5.8, preferably 4.0 - 5.3 of ZM/ZT. In said preferred interval the degree of efficiency W/Wk is higher than 96 %. The highest degree of efficiency , W/Wk in said interval is achieved when ZM/ZT is about 4.6.
i - Since the degree of efficiency W/Wk has its peak when ZM/ZT is about 4.6 it can be concluded that the theoretically preferred design is when the different portions 10a, 10b and 11a, 11b of the piston 10 and drill bit 11, respectively, each have a constant impedance Z in their axial directions. Also the portions 10a and 11a should have the same impedance and the portions 10b and 11 b should have the same impedance. However, this is not likely to happen in the practical embodiments, see above. Therefore, it should again be emphasized that the 5 impedances ZM1, ZT1~ ZT2 and ZM2 need not have constant values but can vary in the axial direction of the corresponding portions 10a, 10b, 1 1 a and 11 b, respectively. The only restriction is that the ratios ZMIlZTI and ZM2/ZT2 are in the intervals specified in the appending claims.
In Fig. 4 a graph shows the relationship between the degree of efficiency W/Wk versus the length ratio LM/L-I- or the time ratio TM/TT, said ratios being valid for both the piston 10 and the drill bit 11. When setting up the graph in Fig. 4, ZM/ZT
= 4.6 and f~ = i, see below for definition of (~. As can be learnt from Fig. 4 the first peak A of W/Wk is within the interval 0,4 - 0,6 of LM/LT or TM/TT. In said interval the degree of efficiency W/Wk is well over 90 %. The highest degree of efficiency is achieved, according to our prior patent to benefit from the first peak A, when LM/LT or TMITT = 0,5.
So far, the present description coincides with the state of the art as disclosed in US-A-5,305,841. We have, however, searched for and found a second peak B, outside the borders of the graph in Fig. 4 of said prior patent. The second peak B can be somewhat lower than the first peak A but peak B is much wider than peak A. The large width of peak B makes the manufacturing of the hammer device according to the present invention less sensitive to the provision of grooves, shoulder and/or splines. For example if the efficiency shall be 96 % or more, the ratio between LM
and LT (or between TM and TT) can vary within only 0.43 to 0.60 for the peak A
area, while it can vary between i .34 to 2.61 for the peak B area. That is, the peak B
area is at least about 7 times the peak A area at a degree of efficiency not less than 96 %, which makes the hammer device efficiency less sensitive to disturbing additions, such as grooves, etc. The optimum design is when TM1 is equal to and TT1 is equal to TT2. A further advantage with increasing the lengths of the portions 10a and 11a is that the total kinetic mass will increase, i.e. will give more power in each impact, compared to the hammer device of the prior patent.
WO 97/42392 PCT/SE97l00754 When using the findings according to this invention as regards the impedance ratio ZIvVZT and the time ratio TM/TT in dimensioning work it is also necessary to introduce a parameter named f~. Said parameter f~ = 2LH k1 / AT2ET2, where LH
=
LT2 + LM2; k1 is the constant illustrated in Fig. 2; AT2 is the cross-sectional area of the portion 1 1 b; and ET2 is the Young's' modulus for the portion 11 b.
In Fig. S the relationship of the degree of efficiency W/Wk versus the parameter (3 is shown. When setting up the graph of Fig. 5 ZM/ZT = 4.6 and TM/TT = 2. From Fig. 5 it can be learnt that the degree of efficiency W/Wk decreases for an increasing value of f3. Therefore it is important that proper matching values for LH
and AT2 are chosen and also that a material having a proper Young's' modulus is chosen. For practical reasons it is not possible to give f~ a too small value although the degree of efficiency W/Wk increases for a decreasing value of f~.
A very important favorable feature of the present invention is that the piston and the drill bit of a hammer device according to the present invention are not subjected to any tensile stresses worth mentioning during the rock crushing work period of the stress wave. Thus the original stress wave can be reflected several times within the system without generating any tensile stress waves worth mentioning. In Fig. 6 the highest positive (tensile) stress and the highest negative (compressive) stress in every cross-section of the piston 10 and drill bit 11 are shown. In the graph the shown stresses are dimension less since they are related to a reference stress. From Fig. 6 it can be seen that generally only the piston front portion 10b and the drill bit rear portion 11 b are subjected to tensile stresses and that the values of said stresses are negligible. It should be pointed out that since tensile stresses are almost absent in the piston and drill bit according to the present invention said details will have a longer life than corresponding details in a conventional down-the-hole hammer.
It is the tensile stresses that give rise to fatigue of details of that kind.
The graphs according to Figs. 3, 4 ,5 and 6 have been set up by using a computer program simulating percussive rock drilling. However, the computer program has only been used to verify the theories of the present invention, namely to have a reversed design of the piston 10 and the drill bit 11.
Background of the invention The present invention relates to a hammer device, preferably a down-the-hole hammer, including a casing, a piston, a drill bit and means for activating the piston to frequently strike the drill bit. The invention also relates to a piston and a drill bit per se.
in down-the-hole hammers the kinetic energy of the piston is transmitted by elastic waves through the drill bit and finally to the rock. However, said transmission is not carried out in an optimal way since the piston is not related to the drill bit in terms of length and mass. Also the drill bit does not cooperate with the rock in the best mode.
in prior art down-the-hole hammers very little attention has been paid to the adaptation of the piston to the drill bit when said drill bit has a mass concentration at the end directed towards the rock.
In applicants US-A-5,305,841, however, the importance of choosing appropriate impedance on the cooperating drill bit and piston, is discussed. The document discloses a down-the-hole hammer, wherein the drill bit includes front and rear portions of different impedance, and the piston includes front and rear portions of different impedance. In the drill bit, the front portion has a larger impedance than the rear portion. In the piston, the rear portion has a larger impedance than the front portion. However the rear portion of the drill bit and the front portion of the piston include relatively small masses, which negatively affects the degree of efficiency during drilling. Furthermore, the known hammer device has been complicated to manufacture due to the requirements for guiding the elongated portions of the bit and the piston.
The objects of the present invention are to further improve the energy transmission from the piston to the rock via the drill bit and to facilitate the manufacture of the hammer device. This is realized by paying attention also to the distribution of the impedance in the piston and the drill bit of a hammer device as defined in the appending claims.
coN~~r~~oN coy Brief descrirJtion of the drawing Below an embodiment of a down-the-hole hammer according to the present invention is described, reference being made to the accompanying drawings, where Fig. 1 schematically discloses the piston and the drill bit of a down-the-hole hammer according to the present invention; Fig. 2 discloses the relationship between the applied force versus the penetration for a drill bit working a rock surface; Fig. 3 discloses in a graph the relationship between the degree of efficiency versus the relationship ZM/ZT; Fig. 4 discloses in a graph the relationship between the degree of efficiency versus the relationship LM/LT or TMITT; Fig. 5 discloses in a graph the relationship between the degree of efficiency versus the parameter f3;
and Fig. 6 discloses a graph showing the compressive and tensile stresses in the piston and the dri I1 bit.
In Fig. 1 the piston 10 and the drill bit 1 1 are schematically shown. As is evident from Fig. 1 the piston 10 and the drill bit 11 have a substantially reversed design relative to each other.
The piston 10 has two portions 10a and 10b. The portion 10a has the length LM1 and the impedance ZM1 while the portion 10b has the length LT1 and the impedance ZT1. The dri I I bit 11 has two portions 1 1 a and 1 1 b. The portion 1 1 a, i.e. the head of the drill bit, has the length LM2 and the impedance ZM2 while the portion 11b, i.e. the shaft of the drill bit, has the length LT2 and the impedance When stress wave energy is transmitted through pistons and drill bits it has been found that the influence by variations in the cross-sectional area A, the Young's modules E and the density 8 can be summarized in a parameter Z named impedance. The impedance Z = AE/c, where c = (E/8)1/2, i.e. the elastic wave speed. Any combinations of A, E and 8 that corresponds to a certain value of the impedance Z gives the same result in respect of stress wave energy transmission.
It should be pointed out that the impedance Z is determined in a certain cross-section transverse to the axial direction of the piston 10 and the drill bit 11, i.e. the impedance Z is a function along the axial direction of the piston 10 and the drill bit 11.
Therefore, within the scope of the present invention it is of course possible that the impedances Z for the different portions 10a, 1 Ob, 11 a and 11 b may vary slightly, i.e. ZM1, ZT1~ ZT2 and ZM2 do not need to have a constant value within each portion but can vary in the axial direction of said portions 1 Oa, 10b, 1 1 a and 1 1 b.
In the practical design of the piston 10 and the drill bit 11 the provision of e.g.
circumferential grooves and/or splines are quite frequent. Also the provision of e.g.
a circumferential shoulder may be necessary.
It should also be pointed out that even if e.g. the portions 10a and 10b must have different impedances ZM1 and ZT1 respectively it is possible to design the piston 10 with a generally constant cross-sectional area by using different materials in the portions 10a and 10b.
It is also necessary to define a further parameter, namely a time parameter T.
The definition is T = L/c, where L is the length of the portion in question and c is the elastic wave speed in the portion in question. Thus for the portion 10a TM1 =
LM1/cM1, for the portion 11 a TM2 = LM2/cM2, for the portion 10b TT1 =
LT1/cT1 and for the portions 1 1 b TT2 = LT2/cT2~ The reason why it is necessary to have the time parameter T instead of the length L is that different portions may consist of different materials that have different values regarding the elastic wave speed c.
Within the scope of the present invention it is also possible that e.g. the portion 10a can consist of several sub-portions having different elastic wave speed c. In such a case the time parameter T is calculated for each sub-portion and the total value of the time parameter T for the entire portion 10a is the sum of the time parameters T
for each sub-portion.
Fig. 2 shows the relationship between the force F applied to the rock versus the - penetration a into the rock . The line k1 illustrates the relation between the force F
and the penetration a when a force F is loaded to the rock. Thus k1 = F/u during the loading sequence and k1 is a constant. The force F1 corresponds to the 'WO 97/42392 PCT/SE97/00754 penetration u1. The unloading of the force F is illustrated by the line k2.
Thus k2 =
Flu during the unloading sequence and k2 is a constant. When complete unloading has taken place there is a remaining penetration u2 which means that a certain , work has been carried out upon the rock, said work being illustrated by the triangular dotted area. The amount of work that said area represents is defined as .
W.
The kinetic energy of the piston 10 when moving towards the drill bit 11 is defined as Wk.
As stated above the aim of the present invention is to maximize the degree of efficiency, which is defined as the relationship W/Wk.
The present invention is based on the idea that the mass distribution of the piston 10 is such that initially a smaller mass, i.e. the portion 10b is contacting the drill bit 11. Subsequently, a larger mass, i.e. the portion 10a, follows. It has turned out that by such an arrangement almost ail of the kinetic energy of the piston is transmitted into the rock via the drill bit.
The most important parameter is the impedance ratios ZM1/ZT1 and ZM2/ZT2~
Said parameter should be in a certain interval. In order to have an optimum degree of efficiency it is also important that the time parameter ratios TM1/TT1 and TM2~T2 are in a certain interval.
In Fig. 3 a graph shows the relationship between the degree of efficiency W/Wk versus the impedance ratio ZM/ZT, said ratio being valid for both the piston 10 and the drill bit 1 1. When setting up the graph in Fig. 3, TMlTT = 2 and ~ = 0.5, see below concerning definition of f~. As can be learnt from Fig. 3 the efficiency peak is within the interval 3.5 - 5.8, preferably 4.0 - 5.3 of ZM/ZT. In said preferred interval the degree of efficiency W/Wk is higher than 96 %. The highest degree of efficiency , W/Wk in said interval is achieved when ZM/ZT is about 4.6.
i - Since the degree of efficiency W/Wk has its peak when ZM/ZT is about 4.6 it can be concluded that the theoretically preferred design is when the different portions 10a, 10b and 11a, 11b of the piston 10 and drill bit 11, respectively, each have a constant impedance Z in their axial directions. Also the portions 10a and 11a should have the same impedance and the portions 10b and 11 b should have the same impedance. However, this is not likely to happen in the practical embodiments, see above. Therefore, it should again be emphasized that the 5 impedances ZM1, ZT1~ ZT2 and ZM2 need not have constant values but can vary in the axial direction of the corresponding portions 10a, 10b, 1 1 a and 11 b, respectively. The only restriction is that the ratios ZMIlZTI and ZM2/ZT2 are in the intervals specified in the appending claims.
In Fig. 4 a graph shows the relationship between the degree of efficiency W/Wk versus the length ratio LM/L-I- or the time ratio TM/TT, said ratios being valid for both the piston 10 and the drill bit 11. When setting up the graph in Fig. 4, ZM/ZT
= 4.6 and f~ = i, see below for definition of (~. As can be learnt from Fig. 4 the first peak A of W/Wk is within the interval 0,4 - 0,6 of LM/LT or TM/TT. In said interval the degree of efficiency W/Wk is well over 90 %. The highest degree of efficiency is achieved, according to our prior patent to benefit from the first peak A, when LM/LT or TMITT = 0,5.
So far, the present description coincides with the state of the art as disclosed in US-A-5,305,841. We have, however, searched for and found a second peak B, outside the borders of the graph in Fig. 4 of said prior patent. The second peak B can be somewhat lower than the first peak A but peak B is much wider than peak A. The large width of peak B makes the manufacturing of the hammer device according to the present invention less sensitive to the provision of grooves, shoulder and/or splines. For example if the efficiency shall be 96 % or more, the ratio between LM
and LT (or between TM and TT) can vary within only 0.43 to 0.60 for the peak A
area, while it can vary between i .34 to 2.61 for the peak B area. That is, the peak B
area is at least about 7 times the peak A area at a degree of efficiency not less than 96 %, which makes the hammer device efficiency less sensitive to disturbing additions, such as grooves, etc. The optimum design is when TM1 is equal to and TT1 is equal to TT2. A further advantage with increasing the lengths of the portions 10a and 11a is that the total kinetic mass will increase, i.e. will give more power in each impact, compared to the hammer device of the prior patent.
WO 97/42392 PCT/SE97l00754 When using the findings according to this invention as regards the impedance ratio ZIvVZT and the time ratio TM/TT in dimensioning work it is also necessary to introduce a parameter named f~. Said parameter f~ = 2LH k1 / AT2ET2, where LH
=
LT2 + LM2; k1 is the constant illustrated in Fig. 2; AT2 is the cross-sectional area of the portion 1 1 b; and ET2 is the Young's' modulus for the portion 11 b.
In Fig. S the relationship of the degree of efficiency W/Wk versus the parameter (3 is shown. When setting up the graph of Fig. 5 ZM/ZT = 4.6 and TM/TT = 2. From Fig. 5 it can be learnt that the degree of efficiency W/Wk decreases for an increasing value of f3. Therefore it is important that proper matching values for LH
and AT2 are chosen and also that a material having a proper Young's' modulus is chosen. For practical reasons it is not possible to give f~ a too small value although the degree of efficiency W/Wk increases for a decreasing value of f~.
A very important favorable feature of the present invention is that the piston and the drill bit of a hammer device according to the present invention are not subjected to any tensile stresses worth mentioning during the rock crushing work period of the stress wave. Thus the original stress wave can be reflected several times within the system without generating any tensile stress waves worth mentioning. In Fig. 6 the highest positive (tensile) stress and the highest negative (compressive) stress in every cross-section of the piston 10 and drill bit 11 are shown. In the graph the shown stresses are dimension less since they are related to a reference stress. From Fig. 6 it can be seen that generally only the piston front portion 10b and the drill bit rear portion 11 b are subjected to tensile stresses and that the values of said stresses are negligible. It should be pointed out that since tensile stresses are almost absent in the piston and drill bit according to the present invention said details will have a longer life than corresponding details in a conventional down-the-hole hammer.
It is the tensile stresses that give rise to fatigue of details of that kind.
The graphs according to Figs. 3, 4 ,5 and 6 have been set up by using a computer program simulating percussive rock drilling. However, the computer program has only been used to verify the theories of the present invention, namely to have a reversed design of the piston 10 and the drill bit 11.
It should be pointed out that the present invention is in no way restricted to a down-the-hole hammer but is also applicable in e.g. so called impact breakers and hard rack excavating machines. Generally speaking the invention can be used in a piston-drill bit system where the piston is acting directly upon the drill bit. Also S there is no limitation concerning the activation of the piston. This means that such activation can be effected by e.g. a hydraulic medium, by air or by any other suitable means.
Although the present invention has been described in connection with a preferred embodiment thereof, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that additions, deletions, modifications, and substitutions not specifically described may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the appended claims.
Although the present invention has been described in connection with a preferred embodiment thereof, it will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that additions, deletions, modifications, and substitutions not specifically described may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the appended claims.
Claims (11)
1. ~A down-the-hole hammer device comprising a drill bit disposed at a front end of the device, and a piston mounted longitudinally behind said drill bit for reciprocation in a longitudinal direction to repeatedly strike said drill bit, said drill bit including front and rear portions of different impedance, and said piston including front and rear portions of different impedance, wherein, Z M1/Z T1 is in the range of 3.5 to 5.8, and Z M2/Z T2 is in the range of 3.5 to 5.8, where Z M1 is the impedance of said piston rear portion, where Z T1 is the impedance of said piston front portion, where Z M2 is the impedance of said drill bit front portion, and where Z T2 is the impedance of said drill bit rear portion, each said impedance Z being mathematically defined as Z = AE/c, where A is the cross-sectional area, E is Young's modulus and where b is the density and where the elastic wave speed c = (E/.delta.)1/2, wherein:
L M1/L T1 or T M1/T T1 is in the range of 1.0 to 3.0, and L M2/L T2 or T M2/T T2 is in the range of 1.0 to 3.0, where:
L M1 is the length and T M1 is the time parameter of said piston rear portion, L T1 is the length and T T1 is the time parameter of said piston front portion, L M2 is the length and T M2 is the time parameter of said drill bit front portion, L T2 is the length and T T2 is the time parameter of said drill bit rear portion, each said time parameter being mathematically defined as T = L/c, where L is the length of the portion in question and c is the elastic wave speed in the portion in question.
L M1/L T1 or T M1/T T1 is in the range of 1.0 to 3.0, and L M2/L T2 or T M2/T T2 is in the range of 1.0 to 3.0, where:
L M1 is the length and T M1 is the time parameter of said piston rear portion, L T1 is the length and T T1 is the time parameter of said piston front portion, L M2 is the length and T M2 is the time parameter of said drill bit front portion, L T2 is the length and T T2 is the time parameter of said drill bit rear portion, each said time parameter being mathematically defined as T = L/c, where L is the length of the portion in question and c is the elastic wave speed in the portion in question.
2. ~A down-the-hole hammer device according to claim 1 wherein L M1/L T1 or T M1/T T1 is in the range 1.5 to 2.5 and L M2/L T2 or T M2/T T2 is in the range 1.5 to 2.5.
3. ~A down-the-hole hammer device according to claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the ratios Z M1/Z T1 and Z M2/Z T2 are in the interval 4.0 - 5.3 and that the ratio L M2/L T2 or T M2/T T2 is about 2 and that Z M1 is equal to Z M2 and Z T1 is equal to Z T2.
4. ~A down-the hole hammer device according to claim 3, wherein the interval is 4.6.
5. ~A down-the-hole hammer device according to claim 1 or claim 2, wherein the piston and the drill bit have a mirror-imaged design relative each other in respect of the time parameter (T) or the length parameter (L).
6. ~A piston for a down-the-hole hammer device for being reciprocated longitudinally into striking engagement with a drill bit located in the front of the piston, said piston including front and rear portions of different impedance, wherein:
Z M1/Z T1 is in the range of 3.5 to 5.8, where Z M1 is the impedance of said piston rear portion, where Z T1 is the impedance of said piston front portion, each said impedance Z being mathematically defined as Z = AE/c, where A is the cross-sectional area, E is Young's modulus and where .delta. is the density and where the elastic wave speed c = (E/.delta.)1/2, wherein:
L M1/L T M1 or T M1/T T1 is in the range of 1.0 to 3.0, where:
L M1 is the length and T M1 is the time parameter of said piston rear portion, L T1, is the length and T T1 is the time parameter of said piston front portion, each said time parameter being mathematically defined as T = L/c, where L is the length of the portion in question and c is the elastic wave speed in the portion in question.
Z M1/Z T1 is in the range of 3.5 to 5.8, where Z M1 is the impedance of said piston rear portion, where Z T1 is the impedance of said piston front portion, each said impedance Z being mathematically defined as Z = AE/c, where A is the cross-sectional area, E is Young's modulus and where .delta. is the density and where the elastic wave speed c = (E/.delta.)1/2, wherein:
L M1/L T M1 or T M1/T T1 is in the range of 1.0 to 3.0, where:
L M1 is the length and T M1 is the time parameter of said piston rear portion, L T1, is the length and T T1 is the time parameter of said piston front portion, each said time parameter being mathematically defined as T = L/c, where L is the length of the portion in question and c is the elastic wave speed in the portion in question.
7. ~A piston according to claim 6, wherein L M1/ L T1 or T M1/T T1 is in the range of 1.5 to 2.5.
8. ~A piston according to claim 6, wherein the ratio L M1/L T1 or T M1/T T1, is about 2.
9. ~A drill bit for a down-the-hole hammer device for being repeatedly struck by a longitudinally reciprocating piston located behind said drill bit, said drill bit including front and rear portions of different impedance, wherein:
Z M2/Z T2 is in the range of 3.5 to 5.8, where Z M2 is the impedance of said drill bit front portion, where Z T2 is the impedance of said drill bit rear portion, each said impedance Z being mathematically defined as Z = AE/c, where A is the cross-sectional area, E is Young's modulus and where .delta. is the density and where the elastic wave speed c = (E/.delta.)1/2, wherein:
L M2/L T2 or T M2/T T2 is in the range of 1.0 to 3.0, where:
L M2 is the length and T M2 is the time parameter of said drill bit front portion, L T2 is the length and T T2 is the time parameter of said drill bit rear portion, each said time parameter being mathematically defined as T = L/c, where L is the length of the portion in question and c is the elastic wave speed in the portion in question.
Z M2/Z T2 is in the range of 3.5 to 5.8, where Z M2 is the impedance of said drill bit front portion, where Z T2 is the impedance of said drill bit rear portion, each said impedance Z being mathematically defined as Z = AE/c, where A is the cross-sectional area, E is Young's modulus and where .delta. is the density and where the elastic wave speed c = (E/.delta.)1/2, wherein:
L M2/L T2 or T M2/T T2 is in the range of 1.0 to 3.0, where:
L M2 is the length and T M2 is the time parameter of said drill bit front portion, L T2 is the length and T T2 is the time parameter of said drill bit rear portion, each said time parameter being mathematically defined as T = L/c, where L is the length of the portion in question and c is the elastic wave speed in the portion in question.
10. A drill bit according to claim 9, wherein the ratio L M2/L T2 or T M2/T T2 is in the range 1.5 to 2.5.
11. A drill bit according to claim 6, wherein the ratio L M2/L T2 or T M2/T T2 is about 2.
Applications Claiming Priority (3)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| SE9601762A SE505422C2 (en) | 1996-05-09 | 1996-05-09 | Impedance and length / time parameter range for hammer device and associated drill bit and piston |
| SE9601762-9 | 1996-05-09 | ||
| PCT/SE1997/000754 WO1997042392A1 (en) | 1996-05-09 | 1997-05-06 | Hammer device |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA2253448A1 CA2253448A1 (en) | 1997-11-13 |
| CA2253448C true CA2253448C (en) | 2006-02-21 |
Family
ID=35985385
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA002253448A Expired - Fee Related CA2253448C (en) | 1996-05-09 | 1997-05-06 | Hammer device |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CA (1) | CA2253448C (en) |
-
1997
- 1997-05-06 CA CA002253448A patent/CA2253448C/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| CA2253448A1 (en) | 1997-11-13 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| KR101183510B1 (en) | Method for controlling percussion device, software product, and percussion device | |
| FI20012022A0 (en) | Method and arrangement in connection with a rock drilling machine | |
| CA2426544A1 (en) | Percussive down-the-hole hammer for rock drilling, and a drill bit used therein | |
| CA2079605C (en) | Hammer device | |
| AU713562B2 (en) | Hammer device | |
| CA2253448C (en) | Hammer device | |
| CN1280646A (en) | Directional drilling tool | |
| US9016396B2 (en) | Percussion device and rock drilling machine | |
| ZA200702367B (en) | Method for breaking rock | |
| SE0202855L (en) | Stroke adapter for transmitting strokes and rotation from a striking rock drill to a drill string | |
| RU2097493C1 (en) | Impact-action device | |
| RU2080985C1 (en) | Self-propelling impact-action pneumatic device | |
| RU2063328C1 (en) | Air-operated percussion device | |
| EP0884139A3 (en) | Oleohydraulic demolition hammer | |
| RU2209914C1 (en) | Submersible air-powered striker to drill holes | |
| RU7431U1 (en) | SHOCK DEVICE | |
| PL375028A1 (en) | Rotating and percussive shank for a rock drill machine with an impact surface a distance from its back end | |
| Paul et al. | Maximization Of Footage Drilled Before Drill Steels Fail In Fatigue | |
| Morrell et al. | Impact assisted segmented cutterhead | |
| RU94045569A (en) | Percussion-type pneumatic device for drilling of bore-holes in ground | |
| JPH0842279A (en) | Drilling device and drilling method for continuous hole |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| EEER | Examination request | ||
| MKLA | Lapsed |
Effective date: 20170510 |