Increasing the development of cone bits when drilling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When drilling blast wells in the technological process of mining magnetite quartzites, the cost of a cone bit is about 60% of the cost of the entire drilling tool. The work includes a literature review of modern methods of increasing the reliability of drilling tools. It has been established that the main directions for increasing the performance of cone bits are the use of wear-resistant materials and coatings for their production, improvement of drilling technology and the organization of repair and preventive maintenance. In the work, it is proposed to use MATEХ (Canada) drilling chemistry, which has found wide application in the oil and gas industry and in granite quarries during impact drilling. The research was carried out in a quarry for the extraction of magnetite quartzites on an Epiroc DM-75E drilling rig, drilling chemicals were fed into the water-air mixture using a MATEХ dispenser. The drilling chemical dispenser is completely self-contained and easy to install on the drilling machine, designed with only one moving part, which ensures low operating costs. Industrial studies with the use of MATEХ drilling chemistry (the consumption of chemistry was 1.5 liters per hour) showed a significant increase in the working hours of cone bits, on average, from 745 to 1488 linear meters. Conclusions were made regarding the use of MATEХ drilling chemistry in the conditions of iron ore quarries of the private joint-stock company «Northern Mining and Processing Plant» (Kryvyi Rih). Experimental studies showed the expediency of using drilling chemistry when drilling blast wells for the extraction of magnetite quartzites. Due to the increase in the working time of cone bits, a reduction in the cost of drilling 1 linear meter of blasting wells by 38.7% was achieved
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".