Accepted Manuscript

Research on rock-breaking mechanism of cross-cutting PDC bit

Chunliang Zhang, Yingxin Yang, Min Lin, Lian Chen

PII: S0920-4105(17)30029-3
DOI: 10.1016/j.petrol.2017.11.034
Reference: PETROL 4450

To appear in: Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering

Received Date: 6 January 2017

Revised Date: 6 November 2017
Accepted Date: 14 November 2017

Please cite this article as: Zhang, C., Yang, Y., Lin, M., Chen, L., Research on rock-breaking mechanism
of cross-cutting PDC bit, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering (2017), doi: 10.1016/
j.petrol.2017.11.034.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Research on Rock-breaking Mechanism of Cross-cutting PDC Bit

2 Chunliang Zhang1, Yingxin Yang1.2 ,Min Lin1,Lian Chen1
1
3 School of Mechanical Engineering, Southwest Petroleum university, Chengdu 610500, China

2
4 SPE, State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation

PT
5 Abstract
6 Cross-cutting PDC (Polycrystalline Diamond Compact) bit is an efficient drilling technology that increases

RI
7 the rock-breaking efficiency and prolongs the service life of the bit through forming mesh-like pattern in the
8 bottom-hole. This paper studies the rock-breaking mechanism of the cross-cutting PDC bit with the
9 combination of both experiment and numerical simulation. With the nonlinear dynamical model being

SC
10 established, the stress status within rock units, sliding fracture characteristic, plastic energy consumption and
11 stress distribution along the cutter edge are analyzed in the cross-cutting process. Compared with
12 unidirectional cutting, cross-cutting generates larger tensile stress within the rock unit and achieves lower

U
13 plastic energy consumption. Moreover average stress on the cutter edge in cross-cutting is much smaller than
14 that in unidirectional cutting. When cutters break the rock protrusions formed during cross-cutting process,
AN
15 cracks inside of the rock will rapidly run through the protrusion, generating brittle fractures within the rock
16 and consequently producing sizable volumetric fractures. During cross-cutting, the rock is damaged not only
17 because the shear failure, but also brittle fracture, which is conductive to improving the rock-breaking
M

18 efficiency. Through unit experiment under cross-cutting condition, this paper studies the influencing
19 regularity of experimental parameters (including the cutter diameter, back rake angle, cross-cutting angle,
20 cutters spacing and rock hardness etc.) on the cutting load, the research achievements are conductive to the
D

21 deeper understanding of rock-breaking mechanism of the new bit and provides theoretical basis for the
22 application of the technology.
TE

23 Keywords
24 Cross-scraping, Rock-breaking, Track, Load, Experiment
EP

25 1. Introduction
26 With the advantages of high ROP (Rate of Penetration), good stability and high design flexibility, the
27 PDC bit is widely used in the exploration and exploitation process of oil and gas1-2. As oil and gas exploration
C

28 being gradually propelled toward deeper formation, low penetration rate and high energy consumption
29 become the main factors affecting drilling efficiency3-5. Besides formation adaptability and drilling
AC

30 parameters, the structure of PDC bit is also an important factor directly affecting the ROP in deep
31 formation6-7. For the past few years, material performance of PDC cutters has gained a great improvement,
32 which, to a certain extent, has made up for the deficiency of conventional PDC bit structure8-10. However,
33 since the cutting tracks of PDC cutters are still concentric circles, rock-breaking efficiency in the PDC bit
34 drilling process cannot be further improved.
35 To address this problem, Yang Yingxin et al. from Southwest Petroleum University put forward a
36 cross-cutting PDC bit technology, which makes it possible that cutters on the PDC bit successively cut rock
37 and form mesh-like bottom-hole pattern11. Experiment results show that the new-type PDC bit (i.e. the

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

38 cross-cutting PDC bit) achieves higher ROP than conventional ones. On the other hand, since rock-breaking
39 mechanics of the new PDC bit is not thoroughly researched, productization of the new technology is seriously
40 blocked. So far, researchers from all over the world have made a great amount of research on the
41 rock-breaking mechanism of PDC bits, and most of the research has been conducted through experiment or
42 simulation on single-cutter cutting process12-15. Among the research, some have got representative
43 achievements16-21. Rojek et al. analyzed the rock-breaking process of the cutter with discrete element model.

PT
44 D. H. Zeuch, D. V. Swenson and J. T. Finger et al. researched the breaking condition of the rock through
45 single-cutter cutting experiment. Zhai Yinghu et al. from China University of Petroleum conducted a series of
46 research on the cutting load variation regularity of individual PDC cutter. However, either experiment or

RI
47 simulation on the rock-breaking mechanism is conducted in the form of unidirectional or parallel cutting
48 tracks, research on rock-breaking mechanism of cross-cutting process is rarely conducted.
49 Generally, by establishing nonlinear dynamical model, dynamic rock-breaking process of the cutter is

SC
50 simulated under cross-cutting condition, on basis of which the stress state of rock element, the geometrical
51 characteristic of broken rock, the plastic energy consumption and the stress state of cutter edge are analyzed.
52 On the other hand, through single cutter rock-breaking experiment, variation regularity of cutting load

U
53 affected by different factors is analyzed under cross-cutting condition. Research results in this paper will
54 deepen the understanding of rock-breaking mechanism of the new PDC bit, and provide theoretical support
AN
55 for the design and application of it.

56 2. Cutting tracks of the new PDC bit

M

57 As shown in Figure 1(a), the cross-cutting PDC bit is an organic combination of both conventional PDC
58 bit and scraping-wheel PDC bit，which is a PDC bit with a plurality of rotational scraping-wheels configured
59 thereon with large angular deflections. As illustrated in Figure 1(b), as an important structural parameter of
D

60 the cross-cutting PDC bit, the angular deflection α is determined by the offset value s and the arm to the
TE

61 journal root center C. The value of the angular deflection is in the range of 20 ° ≤ | α |≤90°, and it can be
62 expressed as:

63 α = tan −1 ( s / c ) (1)
C EP
AC

64
65 (a) Cross-cutting PDC bit (b) Angular deflection of the scraping-wheel

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
66
67 (c) Cutting tracks of the (d) Cutting tracks of a (e) Cutting tracks of the
68 scraping-wheel PDC bit conventional PDC bit cross-cutting PDC bit

RI
69 Fig1. Structure and cutting tracks of the cross-cutting PDC bit
70

SC
71 When the angular deflection α=0, then the movement of the scraping-wheel will be pure rolling without
72 slipping. If α ≠0, then the pure-rolling condition will no longer exist, and the rotation speed of the
73 scraping-wheel will be lower than pure rolling, thus, cutters on the scraping-wheel (hereinafter referred to as

U
74 scraping-wheel cutter) will slip on the bottom-hole rock. The large angular deflection allows the drill bit to
75 have a small wheel speed ratio, so that the scraping-wheel cutters forms a series of long spiral-like tracks in
AN
76 the bottom-hole, as shown in Figure 1(c). On the other hand, the conventional PDC bit forms a series of
77 concentric-circle tracks in the bottomhole, as shown in Figure 1(d). For the cross-cutting PDC bit, these two
78 types of tracks overlap with each other and finally form a mesh-like bottomhole pattern, as shown in Figure
M

79 1(e).Table 1 is a contrast of drilling parameters and performance indices between the cross-cutting PDC bit
80 and the conventional PDC bit. Contrast experiment results show that ROP of the new PDC bit is obviously
D

81 higher than the conventional one, either drilling in Wusheng sandstone or Beibei limestone. Particularly,
82 ROP of the new PDC bit is increased by 20.5% on the basis of conventional PDC bit in soft sandstone, while
TE

83 increased by 48.8% in harder limestone. Apparently, the cross-cutting PDC bit will increase ROP of the bit
84 more significantly when drilling in hard formation.
85
EP

86 Table 1. Drilling indicators comparison of the novel bit and the conventional PDC bit

Rock Type Bit Type RS(r/min) WOB(t) Torque(Nm) ROP(m/h)

C

Wusheng Cross-cutting PDC bit 30 2.6 211.57 6.10

limestone
AC

Conventional PDC bit 30 2.6 206.55 5.06

Beibei Cross-cutting PDC bit 30 2.6 186.49 1.25
sandstone Conventional PDC bit 30 2.6 182.40 0.84
87 RS: Revolving Speed. WOB: Weight on Bit

88 3. Numerical simulation on cross-cutting process

89 3.1 Cutter-rock system model and constitutive relations

90 For ease of the establishing and solving of the cutter-rock system model, the model is simplified as
91 follows: 1. Take each cutter as a rigid body. 2. The bottom-hole rock is in the far-field region of the borehole.
3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

92 3. Without considering the influence of temperature and confining pressure on rock-breaking process.
93 The rock-breaking process of a cutter is a typical dynamic contacting and impacting issue, which means
94 it is a process comprising both the geometric nonlinearity caused by structural displacement in a short time
95 and the material nonlinearity caused by the large strain of rock. By adopting finite element method, take the
96 spatial domain of the cutter-rock contacting system at time t as Ω, and the body force, boundary stress and
97 Cauchy's stress respectively as b, r, rc and σ, then the contacting issue could be represented as22:

PT
98 ∫ σδ ed Ω −∫
Ω Ω
bδ ud Ω −∫ rδ edS − ∫ rcδ udS + ∫ ρ a1δ ud Ω = 0
Γf Γc Ω
(2)

99 Wherein, Γ represents the boundary of given boundary stress, Γ is the contacting boundary, is the

RI
100 virtual displacement, is the virtual strain, is the density and a1is the acceleration.
101 By discretizing the spatial domain Ω with finite element method and introducing virtual displacement
102 field, then there is the equation:

SC
103 mu = P(t ) + g (u, λ ) − h(u, γ ) (3)
104 Where m is the Mass matrix, is the acceleration vector, t is a time variable, p is the external force
105 vector, g is the contact force and friction vector, h is the internal stress vector, u is the object displacement, λ

U
106 is a variable associated with contact surface characteristics and γ is a variable associated with constitutive
107 relation of materials.
AN
M
D

108
TE

109 Fig 2. Yield surfaces of the linear D-P model Fig 3. Yield surfaces of the linear D-P
110 in the meridional plane model in the π plane
111 Considering that a proper plastic constitutive model is the key of accurately simulating the yielding,
EP

112 hardening and damaging process, and that bottom-hole rock is a kind of granular material so that the rock
113 element will be expanded when suffering shear force, Drucker-Prager model is adopted in this paper. The
114 Drucker-Prager plastic constitutive model, which is widely used in the research of rock-breaking process, not
115 only considers the influence of intermediate principal stress on yielding, but also reflects the expansion
C

116 caused by shearing. Figure 2 and 3 show the yield surface on the meridional plane and π plane respectively.
AC

117 On the meridional plane, the D-P yield criterion should be represented as:
118 F = t − p tan β − d = 0 (4)

119 In the above formula: p = −(1/ 3) t r ace(σ ) , representing the equivalent compressive stress, d is the

120 cohesion of material, is the slope of the linear yield surface projected on the p-t stress plane, t is the
121 deviatoric stress parameter of which the expression is:

q 1  1  r  
3

122 t= 1 + −  1 −     (5)
2  k  k   q  

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

123 Wherein, deviatoric stress q is an equivalent stress, k is the specific value between triaxial compressive
124 strength and triaxial tensile strength, r is the third invariant of the deviatoric stress.
125 Since PDC cutters break rock mainly by shearing, when the equivalent plastic strain value of the rock
126 elemental node reaches that of the material, the material starts to damage. The judge criterion of plastic strain
127 of rock-breaking is:

ε p ≤ ε f pl

PT
128 (6)
129 Wherein, is the equivalent plastic strain of rock, ̅ is the equivalent plastic strain of the rock been
130 totally damaged.

RI
131 3.2 Establishing of cross-cutting model
132 As illustrated in Figure 4, which is a schematic diagram showing the cross-cutting process, firstly let the

SC
133 PDC cutter cut the rock toward one direction and form a series of equispaced cutting tracks, then change the
134 moving direction of the cutter so that they will cut the rock toward a new direction at a certain angle relative
135 to the existed tracks, thus realizing the cross-cutting process and finally making a mesh-like cutting tracks on

U
136 the rock. Figure 5 shows the finite element model of the cutter-rock system, wherein, diameter of the cutter is
137 15.7mm, thickness of the cutter is 7.5mm and back rake angle of the cutter is 15°. On the other hand, the rock
AN
138 is discretized by using C3D8R (8-node linear brick, reduced integration, hourglass control), and some local
139 mesh is refined. For boundary conditions, fixed constraint is imposed on the bottom surface of the rock,
140 moving velocity of the cutter is 0.251m/s and the cutting depth is 2mm. Particularly, angle of
M

141 cross-cutting(hereinafter referred to as cross-cutting angle) in the simulation is set as 85° and lithology of the
142 rock is set in accordance with Beibei limestone, of which the parameters are listed in Table 2.
D
TE
C EP

143
144 Fig 4.
. Schematic diagram of the cross-cutting process Fig 5. Finite element model of the cutter-rock system
AC

145
146 Table 2. Basic mechanical parameters of the rock
Rock Elastic Poisson's Compressive Tensile Shear Friction
Sample modulus Ratio Strength Strength Strength angle
(Gpa) (Mpa) (Mpa) (Mpa) (°)
Beibei
31.2 0.171 105.951 6.578 17.72 43.62
limestone

147 3.3 Results and analysis

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

148 For the stress in rock in the mentioned two cutting modes, the stress states at different time points
149 are illustrated in Figure 6(a), and the variation of cutting force with time factor under two cutting modes
150 are shown in Figure 6 (b). In unidirectional cutting, since the cutter (cutter #1) continuously engages
151 with rock material, the cutting force is obviously greater than that of cross-cutting. While in
152 cross-cutting, the cutting force of the cutter (cutter #2) is substantially smaller than that of unidirectional
153 cutting and shows observable periodic characteristic. During cross-cutting, the cutter will move across

PT
154 the spaced rock protrusions and grooves (formed by previous cutting process), each time when the cutter
155 move across a rock protrusion, the contacting area between the cutter and rock will experience a
156 variation period, as a result the cutting force varies periodically.

RI
157

U SC
AN
M

158
159 (a) Rock stress at different time. (b) Cutting force
160 Fig 6. Change regulation of rock stress and cutting force under two different cutting modes
D

161
162 As one result of the simulation, the maximum principal stress nephogram of the rock in unidirectional
TE

163 cutting and cross-cutting process are shown in Figure 7(a) and 7(b) respectively. The stress nephogram
164 indicates that tensile stress occurs in the contacting surface of the rock, especially in the cross region of two
165 cutting tracks, the tensile stress in the rock appears to be relatively large. Actually, the tensile stress will
EP

166 function as original rock-breaking force that help the cutter penetrate into the rock and increase the
167 rock-breaking efficiency. Generally, stress concentration also occurs during unidirectional cutting, but it is
168 much lower than that in the cross-cutting process. Besides, either in unidirectional cutting or cross-cutting,
C

169 the rock below acting face of the cutter suffers compressive stress, but the compressive stress is larger in
170 unidirectional cutting than cross-cutting. As a consequence, when PDC cutters engage with the rock
AC

171 protrusions that created by cross-cutting, the stress concentration will make the rock much easier to produce
172 volumetric fractures.

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
173
174 (a) Unidirectional cutting (b) Cross-cutting

RI
175 Fig 7. Maximum principal stress nephogram of the rock
176 To furtherly analyze the characteristics of the shear-sliding plane in rock-breaking process, the
177 generation of macro-crack and rock debris should be simulated. Figure 8shows the geometric characteristics

SC
178 of the shear-sliding plane of the rock in unidirectional cutting. It can be seen that the breaking area is covered
179 with parallel macro-cracksin the initial period. As illustrated in Figure 8, as the cutting action proceeding,
180 part of the rock debris under acting face of the cutter will be re-fractured by the pressure from the cutter. In

U
181 fact, re-fracturing of rock debris cannot make effective volumetric rock fracture and will consume additional
182 energy, in other words, the re-fracturing of rock debris will weaken the rock-breaking effect of the shearing
AN
183 action. Figure 9 shows the geometric characteristics of the rock fractured by cross-cutting. Apparently, when
184 the cutter breaks the rock protrusion, pressure exerted on the rock by the acting face is significantly reduced,
185 so that macro-cracks will run through the protrusion before obvious plastic deformation occurs in these rock
M

186 units, thus generating brittle fractures within the rock and consequently producing sizable volumetric
187 fractures. Therefore, the failure of rock during cross-cutting consists of shear failure and brittle fracture.
188
D
TE
EP

189
190 Fig8. Sliding fracture of the rock under Fig 9. Sliding fracture of the rock under
191 unidirectional cutting cross-cutting
C

192
193 In the rock-breaking process, since contacting area of rock and the cutter’s acting face is time-varying,
AC

194 distribution regularity of the instantaneous stress in the cutter is neither obvious nor typical. In order to study
195 the distribution regularity of the load on cutter, average stress of each cutter node in the cutting process is
196 calculated on basis of PYTHON, then the real load distribution on the cutter in a certain situation can be
197 reflected though it. Figure 11 and 12 are respectively the instantaneous stress nephogram and average stress
198 nephogram. It can be seen from both figures that stress mainly concentrates on the edge of the cutter
199 (hereinafter referred to as cutter edge). Actually, since stress distribution on cutter edge determines the wear
200 rate and rock-breaking effect of the cutter, it has always been the focus of researchers’ attention. Figures 13
201 and 14 respectively show the Mises stress and C-press stress patterns on the cutter edge within the cutter’s

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

202 working area (within the angular region of polar angle θ on the acting face, highlighted with green arc in the
203 figure10). The figures indicate that stress on the cutter edge in unidirectional cutting is much higher than that
204 in cross-cutting. So it can be concluded that cross-cutting not only break rock with a larger damage effect, but
205 will also lower the load on the cutter and consequently lower the wear rate and delamination failure
206 probability for the cutter, which is conductive to prolonging the cutter’s service life.
207

PT
RI
SC
208
209 Fig 10. Cutter edge Fig 11. Instantaneous stress nephogram Fig 12. Average stress nephogram
210

U
AN
M
D
TE

211
212 Fig 13. Mises stress pattern on the cutter edge Fig 14. C-press stress pattern on the cutter edge
213
214 Figures 15and16 respectively show the plastic energy consumption in unidirectional cutting and
EP

215 cross-cutting processes. During unidirectional cutting, the cutter continuously break rock, so the energy
216 consumption increases linearly. While in the cross-cutting process, since rock protrusions and grooves
217 emerge alternately, the energy consumption increases like stair-steps. It is because the cutter almost
C

218 dissipates no energy when moving across the cutting grooves while suddenly dissipates more energy when
219 breaking the rock protrusions. Table 3 shows the plastic energy consumption indices of both unidirectional
AC

220 cutting and cross-cutting process. It can be seen that energy consumption of cross-cutting is 40% smaller than
221 unidirectional cutting. The reason is that brittle fracture of the rock in cross-cutting process has significantly
222 reduced the plastic energy consumption.
223 When the energy of the cutter is not enough to break the rock, the bit stops rotating (Stick phase of the bit)
224 and the energy is accumulated. When accumulated to a certain degree (large enough to break the rock), the
225 energy will be suddenly released in the form of breaking bottomhole rock, and the bit will be motivated to
226 revolve with a lar angular velocity (Slip phase). This phenomenon is called stick-slip effect of a drill bit. For

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

227 the cross-cutting bit in this paper, since its special rock-breaking method, it will form a rugged surface in the
228 bottomhole, releasing a lot of strata stress, so that the rock can be removed with relatively small
229 rock-breaking energy, i.e. it is no longer necessary for the bit to accumulate energy, so that the stick-slip
230 effect can be significantly decreased. On the other hand, friction between the scraping-wheel and the rock is
231 mainly rolling friction rather than sliding friction of the conventional PDC bit, so the friction force is much

PT
232 smaller, which furtherly decreases the stick-slip effect.
233

RI
U SC
AN
234
235 Fig15. Plastic energy consumption in unidirectional Fig16. Plastic energy consumption in
236 cutting process cross-cutting process
M

237
238 Table 3. Plastic energy consumption indexes of unidirectional cutting and cross-cutting
Rock-breaking Plastic Energy Energy
D

Cutting Type 3
Volume（mm ） Consumption（J） Consumption-Volume Ratio
（J/mm3）
TE

Unidirectional cutting 580.2 28.124 0.0484

Cross-cutting 200.6 6.633 0.0331

239
EP

240 4. Unit experiment and analysis

241 4.1 Experimental apparatus and method

C

242 Experiment on cross-cutting process is conducted to reveal the influence of different factors on
AC

243 cross-cutting effect. Figure 17 shows the experiment machine for cross-cutting. The experiment machine and
244 the cutting force data acquisition system make the experimental apparatus, which is able to undertake
245 cross-cutting experiment of different situations. Figure17 is a mechanical schematic of the experiment
246 machine. The planning blade is installed below the tool-holder on the experiment machine, triaxial forces
247 sensors are equipped in the middle of the planning blade, and a PDC cutter is fixed below the sensors. On the
248 other hand, a rotatable rock clamping box is set on the operating table (the operating table together with the
249 clamping box is referred to as rotating table hereinafter). In the experiment, the rock sample is fixed on the
250 rotating table, when the experiment get started, unidirectional cutting process is completed firstly, then the
251 direction of the rock sample is changed and the cross-cutting process is completed.
9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
252
253 Fig17. Cutting experiment machine

SC
254 4.2 Experiment content
255 Cross-cutting process of a PDC cutter is affected by many factors, among which the radius, back rake

U
256 angle, cross-cutting angle, cutters spacing, rock properties etc. are the most important. In order to find out the
257 affection of respective factor on cutting load, each factor is set as the only variable while the others remain
AN
258 invariant (univariate analysis method). Before starting the experiment, cutters of 3 different diameters and 5
259 different back rake angles are prepared. On the other hand, 3 types of rock including Nanchong sandstone,
260 Wusheng sandstone and Beibei limestone (which are respectively taken as soft, medium hard and hard rock)
M

261 are prepared as rock samples. And cutting speed of the machine is set as 0.251m/s.
D
TE

262
EP

263 （ a）
） Cutting process （ b）
） Surface of a rock sample
264 Fig18. Cross-cutting experiment
265 To avoid random error and make the experimental data more scientific, at least two layers of rock
C

266 material are removed in one experiment unit. Figure 18a shows the cutting process and Figure 18b shows the
267 surface pattern shaped in the cross-cutting process.
AC

268 4.3 Data processing and analyzing

269

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
270
271 Fig19.Tangential force in unidirectional cutting process

U SC
AN
M

272
273 Fig20. Tangential force in cross-cutting process
274
D

275 Figures 19 and 20 respectively show the time-variation of tangential force (cutting force) of
276 unidirectional cutting and cross-cutting under same condition. The figures indicate that cutting force during
TE

277 unidirectional cutting is larger than that during cross-cutting. In cross-cutting process, rugged rock pattern
278 make the cutting force fluctuate periodically. While in unidirectional cutting process, the cutter continuously
279 cuts the rock sample with nearly constant contacting area, so the cutting force appears to be more stable. In
EP

280 the experiment, cutting force information collected by the data acquisition system is discrete data (the
281 sampling frequency is 1000Hz). To analyze and contrast the experiment data more conveniently, the cutting
282 load or rock-breaking power is measured as the specific load (hereinafter referred to as specific load), the
C

283 smaller the specific load, the smaller the cutting force or energy consumption. Expression of the specific load
284 could be represented as:
AC

1 n
285 F= ∑ xi
V i =1
(7)

286
287 Wherein, xi is the sampling point of the cutting force data, V is the cutting volume. At the right of the
288 equation is the cumulative load, i.e. the sum of the sampling load (axial, tangential and radial force) in each
289 cutting process. This paper mainly focuses on the analysis on axial and tangential force, so the radial force is
290 not to be discussed.

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
291
292
293 Fig 21. Variation curve of axial specific load Fig 22. Variation curve of tangential specific load

SC
294 with cutters spacing with cutters spacing
295
296 As illustrated in Figures 21 and 22, with the same experimental parameters (Nanchong sandstone, cutter

U
297 diameter is 13.44mm, cutting depth is 2mm, back rake angle is 15°, cross-cutting angle is 45°, rock volume
298 is 225×307×4mm3), both axial and tangential load of cross-cutting are smaller than that of unidirectional
AN
299 cutting. Furtherly, when the cutters spacing is larger than 14mm, load of unidirectional cutting will obviously
300 increase, while load of cross-cutting remains nearly constant. For unidirectional cutting, if the cutters spacing
301 is too large (larger than 14mm), there will be no overlapped area between two adjacent cutting grooves, so
M

302 rock protrusions of these area will be nearly not damaged, thus making the cutting load larger. On the
303 contrary, since cross-cutting makes rugged pattern in the rock, high stress concentration and micro-cracks
304 will be formed within the rock protrusions near the cross area, when cutters contact this area, the
D

305 rock-breaking ratio of tensile stress increases, making the cutting load smaller.
306
TE
C EP
AC

307
308
309 Fig 23. Variation curve of tangential and axial Fig 24. Variation curve of tangential and axial
310 specific load with cutters spacing specific load with back rake angle
311
312 As illustrated in Figure 23, with the same experimental parameters (Nanchong sandstone, cutter
313 diameter is 13.44mm, cutting depth is 2mm, back rake angle is 15°, angle of cross-cutting is 30 °, rock
314 volume is 208×307×8mm3), both axial and tangential load decrease with the increasing of cutter spacing.
12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

315 As illustrated in Figure 24, with the same experimental parameters (Nanchong sandstone, cutter
316 diameter is 13.44mm, cutting depth is 2mm, back rake angle is 15°, rock volume is 245×307×8mm3), both
317 axial and tangential load increase with the increasing of back rake angle. It is to be noticed that when back
318 rake angle increases in the range of 5°-10°, both load increase slowly, while back rake angle exceeds 10°,
319 both load increases more rapidly. This phenomenon can be explained that a larger back rake angle will
320 enhance the pressing action of PDC cutter on rock, making the cutting load higher.

PT
321

RI
U SC
AN
322 po
323 Fig 25. Variation curve of tangential and axial Fig 26. Variation curve of tangential and axial
324 specific load with cutter diameter specific load with rock hardness
M

325
326 As illustrated in Figure 25, with the same experimental parameters (Nanchong sandstone, back rake
327 angle is 15°, cutting depth is 2mm, angle of cross-cutting is 15 °, cutters spacing is 14mm, rock volume is
D

328 245×307×8mm3), both axial and tangential load increase linearly with the increasing of cutter diameter,
329 which can be explained that a larger diameter makes both contacting length and area larger, finally resulting
TE

330 in the increasing of cutting load.

331 As illustrated in Figure 26, with the same experimental parameters (cutter diameter is 13.44mm, back
332 rake angle is 15°, cutting depth is 2mm, angle of cross-cutting is 15 °, cutters spacing is 14mm, rock volumes
EP

333 respectively are: Nanchong sandstone 208×307×8mm3, Wusheng sandstone 293×294×20mm3, Beibei
334 limestone 268×375×14mm3), both axial specific load and tangential specific energy increase with the
335 increasing of rock hardness. It is to be noted that the increasing range of axial load is larger than that of the
C

336 tangential, because it is more difficult for the cutter to penetrate in hard rock. The results indicate that
337 penetrating ability in hard rock is an important factor influencing rock-breaking efficiency of the cutter.
AC

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
338
339 Fig 27. Variation curve of axial specific load Fig28. Variation curve of tangential specific load
340 with the angle of cross-cutting with the angle of cross-cutting

SC
341
342 In the drilling process of a bit, cutters often cut along old tracks, i.e. cutters often move along the
343 grooves already formed by previous ones, which will decrease the energy utilization and rock-breaking

U
344 efficiency. To study this issue, experiments on both same-track cutting (cutting along old tracks) and
345 various-track cutting (cutters cutting along different tracks, especially cross tracks) are respectively
AN
346 conducted, of which the experimental parameters are: Nanchong sandstone, cutter diameter 13.44mm,
347 cutting depth 2mm, back rake angle 15°, angle of cross-cutting 15 ° and rock volume 225×307×4mm3.
348 Information of two aspects can be discovered in Figure 27 and 28, i.e. the influence of cross-cutting
M

349 angle (i.e. angle of cross-cutting as mentioned above) on cross-cutting process, and the difference of
350 rock-breaking efficiency between same-track and various-track cutting. More specifically, with other
351 parameters being constant, both axial and tangential specific load in cross-cutting decrease with the
D

352 increasing of the cross-cutting angle. On the other hand, with the same cross-cutting angle, both axial and
TE

353 tangential load in various-track cutting are lower than that in same-track cutting, meaning that the same-track
354 cutting should be avoided when designing a new bit with the technology in this paper.
355
EP

356 5. Conclusions
357 1. This paper has studied the tracks of cutters on cross-cutting PDC bit, and furtherly proved the validity
358 of it with the mesh-like bottom-hole pattern in the experiment.
C

359 2. According to the nonlinear dynamical simulation under cross-cutting condition, conclusions could be
360 drawn as follows:
AC

361 (1) Compared with unidirectional cutting, cross-cutting will generate high tensile stress within the
362 cross-cutting area in the rock, which is beneficial to increasing the rock-breaking efficiency.(2) When cutters
363 break the rock protrusions formed during cross-cutting process, macro-cracks inside of the rock will rapidly
364 run through the protrusion before obvious plastic deformation occurs in rock, generating brittle fractures
365 within the rock and consequently producing sizable volumetric fractures. While in unidirectional cutting
366 process, the rock is compressed by the acting face of the cutter, which will lower energy utilization and
367 rock-breaking efficiency. The failure of rock during cross-cutting consists of shear failure and brittle
368 fracture.(3) In the unidirectional cutting of the existing PDC bit, cutters break rock with continuous
369 contacting, making the plastic energy consumption increases linearly. While in the cross-cutting process, the
14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

370 plastic energy consumption increases like stair-steps, moreover, plastic energy consumption in cross-cutting
371 process is 40% smaller than the unidirectional cutting.(4) During rock-breaking, load on the cutter edge in
372 cross-cutting is smaller than that in unidirectional cutting.
373 3. The influencing regularity of different factors on cutting load is researched through cross-cutting
374 experiment：
375 (1) Both Axial and tangential load during cross-cutting is lower than that during unidirectional cutting.(2)

PT
376 Cutting load decreases with the increasing of cutters spacing.(3) Cutting load increases with the increasing of
377 back rake angle, but the variation range is relatively small when the angle varies between 5°-10°.(4) Cutting
378 load increases linearly with the increasing of cutter diameter.(5) Cutting load increases with the increasing of

RI
379 rock hardness, more specifically, variation range of the axial load is larger than the tangential. Moreover,
380 penetrating ability of the cutter is an important factor influencing rock-breaking efficiency when drilling in
381 hard formation.(6) Both axial and tangential load decrease with the increasing of cross-cutting angle.

SC
382 Furtherly, with the same cross-cutting angle, both axial and tangential load in various-track cutting are lower
383 than that in same-track cutting, so that the same-track cutting should be avoided when designing a new bit.

384

385 Acknowledgments
U
AN
386 This project is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China, grant NO.51374176.

387 References
M

388 1.ZUO Ｒu-qiang ,2016.International Advancement of Drilling Bits for Oil and Gas Well (4) —PDC Bits
389 Progress and Present Trend[J]. Exploration Engineering (Ｒock ＆ Soil Drilling and Tunneling). 43 ( 4),
390 pp :40-48.
D

391 2.Patrick S.M. Dougherty, Randyka Pudioprawoto, C.Fred Higgs, Bit cutter-on-rock tribometry:
392 Analyzing friction and rate-of-penetration for deep well drilling substrates[J]. Tribology international,
TE

393 77(2014)178-185.
394 3.Tulu,I.B. and Heasley,K.A, 2008.Modeling Rock and Drill Cutter Behavior[J], ARMA, July 2
395 4 Tulu,I.B. and Heasley,K.A, 2008.Modeling Rock and Drill Cutter Behavior. ARMA 08-342, the 42nd US
396
EP

Rock Mechanics Symposium, June 29-July 2, 2008.

397 5.Michael azar et al,2013. Pointing towards improved PDC bit performance: innovative conical shaped
398 polycrystalline diamond element achieves higher Rop and total footage[R]. SPE Drilling &Cpmpletion,
399
C

March 5-7.
400 6.Sara Negm, Karim Aguib, et al,2016. The disruptive concept of 3D cutters and hybrid bits in
AC

401 polycrystalline diamond compact drill-bit design [R]. SPE-183335-MS, SPE Abu Dhabi international
402 petroleum exhibition and conference, pp: 1-10.
403 7.Linda Hsieh, Alex Endress. Better and better , bit by bit /New drill bits utilize cutting structures, cutter
404 element shapes, advanced modeling to increase ROP,control,durability. Drilling contractor[S],
405 IADC,2015,(7-8).
406 8.M.Yahiaoui, L. Gerbaud, J. y.p, Aaris, J.Denape, A.Dourfaye, A study on PDC drill bits quality[J], wear,
407 298-299(2013)32-41.
408 9.D.A.Glowka,Use of single-cutter date in the analysis of PDC bit designs :part 1-development of a PDC
409 cutting force mode[J]l, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics
15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

410 Abstracts, Page A98.

411 10.Luc Perneder, Emmanuel Detournay, Geoff Downton,2012.Bit/rock interface laws in directional
412 drilling[J], International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 51(2012)81-90.
413 11.Yang, Y.X., Chen, L., Lin, M., Pei, Z., Ren, H.T. 2012. Composite Drill Bit. International (PCT) Patent
414 No.WO2013/0126247
415 12.Pryhorovska T O, Chaplinskiy S S, Kudriavtsev I O, 2015.Finite element modelling of rock mass cutting

PT
416 by cutters for PDC drill bit[J], Petroleum exploration and development,42(6)888-892.
417 13.Ju P, Wang Z, Zhai Y, et al. Numerical simulation study on the optimization design of the crown shape of
418 PDC drill bit[J]. Journal of Petroleum Exploration & Production Technology, 2013, 4(4): 343-350.

RI
419 14.Maria J. Numerical modeling of rock cutting and its associated fragmentation process using the finite
420 element method[D]. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh, 2012.
421 15.Laiju H, Tinggen C, Higang H (1992) Experimental study on the working load distribution on cutting

SC
422 teeth of full scale PDC bit[J]. J Univ Petrol 16(6):24–28.
423 16.Rojek J,Oate E,Labra C,et al. Discrete element simulation of rock cutting[J]. International Journal of
424 Rock Mechanics＆Mining Sciences,2011,48(6):996-1010.

U
425 17.D. V. Swenson, etc. Analytical and experimental investigations of rock cutting using PDC drag
426 cutters[R], SPE l0l50, Oct. 1981.
AN
427 18. D. V. Swenson Imp1ementation of two geo1ogic constitutive models in the HONDO finites element
428 code and Modeling and analysis of drag bit cutting[J], SAND 83-0278, l983.
429 19.D. H. Zeuch, D. V. Swenson, J. T. Finger:“Subsurface damage deve1opment in rock during drag-bit
M

430 cutting: observations and mode1 predictions” [J], 24th US Symp. on Rock Mechanics(June l983).
431 20.J. T. Finger , D. H. Zeuch: “Rock breakage mechanisms with PDC cutter” [R], SPE l42l9, Sept. l985.
432 21.Zhai Yinghu, Research on The Theory and Method of PDC Bit Design［D］, doctoral dissertation of
D

433 Petroleum University, 1990.

434 22. Zhu Xiaohua，Tang Liping，Tong Hua．Rock breaking mechanism of a high frequency torsional impact
TE

435 drilling［J］.Journal of Vibration and Shock,2012,31( 21) :75-78

436
437 List of Symbol
EP

438 α Angular deflection of the scraping-wheel

439 c Arm of journal root center
440 s Offset distance
C

441 Ω Spatial domain

442 b Body force
AC

443 r Boundary
444 rc Boundary
445 σ Cauchy's stress
446 Γ Boundary of given boundary stress
447 Γ Contacting boundary
448 Virtual displacement
449 Virtual strain
450 Density

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

451 a1 Acceleration
452 m Mass matrix
453 Acceleration vector
454 p External force vector
455 g Contact force and friction vector
456 h Internal stress vector

PT
457 u Object displacement
458 λ Variable associated with contact surface characteristics
459 γ Variable associated with constitutive relation of materials

RI
460 Slope of the linear yield surface projected on the stress p-t plane
461 d Cohesion of material
462 q Equivalent stress

SC
463
k Specific value
464 ε p Equivalent plastic strain of rock

U
465 ε f pl Equivalent plastic strain of the rock been totally damaged
466 xi Sampling point of the cutting force data
AN
467 V Cutting volume
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights
（1） Cross-cutting PDC (Polycrystalline Diamond Compact) bit is a new drilling technology that
enables cutters to work alternatively to conduct cross-cutting on rock with high efficiency.
（2）This paper studies the rock-breaking mechanism of the cross-cutting PDC bit with the
combination of both experiment and numerical simulation. With numerical simulation, the stress
status and macro-cracks are analyzed in the cross-cutting process. Average stress nephogram on
the cutter and average stress on the cutter edge during rock-breaking process are calculated on

PT
basis of PYTHON language program, and the results in cross-cutting and unidirectional cutting
are compared.
（3）Through unit experiment under cross-cutting condition, this paper studies the influencing

RI
regularity of experimental parameters on cross-cutting rock-breaking efficiency.
（4）The experiment also studies the influence of same-track cutting and various-track cutting on
cross-cutting load.

U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC