IEEE/ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS, VOL. 13, NO.

2, APRIL 2008 153

A Self-Optimizing Control System for Hard Rock

Percussive Drilling
Gary L. Cavanough, Member, IEEE, Mark Kochanek, Jock B. Cunningham, and Ian D. Gipps

Abstract—The derivation and application of a self-optimizing

control system for percussive drilling of hard rock is presented.
The control system superimposes an oscillating force signal onto
the drill feed force and demodulates the signal from the drill ro-
tational torque. The resultant demodulated signal is then used to
control the drill, allowing real-time maximization of penetration
rate, minimum hole deviation, and measurement of rock charac-
teristics regardless of drilling conditions. The control system allows
the drill to adapt to changing rock conditions. Testing has proven
the control to be reliable and to increase drilling efficiency.
Index Terms—Drill control system, mining, percussive drilling,
rock excavation. Fig. 1. Schematic of “top hole” percussive drilling.

I. INTRODUCTION
N percussive drilling, penetration is achieved by the repeated
I application of a large impulsive force to a rock drill bit. The
impulsive force is supplied by a hydraulic or pneumatic operated
piston striking a shank adaptor. This creates a stress wave, which
travels through the shank adaptor via couplings and drill strings
to the rock drill bit (see Fig. 1). The drill bit is rotated to a
suitable point after each impact and rock particles are cleared
from the drilling area by air or water flushing. The device used
to generate the impulsive force is called a “drifter.”
Rock drill bits typically consist of a cylindrical surface with
button-like projections that are in direct contact with the rock.
Fig. 2 shows a convex button bit and a reaming rock drill bit.
The projections are made of a hard, wear resistant material.
When the bit is loaded, the projections crush and crack the rock.
The feed, impact, and rotation forces on the rock drill bit are Fig. 2. Convex button bit and a reaming rock drill bit: 80 mm diameter drill
provided by the drifter. Drifters can be “top hole,” where the and 190 mm diameter reaming bits.
drifter is positioned outside the hole and contacts the rock drill
bit via drill strings (see Fig. 1) or they can be “in the hole,”
10% hole deviation common in drilling operations [12], [17].
where the drifter is positioned in the hole directly attached to
Rock characteristics, drilling equipment, and the proficiency of
the drill bit. The control system presented in this paper has been
the drill operator affect drilling accuracy and drilling rates [2]–
applied to a hydraulic “top hole” drifter.
[4], [7], [9], [13], [16], [18], [19]. Sinkala [15] developed the
Drilling is a fundamental and a major operating cost in min-
Ntanje system to increase hole accuracy. The Ntanje system
ing, comprising some 5–15% of total costs. It is estimated that
is typical of all automatic drilling systems; in which rotational
more than 90 × 106 m of drilling is undertaken at mines in
torque is the key parameter used to control the drilling process.
Australia each year [6].
The feed force is adjusted to maintain rotational torque between
The major aims in control in drilling are to increase drilling
the upper and lower preset limits.
rates and improve drilling accuracy. Drilling accuracy is defined
as the level of deviation from the desired hole position, with a
II. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FEED FORCE, ROTATIONAL
Manuscript received February 20, 2006; revised November 20, 2007. TORQUE, AND PENETRATION RATE
Recommended by Technical Editor P. R. Pagilla.
The authors are with the Division of Exploration and Mining, Com- The feed force keeps the drill bit in contact with the rock
monwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), Queensland while allowing the drill bit to rotate. Feed force is normally
Center for Advanced Technologies, Pullenvale, Qld. 4069, Australia (e-mail: in the range of 500–1500 kg [2], and is achieved by the drifter
gary.cavanough@csiro.au; Mark.Kochanek@csiro.au; Jock.Cunningham@
csiro.au; Ian.Gipps@csiro.au). moving on a cradle by the action of a hydraulic cylinder or chain
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TMECH.2008.918477 drive (see Fig. 3).

1083-4435/$25.00 © 2008 IEEE

154
Fig. 3. Drifter on drill carriage.
A hydraulic cylinder feed system is more commonly used
because of simplicity in fabrication and maintenance [8]. (The
control system presented in this paper operates on a hydraulic
feed cylinder.)
Low feed force causes [1]:
1) low percussion energy transmission, and therefore, low
penetration rate;
2) looseness and overheating of string couplings;
3) low rotation torque;
4) increased inner button wear on bit;
5) large hole deviations in some rocks [14].
Very high feed force causes [1]:
1) bending and wear of drill strings;
2) flushing problems;
3) rapid bit button wear;
4) increased hole deviation;
5) excessively tight coupling threads;
6) low penetration rates.
Feed force adjustment is the primary method of drill control
and Sinkala [14] developed the following equation to calculate
the rotational torque for a given feed force

optimizing control system utilizing these relationships.
2 ϕυ − υ 2
τ = FD (1)
3 ϕ − 2υ
where τ is the rotational torque, F is the feed force, D is the bit
diameter, ϕ is button radius, and υ is the penetration per impact.
Derivation of the equation was based on work by Lindqvis
[10] and Clark [5] on the indentation force of hemispherical
carbide buttons in rock. The equation applies to drilling at a
constant penetration rate and is affected by drilling equipment
condition, friction at the sides of the hole, and flushing efficiency.
Sinkala [14] concluded that the equation would not hold for
porous, coarse-grained, and soft rocks.
Optimal feed force can be judged by monitoring feed rate
and rotational “smoothness” [1]. Fig. 4 shows the relationship
between feed force, rotational torque, and penetration rate, as
reported by Pearse [11] for manual percussive drilling. The
descriptive term “smoothness” is likely to be the drilling op-
IEEE/ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS, VOL. 13, NO. 2, APRIL 2008
Fig. 4. Relationship between feed force, rotational torque, and penetration
rate [11].
erator identifying the level of feed pressure that corresponds
to maximum penetration rate. Sinkala [14] performed a series
of experiments and reported similar results for large percussive
drilling rigs, as shown in Fig. 4.
The relationships described in Fig. 4 provide a method to
optimize drilling operations by adjusting the feed pressure to
maintain maximum penetration rate. Sinkala [14] used the pen-
etration rate/feed pressure curves to determine drill operating
parameters. Sinkala’s method used Fm in and Fm ax (see “mini-
mum” and “maximum” projections in Fig. 4) in addition to the
physical constants of the drilling rig (e.g., number of drill strings,
hydraulic cylinder size, etc.) to calculate preset minimum and
maximum rotation pressure values. These parameters were then
manually set in the Ntanje control system. Hence, the system is
not able to respond to changing rock or drill conditions.
This paper reports on experiments performed to verify the
relationships shown in Fig. 4 and the development of a self-
III. INSTRUMENTATION
The first task undertaken was the fitting of instrumentation
to measure the following key drilling parameters identified in
Fig. 4.
A. Penetration Rate
A wire type extensometer was fitted to the drifter carriage to
measure the penetration rate.
Sinakala [14] found relatively large amplitude fluctuations in
penetration rate signals and reported average penetration rates.
The high levels of measurement noise are a result of fluctu-
ations in rock structure and mechanical vibration due to the
high-frequency impulsive forces generated by the drifter. Mea-
surements taken during drilling operations confirmed the high
CAVANOUGH et al.: SELF-OPTIMIZING CONTROL SYSTEM FOR HARD ROCK PERCUSSIVE DRILLING 155

levels of noise with the wire extensometer achieving a resolution

of ±2.9 mm for instantaneous measurement. The implications
of this resolution to the control method will be discussed in the
next section.

B. Measurement of Feed Force and Rotational Torque

Feed force is supplied by a hydraulic cylinder and rotational
torque by a hydraulic motor. The force and torque are directly
proportional to the hydraulic feed pressures [14] supplied to the
feed cylinder and motor. Consequently, pressure transducers
were installed in the hydraulic feed lines supplying the feed
cylinder and rotation motor for the measurement of feed force
and rotational torque.
The following experimental results and discussions will not Fig. 5. Rotation pressure as a function of feed pressure with slopes identified.
refer to “feed force” and “rotational torque” and instead will use
the terms “feed pressure” and “rotation pressure.”

IV. TIME CONSTANTS FOR FEED PRESSURE CONTROL

Drill control is primarily achieved by the adjustment of the
feed pressure to achieve optimum drilling. Consequently, a drill
control system response time is a function of the open-loop time
constants of the drill feed electrohydraulic actuation system.
A series of open-loop “step tests” were performed to al-
low these time constants to be calculated. The test procedure
was based on establishing the drill in the “estimated” optimum
drilling configuration and then increasing the feed pressure set
point as quickly and to as high a level as possible without stalling
the drill. This process was repeated for four drill bit sizes.
Fig. 6. Penetration rate as a function of feed pressure.
From the experimental results for drill bit sizes of 46–190 mm,
the dead time ranged from 0.12 to 0.23 s and the correspond-
ing time constants were 0.31–0.34 s. It was therefore deduced in penetration rate will range from ±72.5% to ±16%. Errors
that the control system should have a maximum response time of this magnitude make instantaneous control using penetration
of 1 s. rate impractical.
Note that the error bars shown in Fig. 5 show the error in
V. DESIGN OF THE CONTROL STRATEGY pressure measurements to be relatively insignificant. Therefore,
The final task to be completed, to allow design of the control control based on rotation pressure will not be unduly affected
systems, was the verification of the relationships reported in by the measurement error.
Fig. 4. This section reports these experiments and presents the The curves shown in Figs. 5 and 6 can be used to determine
derivation and design of the drill control system. the drill operating parameters (for a particular drilling setup).
To achieve real-time control would require the generation of the
A. Confirmation of Relationships for Feed Force/Rotation curves shown in Figs. 5 and 6 during drilling to allow real-time
Pressure and Feed Force/Penetration adjustment of drilling parameters to suit rock conditions and drill
setup. This is not feasible due to the time required and the prac-
To confirm the relationships shown in Fig. 4, key parame-
ticality of continually changing feed pressure levels to enable
ters were recorded when drilling at a range of feed pressures
the curves to be generated as rock and drill condition change.
for 56 mm diameter drill, 80 mm diameter drill, and 190 mm
However, it is possible to deduce information contained in the
diameter reaming bit. Fig. 5 shows examples of the feed pres-
curves in real time by applying a low frequency, low amplitude
sure/rotation pressure curves and Fig. 6 shows examples of the
pressure pulse to the hydraulic feed cylinder. The resulting pres-
feed pressure/penetration rate curves recorded during drilling.
sure fluctuations on the rotation pressure signals would allow
Since both curves are of the same shape as those in Fig. 4, the
the calculation of the slope of the rotation/feed pressure curve.
relationships shown in Fig. 4 are confirmed.
Fig. 4 shows that the knee of the rotation pressure/feed pressure
curve corresponds to the maximum penetration rate. Therefore,
B. Control Strategy
maintaining operation at the knee of the curve would result in
Fig. 6 shows that the penetration rate has values ranging from maximum penetration rate. The slope of the curve above the
4 to 18 mm·s−1 . The error in instantaneous penetration rate knee is of greater magnitude than the slope below the knee (see
measurement is ±2.9 mm·s−1 . Therefore, the percentage error Fig. 5).
156
Fig. 7. Control system schematic.
Fig. 8. Rotation/feed pressure curves showing knee of curve occurring at a reduced pressure level as more strings are added.
C. Control System
Because the feed pressure open-loop response was approxi-
mately 1 s, the control system update time was set for 2 s by
adding a 0.5 Hz sine wave pressure pulse to the feed pressure.
An analog electronic circuit was used to add the sine wave pulse
to the feed pressure electrohydraulic valve and the resulting ro-
tation pressure signal was filtered and demodulated in software
as part of the SCADA control system.
Fig. 7 shows a schematic of the control system. The functional
description of the controller logic is described as follows.
1) Start with hydraulic feed pressure level at 30 bar.
2) Demodulate rotation pressure pulse height every 2 s.
3) If rotation pressure pulse <15 bar, increase feed pressure
by 5 bar.
4) If rotation pressure pulse >15 bar, decrease feed pressure
by 5 bar.
IEEE/ASME TRANSACTIONS ON MECHATRONICS, VOL. 13, NO. 2, APRIL 2008
5) Continuously repeat program to maintain feed pressure in
the optimum drilling range.
VI. RESULTS
The control system was initially tested on the 80 mm diame-
ter drill and 190 mm reaming bits. The test procedure consisted
of manually increasing the feed pressure to obtain data to allow
plotting of the rotation pressure/feed pressure curves. Optimum
drilling feed pressure was calculated from these curves to al-
low evaluation of the control system. The drill was then set
to automatic control and the resulting feed pressure were the
same values as those determined from the curves. For the 80
and 190 mm diameter bits, the optimum feed pressures were
75 and 63 bar, respectively, and the control system automat-
ically adjusted the pressures to 77 and 63 bar (in excellent
agreement).
CAVANOUGH et al.: SELF-OPTIMIZING CONTROL SYSTEM FOR HARD ROCK PERCUSSIVE DRILLING
The second test used only the 80 mm diameter bit to drill a
long hole using one to nine drill strings. For every drill string, the
rotation pressure/feed pressure curve was manually determined
to allow evaluation of the optimum feed pressure (see Fig. 8) and
then the drill was set in automatic control. Feed pressures under
automatic control were equal to the optimum feed pressures
indicated by the graph shown in Fig. 8.
VII. CONCLUSION
The relationships between rotation pressure/feed pressure and
penetration rate/feed pressure have been verified and used as a
method of self-optimizing control of drill feed pressure. As
the control system maintains drill feed pressure at the opti-
mum level, maximum drilling rate and minimum hole deviation
are achieved. Rock characteristics affect drill performance, and
therefore, the feed pressure set point determined by the control
system. Consequently, the feed pressure level may prove to be
a method of determining an empirical measure of rock drilling
quality and identifying when rock characteristics change during
drilling.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank N. Witty for his assistance in
construction and commissioning drilling hardware and helpful
discussions on drilling.
REFERENCES
[1] Rock Excavation Handbook, Matti Heiniö, Ed., Finland, Sweden: Sandvik
Tamrock Corp., 1999.
[2] Drill Theory. Part 3. Percussion Pressure, From Frequent Drillers Club.
(2002) [Online]. Available: http://www.drillersclub.com
[3] Bever Control Bever Data Computerised Drill Rig Guidance Sys-
tem. (2003). Advertising literature form bever control. Gunnersbraatan,
Lierskiogen, Norway [Online]. Available: www.bever.no
[4] “Problem-solvers of the APPENNIES,” (2003). Mining Construction [On-
line]. Available: www.miningandconstruction.com/arch/feat/prob.htm
[5] B. G. Clark, “Principles of rock drilling and bit wear,” Quart. J., vol. 77,
no. 1, 1982.
[6] P. Degnan, “Minerals down under project, CSIRO exploration and min-
ing,” Queensland Center for Advanced Technologies, Brisbane, Qld.,
Australia, Internal CSIRO Rep., Nov. 2007.
[7] K. Fleetwood, “The development and evaluations of the automated
Horidiam stoping method,” M.S. thesis, Curtin Univ. Technol., Perth,
WA, Australia, 1999.
[8] T. Holsten, Australian Drill Support, Waterford, Gold Coast, Qld., Aus-
tralia, personal communication, 2003.
[9] M. Hopkins and S. Duggan, “Automated drilling of surface blast holes
using computer control,” in Mine Mechanization and Automation, Kumar
and Vagenas, Ed., Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Du Balkema, 1993 [ISBN
90 5410 3140].
[10] P. A. Lindqvis, “Rock fragmentation by indentation and disc cutting—
Some theoretical and experimentatl studies,”, Ph. D. Diseratation, Univ.
Lulea, Lulea, Sweden, 1982.
[11] G. Pearse, “Hydaulic rock drills,” Min. Mag., pp. 220–231, Mar. 1985.
[12] J. Segue, Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral Research Center,Brisbane, Qld., Aus-
tralia, personal communication, 2003.
[13] P. Singh, “The effects of rock mass characteristics on blasthole deviation,”
CIM Bull., vol. 91, no. 1016, pp. 90–95, 1998.
[14] T. Sinkala, “Hole deviatons in percussion drilling and control measures,”,
Ph. D. dissertation, Lulea Univ. Technol., Lulea, Sweden, 1989.
[15] T. Sinkala, “Improving hole quality by automatic control of the drilling
process: Theoretical and field studies,” in Mining Science and Technology,
vol. 12, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier, 1991, pp. 79–88.
157
[16] E. Villaescusa, T. Lund, and A. Thompson, “Scoping Study for Auto-
mated Horiadiam Stoping Method,” WA School of Mines, Kalgoorlie, WA,
Australia, Internal Rep.
[17] N. Witty, Geopgraphe, Kewdale, WA, Australia, personal communication,
2003.
[18] C. Wu, “Influence of springy impact interface and curve drill rods on
energy transfer in percussive rock drilling,” Ph.D. dissertation, Lulea
Univ., Lulea, Sweden, 1993.
[19] T. Xiangchum, “Modelling of drill string buckling and tool indentation
in rock drill and fragmentation,” Ph.D. dissertation, Lulea Univ., Lulea,
Sweden, 1996.
Gary L. Cavanough (M’91) received the Asso-
ciate Diploma in industrial instrumentation from the
Capricornia Institute of Advanced Education,
Rockhampton, Qld., Australia, in 1987, the Bache-
lor of Applied Science degree in physics with dis-
tinction from the University of Central Queensland,
Rockhampton, in 1992, the Master of Applied Sci-
ence degree in physics from the Queensland Univer-
sity of Technology, Brisbane, Qld., in 1995, and the
Ph.D. degree in mining engineering from the Univer-
sity of Queensland, Brisbane, in 2004.
He is currently a Senior Research Scientist in the Division of Exploration
and Mining, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization
(CSIRO), Queensland Center for Advanced Technologies, Pullenvale, Qld. His
current research interests include drilling, instrumentation and control, and mag-
netic measurement.
Dr. Cavanough is a member of the Institute of Engineers, Australia, and a
Registered Professional Engineer Queensland (RPEQ).
Mark Kochanek received the B.Sc. (Hons.) degree
in physics from the University of Queensland, Bris-
bane, Qld., Australia, in 1992.
He is currently a Research Officer in the Minerals
Down Under Flagship, Commonwealth Scientific In-
dustrial Research Organization (CSIRO), Pullenvale,
Qld. His current research interests include develop-
ing novel drill control systems, and the automation
and remote control of mining systems.
Jock B. Cunningham received the Bachelor of Ap-
plied Science and Master of Applied Science degrees
in physics from Queensland University of Technol-
ogy, Brisbane, Qld., Australia, in 1976 and 1986,
respectively.
He is currently a Theme Leader for mining re-
search in the Minerals Down Under Flagship, Com-
monwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organiza-
tion (CSIRO), Pullenvale, Qld. His current research
interests include mining automation and automated
mineral analysis.
Mr. Cunningham is a Fellow of the Institute of Engineers, Australia and
a Chartered Profession Engineer (CPEng), and a member of the Australasian
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.
Ian D. Gipps received the B.E. degree in mining en-
gineering from the University of New South Wales,
Sydney, N.S.W., Australia, in 1973, and the M.A.F.
degree from the University of Southern Queensland,
Toowoomba, Qld., Australia, in 2002.
He is currently a Stream Leader for underground
mining research in the Minerals Down Under Flag-
ship, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Re-
search Organization (CSIRO), Pullenvale, Qld. His
current research interests include developing new
mining systems utilising advanced communications,
automation, and remote control of equipment.