RIPPABILITY CLASSIFICATION FOR QUARTZITE BASED ON SPECIFIC ENERGY AND FIELD PRODUCTION RATE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/mjce.v21.15779Keywords:
Quartzite, Specific Energy, Field Production Rate, Rippability ClassificationAbstract
When rock is deemed to be rippable, it is essential to classify how difficult to actually rip this rock on site. The rating on the difficulty is termed as rippability classification, and it is based on mass and material properties of the rock which contribute to its resistance against ripping. This paper highlights a study to establish a similar classification for quartzite which is based on specific energy (SE) and field production rate (Qr). To facilitate in analysis of data, the study area (located in Dengkil, Selangor) is divided into 6 panels (A to F). Collected data are grouped according to these panels. Laboratory assessments include verification on cuttability and strengths of the rock samples. Seismic survey and in situ ripping test were field appraisals conducted to assess rippability of the in situ quartzite. Analysis of data indicates that besides its material properties, rippability of quartzite can be evaluated using its SE. Ranging between 3.19 and 6.19 MJ/m3 , the SE is related to the Qr, which is between 147 and 292 m3 /hr. For the six panels investigated, it is found that the higher the SE, the lower is the Qr (i.e. more difficult to rip). Based on the SE, Qr and horsepower of ripper dozer, rippability classification for the quartzite is established. This classification is essential for planning and costing of major earthworks, particularly in estimating capacity of ripper dozer and duration of earthwork.References
Anon (1988). Caterpillar Performance Handbook (19th.ed). Preoria, Illinois, USA: Mc Graw-Hill Inc.
Basarir, H., Karpuz, C. and Tutluoglu, L. (2008). Specific Energy based Rippability Classification System for Coal Measure Rock. Journal of Terramechanics. Vol. 45: 51-62.
Basarir, H. and Karpuz, C. (2004). A Rippability Classification System for Marls in Lignite mines. Journal of Engineering Geology, (Vol. 74) Issues 3-4: 303-318.
Bell, F.G. (2004). Engineering Geology and Construction. London: Spon Press. Caterpillar (2008). Caterpillar Performance Handbook Edition (38th ed). Peoria, Illnois, USA: CAT publication, Caterpillar Inc.
Fowell, R.J. & Johnson, S.T. (1991). Cuttability Assessment Applied to Drag Tool Tunneling Machines. Proc. 7th Int. Congress Rock Mechanics. ISRM, ed. Wittke, A.A. Balkema, Achen:
-990.
Hudson, J.A. (1989). Rock Mechanics Principles in Engineering Practice, CIRIA, Butterworth & Co, London
ISRM (1981). Rock Characterisation Testing and Monitoring, ISRM Suggested Methods. Commission on Testing Methods, Int. Society for Rock Mechanics. Brown E.T. (ed)
Pergamon Press Ltd. Oxford.
Legget, R.F. & Hatheway, A.W. (1988). Geology and Engineering. (3rd ed). New York: McGraw-Hill Inc.
McLean, A.C. & Gribble, C.D. (1985). Geology for Civil Engineers, 2nd ed. London: E & FN Spon.
Mohd For Mohd Amin (2008). Laboratory Ripping Machine-Invention Disclosure for INATEX 2008. August 2008. Research Management Centre, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai,
Johor.
Mohd For Mohd Amin, Chan Sook Huei, Azman Kassim, Mushairry Mustaffa & Edy Tonizam Mohammad (2009). Excavatability of Unclassified Hard Materials (LPPIM: CREAM/
UPP03-02-06-0111) Final Report, CIDB-CREAM, Kuala Lumpur.
Pettifer, G.S., and Fookes, P.G. (1994). A Revision of the Graphical Method for Assessing the Excavatability of Rock: Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology, (Vol. 27): 45-164.
Singh, B. and Goel, R.K. (1999). Rock Mass Classification- A Practical Approach in Civil Engineering. (1st ed.). Elsevier Science Ltd. Oxford.
