Drilling comparison in "warm ice" and drill design comparison

L. Augustin; H. Motoyama; F. Wilhelms; P. Talalay; N. Vasiliev; Sigfus Johann Johnsen

doi:10.3189/172756407786857820

Drilling comparison in "warm ice" and drill design comparison

L. Augustin, H. Motoyama, F. Wilhelms, P. Talalay, N. Vasiliev, Sigfus Johann Johnsen

Physics of Ice, Climate and Earth

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

For the deep ice-core drilling community, the 2005/06 Antarctic season was an exciting and fruitful one. In three different Antarctic locations, Dome Fuji, EPICA DML and Vostok, deep drillings approached bedrock (the ice-water interface in the case of Vostok), emulating what had previously been achieved at NorthGRIP, Greenland, (summer 2003 and 2004) and at EPICA Dome C2, Antarctica (season 2004/05). For the first time in ice-core drilling history, three different types of drill (KEMS, JARE and EPICA) simultaneously reached the depth of 'warm ice' under high pressure. After excellent progress at each site, the drilling rate dropped and the drilling teams had to deal with refrozen ice on cutters and drill heads. Drills have different limits and perform differently. In this comparative study, we examine depth, pressure, temperature, pump flow and cutting speed. Finally, we compare a few parameters of ten different deep drills.
Udgivelsesdato: Dec

Original language	English
Journal	Annals of Glaciology
Volume	47
Issue number	1
Pages (from-to)	73-78
Number of pages	6
ISSN	0260-3055
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3189/172756407786857820
Publication status	Published - 2007

Keywords

Faculty of Science

Access to Document

10.3189/172756407786857820

Cite this

@article{d95dee20f69311ddbf70000ea68e967b,

title = "Drilling comparison in {"}warm ice{"} and drill design comparison",

abstract = "For the deep ice-core drilling community, the 2005/06 Antarctic season was an exciting and fruitful one. In three different Antarctic locations, Dome Fuji, EPICA DML and Vostok, deep drillings approached bedrock (the ice-water interface in the case of Vostok), emulating what had previously been achieved at NorthGRIP, Greenland, (summer 2003 and 2004) and at EPICA Dome C2, Antarctica (season 2004/05). For the first time in ice-core drilling history, three different types of drill (KEMS, JARE and EPICA) simultaneously reached the depth of 'warm ice' under high pressure. After excellent progress at each site, the drilling rate dropped and the drilling teams had to deal with refrozen ice on cutters and drill heads. Drills have different limits and perform differently. In this comparative study, we examine depth, pressure, temperature, pump flow and cutting speed. Finally, we compare a few parameters of ten different deep drills. Udgivelsesdato: Dec",

keywords = "Faculty of Science",

author = "L. Augustin and H. Motoyama and F. Wilhelms and P. Talalay and N. Vasiliev and Johnsen, {Sigfus Johann}",

year = "2007",

doi = "10.3189/172756407786857820",

language = "English",

volume = "47",

pages = "73--78",

journal = "Annals of Glaciology",

issn = "0260-3055",

publisher = "International Glaciological Society",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Drilling comparison in "warm ice" and drill design comparison

AU - Augustin, L.

AU - Motoyama, H.

AU - Wilhelms, F.

AU - Talalay, P.

AU - Vasiliev, N.

AU - Johnsen, Sigfus Johann

PY - 2007

Y1 - 2007

N2 - For the deep ice-core drilling community, the 2005/06 Antarctic season was an exciting and fruitful one. In three different Antarctic locations, Dome Fuji, EPICA DML and Vostok, deep drillings approached bedrock (the ice-water interface in the case of Vostok), emulating what had previously been achieved at NorthGRIP, Greenland, (summer 2003 and 2004) and at EPICA Dome C2, Antarctica (season 2004/05). For the first time in ice-core drilling history, three different types of drill (KEMS, JARE and EPICA) simultaneously reached the depth of 'warm ice' under high pressure. After excellent progress at each site, the drilling rate dropped and the drilling teams had to deal with refrozen ice on cutters and drill heads. Drills have different limits and perform differently. In this comparative study, we examine depth, pressure, temperature, pump flow and cutting speed. Finally, we compare a few parameters of ten different deep drills. Udgivelsesdato: Dec

AB - For the deep ice-core drilling community, the 2005/06 Antarctic season was an exciting and fruitful one. In three different Antarctic locations, Dome Fuji, EPICA DML and Vostok, deep drillings approached bedrock (the ice-water interface in the case of Vostok), emulating what had previously been achieved at NorthGRIP, Greenland, (summer 2003 and 2004) and at EPICA Dome C2, Antarctica (season 2004/05). For the first time in ice-core drilling history, three different types of drill (KEMS, JARE and EPICA) simultaneously reached the depth of 'warm ice' under high pressure. After excellent progress at each site, the drilling rate dropped and the drilling teams had to deal with refrozen ice on cutters and drill heads. Drills have different limits and perform differently. In this comparative study, we examine depth, pressure, temperature, pump flow and cutting speed. Finally, we compare a few parameters of ten different deep drills. Udgivelsesdato: Dec

KW - Faculty of Science

U2 - 10.3189/172756407786857820

DO - 10.3189/172756407786857820

M3 - Journal article

SN - 0260-3055

VL - 47

SP - 73

EP - 78

JO - Annals of Glaciology

JF - Annals of Glaciology

IS - 1

ER -