Abstract
In last two decade, studies of ice ridge morphometry and strength properties have been actively carried out. Thermal drilling of ice and experiments to determine the local strength of ice using a borehole jack are performed. The paper discusses the issues of joint use of thermal drilling equipment and borehole jack for the ice cover research. Two approaches to the comparison of the results obtained by these two methods are considered. Average penetration rate versus local ice strength dependences are presented. With increasing ice strength and decreasing penetration rate the interval of changes in the ice strength increases and correspondence of the strength to the penetration rate decreases. Based on the results of ice ridges research, depth-wise distributions of local strength and thermal drill penetration rate are compared. Difference between the average thicknesses of the consolidated layer obtained from these distributions was 5 %.
Highlights
Thermal drilling of ice and experiments to determine the local strength of ice using a borehole jack are performed
The paper discusses the issues of joint use of thermal drilling equipment and borehole jack
Two approaches to the comparison of the results obtained by these two methods are considered
Summary
State Scientific Center of the Russian Federation Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia. Summary In last two decade, studies of ice ridge morphometry and strength properties have been actively carried out. Thermal drilling of ice and experiments to determine the local strength of ice using a borehole jack are performed. The paper discusses the issues of joint use of thermal drilling equipment and borehole jack for the ice cover research. Two approaches to the comparison of the results obtained by these two methods are considered. Average penetration rate versus local ice strength dependences are presented. Based on the results of ice ridges research, depth-wise distributions of local strength and thermal drill penetration rate are compared. Difference between the average thicknesses of the consolidated layer obtained from these distributions was 5 %.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
