蒙陕部分冲击地压矿井由于受到顶板砂岩含水层等影响，煤层含水率过高易导致钻屑法监测出现钻屑泥化进而引发钻屑量监测结果存在误差等现象，为探究其是否由于当前国标中规定的孔径过小亦或是水的影响显著所导致，本文采用实验室试验、数据统计、理论分析与现场验证相结合的方法，系统揭示了水-应力耦合作用下钻屑量变化的双重作用及孔径对钻屑法评价富水煤层冲击危险的影响机制。

基于钻屑量与应力解析式，设计了3种应力水平、4种含水率试件三轴加载钻进试验以及4种含水率煤体物理力学参数弱化试验，发现对理论钻屑量影响的煤体物理力学参数中塑性软化系数占据主导作用。此外，通过试验与理论钻屑量变化趋势的对比分析，揭示了水-应力耦合作用下钻屑量变化的双重作用机制：即水的弱化作用使煤体塑性变形增大，导致钻屑量增加，而水粘结效应使钻屑量降低，二者共同作用下导致钻屑法监测数据失真。

依据水-应力耦合作用下钻屑量变化的双重作用机制，探究了4种钻杆直径钻进条件下3种含水率煤体三轴加载钻进试验力学行为及其响应特征。声发射能量变化趋势表明，随着含水率的升高，水对煤体的弱化作用逐渐增强，声发射能量呈现出“低能高频”等特征；随着钻杆直径的增大，煤体扰动范围与强度增加，内部损伤逐渐积累。二者协同作用下，扩大了钻孔周边塑性区半径，促使煤体发生压缩变形。声发射空间定位显示，钻杆直径与含水率对声发射事件分布具有显著协同增强效应，声发射事件分布范围随孔径增大向煤体更深部扩展，高含水率条件下声发射信号分布范围扩大。基于损伤椭球体的量化分析表明，损伤体积与钻杆直径、含水率均呈正相关关系，在φ14mm钻杆与7.2%含水率条件下达到极值。

在三轴加载钻进条件下，含水煤体的钻屑特征与孔径、含水程度、钻杆参数紧密相关。研究发现，含水程度增加会阻碍钻屑排出，但孔径增大能相对削弱水的粘结作用，提升钻屑运移效率，缩小试验与理论钻屑量差值。室内研究结果表明，钻杆直径从8 mm增至14 mm时，排粉通道容积扩大，破碎模式转变，促使大粒径钻屑占比上升，结合水与孔径的协同作用，使得试验钻屑量更贴近理论值；对比现场42 mm和153 mm孔径钻孔，二者钻屑量均随孔深增加而增长，粒径先增后减。而153 mm钻孔因围岩应力扰动大、破煤体积广，更易产生粗颗粒钻屑，其钻屑量与理论临界指标比值更高，对围岩应力变化响应敏感，显著优化了钻屑法监测冲击地压的效果。该研究可为富水冲击地压矿井钻屑法现场监测优化结果提供有效借鉴及新的理论视角。

In some rock burst mines in the Inner Mongolia and Shaanxi region, excessive coal seam moisture content influenced by roof sandstone aquifers leads to drilling cuttings sludging during monitoring using the drilling cuttings method, causing significant errors in monitoring results. To determine whether such discrepancies are attributed to the undersized borehole diameters specified in current national standards or the prominent impact of water. By integrating laboratory testing, data statistics, theoretical analysis and field validation, this paper systematically reveals the dual mechanisms governing the variation in drilling cuttings quantity under water-stress coupling and the optimization effect of large-diameter boreholes in drilling cuttings methods.

Based on the analytical formula of drilling cuttings volume and stress, triaxial loading drilling tests with 3 stress levels and 4 moisture content specimens, and physical-mechanical parameter weakening tests of coal with 4 moisture contents were designed. Results show that among the physicomechanical parameters of coal affecting the theoretical cuttings volume, the plastic softening coefficient plays a dominant role. Through comparative analysis of experimental and theoretical drilling cuttings trends, the dual action mechanism of drilling cuttings variation under water-stress coupling is revealed: water weakening increases coal plastic deformation, leading to higher drilling cuttings volume, while water adhesion reduces cuttings volume, collectively causing distortion in monitoring data from the drilling cuttings method.

Guided by the dual-action mechanism of drilling cuttings quantity variation under water-stress coupling, this study explores the mechanical behavior and response characteristics of triaxial loading drilling tests on coal with three moisture contents under four drill pipe diameters. The trend of acoustic emission (AE) energy indicates that as moisture content increases, the weakening effect of water on coal gradually intensifies, leading to characteristics such as "low-energy, high-frequency" AE signals. With the increase in drill pipe diameter, the disturbance range and intensity of coal increase, causing gradual accumulation of internal damage. Under their synergistic action, the radius of the plastic zone around the borehole expands, promoting compressive deformation of the coal. AE spatial positioning results show that drill pipe diameter and moisture content have a significant synergistic enhancement effect on the distribution of AE events: the distribution range of AE events extends deeper into the coal as the borehole diameter increases, and the distribution range of AE signals further expands under high moisture content conditions. Quantitative analysis based on the damage ellipsoid reveals a positive correlation between damage volume and both drill pipe diameter and moisture content, with the maximum value achieved under the conditions of a φ14 mm drill pipe and 7.2% moisture content.

Under the condition of triaxial loading and drilling, the cuttings characteristics of water-bearing coal are closely related to the aperture, water content, and drill pipe parameters. The study finds that an increase in water content hinders the discharge of cuttings, but an increase in aperture can relatively weaken the bonding effect of water, improve the cuttings migration efficiency, and narrow the difference between the experimental and theoretical cuttings volume. Indoor research results show that when the drill pipe diameter increases from 8 mm to 14 mm, the volume of the cuttings discharge channel expands, and the crushing mode changes, which promotes the increase in the proportion of large-particle-size cuttings. Combined with the synergistic effect of water and aperture, the experimental cuttings volume is closer to the theoretical value. By comparing the on-site boreholes with apertures of 42 mm and 153 mm, the cuttings volume of both increases with the increase of hole depth, and the particle size first increases and then decreases. However, due to the large disturbance of surrounding rock stress and the wide coal-breaking volume of the 153 mm borehole, it is more prone to generate coarse-grained cuttings, and the ratio of its cuttings volume to the theoretical critical index is higher, which is sensitive to the change of surrounding rock stress and significantly optimizes the effect of the cuttings method in monitoring rock burst. This study can provide an effective reference and a new theoretical perspective for the on-site monitoring optimization results of the cuttings method in water-rich rock burst mines.

[1] 窦林名, 何学秋. 冲击矿压防治理论与技术[M]. 中国矿业大学出版社,2001.

[2] 潘一山. 冲击地压发生和破坏过程研究[D]. 北京:清华大学,1999.

[3] 赵本钧. 冲击地压及其防治[M]. 北京:煤炭工业出版社,1994.

[4] 何满潮, 谢和平, 彭苏萍, 等. 深部开采岩体力学研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2005,24(16):2803-2813.

[5] Dai L P, Pan Y S, Zhang C G, et al. New criterion of critical mining stress index for risk evaluation of roadway rockburst[J]. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering,2022,55(8): 4783-4799.

[6] 姜福兴, 曲效成, 于正兴, 等. 冲击地压实时监测预警技术及发展趋势[J]. 煤炭科学技术,2011,39(02):59-64.

[7] 潘一山, 宋义敏, 刘军. 我国煤矿冲击地压防治的格局、变局和新局[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2023,42(09):2081-2095.

[8] Cook N G W. The failure of rock[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts,1965,2:389-403.

[9] Cook N G W. A note on rockbursts considered as a problem of stability[J]. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy,1965,65:437-446.

[10] Bieniawski Z T. Mechanism of brittle fracture of rocks. Part I, II and III[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts, 1967,6:395-430.

[11] Bieniawski Z T, Denkhaus H G, Vogler U W. Failure of fracture rock[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts, 1969,6:323-341.

[12] Cook N G W, Hoek E, Pretorius J P G, et al. Rock mechanics applied to the study of rockbursts[J]. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 1966,66:435-528.

[13] 王博. 陕蒙深部矿区典型动力灾害发生机理及防治研究[D]. 北京:北京科技大学,2021.

[14] 潘俊锋, 刘少虹, 马文涛, 等. 陕西煤矿冲击地压发生规律与分类防治[J]. 煤炭科学技术,2024,52(01):95−105.

[15] Wang J X, Wang E Y, Yang W, et al. Rock burst monitoring and early warning under uncertainty based on multi information fusion approach[J]. Measurement,2022,205: 112188.

[16] Li M L, Li K G, Qin Q C. A rock burst prediction model based on extreme learning machine with improved Harris Hawks optimization and its application[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology,2023,134:104978.

[17] Zhang J R. Exploration on coal mining-induced rockburst prediction using Internet of things and deep neural network[J].The Journal of Supercomputing,2022,78:13988–14008.

[18] 窦林名, 田鑫元, 于正兴, 曹安业等. 我国煤矿冲击地压防治现状与难题[J]. 煤炭学报,2022,47(01):152-171.

[19] 齐庆新, 马世志, 孙希奎等. 煤矿冲击地压源头防治理论与技术架构[J]. 煤炭学报,2023,48(05):1861-1874.

[20] 中华人民共和国国家标准编写组. GB/T 25217.6-2019 冲击地压测定、监测与防治方法第6部分：钻屑监测方法[S]. 北京:中国标准出版社,2019.

[21] 窦林名, 李振雷, 张敏. 煤矿冲击地压灾害监测预警技术研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术,2016,44(07):41-46.

[22] 窦林名, 牟宗龙. 采矿地球物理理论与技术[M]. 科学出版社,2014.

[23] 吕进国, 姜耀东, 赵毅鑫, 等. 冲击地压层次化监测及其预警方法的研究与应用[J]. 煤炭学报,2013,38(07):1161-1167.

[24] 赵善坤, 李宏艳, 刘军, 等. 深部冲击危险矿井多参量预测预报及解危技术研究[J]. 煤炭学报,2011,36(S2):339-345.

[25] 蓝航, 齐庆新, 潘俊锋, 等. 我国煤矿冲击地压特点及防治技术分析[J]. 煤炭科学技术,2011,39(01).

[26] 窦林名, 何学秋. 煤矿冲击矿压的分级预测研究[J]. 中国矿业大学学报,2007(06):717-722.

[27] 刘金海. 煤矿冲击地压监测预警技术新进展[J]. 煤炭科学技术,2016,44(06):71-77.

[28] 张万斌, 王淑坤, 滕学军. 我国冲击地压研究与防治的进展[J]. 煤炭学报,1992(03):27-36.

[29] 王同旭, 刘文杰, 刘钒, 等. 冲击地压现场监测方法分析与选择原则[J]. 山东科技大学学报(自然科学版),2014,33(03):43-47.

[30] 薛雅荣, 宋大钊, 何学秋, 等. 突出煤岩纵波波速与应力相关关系[J]. 西安科技大学学报,2019,39(05):826-835.

[31] 王桂峰, 窦林名, 蔡武, 等. 冲击地压的不稳定能量触发机制研究[J]. 中国矿业大学学报,2018,47(01):190-196.

[32] Van Eeckhout E M, Peng S S. The effect of humidity on the compliances of coal mine shales[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts. Pergamon,1975,12(11):335-340.

[33] Chugh Y P, Missavage R A. Effects of moisture on strata control in coal mines [J]. Engineering Geology,1981,17:241−255.

[34] Yao Q L, Experimental study of strength characteristics of coal specimens after water intrusion [J]. Arabian Journal of Geosciences.2015,08:6779-6789.

[35] 康红普. 水对岩石的损伤[J]. 水文地质工程地质,1994 (03):39-41.

[36] 于超云, 唐世斌, 唐春安. 含水率对红砂岩瞬时和蠕变力学性质影响的试验研究[J]. 煤炭学报,2019,44(02):473.

[37] 张村, 王潇杰, 师旭涛, 等.含水饱和度影响下砂岩劈裂特性与水岩作用机制[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2024,43(S2):3722-3737.

[38] 汪亦显, 曹平, 黄永恒, 等. 水作用下软岩软化与损伤断裂效应的时间相依性[J]. 四川大学学报(工程科学版),2010,42(04):55-62.

[39] Song C S, Wang W, Liu K, et al. Energy dissipation characteristics of water saturated coal samples under true triaxial dynamic and static combined loading[J]. Journal of China Coal Society,2022,47(05):2011-2026.

[40] 肖晓春, 金晨, 丁鑫, 等. 基于声发射时频特征的不同含水煤样冲击倾向试验研究[J]. 煤炭学报,2018,43(04):931-938.

[41] 蒋景东, 陈生水, 徐婕, 等. 不同含水状态下泥岩的力学性质及能量特征[J]. 煤炭学报,2018,43(8):2217-2224.

[42] 王春萍, 廖益林, 刘建锋, 等. 应力及含水状态对裂隙花岗岩蠕变特性的影响研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2024,43(04):907-917.

[43] 佩图霍夫. 煤矿冲击地压[M]. 王诱安译. 北京:煤炭工业出版社,1980.

[44] 佩图霍夫. 冲击地压和突出的力学计算方法[M]. 段克信译. 北京:煤炭工业出版社，1994.

[45] 勃罗纳G. 煤层极限应力[M]. 矿业译丛, 中国矿业学院情报室,1983.

[46] 管原胜彦. 煤壁压出及煤粉钻孔力学[J]. 日本矿业会志,1981,(1113):25-29.

[47] 赵本钧, 章梦涛. 钻屑法的研究和应用[J]. 阜新矿业学院学报,1985(S1):13-28.

[48] 潘一山. 煤体钻粉理论的研究[J]. 阜新矿业学院学报,1985(S1):91-97.

[49] 文光才,王先义. 突出预测钻屑量指标的探讨[J]. 煤炭工程师,1998(03):32-34+49.

[50] 陈峰. 利用钻屑法预测冲击地压危险性的试验研究[D]. 辽宁:辽宁工程技术大学,2017.

[51] 曲效成, 姜福兴, 于正兴, 等. 基于当量钻屑法的冲击地压监测预警技术研究及应用[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2011,30(11):2346-2351.

[52] Zhao R J,Yao R B,Zhang T, et al. Estimation of tunnelin-situ stress magnitude and direction using measurement while drilling data and acoustic wave information[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporation Trenchless Technology Research, 2024,152:105905.

[53] Zhang W L, Li C, Jin J X, et al. A new monitoring-while-drilling method of large diameter drilling in underground coal mine and their application[J]. Measurement,2021, 173:108840.

[54] 潘一山, 徐连满. 钻屑温度法预测冲击地压的试验研究[J]. 岩土工程学报,2012,34(12):2228-2232.

[55] 朱广安, 刘海洋, 沈威, 等. 富水条件下冲击煤体钻屑法试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2022,41(12):2417-2431.

[56] 朱广安, 刘欢, 苏晓华, 等. 基于声发射特征的含水煤体钻屑法临界指标优化试验研究[J]. 煤炭学报,2023,48(12):4433-4442.

[57] Geng Y F, Tan J, Yin Y C, et al. Theoretical analysis of drilling cuttings considering stress zoning of surrounding rock and its application in stress detection[J]. Energy Science & Engineering,2023,11(5):1662-1670.

[58] Yin Y, Zhang Q, Guo L, et al. Drill cuttings test of coal under different stresses and characteristics of coal carticle distribution during borehole collapse[J]. Processes，2025,13(2):499.

[59] 唐巨鹏, 李卫军, 潘一山等. 钻杆直径及钻进速度对钻屑量影响试验研究[J]. 采矿与安全工程学报,2019,36(01):166-174.

[60] 李京达, 魏全德, 贾明魁. 大直径钻孔钻屑检验方法及现场应用[J]. 煤矿安全,2016,47(01):126-129.

[61] 顾广耀, 王家玉. 大直径钻孔钻屑指标法临界值的研究[J]. 煤炭技术,2007(03):60-62.

[62] 赵同彬, 尹延春, 任文涛, 等. 基于煤体卸压钻孔钻屑的冲击危险性检测方法及应用[J/OL]. 煤炭学报,1-10[2025-03-16].

[63] 尹延春, 郑武威, 赵同彬, 等. 煤层钻孔钻进煤粉自动测量方法及试验研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术,2023,51(11):23-32.

[64] 李东, 姜福兴, 陈洋等．深井富水工作面“动—静”应力效应诱发冲击地压机理研究[J].岩土工程学报,2018,40(09):1714-1722．

[65] 舒凑先, 姜福兴, 魏全德, 等. 疏水诱发深井巷道冲击地压机理及其防治[J]. 采矿与安全工程学报,2018,35(04):780-786.

[66] Roy D G, Singh T N, Kodikara J, et al. Effect of water saturation on the fracture and mechanical properties of sedimentary rocks[J]. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 2017,50(10):2585-2600.

[67] Zhao K, Yang DX, Zeng P, et al. Effect of water content on the failure pattern and acoustic emission characteristics of red sandstone[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences,2021,142.

[68] Erguler Z A, Ulusay R. Water-induced variations in mechanical properties of clay-bearing rocks[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 2009,46(2):355-370.

[69] 于超云. 水对岩石力学性质影响的试验及数值模拟研究[D]. 大连:大连理工大学,2020.

[70] 姚强岭, 郝琪, 陈翔宇, 等. 煤矿地下水库煤柱坝体宽度设计[J]. 煤炭学报,2019,44(03):891-899.

[71] 李波波, 王忠晖, 任崇鸿, 等. 水-力耦合下煤岩力学特性及损伤本构模型研究[J]. 岩土力学,2021,42(02):315-323+332.

[72] 茅献彪, 陈占清, 徐思朋, 等. 煤层冲击倾向性与含水率关系的试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,2001(01):49-52.

[73] Daraei A, Zare S. Effect of water content variations on critical and failure strains of rock[J]. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering,2018,22(09):3331-3339.

[74] M I. Global. sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates[J]. Mathematics & Computers in Simulation,2001,55(1-3):271-280.

[75] 蔡美峰, 何满潮, 刘东燕. 岩石力学与工程第2版[M]. 北京:科学出版社,2013.

[76] 杨磊. 不同冲击倾向性煤体声发射能量特征与时空演化规律研究[J]. 采矿与安全工程学报,2020,37(03):525-532.

[77] 文圣勇, 韩立军, 宗义江, 等.不同含水率红砂岩单轴压缩试验声发射特征研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术,2013,41(08):46-48+52.

[78] Chen Z, Wang P, Shi F, et al. Investigation of crack recognition and spatio-temporal evolution pattern in coal samples damage[J]. Scientific Reports,2023,13(1):17961.

[79] Liu S M, Li X L, Li Z H,et al. Energy distribution and fractal characterization of acoustic emission (AE) during coal deformation and fracturing [J]. Measurement,2019,136: 122-131.

[80] 艾婷, 张茹, 刘建锋, 等. 三轴压缩煤岩破裂过程中声发射时空演化规律[J]. 煤炭学报,2011,36(12):2048-2057.

[81] 雷瑞德, 粟罗, 贺培, 等. 不同高径比煤样巴西劈裂声发射特征及能量演化机制研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术,2024,52(10):63-77.

[82] 巩思园, 窦林名, 李静, 等. 一种提高CT反演分辨率和效率的自适应不等间距网格划分方法[P]. 中国:CN106646607A,2017.05.10.

[83] 冯国瑞, 文晓泽, 郭军, 等. 含水率对煤样声发射特征和碎块分布特征影响的试验研究[J]. 中南大学学报(自然科学版),2021,52(08):2910-2918.

[84] 毋首杰, 王亮. 水平螺旋钻杆结构参数对排粉量的影响[J]. 煤矿安全, 2018,49(01): 107-111.