ArticleScientific reports2025
Numerical modeling of abrasive waterjet to optimize rock cutting parameters.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This research was conducted to determine the optimal parameters affecting the quality and efficiency of rock cutting by high-pressure Abrasive Water Jets (AWJs). The process was simulated using the combined Finite Element Method-Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (FEM-SPH) in LS-DYNA software. In order to validate the two-phase state of numerical model, several experimental tests were performed on Sandstone and Marble rock samples. The effect of parameters such as jet flow velocity, dwell time, abrasive volumetric concentration (feed rate), and diameter of abrasive particles on the Cutting Depth (CD) and Cutting Volume (CV) was separately investigated. The results showed that increasing the jet velocity led to an increase in CD and CV. Increasing the dwell time resulted in more energy being spent on the cutting process, leading to an increase in CD and CV. Increasing the volumetric concentration of abrasive particles up to 3% led to a sensible growth in CD and CV, but no significant effect was observed for concentrations more than 3%. Similarly, increasing the diameter of abrasive particles up to 1.25 mm led to an initial intensification in CD and CV, and thereafter any improvement was not observed. Therefore, an abrasive volumetric concentration of 3% and an abrasive particle diameter of 1.25 mm are recommended to improve the cutting quality of the rocks studied in this research, in addition to logical increasing the jet velocity and dwell time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.