Polycrystalline diamond compact

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 12044075
  • Patent Number
    12,044,075
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, February 24, 2021
    3 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, July 23, 2024
    a month ago
Abstract
In an embodiment, a method of fabricating a polycrystalline diamond compact is disclosed. The method includes sintering a plurality of diamond particles in the presence of a metal-solvent catalyst to form a polycrystalline diamond body; leaching the polycrystalline diamond body to at least partially remove the metal-solvent catalyst therefrom, thereby forming an at least partially leached polycrystalline diamond body; and subjecting an assembly of the at least partially leached polycrystalline diamond body and a cemented carbide substrate to a high-pressure/high-temperature process at a pressure to infiltrate the at least partially leached polycrystalline diamond body with an infiltrant. The pressure of the high-pressure/high-temperature process is less than that employed in the act of sintering of the plurality of diamond particles.
Description
BACKGROUND

Wear-resistant, superabrasive compacts are utilized in a variety of mechanical applications. For example, polycrystalline diamond compacts (“PDCs”) are used in drilling tools (e.g., cutting elements, gage trimmers, etc.), machining equipment, bearing apparatuses, wire-drawing machinery, and in other mechanical apparatuses.


PDCs have found particular utility as superabrasive cutting elements in rotary drill bits, such as roller cone drill bits and fixed-cutter drill bits. A PDC cutting element typically includes a superabrasive diamond layer commonly referred to as a diamond table. The diamond table may be formed and bonded to a substrate using a high-pressure, high-temperature (“HPHT”) process. The PDC cutting element may also be brazed directly into a preformed pocket, socket, or other receptacle formed in a bit body of a rotary drill bit. The substrate may often be brazed or otherwise joined to an attachment member, such as a cylindrical backing. A rotary drill bit typically includes a number of PDC cutting elements affixed to the bit body. A stud carrying the PDC may also be used as a PDC cutting element when mounted to a bit body of a rotary drill bit by press-fitting, brazing, or otherwise securing the stud into a receptacle formed in the bit body.


Conventional PDCs are normally fabricated by placing a cemented carbide substrate into a container with a volume of diamond particles positioned adjacent to the cemented carbide substrate. A number of such cartridges may be loaded into an HPHT press. The substrates and volume of diamond particles are then processed under HPHT conditions in the presence of a catalyst material that causes the diamond particles to bond to one another to form a matrix of bonded diamond grains defining a polycrystalline diamond (“PCD”) table that is bonded to the substrate. The catalyst material is often a metal-solvent catalyst (e.g., cobalt, nickel, iron, or alloys thereof) that is used for promoting intergrowth of the diamond particles. For example, a constituent of the cemented carbide substrate, such as cobalt from a cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate, liquefies and sweeps from a region adjacent to the volume of diamond particles into interstitial regions between the diamond particles during the HPHT process. The cobalt acts as a catalyst to promote intergrowth between the diamond particles, which results in formation of bonded diamond grains.


Because of different coefficients of thermal expansion and modulus of elasticity between the PCD table and the cemented carbide substrate, residual stresses of varying magnitudes may develop within different regions of the PCD table and the cemented carbide substrate. Such residual stresses may remain in the PCD table and cemented carbide substrate following cooling and release of pressure from the HPHT process. These complex stresses may be concentrated near the PCD table/substrate interface. Residual stresses at the interface between the PCD table and cemented carbide substrate may result in premature failure of the PDC upon cooling or during subsequent use under thermal stresses and applied forces.


In order to help reduce de-bonding of the PCD table from the cemented carbide substrate, some PDC designers have made the interfacial surface of the cemented carbide substrate that bonds to the PCD table significantly nonplanar. For example, various nonplanar substrate interfacial surface configurations have been proposed and/or used, such as a plurality of spaced protrusions, a honeycomb-type protrusion pattern, and a variety of other configurations.


SUMMARY

Embodiments of the invention relate to PCD exhibiting enhanced diamond-to-diamond bonding. In an embodiment, PCD includes a plurality of diamond grains defining a plurality of interstitial regions. A metal-solvent catalyst occupies at least a portion of the plurality of interstitial regions. The plurality of diamond grains and the metal-solvent catalyst collectively may exhibit a coercivity of about 115 Oersteds (“Oe”) or more and a specific magnetic saturation of about 15 Gauss·cm3/grams (“G·cm3/g”) or less.


In an embodiment, PCD includes a plurality of diamond grains defining a plurality of interstitial regions. A metal-solvent catalyst occupies the plurality of interstitial regions. The plurality of diamond grains and the metal-solvent catalyst collectively may exhibit a specific magnetic saturation of about 15 G·cm3/g or less. The plurality of diamond grains and the metal-solvent catalyst define a volume of at least about 0.050 cm3.


In an embodiment, a method of fabricating PCD includes enclosing a plurality of diamond particles that exhibit an average particle size of about 30 μm or less, and a metal-solvent catalyst in a pressure transmitting medium to form a cell assembly. The method further includes subjecting the cell assembly to a temperature of at least about 1000° C. and a pressure in the pressure transmitting medium of at least about 7.5 GPa to form the PCD.


In an embodiment, a PDC includes a PCD table bonded to a substrate. At least a portion of the PCD table may comprise any of the PCD embodiments disclosed herein. In an embodiment, the substrate includes an interfacial surface that is bonded to the polycrystalline diamond table and exhibits a substantially planar topography. According to an embodiment, the interfacial surface may include a plurality of protrusions, and a ratio of a surface area of the interfacial surface in the absence of the plurality of provisions to a surface area of the interfacial surface with the plurality of protrusions is greater than about 0.600.


In an embodiment, a method of fabricating a PDC includes enclosing a combination in a pressure transmitting medium to form a cell assembly. The combination includes a plurality of diamond particles that exhibit an average particle size of about 30 μm or less positioned at least proximate to a substrate having an interfacial surface that is substantially planar. The method further includes subjecting the cell assembly to a temperature of at least about 1000° C. and a pressure in the pressure transmitting medium of at least about 7.5 GPa to form a PCD table adjacent to the substrate.


Further embodiments relate to applications utilizing the disclosed PCD and PDCs in various articles and apparatuses, such as rotary drill bits, bearing apparatuses, wire-drawing dies, machining equipment, and other articles and apparatuses.


Features from any of the disclosed embodiments may be used in combination with one another, without limitation. In addition, other features and advantages of the present disclosure will become apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art through consideration of the following detailed description and the accompanying drawings.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The drawings illustrate several embodiments of the invention, wherein identical reference numerals refer to identical elements or features in different views or embodiments shown in the drawings.



FIG. 1A is a schematic diagram of an example of a magnetic saturation apparatus configured to magnetize a PCD sample approximately to saturation.



FIG. 1B is a schematic diagram of an example of a magnetic saturation measurement apparatus configured to measure a saturation magnetization of a PCD sample.



FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of an example of a coercivity measurement apparatus configured to determine coercivity of a PCD sample.



FIG. 3A is a cross-sectional view of an embodiment of a PDC including a PCD table formed from any of the PCD embodiments disclosed herein.



FIG. 3B is a schematic illustration of a method of fabricating the PDC shown in FIG. 3A according to an embodiment.



FIG. 3C is a graph of residual principal stress versus substrate thickness that was measured in a PCD table of a PDC fabricated at a pressure above about 7.5 GPa and a PCD table of a conventionally formed PDC.



FIG. 4A is an exploded isometric view of a PDC comprising a substrate including an interfacial surface exhibiting a selected substantially planar topography according to an embodiment.



FIG. 4B is an assembled cross-sectional view of the PDC shown in FIG. 4A taken along line 4B-4B.



FIG. 5A is cross-sectional view of a PDC comprising a substrate including an interfacial surface exhibiting a selected substantially planar topography according to yet another embodiment.



FIG. 5B is an isometric view of the substrate shown in FIG. 5A.



FIG. 6A is an isometric view of an embodiment of a rotary drill bit that may employ one or more of the disclosed PDC embodiments.



FIG. 6B is a top elevation view of the rotary drill bit shown in FIG. 6A.



FIG. 7 is an isometric cutaway view of an embodiment of a thrust-bearing apparatus that may utilize one or more of the disclosed PDC embodiments.



FIG. 8 is an isometric cutaway view of an embodiment of a radial bearing apparatus that may utilize one or more of the disclosed PDC embodiments.



FIG. 9 is a schematic isometric cutaway view of an embodiment of a subterranean drilling system including the thrust-bearing apparatus shown in FIG. 7.



FIG. 10 is a side cross-sectional view of an embodiment of a wire-drawing die that employs a PDC fabricated in accordance with the principles described herein.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Embodiments of the invention relate to PCD that exhibits enhanced diamond-to-diamond bonding. It is currently believed by the inventors that as the sintering pressure employed during the HPHT process used to fabricate such PCD is moved further into the diamond-stable region away from the graphite-diamond equilibrium line, the rate of nucleation and growth of diamond increases. Such increased nucleation and growth of diamond between diamond particles (for a given diamond particle formulation) may result in PCD being formed exhibiting one or more of a relatively lower metal-solvent catalyst content, a higher coercivity, a lower specific magnetic saturation, or a lower specific permeability (i.e., the ratio of specific magnetic saturation to coercivity) than PCD formed at a lower sintering pressure. Embodiments also relate to PDCs having a PCD table comprising such PCD, methods of fabricating such PCD and PDCs, and applications for such PCD and PDCs in rotary drill bits, bearing apparatuses, wire-drawing dies, machining equipment, and other articles and apparatuses.


PCD Embodiments

According to various embodiments, PCD sintered at a pressure of at least about 7.5 GPa may exhibit a coercivity of 115 Oe or more, a high-degree of diamond-to-diamond bonding, a specific magnetic saturation of about 15 G·cm3/g or less, and a metal-solvent catalyst content of about 7.5 weight % (“wt %”) or less. The PCD includes a plurality of diamond grains directly bonded together via diamond-to-diamond bonding (e.g., sp3 bonding) to define a plurality of interstitial regions. At least a portion of the interstitial regions or, in some embodiments, substantially all of the interstitial regions may be occupied by a metal-solvent catalyst, such as iron, nickel, cobalt, or alloys of any of the foregoing metals. For example, the metal-solvent catalyst may be a cobalt-based material including at least 50 wt % cobalt, such as a cobalt alloy.


The diamond grains may exhibit an average grain size of about 50 μm or less, such as about 30 μm or less or about 20 μm or less. For example, the average grain size of the diamond grains may be about 10 μm to about 18 μm and, in some embodiments, about 15 μm to about 18 μm. In some embodiments, the average grain size of the diamond grains may be about 10 μm or less, such as about 2 μm to about 5 μm or submicron. The diamond grain size distribution of the diamond grains may exhibit a single mode, or may be a bimodal or greater grain size distribution.


The metal-solvent catalyst that occupies the interstitial regions may be present in the PCD in an amount of about 7.5 wt % or less. In some embodiments, the metal-solvent catalyst may be present in the PCD in an amount of about 3 wt % to about 7.5 wt %, such as about 3 wt % to about 6 wt %. In other embodiments, the metal-solvent catalyst content may be present in the PCD in an amount less than about 3 wt %, such as about 1 wt % to about 3 wt % or a residual amount to about 1 wt %. By maintaining the metal-solvent catalyst content below about 7.5 wt %, the PCD may exhibit a desirable level of thermal stability suitable for subterranean drilling applications.


Many physical characteristics of the PCD may be determined by measuring certain magnetic properties of the PCD because the metal-solvent catalyst may be ferromagnetic. The amount of the metal-solvent catalyst present in the PCD may be correlated with the measured specific magnetic saturation of the PCD. A relatively larger specific magnetic saturation indicates relatively more metal-solvent catalyst in the PCD.


The mean free path between neighboring diamond grains of the PCD may be correlated with the measured coercivity of the PCD. A relatively large coercivity indicates a relatively smaller mean free path. The mean free path is representative of the average distance between neighboring diamond grains of the PCD, and thus may be indicative of the extent of diamond-to-diamond bonding in the PCD. A relatively smaller mean free path, in well-sintered PCD, may indicate relatively more diamond-to-diamond bonding.


As merely one example, ASTM B886-03 (2008) provides a suitable standard for measuring the specific magnetic saturation and ASTM B887-03 (2008) e1 provides a suitable standard for measuring the coercivity of the PCD. Although both ASTM B886-03 (2008) and ASTM B887-03 (2008) e1 are directed to standards for measuring magnetic properties of cemented carbide materials, either standard may be used to determine the magnetic properties of PCD. A KOERZIMAT CS 1.096 instrument (commercially available from Foerster Instruments of Pittsburgh, Pa.) is one suitable instrument that may be used to measure the specific magnetic saturation and the coercivity of the PCD.


Generally, as the sintering pressure that is used to form the PCD increases, the coercivity may increase and the magnetic saturation may decrease. The PCD defined collectively by the bonded diamond grains and the metal-solvent catalyst may exhibit a coercivity of about 115 Oe or more and a metal-solvent catalyst content of less than about 7.5 wt % as indicated by a specific magnetic saturation of about 15 G·cm3/g or less. In a more detailed embodiment, the coercivity of the PCD may be about 115 Oe to about 250 Oe and the specific magnetic saturation of the PCD may be greater than 0 G·cm3/g to about 15 G·cm3/g. In an even more detailed embodiment, the coercivity of the PCD may be about 115 Oe to about 175 Oe and the specific magnetic saturation of the PCD may be about 5 G·cm3/g to about 15 G·cm3/g. In yet an even more detailed embodiment, the coercivity of the PCD may be about 155 Oe to about 175 Oe and the specific magnetic saturation of the PCD may be about 10 G·cm3/g to about 15 G·cm3/g. The specific permeability (i.e., the ratio of specific magnetic saturation to coercivity) of the PCD may be about 0.10 G·cm3/g·Oe or less, such as about 0.060 G·cm3/g·Oe to about 0.090 G·cm3/g·Oe. Despite the average grain size of the bonded diamond grains being less than about 30 μm in some embodiments, the metal-solvent catalyst content in the PCD may be less than about 7.5 wt % resulting in a desirable thermal stability.


In one embodiment, diamond particles having an average particle size of about 18 μm to about 20 μm are positioned adjacent to a cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate and subjected to an HPHT process at a temperature of about 1390° C. to about 1430° C. and a pressure of about 7.8 GPa to about 8.5 GPa. The PCD so-formed as a PCD table bonded to the substrate may exhibit a coercivity of about 155 Oe to about 175 Oe, a specific magnetic saturation of about 10 G·cm3/g to about 15 G·cm3/g, and a cobalt content of about 5 wt % to about 7.5 wt %.


In one or more embodiments, a specific magnetic saturation constant for the metal-solvent catalyst in the PCD may be about 185 G·cm3/g to about 215 G·cm3/g. For example, the specific magnetic saturation constant for the metal-solvent catalyst in the PCD may be about 195 G·cm3/g to about 205 G·cm3/g. It is noted that the specific magnetic saturation constant for the metal-solvent catalyst in the PCD may be composition dependent.


Generally, as the sintering pressure is increased above 7.5 GPa, a wear resistance of the PCD so-formed may increase. For example, the Gratio may be at least about 4.0×106, such as about 5.0×106 to about 15.0×106 or, more particularly, about 8.0×106 to about 15.0×106. In some embodiments, the Gratio may be at least about 30.0×106. The Gratio is the ratio of the volume of workpiece cut to the volume of PCD worn away during the cutting process. An example of suitable parameters that may be used to determine a Gratio of the PCD are a depth of cut for the PCD cutting element of about 0.254 mm, a back rake angle for the PCD cutting element of about 20 degrees, an in-feed for the PCD cutting element of about 6.35 mm/rev, a rotary speed of the workpiece to be cut of about 101 rpm, and the workpiece may be made from Barre granite having a 914 mm outer diameter and a 254 mm inner diameter. During the Gratio test, the workpiece is cooled with a coolant, such as water.


In addition to the aforementioned Gratio, despite the presence of the metal-solvent catalyst in the PCD, the PCD may exhibit a thermal stability that is close to, substantially the same as, or greater than a partially leached PCD material formed by sintering a substantially similar diamond particle formulation at a lower sintering pressure (e.g., up to about 5.5 GPa) and in which the metal-solvent catalyst (e.g., cobalt) is leached therefrom to a depth of about 60 μm to about 100 μm from a working surface thereof. The thermal stability of the PCD may be evaluated by measuring the distance cut in a workpiece prior to catastrophic failure, without using coolant, in a vertical lathe test (e.g., vertical turret lathe or a vertical boring mill). An example of suitable parameters that may be used to determine thermal stability of the PCD are a depth of cut for the PCD cutting element of about 1.27 mm, a back rake angle for the PCD cutting element of about 20 degrees, an in-feed for the PCD cutting element of about 1.524 mm/rev, a cutting speed of the workpiece to be cut of about 1.78 m/sec, and the workpiece may be made from Barre granite having a 914 mm outer diameter and a 254 mm inner diameter. In an embodiment, the distance cut in a workpiece prior to catastrophic failure as measured in the above-described vertical lathe test may be at least about 1300 m, such as about 1300 m to about 3950 m.


PCD formed by sintering diamond particles having the same diamond particle size distribution as a PCD embodiment of the invention, but sintered at a pressure of, for example, up to about 5.5 GPa and at temperatures in which diamond is stable may exhibit a coercivity of about 100 Oe or less and/or a specific magnetic saturation of about 16 G·cm3/g or more. Thus, in one or more embodiments of the invention, PCD exhibits a metal-solvent catalyst content of less than 7.5 wt % and a greater amount of diamond-to-diamond bonding between diamond grains than that of a PCD sintered at a lower pressure, but with the same precursor diamond particle size distribution and catalyst.


It is currently believed by the inventors that forming the PCD by sintering diamond particles at a pressure of at least about 7.5 GPa may promote nucleation and growth of diamond between the diamond particles being sintered so that the volume of the interstitial regions of the PCD so-formed is decreased compared to the volume of interstitial regions if the same diamond particle distribution was sintered at a pressure of, for example, up to about 5.5 GPa and at temperatures where diamond is stable. For example, the diamond may nucleate and grow from carbon provided by dissolved carbon in metal-solvent catalyst (e.g., liquefied cobalt) infiltrating into the diamond particles being sintered, partially graphitized diamond particles, carbon from a substrate, carbon from another source (e.g., graphite particles and/or fullerenes mixed with the diamond particles), or combinations of the foregoing. This nucleation and growth of diamond in combination with the sintering pressure of at least about 7.5 GPa may contribute to the PCD so-formed having a metal-solvent catalyst content of less than about 7.5 wt %.



FIGS. 1A, 1B, and 2 schematically illustrate the manner in which the specific magnetic saturation and the coercivity of the PCD may be determined using an apparatus, such as the KOERZIMAT CS 1.096 instrument. FIG. 1A is a schematic diagram of an example of a magnetic saturation apparatus 100 configured to magnetize a PCD sample to saturation. The magnetic saturation apparatus 100 includes a saturation magnet 102 of sufficient strength to magnetize a PCD sample 104 to saturation. The saturation magnet 102 may be a permanent magnet or an electromagnet. In the illustrated embodiment, the saturation magnet 102 is a permanent magnet that defines an air gap 106, and the PCD sample 104 may be positioned on a sample holder 108 within the air gap 106. When the PCD sample 104 is lightweight, it may be secured to the sample holder 108 using, for example, double-sided tape or other adhesive so that the PCD sample 104 does not move responsive to the magnetic field from the saturation magnet 102 and the PCD sample 104 is magnetized at least approximately to saturation.


Referring to the schematic diagram of FIG. 1B, after magnetizing the PCD sample 104 at least approximately to saturation using the magnetic saturation apparatus 100, a magnetic saturation of the PCD sample 104 may be measured using a magnetic saturation measurement apparatus 120. The magnetic saturation measurement apparatus 120 includes a Helmholtz measuring coil 122 defining a passageway dimensioned so that the magnetized PCD sample 104 may be positioned therein on a sample holder 124. Once positioned in the passageway, the sample holder 124 supporting the magnetized PCD sample 104 may be moved axially along an axis direction 126 to induce a current in the Helmholtz measuring coil 122. Measurement electronics 128 are coupled to the Helmholtz measuring coil 122 and configured to calculate the magnetic saturation based upon the measured current passing through the Helmholtz measuring coil 122. The measurement electronics 128 may also be configured to calculate a weight percentage of magnetic material in the PCD sample 104 when the composition and magnetic characteristics of the metal-solvent catalyst in the PCD sample 104 are known, such as with iron, nickel, cobalt, and alloys thereof. Specific magnetic saturation may be calculated based upon the calculated magnetic saturation and the measured weight of the PCD sample 104.


The amount of metal-solvent catalyst in the PCD sample 104 may be determined using a number of different analytical techniques. For example, energy dispersive spectroscopy (e.g., EDAX), wavelength dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (e.g., WDX), Rutherford backscattering spectroscopy, or combinations thereof may be employed to determine the amount of metal-solvent catalyst in the PCD sample 104.


If desired, a specific magnetic saturation constant of the metal-solvent catalyst content in the PCD sample 104 may be determined using an iterative approach. A value for the specific magnetic saturation constant of the metal-solvent catalyst in the PCD sample 104 may be iteratively chosen until a metal-solvent catalyst content calculated by the analysis software of the KOERZIMAT CS 1.096 instrument using the chosen value substantially matches the metal-solvent catalyst content determined via one or more analytical techniques, such as energy dispersive spectroscopy, wavelength dispersive x-ray spectroscopy, or Rutherford backscattering spectroscopy.



FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of a coercivity measurement apparatus 200 configured to determine a coercivity of a PCD sample. The coercivity measurement apparatus 200 includes a coil 202 and measurement electronics 204 coupled to the coil 202. The measurement electronics 204 are configured to pass a current through the coil 202 so that a magnetic field is generated. A sample holder 206 having a PCD sample 208 thereon may be positioned within the coil 202. A magnetization sensor 210 configured to measure a magnetization of the PCD sample 208 may be coupled to the measurement electronics 204 and positioned in proximity to the PCD sample 208.


During testing, the magnetic field generated by the coil 202 magnetizes the PCD sample 208 at least approximately to saturation. Then, the measurement electronics 204 apply a current so that the magnetic field generated by the coil 202 is increasingly reversed. The magnetization sensor 210 measures a magnetization of the PCD sample 208 resulting from application of the reversed magnetic field to the PCD sample 208. The measurement electronics 204 determine the coercivity of the PCD sample 208, which is a measurement of the strength of the reversed magnetic field at which the magnetization of the PCD sample 208 is zero.


Embodiments of Methods for Fabricating PCD

The PCD may be formed by sintering a mass of a plurality of diamond particles in the presence of a metal-solvent catalyst. The diamond particles may exhibit an average particle size of about 50 μm or less, such as about 30 μm or less, about 20 μm or less, about 10 μm to about 18 μm or, about 15 μm to about 18 μm. In some embodiments, the average particle size of the diamond particles may be about 10 μm or less, such as about 2 μm to about 5 μm or submicron.


In an embodiment, the diamond particles of the mass of diamond particles may comprise a relatively larger size and at least one relatively smaller size. As used herein, the phrases “relatively larger” and “relatively smaller” refer to particle sizes (by any suitable method) that differ by at least a factor of two (e.g., 30 μm and 15 μm). According to various embodiments, the mass of diamond particles may include a portion exhibiting a relatively larger size (e.g., 30 μm, 20 μm, 15 μm, 12 μm, 10 μm, 8 μm) and another portion exhibiting at least one relatively smaller size (e.g., 6 μm, 5 μm, 4 μm, 3 μm, 2 μm, 1 μm, 0.5 μm, less than 0.5 μm, 0.1 μm, less than 0.1 m). In one embodiment, the mass of diamond particles may include a portion exhibiting a relatively larger size between about 10 μm and about 40 μm and another portion exhibiting a relatively smaller size between about 1 μm and 4 μm. In some embodiments, the mass of diamond particles may comprise three or more different sizes (e.g., one relatively larger size and two or more relatively smaller sizes), without limitation.


It is noted that the as-sintered diamond grain size may differ from the average particle size of the mass of diamond particles prior to sintering due to a variety of different physical processes, such as grain growth, diamond particle fracturing, carbon provided from another carbon source (e.g., dissolved carbon in the metal-solvent catalyst), or combinations of the foregoing. The metal-solvent catalyst (e.g., iron, nickel, cobalt, or alloys thereof) may be provided in particulate form mixed with the diamond particles, as a thin foil or plate placed adjacent to the mass of diamond particles, from a cemented carbide substrate including a metal-solvent catalyst, or combinations of the foregoing.


In order to efficiently sinter the mass of diamond particles, the mass may be enclosed in a pressure transmitting medium, such as a refractory metal can, graphite structure, pyrophyllite, combinations thereof, or other suitable pressure transmitting structure to form a cell assembly. Examples of suitable gasket materials and cell structures for use in manufacturing PCD are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,338,754 and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/545,929, each of which is incorporated herein, in its entirety, by this reference. Another example of a suitable pressure transmitting material is pyrophyllite, which is commercially available from Wonderstone Ltd. of South Africa. The cell assembly, including the pressure transmitting medium and mass of diamond particles therein, is subjected to an HPHT process using an ultra-high pressure press at a temperature of at least about 1000° C. (e.g., about 1100° C. to about 2200° C., or about 1200° C. to about 1450° C.) and a pressure in the pressure transmitting medium of at least about 7.5 GPa (e.g., about 7.5 GPa to about 15 GPa, about 9 GPa to about 12 GPa, or about 10 GPa to about 12.5 GPa) for a time sufficient to sinter the diamond particles together in the presence of the metal-solvent catalyst and form the PCD comprising bonded diamond grains defining interstitial regions occupied by the metal-solvent catalyst. For example, the pressure in the pressure transmitting medium employed in the HPHT process may be at least about 8.0 GPa, at least about 9.0 GPa, at least about 10.0 GPa, at least about 11.0 GPa, at least about 12.0 GPa, or at least about 14 GPa.


The pressure values employed in the HPHT processes disclosed herein refer to the pressure in the pressure transmitting medium at room temperature (e.g., about 25° C.) with application of pressure using an ultra-high pressure press and not the pressure applied to exterior of the cell assembly. The actual pressure in the pressure transmitting medium at sintering temperature may be slightly higher. The ultra-high pressure press may be calibrated at room temperature by embedding at least one calibration material that changes structure at a known pressure such as, PbTe, thallium, barium, or bismuth in the pressure transmitting medium. Optionally, a change in resistance may be measured across the at least one calibration material due to a phase change thereof. For example, PbTe exhibits a phase change at room temperature at about 6.0 GPa and bismuth exhibits a phase change at room temperature at about 7.7 GPa. Examples of suitable pressure calibration techniques are disclosed in G. Rousse, S. Klotz, A. M. Saitta, J. Rodriguez-Carvajal, M. I. McMahon, B. Couzinet, and M. Mezouar, “Structure of the Intermediate Phase of PbTe at High Pressure,” Physical Review B: Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, 71, 224116 (2005) and D. L. Decker, W. A. Bassett, L. Merrill, H. T. Hall, and J. D. Barnett, “High-Pressure Calibration: A Critical Review,” J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, 1, 3 (1972).


In an embodiment, a pressure of at least about 7.5 GPa in the pressure transmitting medium may be generated by applying pressure to a cubic high-pressure cell assembly that encloses the mass of diamond particles to be sintered using anvils, with each anvil applying pressure to a different face of the cubic high-pressure assembly. In such an embodiment, a surface area of each anvil face of the anvils may be selectively dimensioned to facilitate application of pressure of at least about 7.5 GPa to the mass of diamond particles being sintered. For example, the surface area of each anvil may be less than about 16.0 cm2, such as less than about 16.0 cm2, about 8 cm2 to about 10 cm2. The anvils may be made from a cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide or other material having a sufficient compressive strength to help reduce damage thereto through repetitive use in a high-volume commercial manufacturing environment. As an alternative to or in addition to selectively dimensioning the surface area of each anvil face, in an embodiment, two or more internal anvils may be embedded in the cubic high-pressure cell assembly to further intensify pressure. For example, the article W. Utsumi, N. Toyama, S. Endo and F. E. Fujita, “X-ray diffraction under ultrahigh pressure generated with sintered diamond anvils,” J. Appl. Phys., 60, 2201 (1986) is incorporated herein, in its entirety, by this reference and discloses that sintered diamond anvils may be embedded in a cubic pressure transmitting medium for intensifying the pressure applied by an ultra-high pressure press to a workpiece also embedded in the cubic pressure transmitting medium.


PDC Embodiments and Methods of Fabricating PDCs

Referring to FIG. 3A, the PCD embodiments may be employed in a PDC for cutting applications, bearing applications, or many other applications. FIG. 3A is a cross-sectional view of an embodiment of a PDC 300. The PDC 300 includes a substrate 302 bonded to a PCD table 304. The PCD table 304 may be formed of PCD in accordance with any of the PCD embodiments disclosed herein. The PCD table 304 exhibits at least one working surface 306 and at least one lateral dimension “D” (e.g., a diameter). Although FIG. 3A shows the working surface 306 as substantially planar, the working surface 306 may be concave, convex, or another nonplanar geometry. Furthermore, other regions of the PCD table 304 may function as a working region, such as a peripheral side surface and/or an edge. The substrate 302 may be generally cylindrical or another selected configuration, without limitation. Although FIG. 3A shows an interfacial surface 308 of the substrate 302 as being substantially planar, the interfacial surface 308 may exhibit a selected nonplanar topography, such as a grooved, ridged, or other nonplanar interfacial surface. The substrate 302 may include, without limitation, cemented carbides, such as tungsten carbide, titanium carbide, chromium carbide, niobium carbide, tantalum carbide, vanadium carbide, or combinations thereof cemented with iron, nickel, cobalt, or alloys thereof. For example, in one embodiment, the substrate 302 comprises cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide.


In some embodiments, the PCD table 304 may include two or more layered regions 310 and 312 exhibiting different compositions and/or different average diamond grain sizes. For example, the region 310 is located adjacent to the interface surface 308 of the substrate 302 and exhibits a first diamond grain size, while the region 312 is remote from the substrate 302 and exhibits a second average diamond grain size that is less than that of the first average diamond grain size. For example, the second average diamond grain size may be about 90% to about 98% (e.g., about 90 to about 95%) of the first diamond grain size. In another embodiment, the second average diamond grain size may be greater than that of the first average diamond grain size. For example, the first average diamond grain size may be about 90% to about 98% (e.g., about 90 to about 95%) of the second diamond grain size.


As an alternative to or in addition to the first and second regions exhibiting different diamond grain sizes, in an embodiment, the composition of the region 310 may be different than that of the region 312. The region 310 may include about 15 wt % or less of a tungsten-containing material (e.g., tungsten and/or tungsten carbide) interspersed between the diamond grains to improve toughness, while the region 312 may be substantially free of tungsten. For example, the tungsten-containing material may be present in the region 310 in an amount of about 1 wt % to about 10 wt %, about 5 wt % to about 10 wt %, or about 10 wt %.



FIG. 3B is a schematic illustration of an embodiment of a method for fabricating the PDC 300 shown in FIG. 3A. Referring to FIG. 3B, a mass of diamond particles 305 having any of the above-mentioned average particle sizes and distributions (e.g., an average particle size of about 50 μm or less) is positioned adjacent to the interfacial surface 308 of the substrate 302. As previously discussed, the substrate 302 may include a metal-solvent catalyst. The mass of diamond particles 305 and substrate 302 may be subjected to an HPHT process using any of the conditions previously described with respect to sintering the PCD embodiments disclosed herein. The PDC 300 so-formed includes the PCD table 304 that comprises PCD, formed of any of the PCD embodiments disclosed herein, integrally formed with the substrate 302 and bonded to the interfacial surface 308 of the substrate 302. If the substrate 302 includes a metal-solvent catalyst, the metal-solvent catalyst may liquefy and infiltrate the mass of diamond particles 305 to promote growth between adjacent diamond particles of the mass of diamond particles 305 to form the PCD table 304 comprised of a body of bonded diamond grains having the infiltrated metal-solvent catalyst interstitially disposed between bonded diamond grains. For example, if the substrate 302 is a cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate, cobalt from the substrate 302 may be liquefied and infiltrate the mass of diamond particles 305 to catalyze formation of the PCD table 304.


In some embodiments, the mass of diamond particles 305 may include two or more layers exhibiting different compositions and/or different average diamond particle sizes. For example, a first layer may be located adjacent to the interface surface 308 of the substrate 302 and exhibit a first diamond particle size, while a second layer may be located remote from the substrate 302 and exhibit a second average diamond particle size that is less than that of the first average diamond particle size. For example, the second average diamond particle size may be about 90% to about 98% (e.g., about 90 to about 95%) of the first diamond particle size. In another embodiment, the second average diamond particle size may be greater than that of the first average diamond particle size. For example, the first average diamond particle size may be about 90% to about 98% (e.g., about 90 to about 95%) of the second diamond particle size.


As an alternative to or in addition to the first and second layers exhibiting different diamond particles sizes, in an embodiment, the composition of the first layer may be different than that of the second layer. The first layer may include about 15 wt % or less of a tungsten-containing material (e.g., tungsten and/or tungsten carbide) mixed with the diamond particles, while the second layer may be substantially free of tungsten. For example, the tungsten-containing material may be present in the first layer in an amount of about 1 wt % to about 10 wt %, about 5 wt % to about 10 wt %, or about 10 wt %.


Employing selectively dimensioned anvil faces and/or internal anvils in the ultra-high pressure press used to process the mass of diamond particles 305 and substrate 302 enables forming the at least one lateral dimension d of the PCD table 304 to be about 0.80 cm or more. Referring again to FIG. 3A, for example, the at least one lateral dimension “D” may be about 0.80 cm to about 3.0 cm and, in some embodiments, about 1.3 cm to about 1.9 cm or about 1.6 cm to about 1.9 cm. A representative volume of the PCD table 304 (or any PCD article of manufacture disclosed herein) formed using the selectively dimensioned anvil faces and/or internal anvils may be at least about 0.050 cm3. For example, the volume may be about 0.25 cm3 to at least about 1.25 cm3 or about 0.1 cm3 to at least about 0.70 cm3. A representative volume for the PDC 300 may be about 0.4 cm3 to at least about 4.6 cm3, such as about 1.1 cm3 to at least about 2.3 cm3.


In other embodiments, a PCD table according to an embodiment may be separately formed using an HPHT sintering process (i.e., a pre-sintered PCD table) and, subsequently, bonded to the interfacial surface 308 of the substrate 302 by brazing, using a separate HPHT bonding process, or any other suitable joining technique, without limitation. In yet another embodiment, a substrate may be formed by depositing a binderless carbide (e.g., tungsten carbide) via chemical vapor deposition onto the separately formed PCD table.


In any of the embodiments disclosed herein, substantially all or a selected portion of the metal-solvent catalyst may be removed (e.g., via leaching) from the PCD table. In an embodiment, metal-solvent catalyst in the PCD table may be removed to a selected depth from at least one exterior working surface (e.g., the working surface 306 and/or a sidewall working surface of the PCD table 304) so that only a portion of the interstitial regions are occupied by metal-solvent catalyst. For example, substantially all or a selected portion of the metal-solvent catalyst may be removed from the PCD table 304 of the PDC 300 to a selected depth from the working surface 306.


In another embodiment, a PCD table may be fabricated according to any of the disclosed embodiments in a first HPHT process, leached to remove substantially all of the metal-solvent catalyst from the interstitial regions between the bonded diamond grains, and subsequently bonded to a substrate in a second HPHT process. In the second HPHT process, an infiltrant from, for example, a cemented carbide substrate may infiltrate into the interstitial regions from which the metal-solvent catalyst was depleted. For example, the infiltrant may be cobalt that is swept-in from a cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate. In one embodiment, the first and/or second HPHT process may be performed at a pressure of at least about 7.5 GPa. In one embodiment, the infiltrant may be leached from the infiltrated PCD table using a second acid leaching process following the second HPHT process.


In some embodiments, the pressure employed in the HPHT process used to fabricate the PDC 300 may be sufficient to reduce residual stresses in the PCD table 304 that develop during the HPHT process due to the thermal expansion mismatch between the substrate 302 and the PCD table 304. In such an embodiment, the principal stress measured on the working surface 306 of the PDC 300 may exhibit a value of about −345 MPa to about 0 MPa, such as about −289 MPa. For example, the principal stress measured on the working surface 306 may exhibit a value of about −345 MPa to about 0 MPa. A conventional PDC fabricated using an HPHT process at a pressure below about 7.5 GPa may result in a PCD table thereof exhibiting a principal stress on a working surface thereof of about −1724 MPa to about −414 MPa, such as about −770 MPa.


Residual stress may be measured on the working surface 306 of the PCD table 304 of the PDC 300 as described in T. P. Lin, M. Hood, G. A. Cooper, and R. H. Smith, “Residual stresses in polycrystalline diamond compacts,” J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 77, 6, 1562-1568 (1994). More particularly, residual strain may be measured with a rosette strain gage bonded to the working surface 306. Such strain may be measured for different levels of removal of the substrate 302 (e.g., as material is removed from the back of the substrate 302). Residual stress may be calculated from the measured residual strain data.



FIG. 3C is a graph of residual principal stress versus substrate thickness that was measured in a PCD table of a PDC fabricated at pressure above about 7.5 GPa in accordance with an embodiment of the invention and a PCD table of a conventionally formed PDC. The substrate of each PDC had a substantially planar interfacial surface. The residual principal stress was determined using the technique described in the article referenced above by Lin et al. Curve 310 shows the measured residual principal stress on a working surface of the PDC fabricated at a pressure above about 7.5 GPa. The PDC that was fabricated at a pressure above about 7.5 GPa had a PCD table thickness dimension of about 1 mm and the substrate had a thickness dimension of about 7 mm and a diameter of about 13 mm. Curve 312 shows the measured residual principal stress on a working surface of a PCD table of a conventionally PDC fabricated at pressure below about 7.5 GPa. The PDC that was fabricated at a pressure below about 7.5 GPa had a PCD table thickness dimension of about 1 mm and the substrate had a thickness dimension of about 7 mm and a diameter of about 13 mm. The highest absolute value of the residual principal stress occurs with the full substrate length of about 7 mm. As shown by the curves 310 and 312, increasing the pressure employed in the HPHT process used to fabricate a PDC, above about 7.5 GPa may reduce the highest absolute value of the principal residual stress in a PCD table thereof by about 60% relative to a conventionally fabricated PDC. For example, at the full substrate length, the absolute value of the principal residual stress in the PCD table fabricated at a pressure above about 7.5 GPa is about 60% less than the absolute value of the principal residual stress in the PCD table of the conventionally fabricated PDC.


As discussed above in relation to FIG. 3C, the application of higher pressure in the HPHT process used to fabricate a PDC may substantially reduce the residual compressive stresses in the PCD table. Typically, high residual compressive stresses in the PCD table are believed desirable to help reduce crack propagation in the PCD table. The inventors have found that the reduced residual compressive stresses in a PCD table of a PDC fabricated in an HPHT process at a pressure of at least about 7.5 GPa may result in detrimental cracking in the PCD table and de-bonding of the PCD table from the substrate upon brazing the substrate to, for example, a carbide extension and/or a bit body of a rotary drill bit depending upon the extent of the nonplanarity of the interfacial surface of the substrate. It is believed by the inventors that when the PDC is fabricated at a pressure of at least about 7.5 GPa, at the brazing temperature, tensile stresses generated in the PCD table due to thermal expansion are greater than if the PCD table had higher residual compressive stresses. Due to the higher tensile stresses at the brazing temperature, hoop stresses generated in the PCD by nonplanar surface features (e.g., protrusions) of the substrate may cause the PCD table to form radially-extending and vertically-extending cracks and/or de-bond from the substrate more frequently than if fabricated at relatively lower pressures. Typically, conventional wisdom taught that a highly nonplanar interfacial surface for the substrate helped prevent de-bonding of the PCD table from the substrate. Thus, in certain embodiments discussed in more detail in FIGS. 3A-6B, the inventors have proceeded contrary to conventional wisdom, which suggested that a highly nonplanar interfacial surface for the substrate promotes bonding. In such embodiments, the topography of the interfacial surface of the substrate may be controlled so that it is still substantially planar and exhibits a nonplanarity that does not exceed a maximum threshold.


Referring again to FIG. 3A, in an embodiment, the interfacial surface 308 of the substrate 302 may be substantially planar. For example, to the extent that the interfacial surface 308 includes a plurality of protrusions, the protrusions may exhibit an average surface relief height of about 0 to less than about 0.00010 inch, about 0 to about 0.00050 inch, about 0 to about 0.00075 inch, or about 0.000010 inch to about 0.00010 inch. The average surface relief is the height that the protrusions extend above the lowest point of the interfacial surface 308. A ratio of a surface area of the interfacial surface in the absence of the plurality of protrusions (i.e., a flat interfacial surface) to a surface area of the interfacial surface with the plurality of protrusions is greater than about 0.600. An example of an interfacial surface that is substantially planar is one in which the ratio is greater than about 0.600. For example, the ratio may be about 0.600 to about 0.650, about 0.650 to about 0.725, about 0.650 to about 0.750, about 0.650 to about 0.950, about 0.750 to less than 1.0, or about 0.750 to about 1.0.



FIGS. 4A-6B illustrate embodiments in which the selected substantially planar topography of the interfacial surface of the substrate is controlled to reduce or substantially eliminate cracking in and/or de-bonding of a PCD table of a PDC. FIGS. 4A and 4B are exploded isometric and assembled isometric views, respectively, of an embodiment of a PDC 400 comprising a substrate 402 including an interfacial surface 404 exhibiting a selected substantially planar topography. The substrate 402 may be made from the same carbide materials as the substrate 302 shown in FIG. 3A. The interfacial surface 404 includes a plurality of protrusions 406 spaced from each other and extending substantially transversely to the length of the substrate 402. The protrusions 406 define a plurality of grooves 408 between pairs of the protrusions 406. A PCD table 410 may be bonded to the interfacial surface 406. The PCD table 410 may exhibit some or all of the magnetic, mechanical, thermal stability, wear resistance, size, compositional, diamond-to-diamond bonding, or grain size properties of the PCD disclosed herein and/or the PCD table 304 shown in FIG. 3A. The PCD table 410 exhibits a maximum thickness “T.” Because the PCD table 410 may be integrally formed with the substrate 402 and fabricated from precursor diamond particles, the PCD table 410 may have an interfacial surface 411 that is configured to correspond to the topography of the interfacial surface 404 of the substrate 402.


A ratio of a surface area of the interfacial surface 404 in the absence of the plurality of protrusions 406 (i.e., a flat interfacial surface) to a surface area of the interfacial surface with the protrusions 406 is greater than about 0.600. For example, the ratio may be about 0.600 to about 0.650, about 0.650 to about 0.725, about 0.650 to about 0.750, about 0.650 to about 0.950, about 0.750 to less than 1.0, or about 0.750 to about 1.0.


The plurality of protrusions 406 exhibits an average surface relief height “h,” which is the average height that the protrusions 406 extend above the lowest point of the interfacial surface 404. For example, h may be greater than 0 to less than about 0.030 inch, greater than 0 to about 0.020 inch, greater than 0 to about 0.015 inch, about 0.0050 inch to about 0.010 inch, or 0.0080 inch to about 0.010 inch. The maximum thickness “T” may be about 0.050 inch to about 0.20 inch, such as about 0.050 inch to about 0.16 inch, about 0.050 inch to about 0.10 inch, about 0.050 inch to about 0.085 inch or about 0.070 inch to about 0.080 inch. The ratio of h/T may be less than about 0.25, such as about 0.050 to about 0.125, about 0.050 to about 0.10, about 0.070 to about 0.090, or about 0.050 to about 0.075.


Referring to FIG. 4B, the outermost of the protrusions 406 (indicated as 406a and 406b) may be laterally spaced from an exterior peripheral surface 414 of the substrate 402 by a distance d. When the PDC 400 is substantially cylindrical, a ratio of d to the radius of the PCD table “R” may be about 0.030 to about 1.0, about 0.035 to about 0.080, or about 0.038 to about 0.060.



FIG. 5A is cross-sectional view of a PDC 500 comprising a substrate 502 including an interfacial surface 504 exhibiting a selected substantially planar topography according to yet another embodiment and FIG. 5B is an isometric view of the substrate 502. The substrate 502 may be made from the same carbide materials as the substrate 302 shown in FIG. 3A. The interfacial surface 504 of the substrate 502 includes a plurality of hexagonal protrusions 506 that extend outwardly from a face 508. The face 508 may be convex, as in the illustrated embodiment, or substantially planar. Tops 509 of the protrusions 506 may lie generally in a common plane. The plurality of protrusions 506 defines a plurality of internal cavities 510. A depth of each internal cavity 510 may decrease as they approach the center of the substrate 502. A bottom 511 of each cavity 510 may follow the profile of the face 508.


The PDC 500 further includes a PCD table 512 exhibiting a maximum thickness “T,” which is bonded to the interfacial surface 504 of the substrate 502. The thickness of the PCD table 512 gradually increases with lateral distance from the center of the PCD table 512 toward a perimeter 513 of the PDC 500. The PCD table 512 may be configured to correspond to the topography of the interfacial surface 504 of the substrate 502. For example, protrusions 513 of the PCD table 512 may fill each of the internal cavities 510 defined by the protrusions 506 of the substrate 502. The PCD table 512 may exhibit some or all of the magnetic, mechanical, thermal stability, wear resistance, size, compositional, diamond-to-diamond bonding, or grain size properties of the PCD disclosed herein and/or the PCD table 304 shown in FIG. 3A. The closed features of the hexagonal protrusions 506 include a draft angle α, such as about 5 degrees to about 15 degrees.


A ratio of a surface area of the interfacial surface 504 in the absence of the protrusions 506 (i.e., a flat interfacial surface) to a surface area of the interfacial surface with the protrusions 506 is greater than about 0.600. For example, the ratio may be about 0.600 to about 0.650, about 0.650 to about 0.725, about 0.650 to about 0.750, about 0.650 to about 0.950, about 0.750 to less than 1.0, or about 0.750 to about 1.0.


The plurality of protrusions 506 exhibits an average surface relief height “h,” which is the average height that the protrusions 506 extend above the lowest point of the interfacial surface 504. For example, h may be greater than 0 to less than about 0.030 inch, greater than 0 to about 0.020 inch, greater than 0 to about 0.015 inch, about 0.0050 inch to about 0.010 inch, or 0.0080 inch to about 0.010 inch. The maximum thickness “T” may be about 0.050 inch to about 0.10 inch, such as about 0.050 inch to about 0.085 inch or about 0.070 inch to about 0.080 inch. The ratio of h/T may be less than about 0.25, such as about 0.050 to about 0.125, about 0.050 to about 0.10, about 0.070 to about 0.090, or about 0.050 to about 0.075.


It is noted that the interfacial surface geometries shown in the PDCs 400 and 500 are merely two examples of suitable interfacial surface geometries. Other interfacial surface geometries may be employed that depart from the illustrated interfacial surface geometries shown in the PDCs 400 and 500 of FIGS. 4A-5B.


Working Examples

The following working examples provide further detail about the magnetic properties of PCD tables of PDCs fabricated in accordance with the principles of some of the specific embodiments of the invention. The magnetic properties of each PCD table listed in Tables I-IV were tested using a KOERZIMAT CS 1.096 instrument that is commercially available from Foerster Instruments of Pittsburgh, Pa. The specific magnetic saturation of each PCD table was measured in accordance with ASTM B886-03 (2008) and the coercivity of each PCD table was measured using ASTM B887-03 (2008) e1 using a KOERZIMAT CS 1.096 instrument. The amount of cobalt-based metal-solvent catalyst in the tested PCD tables was determined using energy dispersive spectroscopy and Rutherford backscattering spectroscopy. The specific magnetic saturation constant of the cobalt-based metal-solvent catalyst in the tested PCD tables was determined to be about 201 G·cm3/g using an iterative analysis as previously described. When a value of 201 G·cm3/g was used for the specific magnetic saturation constant of the cobalt-based metal-solvent catalyst, the calculated amount of the cobalt-based metal-solvent catalyst in the tested PCD tables using the analysis software of the KOERZIMAT CS 1.096 instrument substantially matched the measurements using energy dispersive spectroscopy and Rutherford spectroscopy.


Table I below lists PCD tables that were fabricated in accordance with the principles of certain embodiments of the invention discussed above. Each PCD table was fabricated by placing a mass of diamond particles having the listed average diamond particle size adjacent to a cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate in a niobium container, placing the container in a high-pressure cell medium, and subjecting the high-pressure cell medium and the container therein to an HPHT process using an HPHT cubic press to form a PCD table bonded to the substrate. The surface area of each anvil of the HPHT press and the hydraulic line pressure used to drive the anvils were selected so that the sintering pressure was at least about 7.8 GPa. The temperature of the HPHT process was about 1400° C. and the sintering pressure was at least about 7.8 GPa. The sintering pressures listed in Table I refer to the pressure in the high-pressure cell medium at room temperature, and the actual sintering pressures at the sintering temperature are believed to be greater. After the HPHT process, the PCD table was removed from the substrate by grinding away the substrate. However, the substrate may also be removed using electro-discharge machining or another suitable method.









TABLE I







Selected Magnetic Properties of PCD Tables Fabricated


According to Embodiments of the Invention.














Average

Specific






Diamond
Sintering
Magnetic


Specific



Particle Size
Pressure
Saturation
Calculated
Coercivity
Permeability


Example
(μm)
(GPa)
(G · cm3/g)
Co wt %
(Oe)
(G · cm3/g · Oe)
















1
20
7.8
11.15
5.549
130.2
0.08564


2
19
7.8
11.64
5.792
170.0
0.06847


3
19
7.8
11.85
5.899
157.9
0.07505


4
19
7.8
11.15
5.550
170.9
0.06524


5
19
7.8
11.43
5.689
163.6
0.06987


6
19
7.8
10.67
5.150
146.9
0.07263


7
19
7.8
10.76
5.357
152.3
0.07065


8
19
7.8
10.22
5.087
145.2
0.07039


9
19
7.8
10.12
5.041
156.6
0.06462


10
19
7.8
10.72
5.549
137.1
0.07819


11
11
7.8
12.52
6.229
135.3
0.09254


12
11
7.8
12.78
6.362
130.5
0.09793


13
11
7.8
12.69
6.315
134.6
0.09428


14
11
7.8
13.20
6.569
131.6
0.1003









Table II below lists conventional PCD tables that were fabricated. Each PCD table listed in Table II was fabricated by placing a mass of diamond particles having the listed average diamond particle size adjacent to a cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate in a niobium container, placing container in a high-pressure cell medium, and subjecting the high-pressure cell medium and the container therein to an HPHT process using an HPHT cubic press to form a PCD table bonded to the substrate. The surface area of each anvil of the HPHT press and the hydraulic line pressure used to drive the anvils were selected so that the sintering pressure was about 4.6 GPa. Except for samples 15, 16, 18, and 19, which were subjected to a temperature of about 1430° C., the temperature of the HPHT process was about 1400° C. and the sintering pressure was about 4.6 GPa. The sintering pressures listed in Table II refer to the pressure in the high-pressure cell medium at room temperature. After the HPHT process, the PCD table was removed from the cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate by grinding away the cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate.









TABLE II







Selected Magnetic Properties of Several Conventional PCD Tables.














Average

Specific






Diamond
Sintering
Magnetic


Specific



Particle Size
Pressure
Saturation
Calculated
Coercivity
Permeability


Example
(μm)
(GPa)
(G · cm3/g)
Co wt %
(Oe)
(G · cm3/g · Oe)
















15
20
4.61
19.30
9.605
94.64
0.2039


16
20
4.61
19.52
9.712
96.75
0.2018


17
20
4.61
19.87
9.889
94.60
0.2100


18
20
5.08
18.61
9.260
94.94
0.1960


19
20
5.08
18.21
9.061
100.4
0.1814


20
20
5.86
16.97
8.452
108.3
0.1567


21
20
4.61
17.17
8.543
102.0
0.1683


22
20
4.61
17.57
8.745
104.9
0.1675


23
20
5.08
16.10
8.014
111.2
0.1448


24
20
5.08
16.79
8.357
107.1
0.1568









As shown in Tables I and II, the conventional PCD tables listed in Table II exhibit a higher cobalt content therein than the PCD tables listed in Table I as indicated by the relatively higher specific magnetic saturation values. Additionally, the conventional PCD tables listed in Table II exhibit a lower coercivity indicative of a relatively greater mean free path between diamond grains, and thus may indicate relatively less diamond-to-diamond bonding between the diamond grains. Thus, the PCD tables according to examples of the invention listed in Table I may exhibit significantly less cobalt therein and a lower mean free path between diamond grains than the PCD tables listed in Table II.


Table III below lists conventional PCD tables that were obtained from PDCs. Each PCD table listed in Table III was separated from a cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate bonded thereto by grinding.









TABLE III







Selected Magnetic Properties of Several Conventional PCD Tables.












Specific






Magnetic


Specific



Saturation
Calculated
Coercivity
Permeability


Example
(G · cm3/g)
Co wt %
(Oe)
(G · cm3/g · Oe)





25
17.23
8.572
140.4
0.1227


26
16.06
7.991
150.2
0.1069


27
15.19
7.560
146.1
0.1040


28
17.30
8.610
143.2
0.1208


29
17.13
8.523
152.1
0.1126


30
17.00
8.458
142.5
0.1193


31
17.08
8.498
147.2
0.1160


32
16.10
8.011
144.1
0.1117









Table IV below lists conventional PCD tables that were obtained from PDCs. Each PCD table listed in Table IV was separated from a cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate bonded thereto by grinding the substrate away. Each PCD table listed in Table IV and tested had a leached region from which cobalt was depleted and an unleached region in which cobalt is interstitially disposed between bonded diamond grains. The leached region was not removed. However, to determine the specific magnetic saturation and the coercivity of the unleached region of the PCD table having metal-solvent catalyst occupying interstitial regions therein, the leached region may be ground away so that only the unleached region of the PCD table remains. It is expected that the leached region causes the specific magnetic saturation to be lower and the coercivity to be higher than if the leached region was removed and the unleached region was tested.









TABLE IV







Selected Magnetic Properties of Several


Conventional Leached PCD Tables.












Specific


Specific



Magnetic


Permeability



Saturation
Calculated
Coercivity
(G · cm3


Example
(G · cm3 per gram)
Co wt %
(Oe)
per g · Oe)














33
17.12
8.471
143.8
0.1191


34
13.62
6.777
137.3
0.09920


35
15.87
7.897
140.1
0.1133


36
12.95
6.443
145.5
0.0890


37
13.89
6.914
142.0
0.09782


38
13.96
6.946
146.9
0.09503


39
13.67
6.863
133.8
0.1022


40
12.80
6.369
146.3
0.08749









As shown in Tables I, III, and IV, the conventional PCD tables of Tables III and IV exhibit a higher cobalt content therein than the PCD tables listed in Table I as indicated by the relatively higher specific magnetic saturation values. This is believed by the inventors to be a result of the PCD tables listed in Tables III and IV being formed by sintering diamond particles having a relatively greater percentage of fine diamond particles than the diamond particle formulations used to fabricate the PCD tables listed in Table I.


Examples 41-120 tested four different substrate interfacial surface geometries to evaluate the effect of the interfacial surface area of the substrate. Twenty samples of each substrate interfacial surface geometry were tested. All of the PDCs in examples 41-120 were fabricated by placing a mass of diamond particles having an average diamond particle size of about 19 μm adjacent to a cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate in a niobium container, placing the container in a high-pressure cell medium, and subjecting the high-pressure cell medium and the container therein to an HPHT process using an HPHT cubic press to form a PCD table bonded to the substrate. The surface area of each anvil of the HPHT press and the hydraulic line pressure used to drive the anvils were selected so that the sintering pressure was at least about 7.7 GPa. The temperature of the HPHT process was about 1400° C. The sintering pressure of 7.7 GPa refers to the pressure in the high-pressure cell medium at room temperature, and the actual sintering pressure at the sintering temperature of about 1400° C. is believed to be greater.


The interfacial surface for the substrate in the PDCs of examples 41-60 was a substantially planar interfacial surface having essentially no surface topography other than surface roughness. The interfacial surface for the substrate in the PDCs of examples 61-80 was similar to the interfacial surface 404 shown in FIG. 4A. The interfacial surface for the substrate in the PDCs of Examples 81-100 was slightly convex with a plurality of radially and circumferentially equally-spaced cylindrical protrusions. The interfacial surface for the substrate in the PDCs of examples 101-120 was similar to the interfacial surface 504 shown in FIGS. 5A and 5B.


After fabricating the PDCs of examples 41-120, the substrate of each PDC was brazed to an extension cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate. The braze alloy had a composition of about 25 wt % Au, about 10 wt % Ni, about 15 wt % Pd, about 13 wt % Mn, and about 37 wt % Cu. The brazing process was performed at a brazing temperature of about 1013° C. After the brazing process, the PDCs of examples 41-120 were individually examined using an optical microscope to determine if cracks were present in the PCD tables.


Table V below lists the substrate diameter, surface area of the interfacial surface of the substrates for each type of substrate geometry, the ratio of the interfacial surface area of the substrate to a flat interfacial surface of a substrate with the same diameter, and the number of PDC samples in which the PCD table cracked upon brazing to the extension cobalt-cemented tungsten carbide substrate. As shown in Table V, as the surface area of the interfacial surface of the substrate decreases, the prevalence of the PCD table cracking decreases upon brazing.









TABLE V







Effect of Substrate Interfacial Surface


Area on PCD Table Cracking Upon Brazing















Number of




Interfacial Surface

Samples That



Substrate
Area of Substrate

Cracked When


Example
Diameter (in)
(in2)
Ratio
Brazed














41-60
0.625
0.308
1.0
0


61-80
0.625
0.398
0.772
0


 81-100
0.625
0.524
0.588
2 out of 20


101-120
0.625
0.585
0.526
9 out of 20









Embodiments of Applications for PCD and PDCs

The disclosed PCD and PDC embodiments may be used in a number of different applications including, but not limited to, use in a rotary drill bit (FIGS. 6A and 6B), a thrust-bearing apparatus (FIG. 7), a radial bearing apparatus (FIG. 8), a subterranean drilling system (FIG. 9), and a wire-drawing die (FIG. 10). The various applications discussed above are merely some examples of applications in which the PCD and PDC embodiments may be used. Other applications are contemplated, such as employing the disclosed PCD and PDC embodiments in friction stir welding tools.



FIG. 6A is an isometric view and FIG. 6B is a top elevation view of an embodiment of a rotary drill bit 600. The rotary drill bit 600 includes at least one PDC configured according to any of the previously described PDC embodiments. The rotary drill bit 600 comprises a bit body 602 that includes radially and longitudinally extending blades 604 with leading faces 606, and a threaded pin connection 608 for connecting the bit body 602 to a drilling string. The bit body 602 defines a leading end structure for drilling into a subterranean formation by rotation about a longitudinal axis 610 and application of weight-on-bit. At least one PDC cutting element, configured according to any of the previously described PDC embodiments (e.g., the PDC 300 shown in FIG. 3A), may be affixed to the bit body 602. With reference to FIG. 6B, a plurality of PDCs 612 are secured to the blades 604. For example, each PDC 612 may include a PCD table 614 bonded to a substrate 616. More generally, the PDCs 612 may comprise any PDC disclosed herein, without limitation. In addition, if desired, in some embodiments, a number of the PDCs 612 may be conventional in construction. Also, circumferentially adjacent blades 604 define so-called junk slots 618 therebetween, as known in the art. Additionally, the rotary drill bit 600 may include a plurality of nozzle cavities 620 for communicating drilling fluid from the interior of the rotary drill bit 600 to the PDCs 612.



FIGS. 6A and 6B merely depict an embodiment of a rotary drill bit that employs at least one cutting element comprising a PDC fabricated and structured in accordance with the disclosed embodiments, without limitation. The rotary drill bit 600 is used to represent any number of earth-boring tools or drilling tools, including, for example, core bits, roller-cone bits, fixed-cutter bits, eccentric bits, bicenter bits, reamers, reamer wings, or any other downhole tool including PDCs, without limitation.


The PCD and/or PDCs disclosed herein (e.g., the PDC 300 shown in FIG. 3A) may also be utilized in applications other than rotary drill bits. For example, the disclosed PDC embodiments may be used in thrust-bearing assemblies, radial bearing assemblies, wire-drawing dies, artificial joints, machining elements, and heat sinks.



FIG. 7 is an isometric cutaway view of an embodiment of a thrust-bearing apparatus 700, which may utilize any of the disclosed PDC embodiments as bearing elements. The thrust-bearing apparatus 700 includes respective thrust-bearing assemblies 702. Each thrust-bearing assembly 702 includes an annular support ring 704 that may be fabricated from a material, such as carbon steel, stainless steel, or another suitable material. Each support ring 704 includes a plurality of recesses (not labeled) that receive a corresponding bearing element 706. Each bearing element 706 may be mounted to a corresponding support ring 704 within a corresponding recess by brazing, press-fitting, using fasteners, or another suitable mounting technique. One or more, or all of bearing elements 706 may be configured according to any of the disclosed PDC embodiments. For example, each bearing element 706 may include a substrate 708 and a PCD table 710, with the PCD table 710 including a bearing surface 712.


In use, the bearing surfaces 712 of one of the thrust-bearing assemblies 702 bear against the opposing bearing surfaces 712 of the other one of the bearing assemblies 702. For example, one of the thrust-bearing assemblies 702 may be operably coupled to a shaft to rotate therewith and may be termed a “rotor.” The other one of the thrust-bearing assemblies 702 may be held stationary and may be termed a “stator.”



FIG. 8 is an isometric cutaway view of an embodiment of a radial bearing apparatus 800, which may utilize any of the disclosed PDC embodiments as bearing elements. The radial bearing apparatus 800 includes an inner race 802 positioned generally within an outer race 804. The outer race 804 includes a plurality of bearing elements 806 affixed thereto that have respective bearing surfaces 808. The inner race 802 also includes a plurality of bearing elements 810 affixed thereto that have respective bearing surfaces 812. One or more, or all of the bearing elements 806 and 810 may be configured according to any of the PDC embodiments disclosed herein. The inner race 802 is positioned generally within the outer race 804 and, thus, the inner race 802 and outer race 804 may be configured so that the bearing surfaces 808 and 812 may at least partially contact one another and move relative to each other as the inner race 802 and outer race 804 rotate relative to each other during use.


The radial bearing apparatus 800 may be employed in a variety of mechanical applications. For example, so-called “roller cone” rotary drill bits may benefit from a radial bearing apparatus disclosed herein. More specifically, the inner race 802 may be mounted to a spindle of a roller cone and the outer race 804 may be mounted to an inner bore formed within a cone and that such an outer race 804 and inner race 802 may be assembled to form a radial bearing apparatus.


Referring to FIG. 9, the thrust-bearing apparatus 700 and/or radial bearing apparatus 800 may be incorporated in a subterranean drilling system. FIG. 9 is a schematic isometric cutaway view of a subterranean drilling system 900 that includes at least one of the thrust-bearing apparatuses 700 shown in FIG. 7 according to another embodiment. The subterranean drilling system 900 includes a housing 902 enclosing a downhole drilling motor 904 (i.e., a motor, turbine, or any other device capable of rotating an output shaft) that is operably connected to an output shaft 906. A first thrust-bearing apparatus 7001 (FIG. 7) is operably coupled to the downhole drilling motor 904. A second thrust-bearing apparatus 7002 (FIG. 7) is operably coupled to the output shaft 906. A rotary drill bit 908 configured to engage a subterranean formation and drill a borehole is connected to the output shaft 906. The rotary drill bit 908 is shown as a roller cone bit including a plurality of roller cones 910. However, other embodiments may utilize different types of rotary drill bits, such as a so-called “fixed cutter” drill bit shown in FIGS. 6A and 6B. As the borehole is drilled, pipe sections may be connected to the subterranean drilling system 900 to form a drill string capable of progressively drilling the borehole to a greater depth within the earth.


A first one of the thrust-bearing assemblies 702 of the thrust-bearing apparatus 7001 is configured as a stator that does not rotate and a second one of the thrust-bearing assemblies 702 of the thrust-bearing apparatus 7001 is configured as a rotor that is attached to the output shaft 906 and rotates with the output shaft 906. The on-bottom thrust generated when the drill bit 908 engages the bottom of the borehole may be carried, at least in part, by the first thrust-bearing apparatus 7001. A first one of the thrust-bearing assemblies 702 of the thrust-bearing apparatus 7002 is configured as a stator that does not rotate and a second one of the thrust-bearing assemblies 702 of the thrust-bearing apparatus 7002 is configured as a rotor that is attached to the output shaft 906 and rotates with the output shaft 906. Fluid flow through the power section of the downhole drilling motor 904 may cause what is commonly referred to as “off-bottom thrust,” which may be carried, at least in part, by the second thrust-bearing apparatus 7002.


In operation, drilling fluid may be circulated through the downhole drilling motor 904 to generate torque and effect rotation of the output shaft 906 and the rotary drill bit 908 attached thereto so that a borehole may be drilled. A portion of the drilling fluid may also be used to lubricate opposing bearing surfaces of the bearing elements 706 of the thrust-bearing assemblies 702.



FIG. 10 is a side cross-sectional view of an embodiment of a wire-drawing die 1000 that employs a PDC 1002 fabricated in accordance with the teachings described herein. The PDC 1002 includes an inner, annular PCD region 1004 comprising any of the PCD tables described herein that is bonded to an outer cylindrical substrate 1006 that may be made from the same materials as the substrate 302 shown in FIG. 3A. The PCD region 1004 also includes a die cavity 1008 formed therethrough configured for receiving and shaping a wire being drawn. The wire-drawing die 1000 may be encased in a housing (e.g., a stainless steel housing), which is not shown, to allow for handling.


In use, a wire 1010 of a diameter d1 is drawn through die cavity 1008 along a wire drawing axis 1012 to reduce the diameter of the wire 1010 to a reduced diameter d2.


While various aspects and embodiments have been disclosed herein, other aspects and embodiments are contemplated. The various aspects and embodiments disclosed herein are for purposes of illustration and are not intended to be limiting. Additionally, the words “including,” “having,” and variants thereof (e.g., “includes” and “has”) as used herein, including the claims, shall have the same meaning as the word “comprising” and variants thereof (e.g., “comprise” and “comprises”).

Claims
  • 1. A polycrystalline diamond compact, comprising: a polycrystalline diamond table, at least an unleached portion of the polycrystalline diamond table including: a plurality of diamond grains bonded together via diamond-to-diamond bonding to define a plurality of interstitial regions;a catalyst occupying at least a portion of the plurality of interstitial regions;a specific magnetic saturation of 10 G·cm3/g to 15 G·cm3/g; anda specific permeability of less than 0.10 G·cm3/g·Oe.
  • 2. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein the polycrystalline diamond table exhibits one or more characteristics of being sintered at a cell pressure of at least 7.5 GPa.
  • 3. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein the plurality of diamond grains exhibit an average grain size of 10 μm to 50 μm.
  • 4. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein the plurality of diamond grains exhibit an average grain size of 10 μm to 30 μm.
  • 5. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein at least the unleached portion of the polycrystalline diamond table includes a catalyst content of the catalyst of 3 weight % to 7.5 weight %.
  • 6. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein the specific permeability of the unleached portion of the polycrystalline diamond table is 0.06 G·cm3/g·Oe to 0.09 G·cm3/g·Oe.
  • 7. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein at least the unleached portion of the polycrystalline diamond table includes a coercivity of 115 Oe to 250 Oe.
  • 8. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein at least the unleached portion of the polycrystalline diamond table includes a coercivity of 155 Oe to 175 Oe.
  • 9. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein the polycrystalline diamond table is formed from only single layer of polycrystalline diamond extending from an upper working surface of the polycrystalline diamond table to the substrate.
  • 10. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein the polycrystalline diamond table includes: a first layer including coarse-sized diamond grains exhibiting a first average grain size; anda second layer including fine-sized diamond grains.
  • 11. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein the unleached portion of the polycrystalline diamond table exhibits a thermal stability thereof as determined by a distance cut prior to failure in a vertical lathe thermal stability test, of at least 1300 m.
  • 12. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein a Gratio of the unleached portion of the polycrystalline diamond table is at least 4.0×106.
  • 13. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein a lateral dimension of the polycrystalline diamond table is 0.8 cm or more.
  • 14. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein the diamond table includes a leached region.
  • 15. The polycrystalline diamond compact of claim 1 wherein the polycrystalline diamond table comprises a working surface exhibiting a residual principal stress of −345 MPa to 0 MPa.
  • 16. A rotary drill bit, comprising: a bit body including a leading end structure configured to facilitate drilling a subterranean formation; anda plurality of cutting elements mounted to the bit body, at least one of the plurality of cutting elements including the polycrystalline diamond compact according to claim 1.
  • 17. A polycrystalline diamond compact, comprising: a substrate;a polycrystalline diamond table bonded to the substrate, at least an unleached portion of the polycrystalline diamond table including: a plurality of diamond grains bonded together via diamond-to-diamond bonding to define a plurality of interstitial regions, the plurality of diamond grains exhibiting an average grain size of 50 μm or less;a catalyst occupying at least a portion of the plurality of interstitial regions, wherein at least the unleached portion of the polycrystalline diamond table includes a catalyst content of the catalyst of 1 weight % to 7.5 weight %;a specific magnetic saturation of 5 G·cm3/g to 15 G·cm3/g; anda specific permeability of less than 0.10 G·cm3/g·Oe.
  • 18. A rotary drill bit, comprising: a bit body including a leading end structure configured to facilitate drilling a subterranean formation; anda plurality of cutting elements mounted to the bit body, at least one of the plurality of cutting elements including the polycrystalline diamond compact according to claim 17.
  • 19. A polycrystalline diamond compact, comprising: a substrate;a polycrystalline diamond table bonded to the substrate, at least an unleached portion of the polycrystalline diamond table including: a plurality of diamond grains bonded together via diamond-to-diamond bonding to define a plurality of interstitial regions;a catalyst occupying at least a portion of the plurality of interstitial regions, wherein at least the unleached portion of the polycrystalline diamond table includes a catalyst content of the catalyst of 3 weight % to 7.5 weight %;a coercivity greater than 115 Oe to 250 Oe;a specific magnetic saturation of 10 G·cm3/g to 15 G·cm3/g;a specific permeability of 0.06 G·cm3/g·Oe to 0.09 G·cm3/g·Oe;a Gratio of at least 4.0×106;a thermal stability, as determined by a distance cut, prior to failure, in a vertical lathe test of 1300 μm to 3950 μm.
  • 20. A rotary drill bit, comprising: a bit body including a leading end structure configured to facilitate drilling a subterranean formation; anda plurality of cutting elements mounted to the bit body, at least one of the plurality of cutting elements including the polycrystalline diamond compact according to claim 19.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 16/667,597 filed on 29 Oct. 2019 (now U.S. Pat. No. 10,961,785 issued on Mar. 30, 2021), which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 16/358,281 filed on 19 Mar. 2019, which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/789,099 filed on 7 Mar. 2013 (now U.S. Pat. No. 10,287,822 issued on 14 May 2019), which is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/623,764 filed on 20 Sep. 2012 (now U.S. Pat. No. 8,616,306 issued on 31 Dec. 2013), which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/690,998 filed on 21 Jan. 2010 (now U.S. Pat. No. 8,297,382 issued on 30 Oct. 2012), which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/244,960 filed on 3 Oct. 2008 (now U.S. Pat. No. 7,866,418 issued on 11 Jan. 2011), the disclosure of each of which is incorporated herein, in its entirety, by this reference.

US Referenced Citations (431)
Number Name Date Kind
2349577 Dean May 1944 A
3101260 Cheney Aug 1963 A
3141746 Lai Jul 1964 A
3149411 Smiley Sep 1964 A
3293012 Smiley Dec 1966 A
3372010 Parsons Mar 1968 A
3574580 Stromberg et al. Apr 1971 A
3743489 Wentorf Jul 1973 A
3745623 Wentorf et al. Jul 1973 A
3767371 Wentorf Oct 1973 A
3786552 Saito Jan 1974 A
3829544 Hall Aug 1974 A
3909647 Peterson Sep 1975 A
3918219 Wentorf, Jr. Nov 1975 A
4009027 Naidich Feb 1977 A
4016736 Lynn Apr 1977 A
4018576 Lowder Apr 1977 A
4042673 Strong Aug 1977 A
4063909 Mitchell Dec 1977 A
4082185 Strong Apr 1978 A
4084942 Fernandez-Villalobos Apr 1978 A
4171339 De Vries Oct 1979 A
4191735 Hudson Mar 1980 A
4224380 Bovenkerk et al. Sep 1980 A
4259090 Bovenkerk Mar 1981 A
4268276 Bovenkerk May 1981 A
4274900 Mueller Jun 1981 A
4288248 Bovenkerk Sep 1981 A
4301134 Strong Nov 1981 A
4303442 Akio Dec 1981 A
4311490 Bovenkerk et al. Jan 1982 A
4333902 Akio Jun 1982 A
4403015 Nakai et al. Sep 1983 A
4410054 Nagel et al. Oct 1983 A
4425315 Tsuji et al. Jan 1984 A
4440573 Ishizuka Apr 1984 A
4460382 Ohno Jul 1984 A
4468138 Nagel Aug 1984 A
4525178 Hall Jun 1985 A
4525179 Gigl Jun 1985 A
4534773 Phaal Aug 1985 A
4560014 Geczy Dec 1985 A
4572722 Dyer Feb 1986 A
4604106 Hall et al. Aug 1986 A
4610600 Bleier Sep 1986 A
4610699 Yazu et al. Sep 1986 A
4636253 Nakai et al. Jan 1987 A
4643741 Yu et al. Feb 1987 A
4676124 Fischer Jun 1987 A
4692418 Boecker Sep 1987 A
4694918 Hall Sep 1987 A
4738322 Hall et al. Apr 1988 A
4729440 Hall May 1988 A
4766040 Hillert et al. Aug 1988 A
4766027 Hillert Oct 1988 A
4778486 Csillag et al. Oct 1988 A
4783245 Eiji Nov 1988 A
4797326 Csillag Jan 1989 A
4802895 Burnard Feb 1989 A
4811801 Salesky et al. Mar 1989 A
4828611 Nakai et al. May 1989 A
4871377 Frushour Oct 1989 A
4907377 Csillag et al. Mar 1990 A
4913247 Jones Apr 1990 A
4940180 Martell Jul 1990 A
4944772 Cho Jul 1990 A
4985051 Ringwood Jan 1991 A
4992082 Drawl Feb 1991 A
5000273 Horton Mar 1991 A
5009673 Cho Apr 1991 A
5011514 Cho Apr 1991 A
5016718 Tandberg et al. May 1991 A
5022894 Vagarali Jun 1991 A
5032147 Frushour Jul 1991 A
5045092 Keshavan Sep 1991 A
5049164 Horton Sep 1991 A
5057124 Cerceau Oct 1991 A
5092687 Hall Mar 1992 A
5116568 Sung May 1992 A
5120327 Dennis Jun 1992 A
5127923 Bunting Jul 1992 A
5135061 Newton, Jr. et al. Aug 1992 A
5151107 Cho et al. Sep 1992 A
5154245 Waldenstrom et al. Oct 1992 A
5158148 Keshavan Oct 1992 A
5173091 Marek Dec 1992 A
5180022 Brady Jan 1993 A
5217154 Elwood Jun 1993 A
5304342 Hall et al. Apr 1994 A
5326380 Yao Jul 1994 A
5348109 Griffin Sep 1994 A
5351772 Smith Oct 1994 A
5355969 Hardy et al. Oct 1994 A
5364192 Damm et al. Nov 1994 A
5368398 Damm et al. Nov 1994 A
5370195 Keshavan et al. Dec 1994 A
5460233 Meany et al. Oct 1995 A
5469927 Griffin Nov 1995 A
5480233 Cunningham Jan 1996 A
5500289 Gavish Mar 1996 A
5544713 Dennis Aug 1996 A
5560754 Johnson Oct 1996 A
5582429 Isaacson Dec 1996 A
5601477 Bunting Feb 1997 A
5605199 Newton Feb 1997 A
5617997 Kobayashi Apr 1997 A
5645617 Frushour Jul 1997 A
5660075 Johnson Aug 1997 A
5709907 Battaglia et al. Jan 1998 A
5711702 Devlin Jan 1998 A
5722449 Nguyen Mar 1998 A
5740874 Matthias Apr 1998 A
5752155 Gates, Jr. et al. May 1998 A
5769176 Sumiya et al. Jun 1998 A
5816347 Dennis et al. Oct 1998 A
5819862 Matthais Oct 1998 A
5848348 Dennis Dec 1998 A
5871060 Jensen Feb 1999 A
5875862 Jurewicz et al. Mar 1999 A
5876859 Saxelby Mar 1999 A
5889219 Moriguchi et al. Mar 1999 A
5954147 Overstreet Sep 1999 A
5957228 Yorston et al. Sep 1999 A
5976707 Grab Nov 1999 A
5980982 Degawa Nov 1999 A
6003623 Miess Dec 1999 A
6044920 Massa et al. Apr 2000 A
6054693 Barmatz Apr 2000 A
6056911 Griffin May 2000 A
6068913 Cho et al. May 2000 A
6090343 Kear et al. Jul 2000 A
6132675 Corrigan et al. Oct 2000 A
6145607 Griffin et al. Nov 2000 A
6165616 Lemelson Dec 2000 A
6187068 Frushour et al. Feb 2001 B1
6189634 Bertagnolli et al. Feb 2001 B1
6196340 Jensen et al. Mar 2001 B1
6202770 Jurewicz Mar 2001 B1
6202772 Eyre Mar 2001 B1
6209429 Urso Apr 2001 B1
6220375 Butcher et al. Apr 2001 B1
6227318 Siracki May 2001 B1
6241035 Portwood Jun 2001 B1
6258139 Jensen Jul 2001 B1
6260638 Massa et al. Jul 2001 B1
6265884 Menashi Jul 2001 B1
6270548 Campbell Aug 2001 B1
6272753 Packer Aug 2001 B2
6290008 Portwood et al. Sep 2001 B1
6302225 Yoshida Oct 2001 B1
6330924 Hall Dec 2001 B1
6338754 Cannon et al. Jan 2002 B1
6342301 Yoshida et al. Jan 2002 B1
6344149 Oles Feb 2002 B1
6390181 Hall May 2002 B1
6405814 Eyre Jun 2002 B1
6408959 Bertagnolli et al. Jun 2002 B2
6410085 Griffin Jun 2002 B1
6435058 Matthias Aug 2002 B1
6443248 Yong et al. Sep 2002 B2
6460637 Siracki et al. Oct 2002 B1
6481511 Matthias Nov 2002 B2
6488106 Dourfaye Dec 2002 B1
6521353 Majagi et al. Feb 2003 B1
6544308 Griffin Apr 2003 B2
6562462 Griffin May 2003 B2
6585064 Griffin Jul 2003 B2
6589640 Griffin Jul 2003 B2
6592985 Griffin et al. Jul 2003 B2
6601662 Matthias Aug 2003 B2
6655234 Scott Dec 2003 B2
6793214 Griffin May 2004 B2
6749033 Griffin Jun 2004 B2
6793681 Pope Sep 2004 B1
6797236 Stoschek Sep 2004 B2
6797326 Griffin Sep 2004 B2
6846341 Middlemiss Jan 2005 B2
6858080 Linares Feb 2005 B2
6861098 Griffin Mar 2005 B2
6861137 Griffin Mar 2005 B2
6878447 Griffin Apr 2005 B2
6884499 Penich et al. Apr 2005 B2
6892836 Eyre May 2005 B1
6913633 Fries et al. Jul 2005 B2
6915866 Middlemiss Jul 2005 B2
6987318 Sung Jan 2006 B2
6991049 Eyre Jan 2006 B2
7033408 Fries et al. Apr 2006 B2
7060641 Qian Jun 2006 B2
7108598 Galloway Sep 2006 B1
7216661 Welty et al. May 2007 B2
7316279 Wiseman et al. Jan 2008 B2
7350601 Belnap et al. Apr 2008 B2
7377341 Middlemiss May 2008 B2
7384821 Sung Jun 2008 B2
7435478 Keshavan Oct 2008 B2
7462003 Middlemiss Dec 2008 B2
7473287 Belnap Jan 2009 B2
7475744 Pope Jan 2009 B2
7493972 Schmidt et al. Feb 2009 B1
7516804 Vail Apr 2009 B2
7517589 Eyre Apr 2009 B2
7543662 Belnap et al. Jun 2009 B2
7549912 Liang et al. Jun 2009 B2
7552782 Sexton et al. Jun 2009 B1
7553350 Kuroda et al. Jun 2009 B2
7559695 Sexton et al. Jul 2009 B2
7559965 Oh Jul 2009 B2
7569176 Pope Aug 2009 B2
7575805 Achilles et al. Aug 2009 B2
7608333 Eyre Oct 2009 B2
7628234 Middlemiss Dec 2009 B2
7635035 Bertagnolli Dec 2009 B1
7647933 Morgenstern Jan 2010 B2
7647993 Middlemiss Jan 2010 B2
7681669 Cannon Mar 2010 B2
7694757 Keshavan Apr 2010 B2
7726421 Middlemiss Jun 2010 B2
7730977 Achilles Jun 2010 B2
7740673 Eyre Jun 2010 B2
7753143 Miess Jul 2010 B1
7754333 Eyre Jul 2010 B2
7757790 Schmidt Jul 2010 B1
7757791 Belnap et al. Jul 2010 B2
7757792 Shamburger Jul 2010 B2
7828088 Middlemiss Nov 2010 B2
7836981 Zhang et al. Nov 2010 B2
7841428 Bertagnolli Nov 2010 B2
7845438 Vai Dec 2010 B1
7866418 Bertagnolli et al. Jan 2011 B2
7883775 Kazahaya et al. Feb 2011 B2
7942219 Keshavan May 2011 B2
7980334 Voronin Jul 2011 B2
8002859 Griffo Aug 2011 B2
8020645 Bertagnolli et al. Sep 2011 B2
8034136 Sani Oct 2011 B2
8043533 Tajima et al. Oct 2011 B2
8056650 Middlemiss Nov 2011 B2
8066087 Griffo Nov 2011 B2
8069937 Mukhopadhyay Dec 2011 B2
8071173 Sani Dec 2011 B1
8080071 Vail Dec 2011 B1
8080074 Sani Dec 2011 B2
8147572 Eyre Apr 2012 B2
8158258 Bertagnolli et al. Apr 2012 B2
8197936 Keshavan Jun 2012 B2
8236074 Bertagnolli et al. Aug 2012 B1
8297382 Bertagnolli et al. Oct 2012 B2
8461832 Bertagnolli et al. Jun 2013 B2
8616306 Bertagnolli et al. Dec 2013 B2
8627905 Eyre et al. Jan 2014 B2
8727046 Miess et al. May 2014 B2
8766628 Bertagnolli et al. Jul 2014 B2
9140072 Nelms et al. Sep 2015 B2
9315881 Bertagnolli et al. Apr 2016 B2
9435160 Gonzalez et al. Sep 2016 B2
9459236 Bertagnolli et al. Oct 2016 B2
9623542 Miess et al. Apr 2017 B1
9932274 Bertagnolli et al. Apr 2018 B2
10287822 Bertagnolli et al. May 2019 B2
10350730 Miess et al. Jul 2019 B2
10507565 Bertagnolli et al. Dec 2019 B2
10508502 Bertagnolli Dec 2019 B2
10703681 Bertagnolli Jul 2020 B2
10961785 Bertagnolli et al. Sep 2021 B2
20010004946 Jensen Jun 2001 A1
20010040053 Beuershausen Nov 2001 A1
20020029909 Griffo Mar 2002 A1
20020029910 Heinrich et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020034631 Griffin Mar 2002 A1
20020034632 Griffen Mar 2002 A1
20020037200 Boyce Mar 2002 A1
20020071729 Middlemiss et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020079140 Eyre Jun 2002 A1
20030019333 Scott Jan 2003 A1
20030037964 Sinor Feb 2003 A1
20030079918 Eyre May 2003 A1
20030191533 Dixon Oct 2003 A1
20040062928 Raghavan et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040111159 Pope Jun 2004 A1
20040112650 Moseley Jun 2004 A1
20040140132 Middlemiss Jul 2004 A1
20040155096 Zimmerman Aug 2004 A1
20050044800 Hall Mar 2005 A1
20050050801 Cho et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050110187 Pope May 2005 A1
20050117984 Eason Jun 2005 A1
20050129950 Griffin Jun 2005 A1
20050139397 Achilles et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050189443 Taylor Sep 2005 A1
20050210755 Cho et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050211475 Mirchandani Sep 2005 A1
20050230156 Belnap Oct 2005 A1
20050247492 Shen et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050262774 Eyre et al. Dec 2005 A1
20050263328 Middlemiss Dec 2005 A1
20060038156 Welty et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060042172 Sung Mar 2006 A1
20060054363 Eyre Mar 2006 A1
20060060390 Eyre Mar 2006 A1
20060060391 Eyre Mar 2006 A1
20060060392 Eyre Mar 2006 A1
20060086540 Griffin Apr 2006 A1
20060157285 Cannon et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060157286 Pope Jul 2006 A1
20060157884 Ludtke Jul 2006 A1
20060159582 Yu et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060162969 Belnap et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060165993 Keshavan Jul 2006 A1
20060180354 Belnap et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060191723 Keshavan Aug 2006 A1
20060099194 Cho Sep 2006 A1
20060207801 Zhang et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060237236 Shreshta et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060254830 Radtke Nov 2006 A1
20060263233 Gardinier Nov 2006 A1
20060266558 Middlemiss et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060266559 Keshavan Nov 2006 A1
20070014965 Chodelka et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070023206 Keshavan Feb 2007 A1
20070034416 Cho Feb 2007 A1
20070056778 Webb Mar 2007 A1
20070079994 Middlemiss Apr 2007 A1
20070187155 Middlemiss Apr 2007 A1
20070102202 Choe May 2007 A1
20070181348 Lancaster et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070186483 Tank Aug 2007 A1
20070187153 Bertagnolli Aug 2007 A1
20070205023 Hoffmaster et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070284152 Eyre Dec 2007 A1
20080010905 Eyre Jan 2008 A1
20080019098 Sung Jan 2008 A1
20080022806 Sumiya Jan 2008 A1
20080023231 Vail Jan 2008 A1
20080073126 Shen Mar 2008 A1
20080073127 Zhan Mar 2008 A1
20080085407 Cooley Apr 2008 A1
20080099250 Hall May 2008 A1
20080115421 Sani May 2008 A1
20080115424 Can May 2008 A1
20080142276 Griffo et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080166596 Das et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080178535 Wan Jul 2008 A1
20080185189 Griffo et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080206576 Qian et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080223575 Oldham Sep 2008 A1
20080223621 Middlemiss Sep 2008 A1
20080223623 Keshavan Sep 2008 A1
20080230279 Bitler Sep 2008 A1
20080230280 Keshavan Sep 2008 A1
20080247899 Cho Oct 2008 A1
20080302023 Goudemond et al. Dec 2008 A1
20080302579 Keshavan et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090003943 Pettersson et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090090563 Voronin Apr 2009 A1
20090120009 Sung May 2009 A1
20090152015 Sani Jun 2009 A1
20090152017 Shen Jun 2009 A1
20090152018 Sani Jun 2009 A1
20090166094 Keshavan Jul 2009 A1
20090173015 Keshavan Jul 2009 A1
20090173547 Voronin Jul 2009 A1
20090208301 Kuroda et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090125355 Hewitt Oct 2009 A1
20090313908 Zhang Dec 2009 A1
20100000158 De Leeuw-Morrison et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100012389 Zhang Jan 2010 A1
20100038148 King Feb 2010 A1
20100084196 Bertagnolli et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100095602 Belnap Apr 2010 A1
20100104874 Yong Apr 2010 A1
20100112332 Kuroda May 2010 A1
20100122852 Russell May 2010 A1
20100181117 Scott Jul 2010 A1
20100186303 Ras Jul 2010 A1
20100186304 Burgess Jul 2010 A1
20100193252 Mirchandani Aug 2010 A1
20100196717 Liversage Aug 2010 A1
20100212971 Mukhopadhyay Aug 2010 A1
20100225311 Bertagnolli Sep 2010 A1
20100236836 Voronin Sep 2010 A1
20100242375 Hall Sep 2010 A1
20100243336 Dourfaye Sep 2010 A1
20100275523 Tank Nov 2010 A1
20100281782 Keshavan Nov 2010 A1
20100287845 Montross Nov 2010 A1
20100294571 Belnap Nov 2010 A1
20100307069 Bertagnolli et al. Dec 2010 A1
20100307070 Bertagnolli et al. Dec 2010 A1
20100310855 Bertagnolli et al. Dec 2010 A1
20100330357 Davies et al. Dec 2010 A1
20110017517 Scott et al. Jan 2011 A1
20110017519 Bertagnolli et al. Jan 2011 A1
20110023375 Sani Feb 2011 A1
20110031031 Vempati Feb 2011 A1
20110031032 Mourik et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110031033 Mourik et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110031037 Bellin et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110036641 Lyons Feb 2011 A1
20110036642 Eyre et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110036643 Belnap Feb 2011 A1
20110042147 Fang et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110042149 Scott et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110056753 Middlemiss Mar 2011 A1
20110067929 Mukhopadhyay Mar 2011 A1
20110072730 Samkelo et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110083908 Shen et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110088950 Scott Apr 2011 A1
20110189468 Bertagnolli et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110192652 Shen Aug 2011 A1
20110283628 Saridikmen Nov 2011 A1
20110284294 Cox Nov 2011 A1
20120000136 Sani Jan 2012 A1
20120037429 Kelkar Feb 2012 A1
20120097457 Davies Feb 2012 A1
20120040183 Sani Mar 2012 A1
20120047815 Lyons Apr 2012 A1
20120080239 Setlur Apr 2012 A1
20120103701 Cho May 2012 A1
20120241226 Bertagnolli et al. Sep 2012 A1
20120261197 Miess et al. Oct 2012 A1
20130015001 Bertagnolli et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130187642 Bertagnolli et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130205677 Bertagnolli et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130264125 Miess et al. Oct 2013 A1
20140215926 Miess et al. Aug 2014 A1
20160207169 Bertagnolli et al. Jul 2016 A1
20160355440 Bertagnolli et al. Dec 2016 A1
20180179114 Bertagnolli et al. Feb 2018 A1
20190211629 Bertagnolli et al. Jul 2019 A1
20200149353 Setlur et al. May 2020 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (41)
Number Date Country
1037070 Nov 1989 CN
1009073 Aug 1990 CN
1249221 Apr 2000 CN
1283712 Feb 2001 CN
101321714 Dec 2008 CN
297071 Dec 1988 EP
352811 Jan 1990 EP
374424 Jun 1990 EP
0462955 Dec 1991 EP
462955 Dec 1991 EP
699642 Mar 1996 EP
737510 Oct 1996 EP
2300424 Oct 1996 GB
2384260 Jul 2003 GB
2419364 Apr 2006 GB
2423320 Aug 2006 GB
2461198 Dec 2009 GB
S59219500 Dec 1984 JP
121251 Jun 1985 JP
H06212874 Aug 1994 JP
2003292397 Oct 2003 JP
233556 Mar 2008 RU
2446870 Apr 2012 RU
WO9817424 Apr 1998 WO
WO2004106003 Sep 2004 WO
04106004 Dec 2004 WO
WO2005068114 Jul 2005 WO
WO2006008691 Jan 2006 WO
06099194 Sep 2006 WO
07020518 Feb 2007 WO
WO2008063568 May 2008 WO
WO201014108 Feb 2010 WO
WO2010039346 Apr 2010 WO
WO2010098978 Sep 2010 WO
WO2010100629 Sep 2010 WO
WO2010100630 Sep 2010 WO
2011011290 Jan 2011 WO
2011017592 Feb 2011 WO
WO2011059648 May 2011 WO
WO2012009285 Jan 2012 WO
WO2012088212 Jun 2012 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (323)
Entry
U.S. Appl. No. 16/667,597, Mar. 10, 2021, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/667,098, Apr. 7, 2021, Restriction Requirement.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/545,929, filed Oct. 10, 2006, Bertagnolli, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/244,960, filed Oct. 3, 2008, Bertagnolli et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 61/232,122, filed Aug. 7, 2009, Mourik et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/608,155, filed Oct. 29, 2009, Sani.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/690,998, filed Jan. 21, 2010, Bertagnolli et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/785,014, filed May 21, 2010, Bertagnolli et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/830,878, filed Jul. 6, 2010, Wiggins et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/846,604, filed Jul. 29, 2010, Bertagnolli et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, filed Aug. 18, 2010, Bertagnolli et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,949, filed Aug. 18, 2010, Bertagnolli et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/961,787, filed Dec. 7, 2010, Mukhopadhyay, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/027,954, filed Feb. 15, 2011, Miess, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/037,548, filed Mar. 1, 2011, Gonzalez, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/085,689, filed Apr. 13, 2011, Bertagnolli, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/087,775, filed Apr. 15, 2011, Miess, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/275,372, filed Oct. 18, 2011, Mukhopadhyay.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/486,578, filed Jun. 1, 2012, Bertagnolli, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/623,764, filed Sep. 20, 2012, Bertagnolli, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/648,913, filed Oct. 10, 2012, Mukhopadhyay.
U.S. Appl. No. 61/768,812, filed Feb. 25, 2013, Mukhopadhyay, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, filed Mar. 7, 2013, Bertagnolli et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/790,172, filed Mar. 8, 2013, Bertagnolli et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/795,027, filed Mar. 12, 2013, Mukhopadhyay, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/909,193, filed Jun. 4, 2013, Miess, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/246,657, filed Apr. 7, 2014, Miess, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/080,379, filed Mar. 24, 2016, Bertagnolli, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/238,475, filed Aug. 16, 2016, Bertagnolli, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/901,124, filed Feb. 21, 2018, Bertagnolli, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/358,281, filed Mar. 19, 2019, Bertagnolli, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/667,098, filed Oct. 29, 2019, Bertagnolli, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/667,597, filed Oct. 29, 2019, Bertagnolli, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/880,131, filed May 21, 2020, Bertagnolli, et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/805,502, filed Dec. 17, 2019, Bertagnolli et al.
D.L. Decker, W.A. Basset, L. Merrill, H.T. Hall, and J.D. Barnett; “High-Pressure Calibration A Critical Review”, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data, vol. 1, No. 3 (1972).
ASTM B887-03 (2008) “Standard Test Method for Determination of Coercivity (Hcs) of Cemented Carbides”.
ASTM B886-03 (2008), “Standard Test Method for Determination of Magnetic Saturation (Ms) of Cemented Carbides”.
W. Utsumi, N. Toyama, S. Endo, and F.E. Fujita, “X-ray diffraction under ultrahigh pressure generated with sintered diamond anvils”, J. Appl. Phys., 60, 2201 (1986).
G. Rousse, S. Klotz, A.M. Saitta, J. Rodriguez-Carvajal, M.I. Mcmahon, B. Couzinet, and M. Mezouar, “Structure of the Intermediate Phase of PbTe at High Pressure”, Physical Review B: Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, 71, 224116 (2005).
Tze-Pin Lin, Michael Hood, George A. Cooper, and Redd H. Smith, Residual Stresses in Polycrystalline Diamond Compacts, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 77[6] pp. 1562-1568 (1994).
DR Moyle, ER Kimmel “Utilization of magnetic saturation measurements for carbon control in cemented carbides” Dec. 1984, American Society of Metals Metals/Materials Technology series 1984 ASM/SCTE conference on technology advancements in cemented carbide production 8415-009.
Akashi et al.; “Synthetis of Sintered Diamond with High Electrical Resistivity and Hardness”; J.Am. Ceram. Soc.; vol. 70, No. 10; 1987; pp. C-237-X-239.
Bochechka et al.; “The Study of HP-HT Interaction between Co-Base Melts and Diamond Powders”; High Pressure Chemical Engineering; 1996; p. 457.
Ekimov et al.; “Sintering of a Nanodiamond in the Presence of Cobalt”; Inorganic Materials; vol. 45, No. 5; 2009; pp. 491-494.
Godick; “Message from Neil B. Godick”; PHLburg Technologies, Inc.; Oct. 2008.
Osipov et al.; “A contribution to the study of the diamond solid state sintering.”; Ceramica; vol. 49; 2003; pp. 151-157.
Shige et al.; “Sintering of Diamond Powder Electroless-Plated with Co Metal”, Science and Technology of New Diamond, pp. 251-255 (1990).
Tardim; “A Novel Method for Obtaining Polycrystalline Diamond Cutters”; Materials Science Forum; vols. 660-661; 2010; pp. 477-482.
German; “Particle Packing Characteristics”, Metal Powder Industries Federation; pp. 101-103; 1989 (6 pages).
International Search Report and Written Opinion from International Application No. PCT/US2009/054398 dated Feb. 2, 2010.
International Search Report and Written Opinion from International Application PCT/US2010/059619 dated Mar. 4, 2011.
Kletetschka et al., “Magnetic properties of aggregate polycrystalline diamond: implications for carbonado history” Earth and Planetary Science Letters 181 (2000) 279-290.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/244,960, Apr. 27, 2010, Restriction Requirement.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/244,960, Jun. 16, 2010, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/244,960, Sep. 27, 2010, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/244,960, Nov. 29, 2010, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/244,960, Dec. 22, 2010, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/690,998, Feb. 27, 2012, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/690,998, Jul. 17, 2012, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/690,998, Oct. 10, 2012, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/785,014, Sep. 10, 2012, Restriction Requirement.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/785,014, Feb. 5, 2013, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/785,014, May 22, 2013, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, Oct. 5, 2012, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, Apr. 10, 2013, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, Jul. 7, 2014, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, Jan. 22, 2015, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, May 18, 2015, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, Oct. 7, 2015, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, Dec. 23, 2015, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, Apr. 7, 2016, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, Aug. 2, 2016, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, Sep. 2, 2016, Corrected Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,906, Sep. 14, 2016, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,949, Dec. 23, 2010, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,949, Jun. 8, 2011, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,949, Jul. 28, 2011, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/858,949, Aug. 31, 2011, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/846,604, Aug. 8, 2011, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/846,604, Feb. 27, 2012, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/846,604, Mar. 28, 2012, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/085,689, Mar. 15, 2013, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/085,689, Jul. 17, 2013, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/085,689, Oct. 30, 2013, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/085,689, Jul. 3, 2014, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/085,689, Jan. 22, 2015, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/085,689, May 7, 2015, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/085,689, Aug. 26, 2015, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/486,578, Sep. 20, 2013, Restriction Requirement.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/486,578, Jan. 13, 2014, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/486,578, Jul. 8, 2014, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/486,578, Oct. 24, 2014, Advisory Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/486,578, May 7, 2015, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/486,578, Sep. 25, 2015, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/486,578, Dec. 11, 2015, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/486,578, Mar. 30, 2016, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/623,764, Jan. 14, 2013, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/623,764, Apr. 16, 2013, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/623,764, Jul. 29, 2013, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/623,764, Dec. 11, 2013, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/790,172, May 15, 2013, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/790,172, Oct. 21, 2013, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/790,172, Feb. 19, 2014, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/790,172, Jun. 11, 2014, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/087,775, Sep. 20, 2013, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/087,775, Jan. 7, 2014, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/087,775, Apr. 30, 2014, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, Nov. 20, 2013, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, Apr. 23, 2014, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, Oct. 23, 2014, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, May 13, 2015, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, May 19, 2016, Examiner's Answer.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, Oct. 2, 2017, Decision on Appeal.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, Feb. 26, 2018, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, Oct. 16, 2018, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, Jan. 4, 2019, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, Apr. 8, 2019, Supplemental Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/789,099, Apr. 24, 2019, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/909,193, Sep. 18, 2015, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/909,193, Feb. 18, 2016, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/909,193, Jun. 28, 2016, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/909,193, Oct. 7, 2016, Advisory Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/909,193, Jan. 6, 2017, Advisory Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/909,193, Feb. 2, 2017, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/909,193, Oct. 6, 2017, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/246,657, May 18, 2016, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/246,657, Jun. 12, 2017, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/246,657, Oct. 20, 2017, Advisory Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/246,657, Nov. 24, 2017, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/246,657, Sep. 14, 2018, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/246,657, Mar. 8, 2019, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/246,657, Jun. 14, 2019, Supplemental Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 14/246,657, Jun. 26, 2019, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/080,379, Jul. 29, 2016, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/080,379, Mar. 10, 2017, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/080,379, Feb. 28, 2018, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/080,379, Sep. 17, 2018, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/080,379, Dec. 28, 2018, Advisory Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/080,379, Aug. 9, 2019, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/080,379, Sep. 11, 2019, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/080,379, Oct. 30, 2019, Corrected Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/080,379, Nov. 26, 2019, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/919,142, Aug. 24, 2015, Restriction Requirement.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/919,142, Apr. 7, 2016, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/238,475, Sep. 29, 2016, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/238,475, Jan. 12, 2017, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/238,475, Apr. 24, 2017, Advisory Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/238,475, Dec. 29, 2017, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/238,475, Mar. 14, 2018, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/358,281, Jun. 10, 2019, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/358,281, Sep. 16, 2019, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/358,281, Nov. 15, 2019, Supplemental Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/358,281, Nov. 26, 2019, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/901,124, Aug. 8, 2019, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/901,124, Feb. 5, 2020, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/901,124, Apr. 21, 2020, Advisory Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/901,124, May 15, 2020, Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/901,124, Jun. 5, 2020, Corrected Notice of Allowance.
U.S. Appl. No. 15/901,124, Jun. 17, 2020, Issue Notification.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/667,597, Sep. 22, 2020, Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/667,597, Dec. 16, 2020, Notice of Allowance.
Berger et al., Characterization and Analysis of the Electrical Properties of a Metal-Filled Polymer; Composite Science and Technology; 1985, pp. 81.
Brown, Medical Impedence Tomography and Process Impedence Tomography: A Brief Review, Institute of Physics Publishing, Meas. Sci. Technol. 12; pp. 991-996; 2001.
Davies et al., Comparison of the Size Distribution of Boron Powders as Measure by Malvern Diffractometer and Coulter Counter; part. Part. Syst, Charact. 5; 1988, pp. 116-121.
Bundy, Direct Conversion of Graphite to Diamond in Static Pressure Apparatus, Chem Phys. vol. 38; 1963; pp. 631-643.
Hall et al., Man-Made Diamons; Nature; vol. 176, No. 4471; 1955; pp. 51-55.
Hall, Sintered Diamond: A Synthetic Carbonado; Science 169; 1970; pp. 868-869.
Hildebrand et al., Viscosity of Liquid Metals: An Interpretation, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA; vol. 73, No. 4; pp. 988-989; Apr. 1976.
Hsueh et al., Residual Stresses in Metal/Ceramic Bonded Strips, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. vol. 68, No. 5; pp. 241-248; 1985.
Ledbetter et al., Elastic Properties of Metals and Alloys. II. Copper; Journal of Physics and Chemical Reference Data, vol. 3, No. 4; pp. 897-935; 1974.
Li et al., Simulation of Pressure Distribution in Pyrophyllite High Pressure Cell by Finite-Elements Analysis; High Pressure Research, vol. 27, No. 2; Jun. 2007; pp. 249-257.
Liao et al., Two-Step Growth of High Quality Diamond Films; Thin Solid Films; vol. 368; 2000; pp. 303-306.
Lin et al., Residual Stresses in Polycrystalline Diamond Compacts; J AM. Ceram. Soc., vol. 77, No. 6; 1994; pp. 1562-1568.
Lionheart, EIT Reconstruction Algorithms: Pitfalls, Challenges and Recent Developments, Institute of Physics Publications, Physiol. Meas. 25; pp. 125-142; 2004.
Liu et al., Fabrication of Supersaturated Solid Solution of Carbon in Copper by Mechanical Alloying, Materials Characterization, vol. 58, Issue 8; pp. 504-508; Jun. 2007.
Loke et al., Practical Techniques for 3D Resisitivity Surveys and Data Inversion, Geophysical Prospecting 1996, 44; pp. 499-523; 1996.
Loke et al., Rapid Least-Squares Inversion of Apparent Resistivity Pseudosections by a Quasi-Newton Method, Geophysical Prospecting, 1996, 44; pp. 131-152; 1996.
Loke, Tutorial: 2-D and 3-D Imaging Surveys Online: http://www.geoelectrical.com/coursenotes.zip; Jul. 2004.
Loke, Tutorial: 2-D and 3-D Imaging Surveys Online: http://www.geoelectrical.com/coursenotes.zip; Sep. 2002.
Mukhopadhyay et al., Control of Exaggerated Tungsten Carbide Grain Growth at the Diamond Carbide Interface of a Polycrystalline Diamond Compact, 17th Plansee Seminar 2009, vol. 2; 2009.
Naka et al., Nature; vol. 259; 1976; p. 38.
Orwa et al., Diamond Nanocrystals Formed by Direct Impantation of Fused Silica with Carbon, Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 90, No. 6; pp. 3007-3018; 2001.
Radtke, Faster Drilling, Longer Life: Thermally Stable Diamond Drill Bit Cutters, Drilling Systems; pp. 5-9; Summer 2004.
Stromberg et al., Sintering of a Diamond at 1800-1900C and 60-65 kbar; Ceramic Bulletin 49; 1970; pp. 1030-1032.
Tomlinson et al., Syndax3 Pins-New Concepts in PCD Drilling, Rock Drilling, IDR 3/92; pp. 109-114; Mar. 1992.
Tsay et al., Electrical Conductivity of Heavily Doped Diamond, Journal of Applied Physics, 1972; pp. 43.
Wakatsuki et al., Notes On Compressible Gasket and Bridgman-AnvilType High Pressure Apparatus; Japan J. Appln Phys., vol. 11, No. 4; 1972; pp. 578-590.
Wakatsuki et al., A Wedge-Type Cubic Anvil High-Pressure Apparatus and its Application to Materials Synthesis Research; High-Pressure Researcg in Geophysics, S. Akimoto and M.H. Manhgnani, Ed., Center for Academic Publications/D. Reidel, Tokyo/Dordrecht; 1982; pp. 13-26.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/880,131, filed Nov. 28, 2022, Final Office Action.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/120,849, filed May 15, 2008, Vail.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/185,457, filed Aug. 4, 2008, Vail.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/363,104, filed Jan. 30, 2009, Sani.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/394,356, filed Feb. 27, 2009, Vail.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/397,969, filed Mar. 4, 2009, Bertagnolli.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/548,584, filed Aug. 20, 2009, Kuroda.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/626,139, filed Nov. 25, 2009, Cooley.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/032,350, filed Feb. 22, 2011, Sani.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/100,388, filed May 4, 2011, Jones.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/171,735, filed Jun. 29, 2011, Bertagnolli.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/230,125, filed Sep. 12, 2011, Sani.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/285,198, filed Oct. 31, 2011, Sani.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/292,491, filed Nov. 9, 2011, Sani.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/292,900, filed Nov. 9, 2011, Vail.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/323,138, filed Dec. 12, 2011, Miess.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/397,971, filed Feb. 16, 2012, Miess.
U.S. Appl. No. 60/850,969, filed Oct. 10, 2006, Cooley.
U.S. Appl. No. 60/860,098, filed Nov. 20, 2006, Sani.
U.S. Appl. No. 60/876,701, filed Dec. 21, 2006, Sani.
U.S. Appl. No. 61/068,120, filed Mar. 3, 2008, Vail.
U.S. Appl. No. 61/109,752, filed Oct. 30, 2008, Sani.
U.S. Appl. No. 61/223,581, filed Jul. 7, 2009, Wiggins.
U.S. Appl. No. 61/309,488, filed Mar. 2, 2010, Gonzalez.
Adler et al: “Uses and Abuses of EIDORS: An Extensible Software Base for EIT”, Institute of Physics Publishing, Physiol. Meas. 27; pp. S25-S42; 2006.
Akashi et al; Synthesis of Sintered Diamond with High Electrical Resistivity and Hardness; J. Am. Ceram. Soc., vol. 70, No. 10; 1987; pp. C237-C239.
Akashi et al; Synthesis of Fine-Grained Polycrystalline Diamond Compact and its Micorstructure; J Am. Ceram. Soc. vol. 74, No. 1; 1991; pp. 5-10.
Akashi et al; Synthesis of Polycrystalline Diamond Compact with Magnesium Carbonate and its Physical Properties; Diamond and Related Materials, vol. 5; 1996; pp. 2-7.
Bach; An Improved Cube Cell Assembly for the Use With High Pressure/High Temperature Cubic Apparatus and Manufacturing Polycrystalline Diamond Compact Inserts; All Theses and Dissertations, Paper 4244; 2009; https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/4244.
Bellin et al; The Current State of PCD Bit Technology Part 2: Leaching Thin Layer at the Working Surface of a PCD Cutter to Remove Cobalt Dramatically Reduces Diamond Degredation due to Friction Heat; World Oil; Oct. 2010; pp. 53-58.
Bhaumik et al; A Modified High-Temperature Cell (up to 3300 K) for Use with a Cubic Press, Rev. Sci. Instrum, vol. 67; 1996; pp. 3679-3682.
Bodganov et al; An Electrical Conductivity Inspection Methodology of Polycrystalline Diamond Cutters; AIP Conf. Proc.; vol. 1430; 2012; pp. 457.
Bodganov et al; Software Optimization for Electrical Conductivity Imaging in PolyCrystalline Diamond Cutters; AIP Conf. Proc.; vol. 1581; 2015.
Bodganov; Model for Conductivity as a Function of Metal Content and Grain Sized Based Percolation Theory.
Bogdanov et al; A New Apparatus for Non-Destructive Evalution of Greent-State Powder Metal Compacts Using the Electrical-Resistivity Method; Department of Electrical Computer Engineering; Worcester Polytechnic Institute; Oct. 1999.
Bogdanov et al; Non-Destructive Testing of Polycrystalline Diamond Cutters using DC Electrical Conductivity Imaging; Meas. Sci. Technol.; vol. 20; 2009; 10 pages.
Borcea; “Electrical Impedance Tomography”, Institute of Physics Publishing, Inverse Problems 18; pp. R99-R136; 2002.
Brooks; Looking Again at Large Grains in Hardmetal Tools; MPR; Sep. 2006; pp. 11-20.
Cheney et al; “Electrical Impedance Tomography”, SIAM Review, vol. 41, No. 1; pp. 85-101; Jan. 22, 1999.
Clegg et al; “Faster, Longer, and More-Reliable Bit Runs with New-Generation PDC Cutter”, SPE 102067; pp. 1-9; 2006.
Dahlin; “The Development of DC Resistivity Imaging Techniques”, Computers and Geosciences 27; pp. 1019-1029; 2001.
Dijkstra et al; “Review Clinical Applications of Electrical Impedance Tomography”, Journal of Medicine Engineering & Technology vol. 17, No. 3; pp. 89-98; May/Jun. 1993.
Ekimov et al; “Mechanical Properties and Microstructure of Diamond-SiC Nanacomposites”, Inorganic Materials, vol. 38, No. 11; pp. 1117-1122.
Ekimov et al; Thermal Conductivity of Diamond Composites Sintered Under High Pressures; Diamond & Related Materials, vol. 17; 2008; pp. 838-843.
Elyutin et al; Effect of Dispersion Strengthening of a Catalyst on the Properties of Polycrystalline Carbonado Diamonds; Doklady Physics, vol. 47, No. 6; 2002; pp. 422-424; Translated from Doklady Adakemii Nauk, vol. 384, No. 5, 2002; pp. 615-617.
Fan et al; Multilayer Diamond Coatings on Silicon Carbide; Surface and Coatings Tech., vol. 81; 1996; pp. 172-182.
Field; The Properties of Natural and Synthetic Diamond; Academic Press Ltd, New York; 1992; pp. 499.
Freeman, et al; Single PDC Cutter Studies of Fluid Heat Transfer and Cutter Thermal Mortality in Drilling Fluid, AADE-12-FTCE-38; 2012.
Giardini et al; Diamond Synthesis: Observations on the Mechanism of Formation; The American Mineralogist; vol. 47; Nov.-Dec. 1962; pp. 1393-1421.
Glowka; PDC Bit Research at Sandia National Laboratories; Jun. 1989.
Hall; High Pressure Techniques; 1980.
Hall; The Synthesis of Diamond; Journal of Chemical Education; vol. 38, No. 10; 1961; pp. 1-7.
Hashin et al; “Conductivity of Polycrystals” Phys. Rev. 130; pp. 129-133; 1963.
Hoover et al; Laboratory Evaluation of PDC Drill Bits Under High-Speed and High-Wear Conditions; Journal of Petroleum Technology; Dec. 1981; pp. 2316-2321.
Houck et al; Correlation of Factors Influencing the Pressure Generated in Multi-Anvil Devices, in High Pressure Measurement; A.A. Giardini and E.C. Lloyd, Ed., Butterworths, Washington, 1963; pp. 221-245.
Hungerford et al; Poly-Crystalline Diamond Drill Bit Development; 14th Coal Operators; Conference; University of Wollongong, the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy & Mine Managers Association of Australia; 2014; pp. 293-300.
Initial Determination of Violation of Section 337 and Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond; 172 pages; Mar. 3, 2022.
Katzman et al; Sintered Diamond Compacts with a Cobalt Binder; Science vol. 172; 1971; pp. 1132-1134.
Kelly et al; Commercial Reference Shape Standards Use in the Study of Particle Shape Effect on Laser Diffraction Particle Size Analysis; AAPSPharmSciTech; vol. 7, No. 2; May 26, 2006.
Kippax; Appraisal fo the Laser Diffraction Particle-Sizing Technique; Pharmaceutical Technology; Mar. 2005.
Kushch et al; The Effect of the Geometry and Properties of the Diamond-Carbide Interface on the Fracture Strength of Diamond-Carbide Blanks; Journal of Superhard Materials, DOI 10.3103/S1063457611010084; Feb. 2011.
Lammer; Mechanical Properties of Polycrystalline Diamonds; Materials Science and Technology, vol. 4, No. 11; Nov. 1988; pp. 945-955.
Li et al; “Sintering Behaviour of the Diamond-Super Invar Alloy System at High Temperature and Pressure”, Journal of Materials Science 25; pp. 4150-4156; 1990.
Li et al; Experimental Research on Optimum Grinding Speed for PCD; vol. 36, No. 10; 2002; pp. 10-13.
Lima et al; Study of the Diamond 5%wt-Cobalt Sinterting under the HPHT Lowest Limit; Materials Science Forum, vols. 498-499, 2005; pp. 225-230.
Lin et al; Wear and Failure Mechanisms of Polycrystalline Diamond Compact Bits; Wear, vol. 156; 1992; pp. 133-150.
Lloyd et al; Compact Multi-Anvil Wedge-Type High Pressure Apparatus; J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand. C: Eng. Instrum 63C; 1959; pp. 59-64.
Lux; Review Models Proposed to Explain the Electrical Conducitivity of Mixtures Made of Conductive and Insulating Materials, Journal of Materials Science; vol. 28; 1993; pp. 285-301.
Mensa-Wilmot et al; Advanced Cutting Structure Improves PDC Bit Performance in Hard Rock Drilling Enviroments; SPE 84354; 2003.
Miess et al; Fracture Toughness and Thermal Resistance of Polycrystalline Diamond Compacts; Materials Science and Engineering; vol. A209; 1996; pp. 270-276.
Miyazaki et al; Performace of Polycrystalline Diamond Compact Bit Based on Laboratory Tests Assuming Geothermal Well Drilling; Geothermics 80; 2019; pp. 185-194.
Mukhopadhyay et al: “Control of Exaggerated Tungsten Carbide Grain Growth at the Diamond-Substrate Interface of Polycrystalline Diamond Cutters”, 29 Int J. of Refractory Metals & Hard Materials; pp. 361-364; 2011.
Ngwekhulu; Effects of Diamond Grain Size on Magnetic Properties of the Cobalt Phase in PCD Compacts; University of Witwatersrand; Oct. 2018.
Ohno et al; “Cost Reduction of Polycrystalline Diamond Compact Bits Through Improved Durability”, Geothermics 31; pp. 245-262; 2002.
Polini et al: Hot Filament Chemical Vapour Deposition and Wear Resistance of Diamond Films on WC-Co Substrates Coated Using PVD-arc Deposition Technique, Diamond & Related Materials; vol. 15; 2006; pp. 1284-1291.
Porat et al; Binder Mean-Free-Path Determination in by Coercive Force and Material Composition; Materials Science Engineerings, vol. A105/106; 1988; pp. 282-29.
Saji et al; Solid Solubility of Carbon in Copper during Mechanical Alloying, Materials Transactions, vol. 39, No. 7; pp. 778-781; 1998.
Schell et al; New Stable PDC Tecnology Signigicantly Reduces Hard Rock Cost Per Fott; 2003.
Scott et al; A Bit of History: Overcoming Early Setbacks, PDC Bits Now Drill 90% Plus of Worldwide Footage; Drilling Contractor; Jul. 2015.
Shin et al: The Mechanism of Abnormal Grain Growth in Polycrystalline Diamond During High Pressure-High Temperature Sinterings; Diamond and Related Materials, vol. 13; 2004; pp. 488-494.
Suryanarayana; “Novel Methods of Brazing Dissimilar Materials”, Advanced Materials & Processes; Mar. 2001.
Takeuchi et al; Adhesion Strength of Multi-Layered Diamond Films on WC-Co Alloy Substrate; Thin Solid Films; 2004; pp; 469-470, 190-193.
Tanaka et al; “Formation of Metastable Phases of Ni—C and Co—C Systems by Mechanical Alloying” Metallurgical Transactions, vol. 23A; pp. 2431-2435; Sep. 1992.
Tapp et al; “Chemical Engineering Applications of Electrical Process Tomography”, Sensors and Actuators B 92; pp. 17-24; 2003.
Te et al: Investigation of Removal Rate and Grinding Ratio of PCD Material Based on Orthogonal Experiment; Diamond and Abrasive Engineering; vol. 159, No. 3; Jun. 2007; pp. 72-75.
Topic et al; The Influence of Microstructure on the Magnetic Properties of WC/Co Hardmetals; Mater Sci Eng, vol. 423; 2006; pp. 306-312.
Uehara et al; High Pressure Sintering of Diamond by Cobalt Infiltration; Science and Technology of New Diamond, KTK Scientific Publishers, Terra Scientific Publishing Company; 1990; pp. 203-209.
Vekinis et al; The Effects of Cyclic Precompression on the Magnetic Coercivity of WC-6wt%Co; Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 96; 1987; pp. L21-L23.
Wakatsuki et al; Characteristics of Link-Type Cubic Anvil, High Pressure-High Temperature Apparatus; Jpn. J. Appl. Phys.; vol. 10 No. 3; 1971; pp. 357-366.
Wise et al; Effects of Design and Processing Parameters on Performance of PDC Drag Cutters for Hard-Rock Drilling; Geothermal Resources Council Transactions; vol. 26; Sep. 2002; pp. 201-206.
Wise et al; “ Effects of Design Processing Parameters on Performance of PDC Drag Cutters for Hard-Rock Drillings”, Sandia Nat'l Corp. & US Synthetic Corp.; pp. 1-11; 2002.
Wise et al; Latest Results of Parameter Studies on PDC Drag Cutters for Hard-Rock Drilling; GRC Transactions, vol. 29; 2005; pp. 545-552.
Yan et al; Wear Performances and Mechanisms of Ultrahard Polycrystalline Diamond Composite Material Grinded Against Granite; International Journal of Refractory Metals and Hard Materials; vol. 54; Jan. 2016; pp. 46-53.
York; Status of Electrical Tomography in Industrial Applications:, Journal of Electronic Imaging, vol. 10, No. 3; pp. 608-619; Jul. 2001.
International Trade Commission Opinion and Dissenting Opinion of Commissioner Schmidtlein, Investigation No. 337-TA-1236, issued Oct. 26, 2022, 77 pages.
Ali et al; Nanocrystalline Diamond Films Deposited Using a New Growth Regime; Materials Science and Technology; DOI 10.1179/026708303225004288 vol. 19, No. 7; 2003; pp. 987-990.
Bellin et al; The Current State of PCD Bit Technology Part 1: Development and Application of Polycrystalline Diamond Compact Bits have Overcome Complex Challenges from the Difficulty of Reliably Mounting PDC Cutters in Bit Bodies to Accelerated Thermal Wear, World Oil, Sep. 2010, pp. 41-46.
Bellin et al; The Current State of PCD Bit Technology Part 3: Improvements in Material Properties and Testing Methods are Being Pursued to Made PDC the Cutter of Choice for an Increasing Variety of Applications; World Oil, Nov. 2010; pp. 67-71.
Belnap; Sintering of Ultrahard Materials; Sintering of Advanced Materials; Dec. 2010; pp. 389-414.
Characterizing Material Property Tradeoffs of Polycrystalline Diamond for Design Selection and Evaluation, Neil David Haddock, BYU Theses and Dissertations, Aug. 2009; pp. 1-86.
Durrand et al; Super-Hard, Thick, Shaped PDC Cutters for Hard Rock Drilling; Development and Test Results; Thirty-Fifth Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering Stanford Universityl Feb. 1-3, 2010.
F.P. Bundy; Chem Phys. vol. 34, No. 2; 1996; pp. 141-153.
Gilmore, Industrial Ultrasonic Imaging and Microscopy, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 29; pp. 1389-1417; 1996.
Glowka et al; Effects of Thermal and Mechanical Loading on PDC Bit Life, SPE Drillng Engineering; pp. 201-214; Jun. 1986.
Glowka; The Thermal Response of Rock to Friction in the Drag Cutting Process; Journal of Structural Geology, vol. 11; Issue 7; 1989; pp. 919-931.
Hall; Ultra-High-Pressure, High-Temperature Apparatus: The “Belt”; Review of Scientific Instruments; vol. 31, No. 2; Mar. 1960; pp. 125-13.
Hosomi et al; “Diamond Formation by a Solid State Reaction”, Science and Technology of New Diamond; pp. 239-243; 1990.
Jia Te et al; Investigation of Removal Rate and Grinding Ratio of PCD Material Based on Orthogonal Experiment; Institute of Mechanical Engineering; Dalian University of Technology; Diamond and Abrasive Engineering; pp. 72-75 Serial 159, No. 3; Jun. 2007.
Katzman et al; Cobalt Catalyst; Science 172(UCLA); 1971; pp. 1132.
Kuftyrev et al; Wear Resistance of Polycrystalline Diamond Cutters for Drill Bits; Moscow Institute of Steel Alloys; Jun. 2017.
Li et al; Wear-Resistance Testing of Synthetic Polycrystalline Diamond; Oct. 2008; pp. 22-25.
Lin et al; Wear and Failure Mechanisms of Polycrystalline Diamond Compact Bits; vol. 156; 1992; pp. 133-150.
Loke; Tutorial: 2-D and 3-D Imaging Surveys Online: http://www.geoelectrical.com/coursenotes.zip; Apr. 2001.
Mukhopadhyay et al; Correlation of Failure Strength with Magnetic Properties and Material Composition of Polycrystalline Diamond; Paper #1323; Intertech 2013; May 2013; pp. 20-24.
Notsu et al; Remanent Magnetism of Sintered Diamond with Cobalt; Materials Research Bulletin; vol. 14, No. 8; Aug. 1979; pp. 1065-1068.
Notsu et al; Sintering of a Diamond with Cobalt Mat. Res. Bull. 12; 1977; pp. 1079-1085.
Pain et al; “Effective Multidimensional Resistivity Inversion using Finite-Element Techniques”, Geophys. J. Int. (2002) 151; pp. 710-728; 2002.
Polini et al; Adherent Diamond Coatings on Cemented Tungsten Carbide Substrates with New Fe/Ni/Co Binder Phase; Thin Solid Films; vol. 494; 2006; pp. 133-140.
Quickelberghe et al; A New Procedure to Analyse the Wear of Cutting Elements; Eurock: Multiphysics Coupling and Long Term Behaviour in Rock Mechanics, A. vanCotthem, R. Charlier, J.-F. Thimus, and J.-P. Tshibangu, Eds., Taylor & Fran-cis, London, pp. 609-615 Ex. AB21 Wise, et al., “Latest Results of Parameter Studies on PDC Drag Cutters for Hard-Rock Drilling,” Geothermal Resources Council 2005.
Roebuck et al; “Measurement Good Practice Guide No. 20”, Center for Materials Measurement and Technology, National Physical Laboratory UK; 1999.
Shujing et al; Interface Conformations of Polycrystalline Diamond Compact and Their Performances; Diamond & Abrasive Engineering; Apr. 2004; vol. 140, No. 2.
Sowers; Examination of the Material Removal Rate in Lapping Polyrcrystalline Diamond Compacts; Aug. 2011.
Thuro et al; “Hard Rock Tunnel Boring, Cutting, Drilling, and Blasting: Rock Parameters for Excavability”, Technology Roadmap for Rock Mechanics, S African Inst. Of Mining and Metallurgy; pp. 1227-134; 2003.
Tillwick et al; Precipitation and Magnetic Hardening in Sintered WC-Co Composite Materials; 6 J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys; pp. 1585-1597; 1973.
Timoshenko et al; Theory of Elasticity; McGraw-Hill Classic Textbook Reissue 1934; pp. 456-458; 1934.
Tu et al., A Study of the Effect of Coolant Parameters to Surface Roughness in External Cylindrical Grinding of 90CrSi Steel Using Taguchi Method; International Journal of Innovation Engineering and Science Research; vol. 4, No. 2; Mar.-Apr. 2020.
Ueda; “Cutting Performance of Sintered Diamond with MgCO3 as a Sintering Agent”, Materials Science and Engineerings; pp. 260-263; 1996.
USSynthetic; “Meet the Toughest Diamond Cutters You'll Ever Use” Brochure; 2004.
Voronov et al. “Thermal Strength and Oxidation Resistance of Hot-Pressed Diamond Compacts Prepared using Hydrocarbons”, Superhard Matter, vol. 9; 1987; p. 10.
Wentorf et al.; Sintered Superhard Materials; Science, vol. 208; May 1980; pp. 873-880.
Yamane et al; “Solid Solubility of Carbon in Copper Mechanically Alloyed”, Journal of Materials Science Letters 20; pp. 259-260; 2001.
Zeren et al; Sintering of Polycrystalline Diamond Cutting Tools, Materials and Design; vol. 28; 2007; pp. 1055-1058.
Oleksandr et al; “Influence of High Sintering Pressure on the Microhardness and Wear Resistance of Diamond Powder and Silicon Carbide-Based Composites”, Materials Research, vol. 17, No. 2; Apr./Jun. 2004.
U.S. Appl. No. 16/667,098, May 9, 2024, Non-Final Office Action.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20210262295 A1 Aug 2021 US
Continuations (5)
Number Date Country
Parent 16667597 Oct 2019 US
Child 17183478 US
Parent 16358281 Mar 2019 US
Child 16667597 US
Parent 13789099 Mar 2013 US
Child 16358281 US
Parent 13623764 Sep 2012 US
Child 13789099 US
Parent 12690998 Jan 2010 US
Child 13623764 US
Continuation in Parts (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 12244960 Oct 2008 US
Child 12690998 US