Thrust boring and horizontal directional drilling are both trenchless techniques for the installation of underground utilities. Unlike traditional trenching as a method of installing pipes, ducts and cables, these techniques avoid the need for extensive, open-cut excavations. This makes them efficient and cost-effective alternatives to outdated trench-digging.
But how do these techniques compare to each other? And how do you decide between thrust boring vs horizontal directional drilling when it comes to your installation project?
When comparing thrust boring with horizontal directional drilling, there are various factors that come into play. This includes cost, plus various other practical pros and cons. However, before embarking on any comparative exercise, it’s important to understand what these techniques involve and how they each work, to provide a context within which to draw comparisons.
To find out more about thrust boring vs horizontal directional drilling, read on ➡
Thrust boring, also commonly known as auger boring, is a trenchless excavation method for pipework installations. It involves using a rotating cutting head (an auger) inside a steel casing to remove soil while the casing is pushed forward through the ground using hydraulic jacks.
How Thrust Boring Works:
Pipe Installation: Once the bore is complete, the intended pipeline, ducting or conduit for cabling is inserted into the prepared borehole.
Horizontal directional drilling is a type of directional drilling that follows a horizontal path. This is a steerable trenchless method that involves drilling a pilot borehole along a predetermined path. The bore is then enlarged and the product pipe or casing is pulled through behind this.
How Horizontal Directional Drilling Works:
Pipe Pullback: The product pipe or casing is attached to the drill string and pulled back through the borehole to complete the installation.
When comparing horizontal directional drilling and auger boring (thrust boring), consideration must be given to the benefits and drawbacks of each. These are both trenchless excavation methods used to navigate under roads, rivers and railways, or other surface infrastructure, with minimal disruption. This avoids the practical problems and costs associated with traditional trench-digging. But what are the capabilities of these techniques compared to each other
Read on for thrust boring vs horizontal directional drilling pros and cons ➡
The cost of thrust boring compared with horizontal directional drilling can vary, where a range of different factors can significantly affect the overall cost. In some cases, one method may be far more suitable than the other, depending on your project needs and ground conditions.
At EPS Trenchless Installations, we can provide you with a free, no-obligation quote for your pipeline project following a site assessment. We offer cutting-edge technology and industry-leading expertise at competitive prices for both thrust boring and horizontal directional drilling. However, to make an informed decision between the two, the following cost comparison can help when it comes to thrust boring vs horizontal directional drilling costs.
Equipment & Setup: Thrust boring uses hydraulic jacking to push a casing through the ground. This is a simpler and less expensive setup compared to horizontal directional drilling, which involves advanced drilling rigs and sophisticated tracking systems. As such, the initial setup cost for horizontal directional drilling is much higher than for thrust boring.
Labour & Expertise: Thrust boring is a mechanical excavation method that requires fewer specialised operators, while horizontal directional drilling requires skilled drillers with geotechnical expertise to navigate underground obstacles. While thrust boring requires a stable launch pit and manual pipe jacking, it’s less labour-intensive than horizontal directional drilling.
Drilling Fluids & Environmental Permits: Thrust boring does not require drilling fluids, which saves costs on fluid management and disposal. Horizontal directional drilling uses bentonite-based drilling mud, which increases material costs and may require a permit.
Project Length & Pipe Diameter: For shorter, straight-line installations (typically under 100 metres), thrust boring is more cost-effective. For longer distances, curved installations, or deeper bores, horizontal directional drilling is preferred but comes at a higher cost.
Overall, thrust boring is cheaper than horizontal directional drilling for shorter distances, straight paths, and larger-diameter pipes, although the cost comparison depends on several factors. If your project involves short, straight pipework installations, thrust boring is usually the cheaper option. If longer distances or curved paths are required, horizontal directional drilling might justify its higher cost due to its greater flexibility. When dealing with unstable or rocky ground, the setup cost of horizontal directional drilling is also again offset by its efficiency.
Feature | Thrust Boring | Horizontal Directional Drilling |
Cost | Lower for short runs | Higher, especially for short distances |
Steerability | Limited, straight paths only | Flexible, can navigate around obstacles |
Distance capability | Short to medium distances | Longer distances possible |
Soil adaptability | Limited, struggles with mixed conditions | Works in most soil types, including rock |
Installation speed | Faster for short runs | Slower setup but efficient for long distances |
Surface disruption | Minimal, but requires pits | Minimal, no pits required |
As industry leaders in trenchless solutions, we have a range of innovative techniques to minimise surface disruption and keep costs down. Our experienced engineers can advise on the most efficient and cost-effective method of completing your underground installation with precision and efficiency, avoiding the mess and disturbance of traditional trench-digging.
Case Studies
HDD Locations
Moling Locations
Website: in.house.media
Skip to content