## 1 Introduction  
Modern mechanical excavation strongly depends on the efficiency of the means involved to optimise investment costs, and so rock features must be considered [1]. Prior to excavation, the type and performance of excavation machinery (i.e., hydraulic breakers, roadheaders, shear-loaders, TBMs, drilling rigs, and cutting bits) must be determined. The influence of rock properties on drillability has been discussed by various authors. [PERSON] et al. [2] experimented on cement mortar (an analogue for natural rock samples) and found that uniaxial compression strength (UCS) strongly influenced the efficiency of the drilling process in terms of specific energy increases and penetration rate decreases. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [3] used 32 different rock types and found a strong relation between the drilling rate index (DRI) and the brittleness expressed as the area under the curve of the compressive strength-tensile strength [4]. In addition, good linear correlations were found between DRI and UCS, Brazilian tensile strength (BTS), shore scleroscope hardness, and axial and diametral point load strength (PLT) [5; 6]. [PERSON] et al. [7] studied 38 in situ drillings in porphyry andesite, limestone, and sandstone, and found that the UCS of rock, the vertical pressure on bit, and bit rotational speed were the most significant parameters in the penetration rate for rotary drilling. [PERSON] et al. [8] experimented on 42 rocks of different types and found that DRI showed strong correlations with UCS and BTS. [PERSON] et al. [1] used schist samples and found a strong relationship between DRI, UCS, BTS, Schmidt hardness (SH), instantaneous cutting rate (ICR), unit weight, rock mass rating (RMR), and the Cerchar abrasiveness index (CAI). [PERSON] et al. [9] used 43 samples from different types of rocks and determined that DRI decreased with increasing UCS, PLT, BTS, and SH, and that DRI increased with apparent porosity and void ratios. More recently, [PERSON] [10] found better predictions of DRI from UCS and BTS for hard rocks (UCS > 100 MPa) than for soft rocks. Elastic and plastic deformations occur during drilling, and for that reason the effects of elastic properties have also been studied in terms of drilling aspects by different authors. [PERSON] et al. [11] used artificial neural networks to estimate UCS and elastic modulus (using operational drilling parameters from oil wells in Iran as inputs) and determined that both UCS and elastic modulus are strongly correlated with operational drilling parameters, although UCS showed the best coefficients of determination (demonstrating that UCS has a greater effect in drilling performance than elastic modulus). [PERSON] et al. [12] studied 11 drilling sites from a mine in Iran and showed a good relationship between drilling rate (DR) and UCS, P-, and S- wave velocities. [PERSON] et al. [13] experimented on samples from nine different rocks and found a strong correlation between DRI and UCS. Although correlation between DRI and elastic modulus was poor, a correlation between Sievers' J-value (SJ) and elastic modulus was found. Previous research evidence shows that mechanical and physical properties strongly determine the drilling performance of rocks, and such properties show the dramatic variations with temperature and cooling method that condition the drillability of thermally treated rocks. Thermal effects on the physical, mineralogical, and mechanical properties of rocks are of interest to researchers. Moreover, the degree of thermal damage strongly depends on the type of rock, and more than a quarter of the studies on the thermal response of rocks are specifically focused on limestone [14]. [PERSON] et al. [15] observed a decrease in UCS even at low temperatures (T < 250 \({}^{\circ}\)C). [PERSON] et al. [16] described a marked decrease in bulk density, P-wave velocity, and effective porosity at 400 \({}^{\circ}\)C. [PERSON] et al.