A Modified Wipfrag Program for Determining Muckpile Fragmentation

"The size distribution of the muckpile formed as a result of open pit blasting operations has a considerable effect on the efficiency of loading, hauling, and crushing. Various researchers have developed specialized computer software that uses image analysis methods for determining the size distribution of the muckpile. However, these methods have some limitations. One of the most important of these limitations is that the very fine fragments in the muckpile cannot be used in the size distribution calculation. In this study, 18 test blasts in total were carried out in two limestone quarries belonging to Batiçim Corp. in Izmir, Turkey. A new model was developed in order to ensure that very fine fragments are used in the size distribution calculation. The size distributions of the test blasts were calculated by both the Wipfrag computer program and the new model. Correlations were established between the muckpile size distributions determined by both methods and the parameters determining the efficiency of the loader. IntroductionThe size distribution of the muckpile formed as a result of open pit blasting operations has a considerable effect on the efficiency of loading, hauling, and crushing. Various researchers have established certain correlations for predicting the efficiency of the operations according to the muckpile size distribution so that production can be carried out economically (Tunstall and Bearman, 1997; Nielsen and Kristiansen, 1996; Workman and Eloranta, 2004; Michaud and Blanchet, 1996; Frimpong, Kabongo, and Davies, 1996; Osanloo and Hekmat, 2005; Molotilov et al., 2010). In these studies, the 50% passing size (X50) is generally used. These methods rely on the correct measurement of the size distribution of the muckpile formed by the blast. The most reliable measurement method would be to subject the entire muckpile to a sieve analysis, but this is obviously impracticable. Therefore, computational method based on image analysis have been developed. These include IPACS (Dahlhielm, 1996), Tucips (Havermann and Vogt, 1996), Fragscan (Schleifer and Tessier, 1996), Cias (Downs and Kettunen, 1996), GoldSize (Kleine annd Cameron, 1996), Wipfrag (Maerz, Palangio, and Franklin, 1996), Split Desktop (Kemeny, 1994), PowerSieve (Chung and Noy, 1996), and Fragalyst (Raina et al., 2002). In these methods, the size limits of the fragments forming the material are determined by image analysis on photographs of the muckpile. However, the computer software has some limitations. It does not take into account the third dimension of the muckpile, nor the size distribution of very fine fragments. In particular, the fragment size ranges below 2.5 to 3 cm cannot be determined, and therefore these cannot be included in the muckpile size distribution. However, the muckpile formed by a bench blast contains a wide range of particle sizes (Tosun et al., 2015)."