Search Documents

By Oliver Finn

Gold dredging has made such rapid strides of late and there is such a widespread interest in this branch of mining that I venture to contribute a detailed account of the way in which a Keystone driller was used by me in California to loosen, by blasting, a very tight gravel deposit, preparatory to dredging. There is a great difference between “cemented gravel” and “tight gravel.” A truly cemented gravel is not a dredging proposition, while the tightest possible gravel, where there is no cement, can be made easy working by the following method of blasting:

Jan 1, 2008

By Thierry Bernard

This case study shows how a unique combination of field measurements and advanced technologies allowed blasters designing, loading and firing an incredibly challenging quarry blast.

Jan 1, 2015

By Jennifer Ward

The primary objective of this paper is to establish how a low cost, high definition (HD) camera can allow for easy sustainable recordings of blasting operations. The subsequent analysis of each video can be utilized to monitor what type of performance was achieved and aids in improving blasting performance.

Jan 1, 2015

By Cathy Aimone-Martin, Caitlin Woznick, Brent Meins

This study is a continuation of previous work in which the responses of tall structures to close-in construction blasting at two rock excavation sites are evaluated. A total of eight buildings were instrumented to calculate blast-induced wall strains. Of these structures, five high-rise buildings measuring 166 ft (51 m) to 294 ft (90 m) in height (15 to 24 stories), were included for this study and compared with the results of previous studies that included one to three story residential structures and mid-rise structures (four to six stories). All five structures were built between 1908 and 1940 with interior walls comprising aged plaster. Three of the structures are designated Landmark, subject to a 0.5 in/s (12.7 mm/s) regulated peak particle velocity (PPV) limit. The regulated PPV limit for the two other structures was 2.0 in/s (50.8 mm/s). To date, a total of 450 close-in construction blasts have taken place over six months at the two adjacent projects, blasting three to six times per day at each site. Seismograph instrumentation included tri-axial geophones in the ground and bi-axial geophones (horizontal components only) mounted on structure exteriors at the corners closest to blasting. Peak global wall tensile strains were calculated from time-correlated differential structure displacements in two horizontal directions as measured by upper and lower geophones mounted near the roof and at street levels. Wall strains were correlated with ground excitations to establish a stiffness factor for each structure defined as the upper bound linear regression slope for strain as a function of ground displacement. In addition, a structure-specific regression best-fit function was established to relate horizontal components of displacement to velocity. These two functions were used to determine the maximum ground motion velocity for a desired limit placed on wall strain. A 25 ?-strain limit was suggested for both projects to protect interior plaster walls. To date, global wall strains have not exceeded 0.53 ?-strains (or 47 times the project limit) for peak particle velocities up to 3.49 in/s (88.6 mm/s). This demonstrates the low strain response of tall structures to ground velocities well above regulated limits. The stiffness factor computed for the most flexible high-rise building was 688 in-1 (17475 mm-1). In comparison, stiffness factors for the most flexible residential and mid-rise structures previously studied were 8651 in-1 (219735 mm-1) and 4387 in-1 (111430 mm-1), respectively. Based on a large number of measurements made at these study structures, the maximum horizontal ground velocity needed to achieve 25 ?-strains in walls ranged from 36 in/s (914 mm/s) to 192 in/s (4877 mm/s) because of the high stiffness of these buildings. Such high amplitudes of ground vibrations can never be safely achieved during close-in blasting in urban environments. These excessive values stand to show how unfounded the current limits of 0.5 in/s (12.7 mm/s) and 2.0 in/s (50.8 mm/s) are when applied to massive, tall structures. This study demonstrated that upper structure motions are highly attenuated from the lower (street-level) motions because of the long travel distances up the buildings. High-rise structures are far stiffer than mid-rise and residential structures and can withstand ground vibration amplitudes far greater than the currently enforced blasting limits in New York City.

Jan 1, 2015

By Larry R. Fletcher

A misfire results when explosives fail to detonate as planned during a mine blast. Accidental detonation of misfires is a frequent cause of personal injury, equipment damage, and lost production. In an effort to minimize these problems, the Bureau of Mines investigated the causes of misfires, methods for detecting misfires, and procedures for their disposal. During this investigation, input was obtained from explosives suppliers, mining companies, blasting contractors, blasting consultants, and governmental agencies. Additional data were obtained through detailed analysis of blasting accidents involving misfires.

Jan 1, 1983

By Paul Kunze

When a new bridge was needed across the upper reaches of the Yellowstone River in Montana, removing the old concrete bridge piers became an environmental concern for the highway department engineers. The location is about fifty miles downstream from the north edge of Yellowstone Park. The determination was made by the federal and state agencies charged with protecting the resource, that the old piers had to go but the river bed had to remain unchanged. Concerns were expressed that removing the concrete presented the potential for environmental damage to this protected portion of the river. These concerns prompted the state to place stringent restrictions on the contractor in the way they carried out the demolition and disposal of the piers. The reinforced concrete masses had to be removed to an elevation at least fifteen feet below the river bed and every bit of concrete debris had to be removed from the river channel. Explosive removal was discouraged, but the only other options: saw cutting, mechanical or chemical breaking, were not viable.

Jan 1, 2014

By Dale S. Preece

A carefully designed and controlled in-place destruction experiment was performed on a concrete bunker buried in 4.27 m (14 ft.) of soil. The objective was to determine if the explosive charges would collapse the structure in-place without requiring mechanical excavation. Collapse of the buried structure was fi rst attempted by drilling holes in the soil and placing four 13.38 Kg (29.5 lb) Comp B explosive charges at a depth of 2.13 m (6.7 ft.). The confi guration of the charges when detonated was 2.13 m (6.7 ft.) off the top of the concrete roof and 3.66 m (12 ft.) apart in a square pattern. Detonation of these charges created a crater ~4.88 m (16 ft.) in diameter and 2.13 m (6.7 ft.) deep, leaving ~2.13 m (6.7 ft.) of soil covering. Very limited spalling occurred on the ceiling of the concrete structure as a result of detonating these four charges. The second attempt to collapse the structure consisted of placing another single 13.38 Kg (29.5 lb) charge, identical to the fi rst four, near the geometrical center of the bunker roof. This charge was detonated in the soil cover 100 to 200 mm (4 to 8 in.) above the reinforced concrete roof, collapsing it. Due to the collapsed roof and remaining soil cover, the structure had been collapsed in place, requiring no further demolition. A computer simulation of the above explosive destruction scenario was completed using the computer hydrocode AUTODYN with a granular material model to treat the soil and the RHT brittle material model to represent the concrete. AUTODYN accurately recreated the scenario including the slightly damaged response of the concrete structure to the initial four charges and the collapse of the structure resulting from the second single charge close to the roof.

Jan 1, 2007

By R. F. Favreau, Patrice Favreau, Dennis Mahan

Cast blasting is becoming more and more popular, not only in coal mines but also in other operations which require excavation of an upper layer of waste rock to uncover temporarily and excavate a layer of ore, which may for example be material for the fertilizer industry.

Jan 1, 2014

By Sushil Bhandari, Amit Bhandari

Blast optimization in open-pit operations is a task that often remains at a theoretical stage. Indeed, when it comes to operational blast design and onsite implementation, time restrictions and field conditions make it difficult to execute a planned pattern accurately and optimization according to local conditions is even more difficult. For example, adjusting a drill pattern to a complex face geometry is not something that can be easily undertaken on site. Blasters and engineers will do their best trying to distribute boreholes over the bench and even then, it can take them hours to achieve an acceptable layout. Similar situations occur with delay sequences, when trying to adjust them to address selectivity or vibration issues. For these reasons, operational blast design will often remain at a very basic level and the required adjustments are laid aside due to the difficulty of implementing them on site.

Jan 1, 2019

By Thierry Bernard, Guy Gagnon

Blasting at very close proximity to urban areas is typically a situation where both local communities and mining stakeholders get nervous. The context becomes logically even more tensed when the blasting operations have to be performed above an old underground mine. When mitigating subsidence risks requires firing the largest possible shots, the nuisance control (flyrock, vibration, and noise) required by local and national regulations, contrarily urge for being more conservative.

Jan 1, 2014

By Kenneth Eltschlager, Jim Ratcliff, Michael Mann, Edward Sheehan

The Appalachian Blaster Certification Delegation initiated a study to compare the consistency of measurements from blasting seismographs. Six blasts were monitored at surface coal mines in West Virginia, Maryland, and Ohio. A total of seven different makes were deployed during the tests, with as many as seven models from five different manufacturers compared during any one blast. Great care was taken to bury the geophones in identical fashion. The variations in seismograph readings were compared to the International Society of Explosives Engineers’ Performance Specifications for Blasting Seismographs. Between 4 and 125 Hertz, the ground vibration amplitudes should be within ±5% and airblast amplitudes should be ±1 decibel. For each of the three mutually perpendicular ground vibration channels and the acoustic channel, the median value of all the units was used as a baseline for comparison. The six blasts monitored had median peak particle velocities ranging from 0.42 to 3.47 inches per second (in/s) (10.7 – 88.1 mm/s) and median airblasts ranging from 124 to 135 decibels (dB). There were 46 seismograph recordings for the six blasts. Eighteen (39%) of the 46 maximum peak particle velocities varied more than ±5% from the median. A total of 138 (3 × 46) component particle velocities were recorded, with 50 (36%) of the readings varying more than ±5% from the median. For airblast comparison, 43 recordings were obtained, with seven (16%) varying more than ±1 dB of the median. Variances may be attributable to blasting seismograph differences, variations in field deployment, and relative locations of the geophones. Full waveform seismic and acoustic overlays for individual blasts showed encouraging conformity with some slight anomalies

Jan 1, 2015

By Pierre L. Labelle

Non electric Dual Delay initiators have revolutionized many aspects of underground mining. The units are used in all types of underground blasting operations. Some operations, due to the complexity and variety of their blasts, have extremely large inventories of conventional non electric products. The Dual Delay system has drastically reduced these inventories and has added an important element of versatility to blast designs.

Jan 1, 1994

By Gene Baker

A new Safety Library Publication (SLP), SLP-27, which is titled “Security in Manufacturing, Transportation, Storage and Use of Commercial Explosives” was recently released by the Institute of Makers of Explosives (IME). SLP-27 makes recommendations for both general security and enhanced security at explosives sites when security risk levels, declared by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) using its Advisory System, have temporarily increased.

Jan 1, 2006

By R. Bitmead, R Barker, A. Drake

The opencut coal mine is located about 50 km west of Brisbane, the capital city of Queensland in Australia and produces about 140 000 tonnes per annum of high grade steaming coal utilising a small team (ten) of personnel to mine remnants of the Aberdare and Bluff seams left by previous underground mining. This, in itself, is not remarkable except that one of the seams has commenced spontaneously cornbusting resulting in temperatures in excess of 55’C commonly being encountered with portions of the p’it being wreathed in steam. To extend mine life, the mine required a blasting system that would: . Safely blast in temperatures below 100°C . Significantly reduce overall unit costs . Not increase the current vibration impacts on nearby housing . Not increase flyrock.

Jan 1, 2002

By Neil T. Davie, Thomas K. Blanchat, Thomas C. Togami, Joe R. Weatherby, Dale S. Preece, Robert A. Benham, James J. Calderone

"Geotechnical structures ,such as underground bunkers, tunnels, and building foundations aresubjected to stress fields produced by..the gravity load on the structure and/or any overlyingstrata. These stress fields may be.. reproduced on a scaled model of the structure byproportionally increasing the gravity field through the use of a centrifuge. This technology canthen be used to assess the vulnerability of various geotechnical structures to explosive loading.Applications of this technology include assessing the effectiveness of earth penetrating weapons,evaluating the vulnerability of various structures, counter-terrorism, and model validation. Thisdocument describes the development of expertise in scale model explosive testing ongeotechnical structures using Sandia’s large scale centrifuge facility. This study focused onburied structures such as hardened storage bunkers or tunnels. Data from this study was used toevaluate the predictive capabilities oft existing hydrocodes and structural dynamics codesdeveloped at Sandia National Laboratories (such as Pronto/SPH, Pronto/CTH, and ALEGRA)."

Jan 1, 1998

By Steve Colbum

LTl’s MapStar LPS (laser positioning system) utilize both tripod mounted and hand held reflectorless distance meters. These are eye safe, easy-to-use, and specifically designed to endure the harsh environment characteristic to the mining, quarry and explosives industries. Survey data collected by the systems is digitally stored in a ruggedized data collector and then processed with a specialized, interactive software program, which can be run on any standard PC. Win Prof, the Windows-based analytical software package is used to reduce the data for generating bench face profiles, surfaces, volumes, estimating true burdens and mining ratio calculations. In addition, the software has many other built-in routines to calculate powder factors, toe shear, to map structural contacts and to predict the flyrock potential based on the Burden to Energy ratios. An extensive, built-in library of explosive’s data facilitates these calculations. It will also conform automatically to user-specified minimum and/or maximum burden in relation to the explosive energy, hole diameter and bench geometry - for both vertical and inclined holes. Numerical data can be represented in 2D or 3D to emphasize the hole-burden-face relationships.In this workshop, the MapStar LPS instruments and Win Prof analytical software will be thoroughly demonstrated. Demonstrations include equipment configuration, typical field setups and several effective survey procedures, including processing of some sample data.

Jan 1, 2000

By Robert B. Hopler

Explosives, originally used only in fireworks and warfare, became legitimate contributors to human progress when miners in Eastern Europe began using them to break rock in the early 1600%. Since that time these powerful materials have had a dual role in the world: as agents of destruction in war, and as irreplaceable tools necessary to advance civilization. In the latter role, they serve as agents to enable mankind to produce metals, build roads, and drive tunnels. In other words, to provide those materials, services, and infrastructure without which the modern world could not exist.

Jan 1, 1997

By Peter Duniam, Stephen John Brace

2000 HIGH-TECH SEMINAR Blasting Technology, Instrumentation and Explosives Applications Orlando,Florida,USA July24-27,200O. Objectives:- After completing this session 1. Explain safety issues 2. Do simple initiation design 3. Describe how the system works 4. Demonstrate scanning, hookup, testing and firing 5. Describe hot to do a post blast check 6. Explain how to treat misfired detonators

Jan 1, 2000

By Gordon M. Matheson, Douglas A. Anderson, David K. Miller

"Traditionally, analysis of vibrations from blasting has been focused on peak particle velocity fordetermining the likelihood of both annoyance and damage. The US Bureau of Mines, in RI 8507,indicated the importance of frequency in vibration. Methods of controlling the vibration by reducingthe vibration concentrated in certain frequency bands using delays have been successful over the past decade."

Jan 1, 1997

By Mick Fritz, Tom Treleaven

The success of any blast is dependent on the accuracy of the blast design and field controls placed at the shot location. The procedure by which the data is collected and analyzed is paramount to accomplishing the anticipated blast results. lf the geometry of the blast is not measured correctly, then the results will not meet expectations. Measuring the geometry and compensating for bole hole deviations is crucial not only to the lnitlal blast but also for any consecutive blasts. Excessive bore hole deviation can cancel any new technology in use. However the instruments and skills required solving this Issue are readily available.

Jan 1, 1998