Search Documents

Adams, Benjamin C., Jr., Student, Univ. of Oklahoma Norman, Okla. '36 Adams, Ernest C., Student, Univ. of Illinois 908 W. Green St., Urbana, Ill. '35 Adams, George H., Student, Colorado School of Mines Golden, Colo. '36 Adams, Robert Keller Mitchell Hotel, No. 18, Golden, Colo. '35 Afshar, Hadji Khan A., Student Box 63, Univ. Sta., Moscow, Idaho. '36 Ahrenholz, Herman William, Jr., Student, Lehigh Univ Bethlehem, Pa. '35 Alger, Robert P., Student, Missouri School of Mines & Met.Rolla, Mo. '36 Allen, Paul W., Student, Mass. Inst. of Tech Cambridge, Mass. '35 Allen, R. M., Jr., Student, Virginia Polytechnic Inst., "G" Co.Blacksburg, Va. '35 Alley, John Arnold, Student, Montana School of Mines Butte, Mont. '36 Amberger, R. H., Student, Michigan College of Min. & Tech Houghton, Mich. '35 Ambrosiani, F. Peter, Student, Michigan College of Min. & Tech Houghton, Mich. '36 Andersen, Burton Lee, Student, School of Mines, Univ. of Washington Seattle, Wash. '36 Anderson, Carlos, Student, Univ. of Oklahoma Norman, Okla. '36 Anderson, J. Wendell, Student, Pennsylvania State College State College, Pa. '36 Anderson, Joseph S. Cornelia Hotel, Ajo, Ariz. '35 Anderson, R. C., Student, Univ. of Washington Seattle, Wash. '35 Anderson, Roy A., Student, Washington State College Pullman, Wash. '35 Anderson, Willard. Student. Univ. of Oklahoma Norman, Okla. '36

Jan 1, 1936

By A. Aly Selim

A computer model was developed to calculate the fragmentation cost for in situ leaching operations as a function of the blast design and deposit parameters. The model is based on blasting an ore zone only or an ore zone plus overburden by either a coyote blast or a vertical blasthole system. The model calculates the blast design parameters and the fragmentation cost based either on a user input powder factor value or on a powder factor calculated by the model as a function of the overburden height and the ore zone thickness. Examples of blast design parameters calculated by the model are the number and spacing of blastholes for a vertical blasthole system and the number and spacing of crosscuts for a coyote system. The model also calculates the total amount of explosives, the detonating cord length, and the number of primers. The cost of blasthole drilling can be calculated by the model based either on purchasing and operating a drill or on a user input value of the contracted cost of drilling. Application of the model to an example ore deposit showed that the vertical blasthole systems were more economical than the coyote system when there was no overburden and the deposit had an average ore thickness less than 45 meters. With no overburden and ore thickness greater than 45 meters, the vertical blasthole system was either more or less expensive than the coyote system depending on the number of levels used in the coyote system. With overburden, the coyote system was less expensive than the vertical blasthole system for blasting either the ore only or the ore plus the overburden. A coyote blast will usually produce larger particle sizes than a vertical blasthole system. Larger particle sizes can result in lower copper recoveries so that a less expensive coyote blast may not improve the overall economics of an in situ leaching operation. Blasting the ore zone only was generally less expensive than blasting the ore plus the overburden by either blasting system. Also, for the example considered, the coyote system costs were less sensitive to changes in overburden thickness and powder factor while the vertical blasthole system costs were less sensitive to changes in ore thickness.

Jan 1, 1977

Jan 1, 1928

Jan 1, 1911

[ ]

Jan 1, 1942

Jan 1, 1949

Jan 1, 1947

Jan 1, 1947

Jan 1, 1909

Jan 1, 1912

Jan 1, 1935

Jan 1, 1886

Jan 1, 1932

Jan 1, 1888

Jan 1, 1935

Jan 1, 1941

Jan 1, 1941

Jan 1, 1943

[ ]

Jan 1, 1938