Search Documents

By Agne Rustan

This paper is intended to give a summary of the first ten Symposia on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting where the symposia activities were governed by a Steering Committee replaced at Fragblast 2 by an International Organizing Committee (IOC). At Fragblast 9 the name was changed to Fragblast International Organizing Committee (FIOC). Eighty four pages of statistical data about Fragblast 1-10 is documented on the Fragblast Website (ISEE.org).

Jan 1, 2014

By Ola Lindahl, Mark Irving, John Hutchings

"Blasting is a process starting with a geometric description of the block of rock and ending with a pileof fragmented material. A key step in improving the productivity and quality control over the processis the integration of blast planning software, explosive delivery control systems, and blast recordingwithin one seamless customer solution."

Jan 1, 1997

By R Yang, M Lownds

This paper reports studies showing the effects of delay scatter on the peak particle velocity (PPV) of blast vibration using a multiple seed wave (MSW) vibration model developed in recent years. The case studies also show the advantage of accurate delay timing on frequency control of blast vibration. The site parameters used in one of the studies are from a case in which the MSW model has been tested and confirmed to yield accurate predictions. This study uses an open pit blast design and a tunnel design in which blast vibrations using electronic detonators are compared with those from pyrotechnic detonators. Mean peak particle velocity (PPV) and the 97.5% upper bound PPV are compared. It is found that both these values increase significantly with the increase of the coefficient of variation of the site parameter. Using an open pit blast design, the modeling shows that electronic initiation shifts vibration energy to the expected frequency for a selected point of interest. However, for the same design of nominal initiation timing pyrotechnic detonators fail to shift vibration to the expected frequency due to its large scatter of timing.

Jan 1, 2011

By A T. Spathis

The 11th International Symposium on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting (FRAGBLAST 11) was held in Sydney, Australia, between 24-26 August, 2015. The 93 papers, including six keynote presentations, covered exciting and practical topics in 20 sessions within 12 themes. Just fewer than 300 delegates from 27 countries attended. Four workshops were conducted on the weekend prior to the symposium, with three field visits after the symposium to Sydney region quarries, the Hunter Valley coal mining region, and the Kalgoorlie gold mining region. Delegates had the opportunity to visit the exhibition areas that showcased the latest products, software, hardware and systems in blasting technology. The keynote addresses were held in plenary sessions and set the tone for the parallel sessions that followed. They spanned the dynamics of the mining industry, the detonics of explosives, the interaction of stress waves and fracture mechanics in fragmentation, wall control blasting, and the importance of education and engineering for full process optimisation.

Jan 1, 2015

By Dan L'Heureux, Joe Haid, Stephen H. Chung

Most coal deposits in Western Canada involve steeply dipping multiple seams. An efficient way to recover coal seams would be to drill through the seams and blast both the overlying and underlying waste material in one shot without disrupting the coal seams while fragmenting the waste rock for easy removal. This requires special blasting techniques as reported by Chung and Jorgenson in 1985.

Jan 1, 1998

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 Kevin Landey, Eric Gerst

Expanding blast patterns to near the limit of an explosives’ ability to do the necessary amount of work is a common practice to reduce drilling and blasting costs. Choosing less expensive explosives such as ANFO vs. emulsion, bulk product versus packaged product, etc. are also common cost savers. Both practices are only effective as long as the pattern geometries are accurately drilled. However, will pushing the limits on pattern sizes and explosive products produce consistent results at the face, minimize oversize, produce superior fragmentation, and improve crusher throughput? Sometimes, but no amount of explosives can overcome a poorly drilled pattern. Knowing the probable outcome of any changes in drilling and blasting is valuable in achieving success.

Jan 1, 2018

By W. J. Birch, R. Farnfield

The use of electronic detonators to control blast vibrations has been previously established by many authors. This is performed by determining the optimum delay period between the blast holes for a particular pattern that can accurately control the firing frequency of the blast, which in turn has a direct bearing on the frequency composition of the ground vibrations recorded at a particular location. This was established by Pedgen, Birch, Hosein & Farnfield (2006) whereby like-for-like comparison tests between non-electric and electronic blasts were carried out in a limestone quarry in northern England. They demonstrated that resulting peak particle velocity values recorded at near and mid-field distances were primarily a product of the firing frequency of the electronically initiated blasts.

Jan 1, 2009

By Ron Beeslaar, Tony Rorke

The Professional Blast Manager is a blast design tool that has been developed in South Africa. It is aimed at mining and civil engineen, blasting contractors and mine planning engineers. The code can be used as a stand-alone package or be combined Into complex mine information systems.

Jan 1, 1998

By Robert Hopler

DESCENT INTO A COAL MINE From “The Playbook of Metals, including Personal Narratives of Visits to Coal, Lead, Copper, and Tin Mines,” by John Henry Pepper. Published by Routledge, Wa rne, and Routledge, London, 1862 ENGINEERING NEWS New Yor k January 22, 1903 THE BEGINNING OF THE END OF DYNAMITE. In another part of this issue we have reported the results of some test results made upon one of the safety powders. It will pay every c o n t r a c t o r, miner, or user of explosives in any form to carefully re a d the article re f e r red to. Dynamite has done a gre a t work in the service of man, as did black powder before it; but its i n h e rent dangers are admitted by all and are proved by the long list of deaths and injuries, and destruction to property which annually occur through its use. Why should we continue to use an explosive that annually kills and maims hund reds of men, when others are available which are equally powerful, no more expensive and far less liable to accidental discharg e ? Dynamite when first manufacture d is pure and comparatively safe; but most unfortunately it does not always stay pure; it “rots,” and then it is exceedingly dangerous. More than this, the explosive part of dynamite is a liquid, nitro - g l y c e rine, which is absorbed or soaked up by sawdust, wood pulp or the like. So long as this liquid nitro - glycerine remains pure and remains “soaked up,” or absorbed t h e re is little danger. It has been found, however, that the nitro - g l y cerine leaks under certain conditions. During thawing it fre q u e n t l y leaks out of the stick, or if it becomes wet the water causes the n i t ro-glycerine to leak out. In either case free liquid nitro - g l y c e r i n e escapes, and in that free state it may be exploded by any very slight shock. Nor is this all, if a stick of frozen dynamite be bro k e n a c ross it has been found by tests that the frozen nitro - g l y c e r i n e w h e re thus broken is very sensitive to shocks afterward .

Jan 1, 2004

By Ruilin Yang

"Blast vibrations are essentially a strain/stress wave propagating in rock or structures inthe vicinity of a blast. However, blast vibration has always been quantified in terms ofpeak particle velocity (PPV) or acceleration (PPA), and a meaningful relationshipbetween blast vibration and strain/stress has not been established. The determination ofthe dynamic strain from blast vibration may improve quantification of blast damage andselection of a blast vibration limit for critical structures or high walls. Dynamic strainrelates to rock mechanics or material strength more directly than peak particle velocity(PPV). This paper documents a method to calculate the three-dimensional dynamic straintensor from recorded blast vibration signals. The method is based on determination of thedisplacement gradient at a point of interest for each time instance during the vibrationduration. The method to calculate dynamic strain is applicable to generic seismicwaveforms including near and far field blast vibration from a production blast withmultiple blast holes. In order to minimize measurement errors the specifications of thespacing between monitors and the sampling frequency of the vibration recording aredescribed."

Jan 1, 2012

By C B. McCampbell, R W. Jr Bickes

Sandia National Laboratories has developed a semiconductor bridge (SCB) igniter for the ignition of a variety of explosive materials. When subjected to a low-energy current pulse, the bridge bursts into a plasma causing rapid ignition of the explosive material pressed against the bridge. Despite the low energies required for ignition, SCB components have proven to be explosively safe, meeting both no-fire and electrostatic discharge (ESD) safety requirements.

Jan 1, 1991

By Robert B. Hopler

First, a definition: “an explosive is called a permissible explosive when it is similar in all respects to the sample that passed certain tests by the national Bureau of Mines, and when it is used in accordance with the conditions prescribed by that bureau. * This was the definition as stated in Miners’ Circular No. 2,” published by the United States Bureau of Mines in 1911, and it is still applicable today. Of course there have been changes over the years, with the name “MSHA Permitted Explosive” now the legal terminology since January 1989, but the old 1911 circular still tells us what the material is. Note that the definition doesn’t even specifically state “coal mining.” A permissible can be required in guy underground operation that is deemed to have a gas or dust hazard, although in 1911 it was certainly meant to refer only to coal.

Jan 1, 1995

By Dimitri Frantzos, Stewart Thompson, Ed Skiba, Hans Tammemagi

On behalf of Acres International we would like to thank Frank Chiappetta of Blasting Analysis International for inviting our organization to participate in this state-of-the-art course on blasting analysis techniques.

Jan 1, 1989

By Jack Eloranta

Building on previous work, this paper expands the template for modeling the economic relationship between blasting and grinding. The actual efficacy of various blasting enhancements is not addressed, however, placing costs and potential benefits in proper context should aid in designing mine/mill optimization trials.

Jan 1, 2014

By Stephen H. Chung

The SABREX computer blast simulation program permits the study of the effective use of explosive energies and predicts the total performance of a blast in terms of:fragment size distribution: muckpile profile; breakage at grade, column and collar with respect to the control case; crack penetration; damage envelope behind and beneath blastholes; a complete cost analysis including explosives, drilling and accessory costs

Jan 1, 1995

By Bruce Vandenberg

Two tests were set up as part of the course given by Blasting Analysis International. Both tests were performed using the prototype Velocity of Detonation Recorder (VODR). The prototype has several limitations, which have been rectified for the production units.

Jan 1, 1990

By David Davison

Metafex®* is an inert material that is more energetic than explosives when activated. Because Metafex is inert until activated (a moment before use), it can profoundly change the logistics of systems and processes that require energetic materials. We have obtained positive test results for a Metafex configuration (called a flat pack) that operates at the practical voltage of ~20 kV. We describe the outcome of the testing and potential uses of the material.

Jan 1, 2006

By Pat McLaughlin

Blast design in the construction industry has often been based on past practice or powder factors. This is to some extent understandable, since construction projects do not have the longevity of mining or quarrying operations and therefore have less opportunity to pursue potential improvements. The main concern of the operator is whether or not the technique will work, and at what cost to the downstream processes. Time, not long term savings, is of the essence.

Jan 1, 1994

By H. S. Venkatesh R. Balachander, G. C. Naveen

During the construction of a 1020 MW underground hydroelectric project in Bhutan a huge rock fall took place in the Downstream Surge Chamber (DSC) during March 2016. The total quantity of rock in the fall area is estimated to be about 1,50,000m3 (2.6 billion cubic feet), out of which about 25,000m3 (0.44 billion cubic feet) of muck was removed. The removal of muck was stopped apprehending that the cavity formed due to the rock fall may get further aggravated leading to widening and destabilising the adjacent transformer hall cavern or it might day light as the top cover was about 190m (623 feet). As the fall has virtually blocked the 314m (1030 feet) long cavern and divided it into two different chambers (south and north), and that the muck cannot be disturbed, it was decided to erect concrete wall on either side of the fall up to the cavern roof and then later address the filling of the cavity with appropriate fill material. As the access to the DSC was there for the southern side it was decided to extend a cable tunnel which was terminated at a distance on the north side of the cavern by D&B so that once it gets punctured into the north wall of the DSC it can be used to access the fall from this front too. This is a unique situation where in every blast approaching the DSC, the parting between them is diminishing and hence the tunnel blast will be exerting axial load on the parting wall leading to dynamic transient loading conditions and buckling may take place on the northern wall of DSC. This paper describes the various drill blast combinations adopted for successful excavation of this tunnel.

Jan 1, 2019