Search Documents

By R Tom Watts

The blasting industry has changed more in the last five years than in any period to date. The equipment utilized to load boreholes has changed in response to more precise blasting products and programs, and the need to maintain tighter control over product formulations produced by bulk loading equipment. Tread Corporation has built over 1,300 heavy ANFO type bulk loading units currently operating in over 40 countries worldwide. These units have been designed to meet almost every possible loading scenario but there are always new situations that require special designs and configurations to meet the challenge. The focus of this presentation is to make you aware of the process that should be used to determine the equipment best suited for your application. We will discuss loading cycle times, delivery rates, multiple product mixing capability, capacities, manpower utilization, regulatory compliance, and where and when to use automation in the loading process. We will also discuss the suitability of chassis with regard to ground pressure, turning radius, terrain, weather conditions as well as highway suitability. The US Bridge Law as well as laws that cover the concept of axle loading and spacing will be covered. Through new computer aided design and modular design capabilities, you can now have almost any configuration required to meet your bulk loading objectives. We will also review the range of equipment currently available in the market place and discuss tradeoffs between price, capacity, and complexity.

Jan 1, 2000

By Bruce Vandenberg, R. Frank Chiappetta, John Foley

Recent advances in solid-state, field portable, fast framing compact video camera systems and PC based frame capture hardware now allow blast imaging up to 1000 frames per second. Up to 4.1 seconds of data can be captured directly into the unit, downloaded to a PC or archived to a standard VCR without data compression. Since no film processing is involved, motion analysis can be performed instantly and on-site within a few minutes. This paper will describe the design features and applications of the MotionMeter system and compare these with the analogous aspects of film-based cameras and other systems. Of all blast monitoring systems and techniques available today, high-speed motion picture photography and videography still remain as the most valuable, stand alone, diagnostic techniques for troubleshooting and evaluating full scale blasts in the mining and explosives industries. High-speed image data, coupled with information obtained from other instrumentation systems, such as continuous velocity of detonation recorders, laser surveying systems, refraction and ground vibration recording seismographs, etc., can eliminate many assumptions about what actually took place in a blast. Thus, diagnostic confidence in evaluating both excellent and poorly designed blasts is increased, and optimum blast results, (which are application dependent), are achieved considerably faster when compared to the trial and error approach of relying on strictly the experience factor. Applications include developing site-specific blast designs, decay equations relating burden, burden velocity and explosive energy, determining ground response times, reducing coal damage, quantifying backbreak, evaluating the effectiveness of sternming, checking delay detonator firing times, evaluating air decks and for studying general dynamics. Motion analysis is performed with a 2D and 3D software package developed specifically for video analysis, but is also directly applicable to film analysis when using a digitizer. Dimensional controls, lens aberration, field set-ups and camera orientation are all automatically corrected for with matrix analysis.

Jan 1, 2000

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 James L. Austing, Allen J. Tulis, Ronald Pape, Ronald G. Draftz

In a certain sense, the explosives industry began in the 13th century with the invention of black powder, which is an intimate mixture of sulfur, carbon black or charcoal, and potassium or sodium nitrate. For several centuries thereafter, black powder was the sole general purpose energetic material, serving as an igniter, propelling charge, bursting charge, and blasting agent. By today’s standards, black powder is totally inadequate for the latter three functions, but its use continues as an igniter for propellant charges because of its unique ability to ignite and burn under ambient conditions. The history of the development of black powder was reviewed by Rose (1980).

Jan 1, 1995

By Eric Kelley

Having been retained as a legal expert for the fatality at the Canberra, Australia project, it made me aware of how good intended blasters profess to be implosion experts. Owners and contractors can be misled by these representations, seeing a video of Directionalized Structures constructed of reinforced concrete may be impressive to watch, but lack sound evidence of the true mechanics of an actual “implosion”; on steel structures more prevalently. If any well intended blaster comes to a determination that he can implode a structure, it should be not be construed he cannot. It should be well investigated that the specific blaster has verifiable experience. What happened in Australia reflects on all end users of explosives. I have heard a direct quote in our project in Alberta, “We don’t want to have what happened in Canberra”. Such a tragedy could have, and should have been avoided. Simple by using the “Right Tool for the Job”. We should sideline egos and economics. Would any competent blaster compromise his or her reputation, company or insurability? More importantly, have an honest conscience knowing that if the proper explosive is available, use it, don’t shortcut it. If possible expand the schedule. Better, yet, examine all avenues before the project, and last, cancel the project. A human life is our best asset and should not be compromised.

Jan 1, 1999

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 N T. Moxon, L W. Armstrong

Explosive manufacturers have for many years provided a service to the mining industry which has,until recently, been unchallenged by mine operators. Today mine operators are more aware of the properties of explosives required to perform particular tasks within their operations. These properties can be reliably quantified using the test procedures described in this paper for emulsion adn ANFO based explosives. Details of an end-user sampling programme desgined to provide quality checks on explosives supplied to a mine site are also discussed.

Jan 1, 1991

By B Brown, P J. Hommert, B J. Thorne

"Early attempts at estimation of stress wave damage in blasting by use of finite element analysis met with limited success due to numerical instabilities that prevented calculations from being carried to late times. A"" improved damage model based on microcrack growth in tension allows finite elementcalculations which remain stable at late times. Estimation of crater profiles for blasting experiments in granite demonstrate successful simulations with this model."

Jan 1, 1990

By Randall M. Wheeler

Using Computer software to analyze and interpret blast vibration effects has never been so practical. Fully digital seismographs and powerful desktop and portable computers have led to the development of fast and easy to use analysis software. This workshop will focus on new Microsoft Windows-based blast vibration analysis programs developed by White Industrial Seismology, Inc. The Windows point and click graphical environment is ideal for developing full-featured and yet intuitive software.

Jan 1, 1994

By Steven Putt

Seismic While Drilling (SWD) is a newly developed technology in the mining industry. Improving upon Measurement While Drilling (MWD) systems, SWD measures mechanical properties of the rock at incremental depths down a blast hole at a much higher resolution. SWD is also immune to common failures and inconsistencies of MWD such as operator and drill specific variation. Seismic While Drilling records the velocity and elastic modulus of the rock with centimeter accuracy in real-time. These properties measured while drilling blastholes are then used as a proxy for density which can be used for: • High resolution geologic modeling • 3D ore control • Drill and blast optimization • Drill to mill tracking One of the distinct challenges with SWD systems is the sheer volume of information acquired. With thousands of measurements per blasthole, the data can be overwhelming for even an experienced engineer. To overcome this complex challenge, the latest cloud computing and analytics models have been simplifying and organizing the data. These newer technologies can amplify an engineer’s capability by delivering actionable insights into their drilling and blasting workflows. The paper presents new results from Datacloud during recent Seismic While Drilling trials in iron ore, metallurgical coal, and hard rock mines around the world. The measurements are compared with wireline geophysical logs, core data, drill cuttings, and conventional measurement while drilling (MWD) systems to validate the technology and show how the data can be used.

By Ed Billington, Mike Shields

The trail blaster is faced with a wide range of workrelated challenges, not the least being the work setting itself. It is usually remote, being anywhere from 5 to 30 or more miles (8 to 50 km) from any road. It may be in mountains, high rock desert, or coastal rain forest, and can range from sea level to over 12,000 feet (3700 m) in elevation. The blaster may be part of a 2-person clearing crew, a 4-person maintenance crew, or a 10-person construction crew. The crew will usually be mobile, moving and working up to 10 miles (16 km) or more per day, relying mostly on their own backpacks to move camp, tools and supplies from site to site. Periodic resupply may be by helicopter, aird rop, or even “sherpa” groups, but most often will be by packstrings of horses and mules. The crew goes into the backcountry a n y w h e re from two weeks to three months at a time, and while there, its members “live the job” 24 hours a day, enjoying baking heat, torrential rain or mid-July s n o w s t o rms along with the truly glorious weather that c o m p e n s a t e s . So who is this blaster? Well, “he” may be she, since some of the top trail blasters are women. He/she will also be more than a blaster: Crews are small, so experienced members must be capable of handling the full range of trail work. Thus this blaster is also a driller, and usually also a bucker, snag faller, rigger, dry-stone mason, log and timber carpenter, bridge builder, mule p a c k e r, small-engine mechanic and, not least, camp cook capable of putting out a hot meal from a campfire , in a downpour, in the dark. Being in remote locations, often without reliable communication to the outside world, trail crews enjoy a remarkable degree of independence from “supervision.” With that comes the responsibility to make sound decisions which expedite the work, while promoting crew safety and welfare .

Jan 1, 2004

By John Meuth, Brandon Fryman, P. E. Hoffman, Joshua Ph. D., P. E. Calnan, Josh Ph. D.

Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) can be specifically tailored for use by the commercial explosives industry to calculate risk to employees and the public from commercial explosives facilities and operations. This methodology has several advantages over the American Table of Distances (ATD) which is solely a Quantity Distance (Q/D) analysis. While the ATD has remained essentially the same for 100 years, the safety of commercial explosives in storage has increased immensely. However, the concepts behind QRA calculations are not as intuitive and even at the end of the calculations the values of risk must be compared to something. A few regimes for assessing an acceptable level of risk are discussed in this paper. Risk levels for various United States Federal entities and international agencies are highlighted and suggestions for acceptable risk criteria for individuals and groups are provided. Referencing risk levels from normal daily activities is also done in this paper to make relative the accepted risk criteria. This paper presents some relevant individual risks for everyday activities and some scenarios for group risk for comparison. Individual risk is a straightforward concept however group risk is more complicated. This paper aims to clarify these concepts and provide means to communicate them to the public.

Jan 1, 2019

By Mark E. Hammele

A number of new thoughts have recently emerged concerning the role of air decks, stemming, gas confinement and gross motion in specific blasting environments and applications. Field research in full-scale production environments is based on the theoret ical work f i rst proposed at the Universi ty of Maryland’s Fracture Mechanics Laboratory.

Jan 1, 1989

By Claude Cunningham

Ths oonoept of precise. eooursts timing with Elsotronic Delay Detonators (EDD’s) was first ssriously sddresssd in ths mid 80’s end much wss made of the cheapness end profusion of digital wstohes in terms of the likelihood of EDD’s also being cheap and essyto produce. Ten years Iater. with every major explosives group end many elsotronios groups having instituted projects to capitalize on the promise of these devices, production devices are still to come into asneral use.

Jan 1, 1994

By Randall M. Wheeler

Many of us have used a seismograph to measure peak particle velocity and frequency. But do we really understand why? Also, why do we measure particle velocity instead of displacement and/or acceleration? What is the vector sum? How do these items relate? Where does frequency fit in? This workshop will attempt to answer these and other questions. Some of the answers may surprise you, others may not.

Jan 1, 1997

By Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering Northwestern University, Mike Wladron, Gordon Revey

A unique judicial opportunity allowed measurement of the response of three cracks in residential structure to blasting for underground aggregate mining. Instrumented cracks were located in the interior basement CMU mortar and upstairs dry wall as well as exterior brickwork. The dynamic environment was unusual. Even though the blasting occurred some 490 m (1600 ft) away, excitation frequencies were unusually high and there were no apparent surface waves. In addition there was no air overpressure wave to produce secondary crack response. As is typical, long term environmental effects produced greater crack response than did the blast induced ground motions.

Jan 1, 2007

Henry Walker Eltin (HWE) are the mining contractors for Gloucester Coal at Stratford mine, which is in an environmentally sensitive area in the Avon Valley, NSW, Australia. Normal blasting at Stratford is done in a “stand up” or “box cut” mode to suit the truck and shovel operations. Recently an opportunity of doing a throw blast became available when part of a ramp had to be blasted to accommodate changes to the pit design while not damaging the remainder of the ramp. The objective was to maximise throw into the void in order to minimise excavation costs by reducing the amount of overburden to be moved by the excavation fleet. It was necessary that the best result be achieved while staying within the vibration and airblast limits at a neighbouring property and nearby township. Both objectives were achieved through the application of Orica’s knowledge of blast design, modelling and i-konTM electronic detonators.

Jan 1, 2003

By Martti Hagfors

UNDERWATER EXPLOSIONS - Part 6 - EFFCTS OF CYLINDERICAL SHAPE OF CHARGE TO THE RESULTS OF ENERGY MEASUREMENTS OF EXPLOSIVES

Jan 1, 2008

By Tom Palangio, Ralph M. Olmstead

Video inspection of boreholes with cameras developed specifically for the mining industry is now possible. These designs are reliable, cost effective, and have the flexibility to be used in other applications.

Jan 1, 1998

By Deepak Vidyarthi

This paper deals with various measures adopted in protecting a conveyor duct (named after a Conveyor Belt that was numbered as ‘02’) housing a 1600 mm (63 inches) belt conveyor system in a large, heavily mechanized open cast iron ore mine, producing about 20.0 million tones of ore per annum.

Jan 1, 2008