Search Documents

By Michael F. Dunn, Francis S. Kendorski

The fall of rock from strip coal mine highwalls continues to be the largest single source of fatal accidents, so methods to improve highwall stability through improved blasting practices were investigated in the field. This paper covers the results of a project to improve, using existing and proven technology, unstable highwall conditions through better blasting practices in Appalachian strip coal mines. Better borehole blasting agent distribution and optimization of burden, spacing, and delay periods allowing satisfactory breakage with minimal backbreak were the objectives. At a selected field site, geologic conditions were closely examined with regard to joint orientation and spacing, and resulting slope stability considerations. Utilizing surface blasting concepts of trying to achieve flexural failure of the rock mass both horizontally and longitudinally by appropriate relationships between burden, spacing, and hole length, as well as delay time sequence to achieve optimal confinement and breakage, successful results were achieved. A test series of eight blasts was completed and the resultant highwall monitored by repetitive photography. Actual blockfalls could be measured and the stability for each blast design thus quantified. The study of drilling and blasting economics along with equipment performance led to an economic model of blast parameters and the identification of blast design cost benefits. The work demonstrated that small strip mining companies are able to achieve a more stable highwall excavation utilizing presently available technology, equipment, and explosive products at improved operational cost and safety.

Jan 1, 1983

By L. H. Bergmann

THE blasting practices described are fairly representative of those employed in the coal mines of Eastern Canada. As such, they may be of interest to Western Canadian coal mine operators. The treatment of the subject is general, no attempt being made to discuss blasting operations at any particular coal mine in detail. All the mines dealt with are mining bituminous coal and are classified under the Coal Mines Regulation Act of the Province of Nova Scotia as 'closed light' mines. As such, they are required to use only 'permitted' explosives and to apply them in a 'permitted' manner, except where authority is given by the Mines Department to do otherwise.

Jan 1, 1945

By Clark J. Gilbert

The mining method at the Cannon mine uses heading and bench stopes, which are subsequently backfilled with cemented high-strength fill before pillar removal. The dimensions of the pillars are 7.3 m wide by 19.8 to 28.9 m high (24 ft by 65 to 95 ft). They require careful blasting in order to not damage the rock, compromising pillar strength and complicating later removal. Additionally, the proximity of dwellings makes vibration control a must for good neighbor relations. A blast monitoring study was conducted in order to optimize bench blasting practices to maximize fragmentation, reduce costs, and to minimize wall damage and ground vibration. The Cannon mine is a joint venture between Asamera Minerals (US) Inc., a 92% owned subsidiary of Gulf Canada Ltd., and Breakwater Ltd. Asamera is the operator. The mine is located at the south end of Wenatchee, WA, a town of roughly 45,000 people on the eastern flanks of the Cascade Mountains. Gold is the primary product at the mine. The rock is extracted using a sublevel end-slicing method on 15 m (50 ft) lifts, with subsequent backfilling and pillar removal. The stope widths, dictated by rock conditions at 7.3 m (24 ft), are the same in the primaries as in the pillars, or secondaries.

Jan 1, 1990

By Victor C. Bryan

"One of the more challenging issues facing operators of U.S. mines and quarries is blasting in an environmentally acceptable way. It is quite important that industry management understand and apply guidance, discipline, and control in the exercise of blasting operations. This presentation is a discussion of problems related to that environment away from the blasthole that may or may not be adversely affected by blasting and the steps management may consider in resolving resultant problems. In any case, one of the main concerns that will continuously be brought up is thatmanagement procedures inherent to good blasting is a uxporate responsibility of the mine or quarry business entity; and can not be delegated to the explosive manufacturer or supplier. This management attitude, based on education, training, and the comprehension that the process of production begins with drilling and blasting and consumes a significant amount of overall production costs."

Jan 1, 1995

By R C. Berglund

Since the Republic Mine began production in the mid 1950's, drilling and blasting practices have continually changed. In recent years, progress has been achieved through the development of more precise blast engineering methods, in greatly increasing the use of non-water resistant ammonium nitrate explosives, and in changing to a non-electric in-hole delay initiation system. Also, recent experience indicates that ammonium nitrate fueled with nitropropane and methanol is a viable substitute for aluminized AN-FO.

Jan 1, 1980

By Calvin J. Konya

The Woodville Lime and Chemical Company Limestone Quarry is located in Sandusky County, Ohio. Fifty years ago, when quarrying began, it was situated approximately two miles from the town of Woodville. Today new houses border the quarry property within 1,500 feet of one of the working faces. During the past two years, the operation has systematically changed the blasting program to achieve better fragmentation, lower costs, and to maintain good relations with the local property owners. This paper will discuss systematic changes made in the blasting program to increase productivity and reduce costs.

Jan 1, 1977

By Frank Sames

Most Blasting Programs are developed focussing on the environmental impact with respect to blast vibration and airblast. Compliance with existing regulations or policies limiting the immissions are generally achieved through constrains in the blast design, or monitoring programs. Efficient monitoring programs combine compliance monitoring and blast assessment. Signals, which are obtained in the area of direct influence of the seismic source, can contain valuable information about the blast design parameters. Techniques to analyze blast vibration signals have advanced and can assist in understanding the contribution of individual blast parameters to blast vibration and airblast. Advanced signal analysis encompasses magnitude analysis, Fast Fourier Transforms (FFT) and frequency scans in the frequency domain, as well as filtering in the time domain. Through examples, the advanced signal analysis techniques and their limitations are described and discussed, showing the impact of blast timing, timing accuracy, charge configuration and the geology dependent transmission behavior. Optimization criteria and pragmatic monitoring programs can be developed on the basis of the most influential blast parameters. In addition, however, safety and the cost efficiency of the blasting program are essential to the success of an operation. That is where advanced signal analysis techniques can interface with blast planning, computer assisted modeling and information systems. A valuable process can be developed to ensure compliance with existing regulations and efficient risk management for mining operations, while tracking cost and supporting operational decisions. A conceptual blasting information system is presented.

Jan 1, 2000

By John Cory, Ran Tamir

Blasting data analytics are being increasing used to increase mining productivity, reduce mining costs, maximize high margin aggregate products, and to reduce fines. Three examples will be illustrated using simple models to maximize the percentage of blasted rock within established dimensions and reduce fines-one from video fragmentation distribution information, the second from sieved crusher fragmentation data, and the third from plant production data. In addition, the use of sieved crusher results to determine blasting related fines and the use of mine productivity data to maximize aggregate sizes when pattern (burden and spacing) areas are changed will be illustrated

Jan 1, 2012

By J Jackson, E Sellers

Blasting related indices were developed to quantify variation in rock strength and structure for each stope, and for each lift of each stope, as part of a Mine to Mill study at an underground open stope mine. The indices were derived from combinations of data from underground diamond drilling because the simplifying assumptions contained in the block model prevented sufficient differentiation in rock mass characteristics to enable adjustments to the blast design.Application of combinations of blasting related indices enabled the identification of stopes with a high potential for inconsistent and oversize fragmentation, underbreak and overbreak. The indices also fragmentation outcomes to deliver increased material flow within stopes, better digability and predict indicative mill throughput. The stopes with issuesCalibration of the results enabled adjustments to the blast design based on the rock mass conditions and accordingly improved the blast outcomes. This enabled improved productivity by reducing underbreak and overbreak, having a more appropriate fragmentation, which reduces unplanned rock handling and improves bogging. The reduction in recovery drilling creates huge opportunities to improve output by reducing production delays and decreasing the overall cost per tonne. By understanding the explosive performance and blast energy distribution in relation to rock mass blastability poor, performing designs in blind upholes and convex stopes were identified.The conclusion of the work is that value improvement, regarding increased revenue and reduced costs, can be achieved across the whole underground Mine to Mill process chain by developing stope based indices from the existing geological information to correctly tailor the blast design to the rock within, and surrounding, the stope.CITATION:Jackson, J and Sellers, E, 2017. Blasting related indices as the key to underground blasting improvements in a challenging rock mass, in Proceedings 13th AusIMM Underground Operators’ Conference 2017, pp 23–32 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Oct 16, 2017

By R. F. Favreau, G. E. Larocque

The objective of the study is development of an analytic process based on rock and explosive properties which allows the prediction of the stress distributions and fracture zone around explosive charges. A computer program has been written for this purpose, using a finite difference approximation to the momentum equation, to describe the motion of the surrounding rock by step-wise integration. Its application provides ground motion data such as stress components, displacement and particle velocity as a function of position and time with respect to a spherical charge. The effect of tensile and shear failure on these ground motion parameters can be included. The analytic procedure contained within this program has been used to predict peak stress as a function of distance in rock for rock-explosive combinations for which field data exists to determine peak stress levels directly. Two methods have been used for the spherical charge which in the analysis replaces the actual cylindrical charges: instantaneous application of peak pressure to a charge having a radius equivalent in contained volume to a charge having a length to diameter ratio of 1, and gradual pressure build up to peak pressure with a charge radius equivalent in contained volume to the total charge used in the field test. The agreement with field data would appear best with the latter treatment. The peak stresses obtained are in closer agreement with field measured peak-stress and a better approximation to field stress wave duration exists in the case of gradual pressure build up. One of the assumptions made in the analysis is that, in the case of cylindrical charges, the explosion pressure rather than the detonation pressure of an explosive establishes the peak stresses in the

Jan 1, 1971

By B. J. Kochanowsky

To improve blasting methods it is necessary to know how the explosive force acts and how rock resists this force. Because of the tremendous power developed within milliseconds and the great number of other factors directly affecting the technical and economic results, an analysis of the fundamentals of blasting theory is difficult. But since the rules used for layout design and for calculations of size of explosive charges are based on theoretical assumptions, complete knowledge of blasting theory has great practical importance in mining. Analysis of Blasting Theory: It is interesting to note the opinion of blasting experts with respect to contemporary blasting theories. F. Stussi,' Professor of the University of Zurich, stated: "We do not have enough experience yet to change our army engineering regulations in blasting and base it on new fundamentals. It is our duty to collect more practical data and to do more research in blasting to close this gap." K. H. Fraenkel,' editor of the Manual on Rock Blasting published in 1953 in Sweden and written by well-known Swedish, German, Swiss, and French blasting and explosive experts, said: "To the best of our knowledge no suitable formulas for civil blasting work are to be found in the American, French or German literature."

Sep 1, 1955

By Mark S. Stagg, Rolfe E. Otterness, Stephen Rholl

The Bureau of Mines is engaged in research to develop and test high explosive fracturing and rubblization techniques that will enhance ore body permeability and thus increase recovery during in situ mining. The natural permeability of many ore bodies is too low to allow successful in-place leaching. These deposits could be profitably mined if flow rates of leach solutions could be increased. Blasting represents a potentially low-cost and effective permeability enhancement technique.

Jan 1, 1991

The risks faced by organisations are part of a risk continuum. They can be evaluated in terms of hazard, uncertainty and opportunity as well as by the degree of influence they have on conformance, operating performance and strategic objectives. This paper discusses the application of risk management techniques for mitigating blasting hazards, reducing blasting output variability, and implementing blast improvement opportunities. Effective risk management practices can identify and evaluate risks across all levels of the continuum and can deliver realistic assessments of the likelihood and impact of risks on the companyÆs safety and business objectives. This paper does not attempt to present technical details about blasting, rather it aims to provide enough blasting context and examples so that the practical benefits of applying the risk management process to blasting can be fully appreciated. The topics discussed include: explosive management plan; statistical process control; quality blasting, rock-on-ground; Blast Management; Mine to Mill optimisation; and blasting information systems. The concept of a blasting risk management system employing a continuous improvement loop is also introduced. On reflection the insights presented should be extremely useful for observing and understanding which risk face has management focus at a mine site or for a blast site.

Jan 1, 2001

Recent analysis of backfilling material has shown that a finer size distribution is preferable for stope filling. In order to increase crusher throughput and pit productivity, a reassessment of the quarrying operation was conducted. Part of that reassessment was a review of blasting practice. Six means of reducing the average muckpile fragment size were examined. Different blast initiation and charging options were compared, and patterns using smaller hole sizes were designed, analysed with the JKMRC 3x3o software, then drilled and fired. The ground vibration and face movement was recorded and compared. To determine whether the Kuz-Ram model could be used in an economic analysis of the quarry operation, the fragmentation distribution of the small diameter hole blasts was determined. Photographs of the muckpiles were taken and digitised. However subsequent analysis indicated that a satisfactorily large photo sample was only obtained from the smallest diameter hole blast. The Kuz-Ram fragmentation model prediction was found to be within the confidence limits of those results. An engineering and cost comparison between the blasts was made.

Jan 1, 1995

By Thomas E. Lobb, Harry C. Verakis

Significant progress has been made in the reduction of serious injuries and fatalities resulting from mine blasting operations. Despite the progress, injuries and fatalities continue to occur. A leading cause of injuries and fatalities from blasting continues to be inadequate blast area security. Even though significant improvements in technology have been made, insuring adequate blast area security remains a challenge and requires constant vigilance. The advances in technology have created safer blasting products and have improved productivity and economics by enabling large, more efficient and effective blasts. However, as blasts grow larger in size, the complexity of adequately securing the blast area increases even more. Periodically the basic fundamentals involved in blasting safety should be reviewed, particularly for securing a blast site regardless of the size of the planned blast. Factors such as flyrock and toxic fumes must be taken into account to insure the safety of persons and property from the results of a blast. This paper examines the factors related to injuries due to inadequate blasting shelters and blast area security, and identifies mitigation techniques. The key concepts are: (a) accurate determination of the bounds of the blast area, (b) clearing employees from the blast area, (c) effective access control, (d) use of adequate blasting shelters, (e) efficient communications, and (f) training. Fundamentals are reviewed with an emphasis on analyzing task elements and identifying root causes for selected blasting accidents. Mitigating techniques are presented along with discussions and examples.

Jan 1, 2005

By Jack D. Arthur

The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, as amended, and related regulations take blasting safety into consideration by requiring compliance with existing state and federal laws. The regulations are based on blasting practices developed by the industry, as well as research and experimentation by the US Bureau of Mines and explosive manufacturers. Residential areas in the proximity of surface mines have made it mandatory that blasting operations be conducted under restrictions and requirements designed to protect the public and structures located within 0.8 km (0.5 mile) of any surface blasting activities. Restrictions against blasting apply where dwellings, schools, churches, hospitals, or nursing facilities are within 305 m (1000 ft) of blasting operations. They also apply where wells, petroleum or gas storage facilities, municipal water storage facilities, fluid transmission pipelines, gas or oil collection lines, and sewage lines are within 152 in (500 ft) of blasting operations.

Jan 11, 1979

By Thomas E. Lobb, Harry C. Verakis

Significant progress has been made in the reduction of serious injuries and fatalities resulting from mine blasting operations. Despite the progress, injuries and fatalities continue to occur. A leading cause of injuries and fatalities from blasting continues to be inadequate blast area security. Even though significant improvements in technology have been made, insuring adequate blast area security remains a challenge and requires constant vigilance. The advances in technology have created safer blasting products and have improved productivity and economics by enabling large, more efficient and effective blasts. However, as blasts grow larger in size, the complexity of adequately securing the blast area increases even more. Periodically the basic fundamentals involved in blasting safety should be reviewed, particularly for securing a blast site regardless of the size of the planned blast. Factors such as flyrock and toxic fumes must be taken into account to insure the safety of persons and property from the results of a blast. This paper examines the factors related to injuries due to inadequate blasting shelters and blast area security, and identifies mitigation techniques. The key concepts are: (a) accurate determination of the bounds of the blast area, (b) clearing employees from the blast area, (c) effective access control, (d) use of adequate blasting shelters, (e) efficient communications, and (f) training. Fundamentals are reviewed with an emphasis on analyzing task elements and identifying root causes for selected blasting accidents. Mitigating techniques are presented along with discussions and examples.

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

"In this work a blasting seismograph was tested on a vibration shaker controlled by a single-point laser Doppler vibrometer (LDV). A total of 43 tests were made to measure the transfer properties(transmissibility and phase shift) of the basic elements of the full monitoring chain and investigate theperformance of the full system. The main elements of the seismograph are described by second ordertransfer functions with typical parameters calibrated through nonlinear fit of the measured responses. The resulting transfer function is used to compare the behavior of the tested seismograph with fourtheoretical seismographs representative of those used in blasting. Fifteen theoretical inputs are runthrough the transfer function of each seismograph to assess their steady-response. The error (expressed as gain) in the peak velocity has been assessed. It varies from -1.5 to 2.3 dB (equivalent to atransmissibility of 0.84 to 1.3, respectively) depending on the seismograph and frequencies of the input.The largest errors occurred for input signals with frequencies in the low (<32 Hz) or high ranges (>125Hz), where the mechanical, electronics and digital parts of the seismograph modify the signals. Seismographs with the nominal transfer function described by DIN 45669:1:2010 are ranked with the smallest errors. Monitoring devices with transmissibility around one in a narrow bandwidth, in line with ISEE suggested criteria for amplitude response, involve large phase shifts at low and high frequencies, resulting in a worst performance."

Jan 1, 2017

By H. B. Farnam

"THE IRON ORE Company of Canada has been using do-it-yourself type explosives for three years. During the last 12 months we have used over 10 million pounds of ammonium nitrate-fuel oil explosives and either purchased or formulated one million pounds of slurried explosives.W e have been moving approximately one million cubic yards of stripping and ore per month and we expect our production rate to in-crease. Eighty per cent of our strip-ping and ore is soft enough to be blasted successfully with ammonium nitrate-fuel oil mixtures. Twenty per cent of our material is extremely hard and requires an explosive having greater strength than an AN-fuel oil mixture.W e had been using canned am-monium nitrate base explosives and TNT pellets to give maximum bottom loading density to fracture hard rock. As AN -fuel oil became widely used, it was apparent that other types of explosives could be formulated to fit our blasting requirements. Dr. M. A. Cook of the University of Utah was consulted regarding new explosives and together we developed the blasting slurries.Figure 1 shows a general view of one of our hard rock pits. The foot wall is on the right-hand side and this material is called iron forma-Figure 1.-General view of hard rock pitstion by our Company but is called 'Taconite by the operators on the Mesabi Range. This material runs 35 to 45 per cent iron and many pieces are hard enough to scratch glass. The formation is tilted at an angle of 55 degrees as can be seen in Figure 3.The bedding planes of this rock are about 24 to 36 inches apart and if the material is not well broken or fragmented, large chunks or slabs must be handled by the shovels which reduces shovel capacity and efficiency and increases maintenance costs."

Jan 1, 1960