Search Documents

By Phil Jones, Ben Johnson

During a period of six months in FY2018, a series of trials were conducted to compare drilling accuracy using two different methodologies and the subsequent impact this had on ore dilution. Testing was conducted at Cracow underground gold mine in Queensland, Australia. The drill rig’s existing alignment process was compared to a new technology system with the following observations:

Jan 1, 2019

By Sushil Bhandari, S. S. Rathore

Controlled drilling and blasting continue to be an important method of block production and for block splitting. Drill and blast technique has disadvantage that sometimes, it produces cracks in uncontrolled manner and also produces micro cracks in the block as well as in remaining rock, if not carefully carried out. Recovery by this method is low compared to other methods. Therefore, attempts have continued to develop controlled growth of crack in desired direction. In this paper a series of tests are described using detonating fuse in marble. Economics of different methods is also compared. In comparison to conventional use when holes are lined with inexpensive cardboard or plastic liners with a slit, the cost and damage is the least and development of crack is in desired direction.

Jan 1, 2002

By Deane Tunaley, Clint Brearley, Steven Kotsonis, Richard Goodridge, Tom Smylie

Explosives are widely used in the Oil & Gas Industry for subsurface mapping via measurement of reflected sound waves as each charge is detonated. To complete a seismic survey, several thousand explosive charges may be deployed into narrow boreholes, often in areas difficult to access or where socio-political factors may increase the risk of unlawful recovery or sabotage of the explosives. Therefore, when misfires occur, the explosives left in the ground often cannot be retrieved or sympathetically detonated safely, in which case they are “abandoned” (in-line with local regulations) potentially posing a safety and security risk.

Jan 1, 2014

By Thierry Bernard, J. M. Laboz

2000 HIGH-TECH SEMINAR Blasting Technology, Instrumentation and Explosives Applications

Jan 1, 2000

By Joseph Daly

An investigation into inaccurate scatter of pyrotechnic detonators led to the innovation of utilising existing (every day) equipment in a manner to accurately determine the true scatter of detonators. This can then be utilised to determine the accuracy of a particular batch of detonators.

Jan 1, 2014

By Calvin Konya, Anthony Konya

State and Federal construction specifications require the Blasting Contractor to prepare a Master Blasting Plan which is reviewed by the Owner’s Representative. The Master Blasting Plan requires the Contractor to submit the design of a typical blast. Most blasting specifications also require the Blasting Contractor to submit Daily Blasting Plans. The Master Blasting Plan and the Daily Blasting Plan require that the Blasting Contractor also submit the types and quantities of explosives and initiators used. The specifications also request that the Blasting Contractor submit the pounds of explosive used per delay for both production and presplit blasts. The Blasting Contractor may also be required to predict the anticipated ground vibration and air overpressure levels for the proposed blasts. There are equations that can be used to predict the ground vibration. There are also equations that can be used to predict the air overpressure levels. The data for these equations were primarily derived from quarry and surface coal mine and some construction blasts. Data from major construction projects were analyzed in this study to determine new air overpressure propagation equations for construction blasting. These new prediction equations compare calculated results analyzed from field data with other existing air overpressure prediction equations. Production blasting air overpressure values are also compared to air overpressure from presplitting

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 W Barry Gregg

The rock blasting and mining industries use a system of detonators and explosives for mining operations. Many detonators use small metal bridgewires, which are heated by passing a current through the wire, heating and igniting the pyrotechnic powder in contact with the wire, Typical bridgewires require a current of at least 3 amps, applied for a few milliseconds, for an explosive output. The semiconductor bridge (SCB), in comparison, initiates an explosive in 0.01 to 0.1 of a millisecond.

Jan 1, 1992

"Blasthole deviation is a frequent, well documented and undesirable occurrence in mining operations. It is caused by the drill string mechanics, operating variables and the 'interactionbetween the drill bit and the rock mass characteristics. It is composed of three distinct components: collaring or marking error, alignment error and trajectory deviation. This study has focussedon the dependence of trajectory or natural deviation on the geological features of the rock mass being drilled."

Jan 1, 1996

By William Wilkinson, Vladisla Kecojevic

Current three-dimensional (3D) computer design technology leveraged into drill and blast planning and operations is changing the way engineers and operations approach drill and blast design. Additionally, Global Positioning Systems (GPS) technology that is now readily available to the civilian population is being implemented into the mining sector with a variety of new products specifically designed for drill and blast operations. The objective of this article is to discuss the steps involved with 3D Computer-Aided Design (CAD) of drilling and blasting, and the benefits such a design can provide in conjunction with GPS and drill monitoring systems.

Jan 1, 2004

By Bob Turnbull

The dictionary definition of calibration is: to determine by measurement or comparison with a standard, the corre c t value for each scale reading on a device.1 As a consultant or blast contractor, you assess risk every day. But, have you considered the importance of, and the risks associated with the calibration of your seismograph and the accuracy that is p rovided? Can your calibration pro v i d e r back you up in times of trouble and provide documented evidence that the equipment was functioning within specification? Can their calibration pro c e d u res withstand independent scrutiny and be shown to be traceable to a National Standards for accuracy of measurement? These are important documents that in court provide tremendous support that blasting and monitoring activities are conducted professionally and competently.

Jan 1, 2004

By Tristan Worsey, Nathan Rouse

The Florida legislature allocated funding for the Florida State Fire Marshal (FSFM) to review the applicability of the United States Bureau of Mines (USBM) Report of Investigations (RI) 8507 blast vibration limits with respect to Florida and its soils. The study also discusses whether the current blasting vibration limits set by statute are still appropriate, including a review of measured vibration amplitudes and frequencies, structure responses, and theoretical analyses of material strength and strains.

Jan 1, 2019

By Richard R. Marston, Scott Herr, Steve Pries, Donald L. Jr Ewart

The purpose of this paper is to identify and examine alternative methods (other than shovel/truck stripping) of effecting the pre-stripping of consolidated overburden, in conjunction with dragline stripping operations, at surface coal mines. The analysis will be case study oriented with practical mining considerations and comparative economics being evaluated. Alternatives that will be examined include blast casting, dozer push, and multiple pass dragline sequences.

Jan 1, 1992

By Gerald W. Longenecker

For decades, traditional hydraulic engineering approaches have been used for sizing stream channels when stream relocation efforts have been necessary to allow for the advancement of quarry and other surface mining operations. These approaches have been based on various ydraulic models to design channel cross sections and slopes that could pass the required regulatory design storm such as the 2-, 5, lo-, 25-, 50-, or even loo-year events. Designing the stream channel to handle these more extreme ,storm events would often lead to large channel designs which required extensive bank and channel bottom stabilization techniques including concrete, rip rap, gabions, or other expensive approaches. The constructed channels often required ongoing maintenance to remove accumulated sediment and other debris which would settle out and reduce the hydraulic capacity of the channel.

Jan 1, 1998

By Cathy Aimone-Martin, Robert Brentar, Brent Meins, James Lauer

Vibration measurements of multi-story structures in an urban environment began 3 years ago in New York City during close-in blasting to adopt correct measurement procedures and recommend revised ground vibration limits that best characterize cracking potential in mid- to high-rise structures. Two broad categories of structures included non-engineered 4- to 6-story multi-family unreinforced brick masonry buildings, built from the late 1800s to around 1930, and post-WWII, high-rise structures of reinforced concrete and steel rising 12 to 40 stories. In-ground vibration limits similar to those recommended by the U.S. Bureau of Mines safe criteria, developed for 1- and 2-story residential structures, are imposed by the New York City Fire Code. However, these limits are often lowered by project engineers or New York Department of Buildings when blasting is planned near buildings designated Landmark or historic and classified as fragile or vibration-sensitive. Seismograph measurements to determine compliance with in-ground velocity limits currently employ geophones mounted to basement walls and on concrete slabs overlying rock. These measurements cannot be correlated with upper structure cracking potential and are often exceeded, resulting in excessive and costly downtime to allow post-blast damage investigations.

Jan 1, 2014

By Steve Dillingham

Here in the United States, as well as around the world, pose a daily dilemma - to wash or not to wash. Let’s face it, all trucks, especially our industry work horses - bulk trucks - get dirty. We all know that these units can be very expensive and washing them keeps your business investment looking new, improves public relations, fuels company pride, and facilitates equipment safety and preventative maintenance inspections.

Jan 1, 2001

By Mike Lovitt

New Gold Inc. had commissioned Orica to assist with the design of the drawbell blasting at New Afton Underground copper/gold block cave at Kamloops, British Columbia, Canada. Orica have had much success in developing the single-shot drawbell method at Freeport Indonesia in 2001 in the Deep Ore Zone and they will be using it exclusively in their new Grasberg Underground Operation. RioTinto Northparkes have also used the single shot drawbell blasting in their Second Lift E26 Project and even in the E48 orebody which is a post undercut block cave, realising the safety and operational benefits of this blasting method.

Jan 1, 2013

By Gilberto Nunez, Ron Eastman, Hector Parra

The prediction of blasting outputs has proven to be a sound engineering tool to provide a guideline for design improvement. It has also been demonstrated to be extremely useful in critical situations when production can be compromised and there is no chance for error.

Jan 1, 2015

By M. Roy

Safety and stability of underground coal mine workings are always in danger when opencast mines are operating in close proximity. A study was conducted to investigate the level of vibration generated from opencast blasting at similar distances on the surface as well as in the nearby operating underground coal mine openings. Eight blasts were performed and nineteen vibration data were recorded on the surface behind the opencast blasting face and also in underground openings at similar distances. It was observed that magnitude of vibration recorded on the surface were more than those recorded in underground.

Jan 1, 2007

By David Ziegler

Rough sketches, field notes, an on-site conference or a phone call may no longer suffice to establish your blast plan at a job site. More and more, general contractors, site supervisors, owner re p resentatives, or the owners themselves want to know details about proposed drill and blast operations at their site, in advance. We are seeing more contracts that re q u i re a blasting plan to be submitted in writing. The purpose of this session is to discuss items that you might want to include and address in a written blast plan, and some ideas about how to present them. This is not intended to be a complete list of items that could be included in a blast plan. Contracts may list specific items that need to be addressed. Only a few of the more common elements will be covered here. The bro a der purpose of this discussion is to get you thinking, about what you might want to include in your own “standard ” blast plan.

Jan 1, 2004