Search Documents

By Yves Lizotte, Malcom Scoble, Sanu Hanspal

"This paper reviews the physical, chemical and mechanical components of what is considered to be the anatomy of a blast muckpile. These relate principally to geometry, floor, fragment size and shapedistribution, density, hydrology, weathering, and diggabiity characteristics."

Jan 1, 1995

By Chris Vagasky

On July 10, 1926, lightning struck at Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey, and caused the explosion of at least 600,000 pounds (272,000 kilograms) of ammunition, resulting in more than $600 million (2015 dollars) in damage, the destruction of 200 buildings, and 22 deaths. Fortunately, there has not been a major incident involving lightning and explosives in the US in some time, though lightning has destroyed fuel storage tanks in recent years, including in North Dakota, Texas, and Ohio. Lightning poses a significant hazard to the explosives industry. Carrying high currents and temperature, lightning can cause explosives to detonate, start fires near storage facilities, and injure or kill operators.

Jan 1, 2017

By Muamer Medusalic, Kim Henley, Lucas Bottomley

The period from 2009 to 2012 has witnessed a large rise in the number of blast-generated fume events in Eastern Australia, where highly visible oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are produced from coal mine blasting. Fume production mechanisms have been poorly understood by mine operators, and practical measures to reduce fume were initially elusive. Over time, data on fume events has been collected and analysis has pointed to a range of contributing factors associated with fume production.

Jan 1, 2012

By C. T. Aimone-Martin, B. M. Meins

This paper compares response of large urban structures to small charge weight, ultra-high frequency rock blast excitation from contiguous excavation to that of houses to more distant, larger charge weight blasts. Time correlated responses were measured for both structures at the corners, top and bottom of the structures as well as in the foundation rock below the bottom. The comparison allowed the following conclusions: Close-in blasting with direct rock to building wave transmission imposes short wave length excitation which fails to excite the large, massive structures synchronously whereas the more distant blasts do synchronously excite houses. The larger urban structures respond predominantly in wave transmission mode where there is a noticeable difference in time, frequency, phase and amplitude of motions measured at the bottom and top corners of the structure. Excitation motions along the base of the larger urban structures also differs in time, frequency, phase and ampli-tude. The short wave length of the excitation motions leads to attenuation of the peak particle veloc-ity along the base. Ultra-high excitation frequencies, which are much higher than the expected struc-tural natural frequencies, lead to deamplification for all events for the large urban structures.

Jan 1, 2018

By Ricardo Chavex, Adrien Letellier

Flyrock remains one of the most critical issues in open-pit blasting. Despite the significant improvements made with modern surveying methods, the necessity remains to define sensible danger zones around blasting areas. Therefore, many semi-empirical models predict flyrock distances based on trajectory calculations and probabilistic adjustments. However, most are merely based on nominal parameters, even though a considerable amount of precise data is nowadays available thanks to modern measurement techniques using lasers, GPS, drones, and probes. These data provide accurate information about the actual field circumstances of a blast concerning geometry and rock-mass conditions. So how can we use and integrate them into existing flyrock models? The answer to this question can significantly improve the accuracy of flyrock prediction models and enhance safety. This paper will present a method to adapt existing models to actual field data using appropriate software and digital tools during the blast design process. In addition to calculating a more pertinent danger zone perimeter, this method provides an efficient and practical tool that helps prevent flyrock incidents. Indeed, it allows the blast designer and shot firer to be warned if there is a hazardous critical deviation due to local conditions. Moreover, it also enables blasters to communicate better and share the visualization of the blast-specific evacuation zone. The paper will also discuss how this method can be calibrated and how it has been used to analyze some actual flyrock incidents.

Jan 21, 2025

By Daniel Vargas Quispe, Yorhinio León Robles, Marco Jauregui Vargas, Helen Espinoza Bailon, Oshin Quispe Luya

This project describes the methodology applied during the execution of tests to determine the multiple controls that mitigate damage to the final walls of the pit. The different tests were executed on production pattern, which considered: modification of the angle of pre-split drill line, damage evaluation in individual drills with different load designs, varied detonation sequences, capture and analysis of elementary waves. After the evaluation and analysis of the results obtained in the tests, we are in process to standardize various damage controls such as; the combination of pre-split drill line angles at 80° and 90°; charge design in buffer drills that reduce the angle of action of the explosive and a detonation sequence that involves the creation of a relief filter that is made up of the detonation of two rows next to the pre-split drill line, which will have the function of filtering the waves of vibrations produced by the detonation of the production drills and at the same time it modifies the direction of damage towards the blasted material. The analysis of the different controls, as well as their combination, will allow us to improve the compliance results of the formation of benches.

Jan 21, 2025

By Sayantan Chakraborty, Kaushik Dey, SaKaushik Dey tyabrata Behera

Drilling and blasting is a popular excavation technique in the drift of underground mine. Faster completion of drift reduces the gestation period and thus longer blast pulls are attempted with longer drill holes. This compels the blasters to initiate higher charge quantity with higher confinements and ultimately results into blast-induced cracks beyond the desired periphery line of excavation. Assessment of the extent of these crack networks is difficult and often neglected. Near-field ground vibration models are often used as damage predictors (Dey, 2007, Yang et.al 1993, Holmberg et. Al 1979) but not necessarily deals with the positions of the cracks. Qualitative measurement of actual damage extent often measured using some geophysical tools, namely, P-wave velocity (Tezuka, 1995), seismic imaging (Dey, 2011), bore hole pressure monitoring (Brent and Smith, 1996), electrical resistivity (Grady and Kipp, 1993), GPR (Adams et.al, 1993) etc. Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) is a similar geo-physical tool, which uses Electro-magnetic (EM) pulse for characterizing the medium. Similar to other geo-physical tools, GPR also comprises of a transmitter and one/multiple receivers to generate the EM pulse and receive the same after reflection/refraction from the medium(s) respectively. After its development in 1970s, GPR gained increased popularity due to its application in many important fields, namely, identification of buried objects, geological characterization, identification of geological disturbances etc. Thus, it is felt that GPR technique can be used to detect the invisible cracks inside the rockmass from the rock surface (wall and roof) itself. Understanding the same, field experimentations are carried out in an underground manganese mine in Central India, which operates on the ‘cut and fill’ method of mining at a depth of around 300m from the surface. Wedge cut blasting is carried out in the horizontal drifts of the mine using suitable blast design. A 1.6 GHz antenna was used for the GPR scanning, in which GPR transmitter transmits signals predominantly of the said frequencies. The signals get reflected back from any type of interfaces between materials in the target area, with different dielectric properties and is received by the receiver part of the ‘trans-receiver’ antenna and memorized in the Data Acquisition Unit (DAU). The data acquired is processed using a software. Ground vibration monitoring of the blasts are also carried out to develop a vibration predictor. The numerical analysis of near-field vibration predictor model results into the estimated vibration levels at the point of identified cracks. Introduction

Jan 1, 2019

By Mick Fritz, Gregory Poole

Construction blasting is always challenging when in close proximity to existing structures, but when you are next to a landmark like Sanford Stadium at the University of Georgia it can get intense. Blasting on this project was performed less than 100 feet from students studying in their dorms at Reed Hall. Some shots are only a few feet from the columns on the stadium that hold up the sky boxes where meetings were being held while blasting was being performed. If a shot goes vertical the rocks would go through the floor of the sky boxes.

Jan 1, 2011

By James Stuart

A man died when the primed charge he was holding against his chest exploded. He was doing legitimate explosive work, and he was following all the safety procedures he had been taught. He and his colleagues had done this, thousands of times previously, with no ill effects.

Jan 1, 2007

By Carlos Pañura, Michael Geldres, Alejandro Rojas

The vibration waves are produced by the detonation of the explosive charges of each blasthole, analyzing the vibration waves produced by each blasthole, allow us to determine the optimal time between the detonation of each blasthole to reduce the vibrations of the production shot. Once the optimal time is found, it is possible also, to predict the vibration of the production shot (considering times and sequences) using predictive models. The waveform recorded includes information regarding the particle velocity and the dominant frequencies of the vibration.

Feb 1, 2020

By Daniel Scott

Mines have used explosives for economical fragmentation for many years. It can therefore be expected that the mining industry has thoroughly researched how to achieve the most efficient blast. However, there is still a large amount of iteration that must be undertaken before blasting at a mine site can be refined enough to allow for consecutively successful blast results. And then the geology changes. This paper will present an approach to blast design that considers production goals, geology, budget, and safety, and will contrast the proposed method with well established blasting theory.

Jan 1, 2012

By Robert Hopler

In use, blasting powder is exploded by a spark from fuse, electric squib or miner’s squib, or by a primer of some high explosive, the last being employed only in heavy charges on open work. In mining, and sometimes in light charges on open work, blasting powder is made into cartridges by means of a paper tube or cylinder sealed at one end, which is known as the Du Pont tamping bag. Sometimes the paper cylinder is made by the miner by coiling a section of heavy paper, known as blasting paper, around a wooden pin, called a cartridge pin, and securing it with what is called blasting soap. The removal of the pin leaves a cylindrical cartridge open at one end, into which the powder is poured and the top folded and sealed with blasting soap.

Jan 1, 2014

By B. Winterberg, C. Lewis, M. Starkel, C. Johnson

Non-electric systems, specifically shock tube, have become the pyrotechnic detonator of choice over electric due to their safety regarding accidental initiation from stray radio signals. Typically, the best practice when hooking up shock tube systems is to have direct contact to ensure initiation. When gaps are introduced to the explosives chain, there is potential for detonation to come to a halt. It is understood that direct coupling is required between the various elements in the explosive chain to ensure detonation. This holds true whether tying in non-electric detonators, loading holes in a mining related blast, or priming a block of C-4. Poor contact and gaps in the explosives chain can lead to detonators firing out sequence, leading to increased vibration, air overpressure, and other undesirable blast results. Furthering work conducted in previous experimentation, a new study was conducted at the Missouri University of Science and Technology’s Experimental Mine in Rolla, Missouri to observe the initiation potential of an air gap and fragmentation on non-electric shock tube. A series of small test blasts were conducted using 50 grain detonating cord and fragments from a blasting cap to initiate a non-electric shock tube across an air gap of varying distances. The data collected in the high-speed imagery was used to analyze the velocity of the pressure fronts and blasting cap fragments used to initiate non-electric shock tubes across an air gap. It was found that the shock tube was sensitive to 50 grain det cord at a 5cm (1.97in) distance while parallel and 10cm (3.94in) when perpendicular as well as sensitive to frag from the electric cap out to 2.4m (7.87ft).

Jan 1, 2024

By Peter Moser, Michael Messner, Florian Bauer

The existence of ammonia in underground blasting fumes was frequently measured in various field tests (6, 7). Ammonia in fumes with a TLV (threshold limit value) of around 30 ppm (slightly different in various countries) is a toxic gas but not considered to be a high risk for the underground work force as ammonia smells very itching and is extremely annoying. This might be the reason why ammonia is hardly measured in routine underground blasting fumes control. Another reason for the lacking measurement might be the circumstance that ammonia is a very reactive gas and the ammonia sensors available on the market are very cross sensitive to other gases like carbon monoxide. Nevertheless, especially since the introduction of bulk emulsion explosives in underground blasting, complaints from miners about ammonia in the blasting fumes increased. Research work by various institutions [8] around the world relates the ammonia in the fumes back to various mechanisms. Amongst others these comprise: a) non ideal (low temperature) detonation of explosives, with NH3 in the reaction products; b) reaction between rock and non detonated bulk explosives (especially when the rock is of a basic nature (high pH value); c) reaction between shotcrete and non detonated bulk explosives. Numerous blasting tests in an experimental underground set up have been made in order to check these hypotheses for ammonia origin in blasting fumes. None of them has been found to be responsible for sometimes high concentrations of ammonia in the fumes. The major reason for ammonia concentration in blasting fumes has been found in mine water of a high pH value (either natural or from using shotcrete). The mechanism identified is as follows: the moment a non detonated ammonium nitrate bearing explosive comes in contact with mine water of a high pH value, ammonia is formed immediately. The source for the undetonated explosive is twofold: firstly there is a certain spillage of explosives when the holes are charged (especially when using bulk products) and secondly not the entire explosives detonate completely. These undetonated remaining of the explosives end up in the muck pile after blasting. In case there is water of a high pH value the reaction between the explosives and the water starts immediately. This explains also the observation why ammonia can be measured in the blasting fumes quite a long time after the blast. The majority of the ammonia is not formed during the detonation; it is formed inside the muck pile even a considerable long time after the blast.

Jan 1, 2010

By Tom Paynter

In an underground mining environment, the primary method of firing a blast is using a combination of an electric detonator and a detonating cord to initiate the Nonelectric detonators. This method has been in use since the 1970’s. A firing line is used which can be subjected to damage and the need for constant testing and maintenance.

Jan 1, 2017

By W. L. Saunders, Richard T. Dana

The dynamites are graded according to the percentage of nitroglycerin that they contain. Thus a “40% powder” would be one in which the sticks, weighing one-half pound each, would include one-fifth of a pound of pure nitroglycerin. Dynamite is usually packed in paper cartridges weighing about one-half pound each which will vary in diameter. When ordering, it is customary to specify a size of cartridge that will as nearly as possible fill the drill hole, the commonest size being 1 ¼” in diameter by 8” in length. It is nearly always shipped in 50-lb. boxes, which have a volumetric capacity of 3/4 cu.ft.

Jan 1, 2013

By Randy Martin, Jessie Bonner, Peter Boyd, Mark Leidig, Timothy Rath

We conducted the Vermont Damage Experiment in central Vermont during July 2008. Five single-hole explosions with yields ranging from 60.8 kg (134 lbs) to 122.5 kg (270 lbs) were detonated in homogeneous, low fracture density granite. The goal of the experiment was to quantify the different levels of rock damage around the source and then relate the seismic wave generation to the degree and distribution of damage and fragmentation. In addition, explosives with different velocities of detonation (VOD), including black powder (0.53 km/sec; 1737 ft/sec), heavy ANFO (4.8 km/sec; 15734 ft/sec), and COMP B (8.1 km/sec; 26574 ft/sec) were detonated to relate the VOD to seismic wave generation and extent of damage zones in the source region. Over 120 seismic stations were deployed to record the explosions at distances between 5 m and 30 km (15 ft to 19 miles).

Jan 1, 2010

By Christopher Laughton

A new underground laboratory is under construction at the recently closed Homestake Gold Mine, Lead South Dakota, United States of America. The Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory is designed to meet the needs of an international group of scientists and engineers interested in conducting fundamental and applied research at depth in the Earth’s crust.

Jan 1, 2011

By K. M. Kim, J. B. Kemeny

A case study was conducted with 5 shots with varying pre-blast block sizes and explosive energies. From this case study a site-specific predictive fragmentation model was developed. There are two main innovations in this study. One is using an image analysis program (Split-Desktop 3.0) on the bench face to obtain the pre-blast block size (F80) quickly and consistently. Another innovation is to utilize the Schmidt Hammer Hardness (SHH) to estimate intact rock strength.

Jan 1, 2011

By R. Alford

In the modern world of demolition safety is paramount and unnecessary or unquantifiable risks are not accepted (FasterCapital, 2024) and all risks must be kept As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) (BSI, 2017). This principle has led to a huge reduction in deaths in the last 50 years and the statistics continue to improve although this is starting to plateau (Beal, 2007). Under normal circumstances, this is now simply part of the normal way work is done and systems are in place to ensure both safety and economic profits are assured. What happens when the environment is less controlled and risks are unknown, such as after a natural disaster, war, an accident or a stand-up from a failed demolition attempt? A dangerous structure cannot responsibly be left alone with a fence around it so some action must be taken, but how can this be done safely and responsibly? An incident in Didcot, England in which half of a power station’s boiler house being prepared for an explosive demolition collapsed suddenly, killing four men in 2016 provides a useful case study of how technology, creativity and planning can be used to conduct complex demolition fully remotely to avoid any further risk to life.

Jan 21, 2025