Search Documents

By John Norman

This paper will cover blasting techniques that are applicable to underground and other rescue that involves removing obstacles and breaking rock in close proximity to rescuers and subjects.

Feb 1, 2020

By Jay Smerekanicz, Florin: Pedersen Gheorghiu, Alan Cameron

In order to expand the capacity of Modern Landtill, a groundwater extraction system consisting of a linear system of pumping wells over 2,700 feet long had to be replaced. The new system would be covered by landtill cells to a depth of approximately 400 feet, and therefore would have to be maintenance free. In addition, the new system had to be proven to be more effective than the previous system, groundwater extraction had to be maintained during construction and construction could not disturb either the landfill operation or nearby residential neighbors.

Jan 1, 2001

Blasting is a common practice in mining whereby solid rock is fractured, using explosives, to a more manageable size. The effectiveness of blasting influences a number of downstream activities such as shovel digability, crusher throughput and mill throughput. As the cost of explosives is relatively low compared to milling costs (mainly due to power consumption), blasting practices can be optimised so that the downstream processes are made more efficient, and an overall cost saving made. This is the basis of the Mine to Mill approach. The effectiveness of the blasting is influenced by two main factors, the blasting practices used (eg explosive amount and type) and the geology of the area. As the geology cannot be altered, the blasting practices must be refined to create optimum blasting. Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines (KCGM) Fimiston operation, located in the heart of the Kalgoorlie Goldfields is the largest gold mine in Australia. Mine to Mill at KCGM has had varied success, with initial positive indications being lessened by a number of factors, including the increase in the amount of voids.

Jan 1, 2003

By Alain Blanchier, Anne Charline Sauvage

Rock mass variations have a huge influence on explosives efficiency and on blasting results. Numerous blasting improvements could be gained by taking into account rock mass and its variations. However, extracted rock mass is generally considered as statistically homogenous. The development of a panel of pre-blast survey procedures that every blaster can use, consists in the realization of a process integrated into every day work: for example as well as toe burden or blast hole depth, discontinuities spacing or the weathering expanse have to enter in rule book, if it provides blasting efficiency and security improvements.

Jan 1, 2004

By Ray Patterson

A planned modification to a cement kiln at the Holnam Portland Cement Plant near Florence, Colorado required the removal of a ring of cast-in-place (CIP) refractory lining. The CIP lining was approximately 14 inches wide, 12 inches thick and 38 feet in circumference.

Jan 1, 1999

By Charlie Brumbaugh

Antarctica with its diverse conditions such as severe cold, high winds, rock and ice structure and limited explosives available posed many obstacles. This paper will give an overall view of the methods used to overcome these obstacles on a daily basis on the highest, driest, coldest continent on earth.

Jan 1, 2000

By Richard Goodridge, Stephen Thomsqn, S Rodgers, D Tunaley

The mining, quarry and construction industries are facing’new challenges everyday. These challenges can be imposed by economic objectives or through external factors such as extreme geological conditions. Simultaneously, all mines, quarries and construction sites are facing more and more stringent environmental requirements.

Jan 1, 1998

By David Miller, James Santoro

Blasting is often required in urbanized areas to allow for economical execution of construction, demolition, and mining. Several examples of operations that require blasting in built up areas include: rock blasting for foundation and utility excavations; surface and underground mining for mineral extraction; and explosives demolition. Although explosives demolition is an engineering discipline, not at all like rock blasting, it still uses explosives for the felling of structures that have outlived their usefulness. Through the use of modem technology and implementation of extra safety precautions, explosives are used safely in congested areas to make the performance of critical work economical and feasible. This paper discusses several precautions required when undertaking various types of rock blasting and explosives demolition in congested areas. It also presents the adverse effects that must be considered when blasting in congested areas. The effects identified include flyrock, vibration and airblast, fumes, and non-elastic (permanent) ground deformations/overbreak. Measures for mitigating and controlling these adverse effects to provide on-site and public safety are presented.

Jan 1, 2000

By Steve Dillingham

Blasting crews, explosive product drivers, drillers, blasters, supervisors, and salespeople all arrive daily at customer blast sites in vehicles of every type whether passenger cars, pickup trucks, or bulk trucks. The majority of these vehicles are company owned and re p re s e n t a substantial investment and risk for the company. That may explain why the costs resulting from blasting incidents is often surpassed by those involving motor vehicle accidents.

Jan 1, 2003

By Steve Dillingham

There are some blasters and blasting companies that just seem to have better safety reputations than others. This is in spite of the fact that they are essentially doing the same type of work under similar conditions. To achieve that enviable safety reputation, it simply comes down to a strong safety culture prompted by a responsibility for others, as well as yourself and your company.

Jan 1, 2003

By Steve Dillingham

The horrific events surrounding September 11th left Americans with a feeling of sudden helplessness...the shock of being unprepared and powerless. From this tragedy, we can understand the need to prepare for the unexpected, and can apply this hard lesson into operational planning for those involved in the commercical explosives industry.

Jan 1, 2003

By Steve Dillingham

Change occurs all of the time. In fact, it’s fair to say that change is a constant. Sometimes the change is inconsequential, but sometimes the change impacts us d i rectly and severely. Take regulations, for instance. Complying with regulatory requirements is just part of the job for those involved with explosives. But in recent years, it seems as if new or revised regulations in areas such as hazardous materials training, drug and alcohol testing, security issues, or local licensing/permitting standards are changing the way we operate on a recurring basis. Simply keeping track of all of these regulations has become a full-time job.

Jan 1, 2003

By Steve Dillingham

In every aspect of conduct, on the blast site or off, the issue of credibility is raised. Promises are made, commitments are satisfied, safe practices are obeyed, communication is maintained, and proven procedures followed. Only by fulfilling these objectives, are we deemed trustworthy and reliable - in other words - credible. Unfortunately, at times, we fall short of achieving our goals. Whether intentionally or accidentally, everything is not completed according to plan or accuracy. On the blast site, falling short of achieving such goals may contribute significantly to a chain of events that can potentially produce accidents. At the very least, a blaster’s credibility will be jeopardized. The fact remains that the blaster that continuously conducts business in a professional manner will less likely find him or herself as a defendant in future claims.

Jan 1, 2003

By Steve Dillingham

The explosives business by nature is providing a specialized, valued service and associated products to a variety of customers whether mine, quarry or construction related. The level of performance demanded by the customer will typically coincide with his or her individual needs. Some will seek out the skills and knowledge of a blasting expert, while the focus of others is simply on production amounts.

Jan 1, 2003

By Steve Dillingham

Whenever misfired holes or portions of misfired holes remain after a blast is fired, a hazardous situation exists until the unfired explosive materials have been disposed of properly. Yet, there are so many factors that can contribute to misfires that it is impossible to give blanket instructions on how to handle them. To complicate matters, misfires today are rare due to reliable blasting products. As such, it isn’t very surprising that many blasters have never had to deal with a misf i re condition. While the likelihood of a misfire occurrence is minimal, you should always be pre p a red to handle a misfire should you be involved in such an event. To begin, every blaster and blasting org a n i z a t i o n should develop a misfire policy which contains the company’s safe operating pro c e d u res, emergency contact list, as well as any regulatory compliance re q u i re m e n t s . Tailgate and/or company-wide safety meetings should communicate the company’s contingent misfire pro c ed u res and any special site-specific precautions BEFORE the start of any project.

Jan 1, 2004

By Dale Preece, Stephen Chung

Blasting induced rock fragmentation is an art that has been developed and refined for hundred’s of years through blasting and recording the results. Good blasting fragmentation practices were thus developed through experience. However, this method requires a history that is typically developed in a mine over a number of years and sometimes at considerable expense. Quantification of fragmentation as a function of rock-mass characteristics and blast design is attractive. Developments towards this end have included semi-empirical methods as well as computer codes that explicitly treat shock wave transmission and the subsequent rock breakage. This paper will present predictions of fragmentation resulting from rock blasting using the computer code AUTODYN and a new state-of-the-art material model for brittle rock and concrete.

Jan 1, 2003

By D. K. Ingram, G. L. Mowrey, T. R. Rehak

Problem: Blasting is a hazardous component of surface mining. Serious injuries and fatalities result from improper judgement or practice during rock blasting. This paper describes several fatal injury case studies, analyzes causative factors, and emphasizes preventive measures. Method: This study examines publications by MSHA, USGS, and other authors. The primary source of information was MSHA’s injury-related publications. Results: During the 21-yearperiod from 1978 to 1998, the mean yearly explosive-related injuries (fatal and nonfatal) for surface coal mines was 8.86 (95% CI: 6.38 -11.33), and for surface metal/nonmetal mines 10.76(95% CI: 8.39 - 13.14). Flyrock and lack of blast area security accounted for 68.2% of these injuries. This paper reviews several case studies of fatal injuries. Case studies indicate that the causative factors for fatal injuries are primarily personal and task-related and to some extent environmental. A reduction in the annual injuries in surface coal mines was observed during the ten-year period of 1989 - 1998 [5.80 (95% CI: 2.71 - 8.89) compared to the previous ten-year period of 1979 - 1988 [10.90 (95% CI: 7.77 - 14.14)]. However, such reduction was not noticed in the metal/nonmetal sector, i.e., 9.30 (95% CI: 6.84 - 11.76) for the period 1989-1998compared with 11.00 (95% CI: 7.11 - 14.89) for the period 1979-1988. Discussion: A multifaceted injury prevention approach consisting of behavioral/educational, administrative/regulatory, and engineering interventions merits consideration. Impact on industry: The mining community, especially the blasters, will find useful information on causative factors and preventive measures to mitigate injuries due to flyrock and lack of blast area security in surface blasting. Discussion of case studies during safety meetings will help to mitigate fatal injuries and derive important payoffs in terms of lower risks and costs of injuries.

In March 2003, Rio Tinto Coal AustraliaÆs (RTCA) new Hail Creek open cut coal mine commenced operations in the Bowen Basin. Hail Creek is a two-seam strip mining operation utilising two 90 m3 draglines and a fleet of excavators and trucks to remove the overburden. All overburden at Hail Creek is blasted prior to excavation. The mine conducts its own drill and blast operations while engaging Dyno Nobel for the provision of explosives supply and loading truck (bulk explosives vehicle û BEV) services. This arrangement was favoured over outsourcing the entire blasting function to a contractor. Subsequent to a value engineering review, the mine set about developing and implementing a blasting operation that did not rely on the need to store bulk quantities of ammonium nitrate on site. There were advantages identified in doing this, in particular the reduction of capital expenditure required and reduced exposure to a number of recently introduced security requirements. This approach also makes sense operationally. The establishment of reload facilities for the BEV close to the blasting location, where turnaround times are kept to a minimum, increases the productivity of the BEV. For this strategy to be successful the logistics of ammonium nitrate supply into the blasting operations has to be well planned and thoroughly executed. This means a robust planning and forecasting arrangement needs to be established with the supplier and transporters of the ammonium nitrate. To date, 80 million bcm of overburden has been blasted at Hail Creek and each year the quantity of overburden requiring blasting is increasing. The purpose of this paper is to present the findings of a study: evaluating the effectiveness to date of the strategy to conduct blasting operations without ammonium nitrate storage on site, and identifying whether there is a limit to which this strategy can operate after which the introduction of bulk ammonium nitrate storage facilities are necessary.

Jan 1, 2007

By Jean-Sébastien Lambert, Joseph Kabuya, Richard Simon

Managing a highwall failure risk in an open pit mine by controlling and mitigating the impact of vibrations produced by blasting operations is key to achieving safe and cost-effective operations. The impetus behind this study was the risk of multiple bench failures in an open pit mine that was detected by Slope Stability Radar (SSR) following blasting at the foot of a highwall. The unstable high wall was over 140 meters(459.3 ft)high and 200 meters(656.2 ft)wide. The quantity of associated material was estimated at 3,000,000 metric tons(3,306,934 US tons). The overall slope angle was 44 degrees. In order to continue mining without causing the highwall to fail, this study was initiated as part of a risk management plan to mitigate this major risk by identifying mitigation measures related to blasting operations and assessing the response of the rock mass to each blast. Identifying blasting mitigation measures consisted of optimizing blasting parameters to avoid failure of the highwall. First, a signature hole operation was carried out to obtain seismic records that were georeferenced and associated with known single charges. The method used made it possible to determine the propagation velocity of the P-waves associated with the various lithologies studied and to calculate, from the geomechanical properties of the rock masses, the maximum peak particle velocities to be respected. Subsequently, the targeted area of operation was modelled with the I-Blast software in order to optimize the firing sequences to be used according to the different lithologies present. The model also made it possible to optimally predict the particle velocities associated with each blast and ensure compliance with the previously determined peak particle velocity limits. The assessment of the rock mass’s response using SSR consisted of defining alarm thresholds and an intervention plan for various possible alarms as well as quantifying the damage to the highwall from blasting. Controlling the impact of blast vibrations on the highwall’s stability was successful, as the mitigation measures used during mining did not accelerate the highwall’s movement. No upward trend in the stabilization time of the rock mass was observed by the SSR after each blast. Post-blast geotechnical inspections and analysis of post-blast deformations in the highwall also did not reveal significant damage to the highwall as a direct consequence of the blasting.

By Scott G. Giltner, Alex Schwenk

Blasting within 250 ft of a crusher was successfully executed through the application of electronic detonators, 3-D imagery, signature hole analysis, custom loading of blast holes. The blast was well contained, the vibrations were minimal, and there was no flyrock.

Feb 1, 2020