Drilling & Blasting Audit

Sponsored by:

Orica Mining Services

BBS
Lima, Peru S.A..

Prepared for:

Gold Fields La Cima S.A.

Cerro Corona Mine

by

R. Frank Chiappetta, BSc., MSc., P. Eng.

Explosives Applications Engineer

Blasting Analysis International, Inc.

Allentown, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.

October 8, 2009
c

2009, Blasting Analysis International, Inc.

All Rights Reserved

Main Concerns
Vibration / Airblast Complaints
Field Controls (Geologic info, drilling accuracy,
Irregular floors, & explosive quantity
Top stemming Plugs
Oversize
Muck pile shape
Dam material & fragmentation

Vibration / Airblast
Average vibration in community = 1.3 mm/s
Airblast = ? (No airblast measurements recorded to date.)

Vibration/Airblast Recommendations
Airblast is cause of 95 % of complaints not vibrations.
Measure airblast on all future measurements.
Set up permanent seismograph along mine perimeter.

Set up weather station and monitor for electrical storms,

temperature, wind speed and direction.

High floor drilled 2 m for secondary blasting.

Not necessary - Causes excessive airblast.

Irregular Floors

High spot

Low spot
High spot

Causes for Irregular Floors

Poor drilling controls.
Loading in wet holes Explosive Contamination

Poor primer placement over Taponex plug

No grade control for excavation equipment.
Backhoe excavator digging below grade line.

Drilling & hole depths - OK

Pumping explosives
in wet holes

Water level

Bottom explosive
column is diluted
and contaminated

Mud, slimes
& sediments
Loading starts in mud

Excavator (back hoe) not equipped with GPS.

Tends to dig below grade.

Explosive Quality Controls

Density measurements = OK
Truck calibration recommended
(minimum) every three months

Top Stemming Plug vs Crushed Rock Stemming

5m

5m
Stem tite, conic
plug, Taponex,
etc.

Angular crushed rock,

1 2 in (25 50 mm)

3m

Drill Cuttings

2m

Angular crushed rock,

1 2 in (25 50 mm)

5m

Presplitting must be done in advance of blast block

Presplit
line

Oversize,
Fragmentation,
Timing and Electronic
Detonators

Mine

Mill

Explosive energy
Energy distribution in rock mass
Timed and controlled release of energy

Major Sources
of Oversize

Bench top

6
9

11
12
Stemming

Explosive
column

1 Collar / Stemming
2 Free Face

8
10

3 Toe & Subgrade

4 Corners & Irregular Bench

5 Intact Massive Seams
6 Imbedded Conglomerate

Boulders

Stemming volume
can be 20 50%
of blast volume
Pit floor

Subgrade

For illustrative
purpose only

Decreasing stemming

Stemming

Explosive
column

Uncontrolled Shot -Severe Flyrock

Unintentional Flyrock Damage

Major Sources
of Oversize

Bench top

6
9

11
12
Stemming

Explosive
column

1 Collar / Stemming
2 Free Face

8
10

3 Toe & Subgrade

4 Corners & Irregular Bench

5 Intact Massive Seams
6 Imbedded Conglomerate

Boulders

Stemming volume
can be 20 50%
of blast volume
Pit floor

Subgrade

For illustrative
purpose only

Stab or Pilot Hole Placed In Between Production Holes

Production
Holes

Stab
Hole

Stab holes are generally

not popular because
* Requires additional holes & drilling.
* Restricts vehicle traffic on blast block.
* Vehicles cannot drive over loaded holes.

Subgrade

Stem Charge Placed Inside Stemming Column

Production
Holes

Good distribution of energy

in the collar zone.
50 65% Stemming

Stemming

Stem
Charge

Stab hole depth is generally drilled

50 65% of the normal stemming
column.
Stem charge must be calculated precisely
with SD = 1.0 1.4. A good starting point
is 1.2.
If using electronic detonators, the stem and
main charges should be fired instantaneously.
If using Nonel, it is critical that the stem charge
is always fired before the main charge.

Subgrade

Imperial Units
Explosive density = 1.15 g/cc
Explosive diameter = 9 in
Surface

Length of W

Explosive diameter = 230 mm

Length of 10 borehole diameters Length of 10 borehole diameters

= (230 mm/1000 mm) x 10
= (9 in/12 in) x 10
= 2.3 m
= 7.5 ft

L = 2.30 m (7.5 ft)

Explosive density = 1.15 g/cc

Stemming = 5.0 m

Stemming = 16.4 ft

Stemming
5 m (16.4 ft)

Metric Units

W
D = Distance from
surface to center of W
W = Weight of explosive
occupied in top of
explosive column,
equivalent to the length of
10 borehole or explosive
diameters

Borehole diameter = 230 mm (9 in)

Explosive density = 1.15 g/cc
1990,Blasting Analysis International, Inc.
All Rights Reserved

One linear foot of explosives at

a density of 1.15 g/cc in a 9 in
hole weighs 31.7 lbs.

One linear foot of explosives at

a density of 1.15 g/cc in a 230
mm hole weighs 47.1 Kg.

Thus, W = 7.5 x 31.7 = 238 lbs

Thus, W = 2.3 x 47.1 = 108 Kg

and

and

W 1/3 = 2381/3 = 6.19 lbs1/3

D = Stemming + (L)

D = Stemming + (L)
= 16.4 + (7.5) = 20.2

SD =

D
W 1/3

20.2
=

6.19

W 1/3 = 1081/3 = 4.75 Kg1/3

= 3.3

= 5.0 + (2.30) = 6.15

SD =

D
W 1/3

6.15
=

= 1.3
4.75

Alternatively, D = SD x W 1/3 and W = (D/SD)3

Uncontrolled Energy

Controlled Energy

Violent flyrock, airblast,

noise and dust.

Good fragmentation.

Very Controlled Energy

Maximum volume of broken

rock in collar zone.

Larger fragmentation.

Very fine fragmentation.

Good craters.

Acceptable vibration/airblast.
Good heave and muck pile
mound.

Reduced volume of broken

rock in collar zone.
Acceptable vibration/airblast.
Reduced heave and muck
pile mound.
No flyrock.

Minimal Surface Effects

Small surface
disturbance

No
fallback

Insignificant
surface effects

Some
fallback

No
breakage
zone

SD = 0 0.60
Metric Units

0.64 0.88

(m/Kg1/3)
0.92 1.40
SD = 0 1.5

1.6 2.2

Imperial Units

1.44 1.80
2.3 3.5

(ft/lb1/3)

3.6 4.5

Significance of SD (Scaled Depth of Burial)

1990, 2008 Blasting Analysis International, Inc.
All Rights Reserved

1.84 2.40
2.40 +
4.6 6.0
6.0 +

For Stem Charge Calculations, Use:

D = 50 65% of Stemming
Stemming

SD = D/W1/3
D = SD * W1/3

W = ( D/SD)3
W = Stem charge quantity (lbs).
D = Distance from surface to
center of stem charge (ft).
SD = Selected Scaled Depth of
Burial (ft/lbs1/3 )

Example Stem Charge Calculation

W = ( D/SD )3
= (3.3/1.2)3

Surface

Stemming
5m

D = 65% Stemming = 3.3 m

W = Stem Charge

= (2.75)3
= 21 Kg

D = Distance from surface to

center of stem charge = 3.3 m

SD is chosen as 1.2

Advantages of Using a Stem Charge

Increases powder factor only 1 4 %

But improves fragmentation

up to 5+ fold in the
stemming zone

Important Stem Charge Cautions

D = 3.3 m
5m

21 Kg

Stem charge quantity and placement

must be exact!
With electronic detonators, fire stem
charge and main charge instantaneously.
With pyrotechnic detonators, always fire
the stem charge first, before main charge.

The same in-hole pyrotechnic delay in the stem and

main charges have too much scatter. If the main
charge fires first, there is a risk that the stem charge
could be ejected out with the stemming.

Electronic Detonators, Air Decks & Stem Charges

Increasing fragmentation

Top
stemming

Stem
charge

Stem
charge

0 ms

525 ms

0 ms

0 ms

0 ms

Explosive
column

500 ms

0 ms

1 m Air
Deck

Taponex

Taponex

C
c

0 ms

0 ms

0 ms

1 m Air
Deck

2009, Blasting Analysis International, Inc.

All Rights Reserved

Effects of a mid-column air deck

versus a full column load
Stemming
Mid column air deck results in
a longer lasting pressure pulse
Explosive
deck

Explosive
deck

Pressure

Air Deck - Rapidly

expanding gasses
collide in center of
air deck

Pressure pulse from a continuous

explosive column load

Time

Hole Delay = 17 42 ms
Row Delay = 65 109 ms

Typical Delays with Conventional Non-Electric (Nonel) System

Hole Delay = 1 3 ms
Row Delay = 100 300 ms

New Delays with Precise Electronic Detonators

Delay Timing

0 ms

0 ms

25 ms

2 ms

50 ms

4 ms

Delay Timing Vp and Vs Arrivals

Vp
Vs

0 ms

Vp
Vs

2 ms

4 ms

Vp = Compressional Wave or Sonic Velocity of the rock.

Vs = Shear Wave Velocity.

Calculating Electronic Delay Time Between Holes

T = 0.6 (S/Vp) x 1000

Where:
T = Delay time between holes in a row (ms)
S = Distance between holes in a row (m)
Vp = Compression or sonic wave velocity (m/s)

Example Calculation
Assume hole spacing S = 7.2 m and Vp = 2500 m/s.

T = 0.6 (S/Vp) x 1000

T = 0.6 (7.2 m/2500 m/s) x 1000

T = 1.7 ms

Primary Concerns were:

Improving fragmentation
Increasing plant throughput
Max. 13% @ 6 in. + (152 mm)

Minimizing vibrations on slopes

Copper Mine in Chile

Copper Mine in Chile

Copper Mine in Chile

Normal Blast
Results

Copper Mine in Chile

Normal stemming &

42 ms hole delay

Stem Charge, 2 ms
hole delay & electronic
detonators

Copper Mine in Chile

Stem charge, 2 ms hole delay &

electronic detonators

Copper Mine in Chile

South Africa

South Africa

Quarry Maryland, USA

Max. explosives/delay increased 4-fold.

Peak vibrations - Reduced

KN2 - Right
2 m Stemming
2 m Stem charge
2 m Stemming

Main Charge

Coal Mine South Africa

Max. explosives/delay increased 4-fold.

Peak vibrations - Unchanged

Quarry Alabama, USA

Quarry 1 Pennsylvania, USA

Max. explosives/delay increased 4-fold.

Peak vibrations - Unchanged

CAP ROCK PROBLEM

Quarry 2 Pennsylvania, USA

BEFORE
Quarry 2 Pennsylvania, USA

After

Max. explosives/delay increased 8-fold.

Peak vibrations Increased only 25%

Quarry 2 Pennsylvania, USA

Before

Quarry 3 Pennsylvania, USA

Quarry 3 Pennsylvania, USA

Max. explosives/delay increased 8-fold.

Peak vibrations Increased only 30%

After

Quarry 3 Pennsylvania, USA

Max. explosives/delay increased 8-fold.

Peak vibrations Increased only 30%

After

Western Australia

180 ft
(55m)

Sequence

Stemming
525 ms

0 ms
0 ms

180 ft
(55m)

Explosive
column

525 ms

0 ms
0 ms

500 ms

Nonelectric
Detonator Timing
Hole Delay = 42 ms

0 ms

Electronic
Detonator Timing
Hole Delay = 10 ms

Muckpile height of nonelectric blast.

Muckpile height of electronic blast.

In Conclusion Improved Blast

Results Depend on Combining:

Precise electronic detonators.

Stem Charges.
Very short delays between holes.
Bottom & mid-column airdecks.
Good drilling controls.

Drilling & Blasting Audit

Sponsored by:

Orica Mining Services

BBS
Lima, Peru S.A..

Prepared for:

Gold Fields La Cima S.A.

Cerro Corona Mine

by

R. Frank Chiappetta, BSc., MSc., P. Eng.

Explosives Applications Engineer

Blasting Analysis International, Inc.

Allentown, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.

October 8, 2009
c

2009, Blasting Analysis International, Inc.

All Rights Reserved