“ We Add More Values”

THIESS
Sangatta Mine Project

PROJECT
REPORT

Herlando Juniansyah Putra

297555

0 Thiess Indonesia
 “ We Add More Values”

DRILL AND BLAST

SQUARE PATTERN

GDP Mining – Drill and Blast Department

This document will describe about evaluation of Drill and Blast activity in
changing holes pattern from Staggered to Square in order to decreasing Powder
Factor (PF) and increasing productivity of the excavators.

April, 27th 2013

1
 “ We Add More Values”

Table of Contents

I. What Drill and Blast Pattern Is……………………………………………………… 4

II. Explosive Usage……………………………………………………………………….. 7
III. Digging Time and Productivity of Excavators………………………….................. 9
IV. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………….. 15

2
 “ We Add More Values”

Overview

In October 2003, Thiess secured a Life of Mine Contract (LOM) with

PT. Kaltim Prima Coal to operate the Melawan and J Pits at the Sangatta Mine Site
in East Kalimantan. The contract involves the clearing of vegetation, stripping of
topsoil, and the removal of 103 million bank cubic metres of overburden annually to
extract and haul coal up to 15 km to the site processing facilities at the rate of 14.5 million
tonnes per annum. The contract also includes the re-instatement and re-vegetation of the
mines area. In 2013, there are 3 pits mining remain here:
1. Melawan Pit
a. Ambalat
b. Angel
2. Mustahil Pit
3. Peri Pit

One of mining procedure is Overburden Removal, in order to expose and mine coal
laying under it. Overburden usually as sediment stone like sandstone and clay. Those stone
have hardness as its natural properties, as result of sedimentation buried process. So to break
and excavating the overburden, drill and blast is needed.

Drill and blast activity must be planned well so it will make more advantage to
company. In the other side, if drill and blast were not planned well, it will took effect
increasing of operational cost and technically blasting process will have bad effect to
environment like ground vibration, air blast, poisonous fumes, and fly rock. Usually, this
activity will be done in one sequence. Drilling process is required to insert the blasting
explosive into the ground by drilling the ground. After that, there will be to blast the area, so
that materials can be hauled easier.

3
 “ We Add More Values”

I. What Drill and Blast Pattern is

Figure 1, Bench Blasting Geometry

Drill and Blast pattern is the position of drill holes that shows types and variation
distance of spacing and burden between holes in one row or column, as important part to be
good control bench blasting result. There are 3 were known of drill and blast pattern :

1. Square Pattern
Square pattern shows that position of burden and spacing in same distance
(burden = spacing). The position of next holes straight in a line with the holes before
and in front of it. Same distance each side. Figure below shows that the area of blast
effect for every hole. Square pattern have zone in the middle that the impact of
blasting couldn’t reach.

Figure 2, Square Pattern Drill Holes Position

4
 “ We Add More Values”

2. Rectangular Pattern
Rectangular pattern shows that spacing is bigger than burden. So the
combination of holes looks like rectangle shape. Maximal distance of spacing could be
twice of burden distance. This pattern have much bigger area that’s not in range of
blast impact. It could excalate to bad fragmentation of rocks.

Figure 3, Rectangular Drill Holes Pattern

3. Staggered Pattern

The position of the next drill holes right in the middle of spacing line for next
rows. The advantage of this pattern is have result of blast energy more and give
uniformity of fragmented rock. Especially for optimum good fragmented rock is
spacing at 1.15 of burden.

The advantage of this staggered pattern could implemented to square pattern

with some conditon. Firstly, for spacing and burden should be shorter. Secondly,
arrange the initiation as well as staggered (zig-zag) or row by row.

Figure 4, Staggered Position for Drill Holes

5
 “ We Add More Values”

The effective Burden (Be) and the effective Spacing (Se) depend not only upon the
blast holes pattern, but also upon the sequence of firing. A square blast holes pattern
which is fired row by row from the face gives an effective burden equal to the
spacing between successive rows parallel to the face. On the other hand, an identical
pattern of blast holes can be fired echelon resulting in completely different burdens and
spacings.

Once the pattern has been designed, it is most important that the blastholes are
drilled in the correct place, at the correct angle and to the correct depth. There is a very
good reason to have the face surveyed and every blasthole measured out carefully.
Optimum blasting results can be achieved only where the correct burdens and spacing are
selected and then implemented.

6
 “ We Add More Values”

II. Explosive Usage

This section will inform about explosive usage those two patterns, staggered and square. Compare both of them based on Blastholes
depth and Powder Factor (PF). Surely it will describe in Plan vs Actual table below :

Plan for Staggered Pattern Plan for Square Pattern Actual

Powder Powder Powder Factor (PF) Powder Factor (PF)
BlastHoles Explosive BlastHoles Explosive BlastHoles
Factor (PF) Factor (PF) Staggered Pattern Square Pattern
Depth (m) (kg) Depth (m) (kg) Depth (m)
(kg/c.m) (kg/c.m) (kg/m.c) (kg/c.m)
3 17 0.118 3 17 0.118 3 0.187 0.120
4 34 0.159 4 34 0.158 4 ~ 0.198
5 52 0.180 5 52 0.179 5 0.246 0.156
6 69 0.193 6 69 0.192 6 0.254 0.230
7 105 0.243 7 105 0.242 7 0.242 0.234
8 141 0.280 8 141 0.279 8 0.320 0.262
9 141 0.245 9 141 0.244 9 0.304 0.274
10 178 0.274 10 178 0.274 10 0.327 0.287
11 215 0.299 11 215 0.297 11 0.312 0.288
12 252 0.319 12 252 0.317 12 0.335 0.321
13 271 0.314 13 271 0.313 13 0.334 0.318
14 309 0.330 14 309 0.329 14 0.327 0.341
15 347 0.345 15 347 0.344 15 0.335 0.351
16 386 0.357 16 386 0.356 16 0.32 0.359
17 425 0.369 17 425 0.367 17 ~ 0.365
18 464 0.379 18 464 0.378 18 ~ ~
Average 212.96 0.275 Average 212.96 0.274 Average 0.296 0.274
*Data above was picking up from Drill and Blast Explosive Reconcile,
comparing between Staggered PF & Square PF from January - March
2012 and 2013 based on holes depth

Figure 5, Table of Plan and Actual PF from each Pattern

7 Thiess Indonesia
 “ We Add More Values”

Figure 6, Graphic of Plan and Actual PF from each Pattern and Various Depth

Drill and Blast team has defined that ideal PF is 0.321 kg/c.m. Graph above shows that PF from Staggered Pattern (red line) sometimes
get higher from planned PF. Especially at 5 to 6 meter and 8 to 10 meter of depth, could going to 0.35 kg/c.m. That’s mean more explosive will
use to blast those holes. If we look at Square Pattern PF (green line), it could get close to planned PF, especially in 12 meter of depth (PF =
0.321 kg/c.m). Square Pattern PF could get close with planned PF. When blastholes getting deeper, spent more explosive, and PF increasing
too.
8
 “ We Add More Values”

III. Digging Time and Productivity of Excavators

Digging time is how long an excavator’s bucket could dig some broken overburden
material, from bucket blade first touch to overburden surface, till bucket dig and filled fully.
Digging time is depend to :

- Hardness of overburden material

- Excavator’s bucket dig capability (power & type)

Digging time performance is very important, because it being a part of whole

excavators hauling cycle time (dig - swing full bucket - dumping to truck vessel - swing empty
bucket - dig). So in this section will show the Digging Rate and Productivity of Excavators
based on actual digging time data of three excavators. Hitachi Ex. 5500 (Big Digger Ex. 3009),
Hitachi Ex. 3600 (Ex. 3042), and Hitachi Ex. 2600 (Ex. 1769). It will be shows and comparing
side to side between Staggered and Square pattern, and how’s it effect to excavator’s
digging productivity.

A. Productivity of Excavator Hitachi EX. 5500 (Ex. 3009)

In order to see how’s the productivity changing that Square Pattern have been
made, here’s the collective productivity data of Ex. 3009 from January – March 2012
(when still using Staggered Pattern) comparing with productivity data from same month
but in 2013 (when applying Square Pattern). Beside that, graphic below shows the actual
field productivity data from Square Pattern, collect digging time of Ex. 3009 from 1st, 2nd,
and 3rd layer cut (M-62C, Angel, Melawan Pit) in order to get theoretic calculation
productivity.

1) January 2012 & 2013

Figure 7, Graphic of Productivity Ex.3009 from each Pattern (January 2012 and 2013)
9 Thiess Indonesia
 “ We Add More Values”

2) February 2012 & 2013

Figure 8, Graphic of Productivity Ex.3009 from each Pattern (February 2012 and 2013)

3) March 2012 & 2013

Figure 9, Graphic of Productivity Ex.3009 from each Pattern (March 2012 and 2013)

10
 “ We Add More Values”

From the graphs above could see different excavator productivity between Square and
Staggered pattern. In January, productivity of excavator 3009 from Staggered Pattern’s
productivity is getting low in the middle month.

In February, Staggered Pattern got low productivity in beginning, in the middle of

month it start getting high. But Square Pattern shows stable production. In March, both of
them are keeps going good. Staggered Pattern shows good productivity of digger, even some
of more above target (1.800 bcm/hours in March 11th, 2012), it happen too in Square
Pattern (1.750 bcm/hours in January 11th, 2013). Both of Staggered and Square shows
fluctuated productivity, Staggered Pattern geting more fluctuative, the gap between raise
and down is bigger than Square Pattern.

Analysis from that matter could be causes by something else, like broken diggable
material is still hard to excavate, boulder fragment make digger’s bucket doing passing to
truck vessel much harder, or because in that month there’re a lot of rain that made
excavator’s working hours getting cut and productivity getting low (should check more
correlation with rainy days). But one thing for sure, excavator’s productivity when applying
Square Pattern shows good, could keep going with defined production target, and little
fluctuate production gap. But there’s some decreasing productivity when dig for 3rd layer
cut. According to theoretical calculation based on Digging Rate, when digger cut getting
depth, digging time getting long, broken material is getting hard, so that made productivity
for 3rd layer cut is getting down. Digging time data for the last cut (4th) haven’t picked up yet.

B. Productivity of Excavator Hitachi EX. 3600 (Ex. 3042)

1) January 2012 & 2013

Figure 10, Graphic of Productivity Ex.3042 from each Pattern (January 2012 and 2013)
11
 “ We Add More Values”

2) February 2012 & 2013

Figure 11, Graphic of Productivity Ex.3042 from each Pattern (February 2012 and 2013)

3) March 2012 & 2013

Figure 12, Graphic of Productivity Ex.3042 from each Pattern (March 2012 and 2013)

12
 “ We Add More Values”

From those 3 months, digger productivity from Staggered Pattern relative good,
even better that Square Pattern. Staggered shows high digger productivity in January and
March (March 7th, 2012), but sometimes productivity got low till 400 bcm/hours. Many
working hours lose. But too bad in February Staggered pattern didn’t show good
productivity performance, in the other hand, Square pattern shows much better
productivity, even could reach till 1800 bcm/hours (more than target). Both of those
patterns have their own raise and down productivity. With Staggered or Square Pattern,
Hitachi EX. 3600 could keep up on production.

C. Productivity of Excavator Hitachi EX. 2600 (Ex. 1769)

1) September 2012 & January 2013

Figure 13, Graphic of Productivity Ex.3042 from each Pattern (September 2012 & January 2013)

In this section, Hitachi Ex.2600 is smallest diggers among Ex.5500 and Ex.3600,
that’s mean this digger have lower productivity, dig capability, and bucket capacity. From
first graph could see that digger’s productivity from Square Pattern didn’t work well,
almost below target all time. Staggered Pattern working more well, but some fall down
production in the end of month is should worried for. Because of the excavator 1769
starting use in Sanggatta Project is September 2012, so this report can’t compare &
explain it with same month like at Ex.3009 and Ex.3042. Overall, Square Pattern could
have productivity result as good as Staggered, even more sometimes, and even worse
sometimes. Another condition maybe much more taking control it.

13
 “ We Add More Values”

2) October 2012 & February 2013

Figure 14, Graphic of Productivity Ex.3042 from each Pattern (October 2012 & February 2013)
3) November 2012 & February 2013

Figure 15, Graphic of Productivity Ex.3042 from each Pattern (November 2012 & March 2013)

14
 “ We Add More Values”

IV. Conclusion
From all explanation, describing, and comparison above, here’s some conclusions for
Square and Staggered Pattern :

1. Square Pattern is better than Staggered Pattern in Explosive Usage and Excavators
Productivity.
2. Square Pattern could decrease explosive usage. It shows up at Powder Factor table
(Figure 5 and 6). Average PF from Staggered Pattern is 0.296 kg/c.m and for Square
Pattern is 0.274 kg/c.m. Decreasing percentage is 7.44% (actual).
3. Excavators Productivity :

PRODUCTIVITY OF ALL EXCAVATORS (BCM/Hours)

Staggered Square Actual Percentage of Raise Digging Rate Digging Rate Digging Rate
EX. 3009
Pattern Pattern and Down Productivity (%) 1st Cut 2nd Cut 3rd Cut
Jan 2012 - 2013 1352.1 1585.6 17.27% 1496 1533 1417
Feb 2012 - 2013 1036 1626.1 56.96% 1496 1533 1417
Mar 2012 - 2013 1581.7 1575.5 -0.39% 1496 1533 1417
EX. 3042

Jan 2012 - 2013 1048.2 1048.9 0.07% 1328 ~ ~

Feb 2012 - 2013 549.5 1181.5 115.01% 1328 ~ ~
Mar 2012 - 2013 1067.9 1091.9 2.25% 1328 ~ ~
EX. 1769

Sep 2012 - Jan 2013 696.6 686.6 -1.44% 838 ~ ~

Oct 2012 - Feb 2013 666 814.5 22.30% 838 ~ ~
Nov 2012 - Mar 2013 671.5 727.7 8.37% 838 ~ ~

4. Drill and Blast Pattern aren’t the main major factor that could control productivity.
Another condition maybe much more taking control it, like weather, services
schedule of every units, working hours, utilization, mechanical availability, and
standby time.

15