Tritton Development Optimisation

Project
July-August 2010
Contents
• Charter Overview
• Project Overview
• Results
• Measurement
• Summary

• Conclusions and Recommendations

Charter Overview
The following was proposed
• Phase 1

• Ten cuts in designated drives with hypercharge + LP + Pentex D

• Phase 2

• Ten cuts with hypercharge +Pentex D + eDev

• Phase 3

• Ten cuts with hypercharge + Pentex D + eDev + smart timing

Aim was to deliver increased pull, improved perimeter and reduced

cycle time
Project Overview
The following was done
• Phase 1
• Benchmarking of existing practise with Hypercharge + LP + Plugs

• Phase 2
• Hypercharge + LP + Pentex D on the 7th of August
• Over 40 firings done (as at 17th August day shift)
• Nothing touched on the drilling pattern

• Phase 3
• Hypercharge + Pentex D + eDev on the 12th of August
• 12 firings done (as at 17th August)
• Nothing touch on the drilling pattern

No changes were made to drilling or loading practice (with the exception of

changes required for application of Pentex D)
Project Measurement

Measurement of blasting results for each phase of project consisted of

• Photogrammetric techniques
• Bored, Bogged and Scaled faces had full 3D survey conducted, average
face-to-face distances calculated
• To assess advance

• Taping
• Bored. Bogged and Scaled faces were dipped (using measuring pole to
confirm bored hole lengths and remaining butt lengths
• To assess advance
• Issues with taping
• Not all butts checked (not visible, blocked, inaccessible)

• Time observations
• Scaling time during bolt and mesh process observed
Using Photogrammetry

• Three surveys conducted for each cut

• Bored face
• Bogged heading
• Scaled heading

• Produce horizontal slices (contours) of each model

• Slices taken at 0.5 metre contour intervals
• Typically 8 contours per heading

• Determine lineal distance from face to face on each contour at

• Drive design centre line
• And 1.5m either side of design centre line

• Resulting in a sample of distance measurements from face to

face
Assessing advance rate
Assessing advance rate
Phase 1 benchmarking results
Hypercharge + Long Period dets +
Senatel Magnum (32 x 200) Short round
(3.6m) cuts min max avg

bogged 1 3.17 3.17 3.17

Short round – 90% advance*

Long round – 80% advance scaled - - - -

Taping of short round indicated advance

of between 2.4 – 3.4m
Long round
Taping of long round indicated advance (4.3m) cuts min max avg
of between 3.2 – 4.1m
bogged 3 3.06 3.54 3.31

Scaled 2 0.13** 0.13** 3.44

* Assumed 0.1 scaling advance

** Measured scaling advance
Phase 2 results
Hypercharge + Long Period dets + Pentex D

Short round
(3.6m) cuts min max avg

Short round – 88% advance 3.08

Long round – 89% advance bogged 4 2.74 3.41

Taping of short round indicated advance scaled 1 0.11* 0.11* 3.18

of between 3.2 – 3.4m
Taping of long round indicated advance
of between 3.6 – 4.3m
Long round
(4.3m) cuts min max avg
Pentex D benefit
• Similar performance on short bogged 5 3.25 4.16 3.76

rounds
Scaled 2 0.07* 0.08* 3.83
• Improvement on long rounds
(+400mm)

* Measured scaling advance

Phase 3 results

Hypercharge + eDev electronic Short round

(3.6m) cuts min max avg
dets + Pentex D
bogged 1 3.11 3.11 3.11

Short round – 94% advance

Long round – 99% advance scaled 1 - 0.28* 3.39

Long round
eDev benefit (over LP + Pentex D) (4.3m-4.4m) cuts min max avg

• Small improvement on short rounds bogged 3** 3.85 4.34 4.05

(+200mm)
• Improvement on long rounds scaled 2 - 0.38* 4.29
(+500mm, 900mm over LP + Magnum)

* Measured scaling advance

**4550 10S Ext not included (2.46m bogged), undercharging of
holes affected results
Phase 1-3 – Scaling observations

Scaling time component of Bolt and Mesh process was recorded

• Scaling with LP + Magnum 32x200

• Waste - 26 minutes
• Ore - 46 minutes

• Scaling with Pentex D + eDev

• Ore - 11 minutes
• Reduced scaling requirement on backs observed
• Increased scaling (volume) on face indicated in surveys (with eDev)
LP normal perimeter results, very minimal half barrels and not totally defined
+ eDev normal perimeter results with highly visible half barrels significantly reducing scaling times at
Phase 3 – eDev applications

• First two headings fired in 1.8 second duration

• 40m throw (long and low)
• Can potentially damage nearby services
• Very uniform fragmentation

• Last 10 headings fired in 3.2 second duration

• 18m throw
• ideal throw to prevent damage to services
• Uniform fragmentation
3.2 second shot duration throw, soccer ball as guide to show fragmentation distribution
Other Observations

• Variation in shot performance observed

• Length of remaining butts
• Requirement for scaling
• In part due to geological variations, however also affected by…..

• Variation in practices between shifts and operators

• Boring different patterns

• Consistency in charging
• Different charge lengths in use
Six reamer pattern, four
reamers and five reamers
were also observed

Burdens and spacings

were fairly uniform
Six reamer burn seen as majority in use for long rounds (4.3m) either located on the fourth row same as below
or either on the third row.
Five reamer burn either used for short (3.6m) or long (4.3m) rounds. The heading below is in long round
(4.3m) that resulted to 700mm butts after blast.
Four reamer burn seen twice in use with short boom (3.6m round). Both occasions resulted to butts of 1.2m
as measured by taping.
 Different charge hand operators have different practices

8 pump strokes 9 pump strokes 10 pump strokes

leaving 1.2m leaving 0.8m leaving 0.4m uncharged
uncharged collar for uncharged collar for collar for 4.3m rounds
4.3m rounds 4.3m rounds
Recommend using 8
Air
pump strokes for
Air 0.4 short bored faces
Air
(3.6m) and 10
0.8
strokes for long
bored faces (4.3m).
1.2
This shall leave an
uncharged collar
lengths of 400mm
CivDr1.0 6.20kg minimum for both.
CivDr1.0 5.60kg

CivDr1.0 5.00kg

4.3 4.3
4.3
Result of undercharged (8 pump strokes) long heading loaded on the 15th of August night shift and pictured 16th
shift. Big boulder containing a shothole with no trace of emulsion being loaded. The face did not pull leaving ove
Conclusions

Pentex D
• Use of Pentex D preferred by charge crew (user friendly)
• Ease of handling (6.1 kg total in a box)
• Less volume, more pieces, highly visible, positive detonator retention to minimise
potential misfires
• Stock management
• Results indicates consistent to small improvement in advance

eDev electronic detonators

• Significantly different results observed
• Improved muckpile profile
– Easier bogging (no time measurements taken, only positive operators comments such
as very easy bogging)
• Consistent Half barrel not previously seen at Tritton
• Reduced scaling
• Improvement in advance measured
• 500mm improvement for 4.3m rounds confirmed by full 3D survey
Recommendations
• Review Hypercharge processes across shifts/operators
• Training as needed
• Spot checks on charge hand practices

• Adopt Pentex D as standard product to replace 32 x 200 Senatel

Magnum

• Trial attached recommended pattern and benchmark against existing

pattern with LP + Pentex D primers in at least one dedicated drive
including jumbo drill operator and charge crew for at least ten cuts
each for straight drives (FW Drives, RAW’s / FAW’s) and cross cutting
• Orica to provide personnel to have a joint observation of results for a week

• eDev + Pentex D to be trialled with the proposed pattern after trial with
LP and Pentex
• eDev timing templates to be produced by Orica for use in different
material types and drive directions
eDev – Future improvements

• Multiple heading capability with eDev in development

• Beta test currently underway

• CEBS (remote firing system) with eDev

• Expected to be released within the year
• Compatible with Straits Analogue UG phone system
Existing pattern has a uniform
collar spacings/burdens.

The perimeters have the most

burden at the toe regions due
to look-out angles contributing
to dishing effect.

On occasions, centre shothole

run into reamer/s impacting
blast results.
Burn detail and void ratio

Void ratio of 30.4 %

For existing pattern
which is really good
above the rule of
thumb of 15%.
However, it does
provide only a single
chance to create that
initial void.
Proposed drill pattern
Collar burden for the perimeter is
set at 600mm, this will still result
to a toe burden having the least
(no more than 800mm) provided
the perimeters does not look-out
by more than 300mm.

Three shotholes more at the burn

with one less reamer added
building redundancies at the burn
region giving more insurance to
pull the burn to drilled depth.

Neutral drilling time is expected

with one less reamer and 3
additional shotholes. Reaming
takes about 4:56 minutes while
shothole takes about 2:14
minutes as logged.
Proposed drill pattern burn detail
Increased void ratio on
each four shotholes
looking into 3 reamers
against existing pattern by
more than 4%.

Four chances to create

that initial void. The work
load is distributed into four
shotholes against one
compared to the existing
pattern. First four
shotholes are shielded
from each other.

Ease in drilling as pattern

is on square grid.
Acknowledgement

• Tritton Straits for the opportunity to trial the Pentex D and

eDev products

• Pybar for their cooperation

• Orica on-site personnel