Flyrock risk assessment in blasting operations

Mohammad Reza Davarzani

Mohammad Ataei (  ataei@shahroodut.ac.ir )
Farhang Sereshki

Research Article

Keywords: Explosion, Mining, Road Construction, Risk Management, Risk Identi cation

Posted Date: December 15th, 2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2370672/v1

License:   This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Read Full License

Additional Declarations:
No competing interests reported.

Tables 1-7 is available in the Supplementary Files section.

 Flyrock risk assessment in blasting operations
Mohammad Reza Davarzani1, Mohammad Ataei2, Farhang Sereshki3
1
PhD candidate in Mining Engineering, Shahroud University of Technology (Kharazmi Campus).
mohammadrezadavarzani7@gmail.com. 05144231150.
2
Professor, Faculty of Mining Engineering, Petroleum, Geotechnics, Shahroud University of Technology,
ataei@shahroodut.ac.ir. 02332392204-9
3
Professor, Faculty of Mining Engineering, Petroleum, Geotechnics, Shahroud University of Technology, farhang-
sereshki@shahroodut.ac.ir. 02332392204 – 9

Abstract
Creating a safe environment is one of the most main indicators in any project. This research has
been carried out with the aim of identifying the risks related to flyrock in blasting operations in
the road construction project in hard rock. Flyrock is one of the destructive consequences of
blasting operations, which occurs in the form of uncontrolled and unintentional flyrock fragments
out of the blast area with high energy and speed. These stone pieces Sometimes their hit of people
and Equipment can lead to irreparable injuries. 54 flyrock events were identified and prioritized
with the help of experts and review of scientific records and observation and inspection. A fault
tree was created for the risk of flyrock that was analyzed as a top event. The opinions of 10 experts
on the probability rate of flyrock were completed using the method of linguistic variables. Experts
were awarded points using the significance coefficient table of each expert. Using mathematical
relations, the consensus of experts was calculated fuzzily. The resulting numbers were fuzzy using
the relationships. The probability rate of the flyrock event was calculated under uncertainty 0.4907.
Keywords:
Explosion, Mining, Road Construction, Risk Management, Risk Identification,
1. Introduction
The technologies used in mining and construction projects are becoming more advanced day by
day and more powerful tools and larger machines are being used. Therefore, necessary measures
must be taken for safety in the use of these tools, equipment and machinery. In this way,
machinery, equipment and manpower can be well protected, Reduce the secondary costs imposed
on the project and prevent delays and problems in the project. Managers will be successful in
workshop and project work to minimize risks. Prevent accidents at work and minimize problems.
By avoiding risks, the project will be completed on time, which will have a direct impact on the
final cost and profitability of the entire project. All these factors on the one hand and the safety
and health of the workforce on the other hand have made safety in all stages of the project, one of
the important factors. Identifying risk factors and knowing the probability of their occurrence and
ranking will give managers information so that they can minimize the risk and show appropriate
and timely responses to these risks. The dangers of flyrock in blasting projects in mines and road
construction in hard rock, especially in mountainous areas that work by blasting and are associated

1
with a lot of equipment and machinery, should be given special attention. In this way, accidents
are controlled. Because flyrock is one of the critical issues of blasting operations and greatly affects
the safety of personnel and equipment. Great care must be taken when flyrock during blasting
operations. This is unpredictable and rocks of different dimensions are thrown at different
distances at different speeds after the explosion in all directions. Because even the smallest parts
due to high speed, will be accidental in dealing with equipment, machinery and manpower and
structures. By choosing a risk management system and flyrock risk management in mining and
construction projects, project costs can be greatly reduced, increased the level of safety in the
workshop. Increased progress in road construction projects and production in mines, and increased
safety credibility for project management.
Explosion in the cycle of mines and construction and road construction projects is one of the
important stages. This stage requires specialized and expert force to do the work and the incidents
in this section are many. One of the most critical explosions is flyrock. Risk management should
reduce these risks and work to maintain equipment and save the lives of professionals. Risk
assessment is one of the most important steps in project management, One of the main components
of the health management system is safety at work and the environment; Is a technique for
identifying and evaluating components; It is also one of the factors that can jeopardize the success
or failure of a project or achieve a goal. This process is a way to quantitative and qualitative risks
and to examine the potential consequences of potential accidents. In this way, the efficiency of
existing control methods is determined and improved and valuable data is provided for risk
reduction decisions. Mining and road construction projects in the mountains, due to their nature,
insufficient knowledge of the state of the land, environmental conditions and uncertainty in related
cases compared to other projects, are always associated with a high percentage of risk. Rehak et
al. and Bajpayee et al. found that rock fragments from flyrock can range in size from a few
centimeters to large pieces. Hence, their treatment of people can lead to irreparable injuries and
even death. In addition, the collision of such stone pieces with machinery and buildings can cause
serious damage (Rehak et al, 2001), (Bajpayee et al, 2002). Bajpayee et al. estimated flyrock and
insecurity in the blast area, which caused specific damage and accidents, at 68.2% (Bajpayee et al,
2004). Mishra et al. and Raina et al. after examining data from US blast operations, concluded that
flyrock accounted for 32% of blasting accidents. These statistics have been reported by many
researchers, which indicates the importance of flyrock (Mishra et al, 2013) and (Raina et al, 2015).
Explosion safety assessment was performed by fault tree analysis method by Kouhdarii et al. The
Fault tree Analysis Method (FFTA) has been proposed as a tool for risk analysis related to blasting
operations. A flyrock incident is considered as a combination of incidents and related components
and the fault tree is used to plot the interrelationships of these components and connections. Using
the minimum cutting set technique, the most critical, most important and most vulnerable
component in explosion events is flyrock. It was also found that strengthening and supporting
surveillance operations is an effective and important measure to prevent flyrock in explosion
operations (Kouhdarii et al, 2016). Mohammad Ataii in his book on risk management, presents all
the stages of risk from identification to response to risk (Ataii, 2016). In their dissertation,
Vazifedan performed risk assessment in tunnel construction projects using the explosion method
using a combination of fault tree analysis method and multi-criteria decision model.

2
Fuzzy fault tree method and fuzzy hierarchy were used. This paper examines the risks of explosion
and drilling in tunneling. The rate of risk of flyrock is 0.462 and the risk of flyrock had the highest
probability of occurrence in the risks of explosion operations (Vazifedan, 2017). Kiani et al.
evaluated the risk of explosion operations in open pit mines using fuzzy hierarchical method. In
this study, some root causes and consequences of drilling and explosion were extracted from the
research of many researchers, which was weighed using the opinion of experts and risks with
higher probability of occurrence and severity were identified. In this study, no verification was
performed for the results (Kiani, 2019). Norouzi masir et.al. Evaluated the risk of flyrock in surface
mines using the combined FFTA-MCDM method. They showed that design error has the greatest
impact on flyrock incidents. Design errors, human error and natural factors with numbers 12, 6
and 2 have a higher probability of occurrence in flyrock (Norouzi masir et.al, 2020).
1-1- Data and research method:
In this part of the research, we review the steps and concepts in identifying the risk and method of
fuzzy fault tree (FFTA) in calculating the probability of occurrence of events.
1-1-1- Risk identification methods:
The risk identification process is a qualitative process (Lavastreet al, 2012), which aims to identify
and describe the risks affecting the project objectives. In a closer look, risk identification is the
process of identifying potential risks affecting the project and determining the characteristics of
each and documenting them. Project risk identification is not subject to a specific time of
implementation; Rather, the implementation of this process should be disciplined and during the
implementation of the project. The overall goal of risk identification is to provide a complete list
of project risks and opportunities and each of the project activities and ensuring that risk
assessments cover all risk categories. Risk identification is an iterative process this is initially done
by part of the project team or risk management team. In the next steps, it will be done by the whole
project team and the main stakeholders. In this process, both internal and external risks must be
considered. A number of information gathering techniques to identify risks include:
1-1-1-1- Identification to help analyze documents and review historical records
By examining the historical background of previous projects, risks can be identified and revealed
(WAY, 2020). For this purpose, the following should be considered:
Risk category lists
Risk lists
Probability and impact of risks
Risk response programs
Experiences gained
Risk articles and books and publications

3
Examining previous project records saves a great deal of risk management time and the repetition
of past mistakes is prevented.
1-1-1-2- Identification by viewing and inspecting other documents:
By examining current project documentation, such as plans and assumptions, it is possible to
identify more risks. This can be done in groups or individually and at general and partial levels,
by the people who are most familiar with the items mentioned.
1-1-1-3- Identification by interview method:
Whenever you ask for the opinions and ideas of others or get intellectual help from people, you
are actually doing an interview. During all stages of the risk management process, you can use
interviews with experts such as experts, employers and senior managers to get expert opinions.
1-1-1-4- Identification by mental storm method:
A brainstorming session is a meeting held to solve problems or come up with new ideas. This is
the most common risk identification technique. It is also used in other issues related to risk
management. The purpose of using brainstorming in this section is to obtain a list of risks that are
used in the analysis process. Sources of risk are identified by providing different opinions and
reviewing them by the group and then the risks are categorized according to the type.
1-1-1-5- Identification using pre-occurrence analysis session:
Pre-occurrence analysis is like a brainstorming session, which is held in order to achieve new
ideas. The difference is that in such meetings the group is asked to assume that the project is
completed or has been completed; then imagine that the project failed to achieve some of its goals.
Finally, the group is asked to explain why the project failed.
1-1-1-6- Identification by nominal group technique:
The nominal group technique is used when we need to use collective thinking instead of individual
ideas. This group sometimes consists of sections or individuals who are marginal stakeholders of
the project or wish to be included in this list. The result of applying this technique is to draw the
attention and focus of individuals to the group's overall opinion about the specific risks of the
project.
1-1-1-7- Identification by Delphi technique:
By using the Delphi technique, agreed ideas can be reached from various expert opinions. In this
way, experts' opinions about the risks in the project, quantitative analysis of identified risks,
necessary measures, etc. can be collected anonymously and extracted the abstract and its product
in a way that was also agreed upon by the group.
1-1-1-8- Analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats:
The main difference between this technique and other methods of analysis is that this technique
looks at risks and opportunities from the perspective of the whole organization, not within the

4
project space. This method raises four basic questions for individuals or groups and the answers
received should be as clear and concise as possible.
Asking about organizational strengths;
Asking about the weaknesses of the organization;
Asking about the opportunities the project has provided;
Asking about threats to the project;
1-1-1-9- Identification by Hypothesis Analysis Method:
Each project is based on a set of possible and scalable hypotheses and scenarios. Hypothesis
analysis is a technique for measuring the validity of hypotheses. In this method, those project risks
that are due to inaccuracy, inconsistency and incomplete project assumptions are identified.
1-1-1-10- Identification by graphing techniques:
A common feature of all graphing techniques is that they are all visual guides to risks that may
have been overlooked or misplaced. If the charts are drawn well, the information provides more
risks for the organization. They also increase team awareness and understanding of the project.
Diagrams such as dependency diagrams, cause and effect, process or system flow, impact, force
field are among these.
1-2- Fuzzy fault tree method (FFTA) in calculating the probability rate of events:
In this method, an unfavorable or critical situation is selected as the top event and then, depending
on the environment and the performance of the system, all the ways can be searched that can cause
this undesirable situation (Hetang W, 2017). Then all the causes of failure are systematically sorted
into a top-down structure that looks like a tree. The structure of the fault tree continues until it
reaches the smallest components of the system, called basic events.
In short, the fault tree contains one top event and several intermediate events. The basic events are
combined through a logical gateway to make the top event happen. After drawing the fault tree,
the cut sets and the minimum cut sets can be obtained. Determining the probability rate of each
basic event is not possible due to lack of sufficient information and accurate estimation of the
probability rate of basic events; therefore, in this stage, the fuzzy approach and its combination
with the opinion of experts is used. An expert is someone who has enough information about the
system under evaluation and be familiar with the fault tree analysis method. These experts may
not be of equal weight and each expert should be assigned a factor of importance according to the
type of responsibility, work experience, education and age. For example, Table (1-1) shows how
to score based on the characteristics of experts. Based on this, the coefficient of importance of each
expert is obtained from the total points obtained by him, divided by the total points obtained by all
experts (7).
Table 1): Scoring based on the characteristics of experts (Renjith et al, 2010)

5
Expert opinions on basic events can be obtained using linguistic variables. Phrases very low (VL),
low (L), medium (M), high (H), very high (VH) are examples of linguistic variables. Trapezoidal
fuzzy numbers can be used to fuzzy them as shown in Figure (1-8) or Table (1-2).
Figure 1): Linguistic variables used by experts (Renjith et al, 2010)

Table (2): The weight of linguistic variables in quantifying the opinion of experts (Lavassani et
al, 2015), (Shulei Shi et al, 2018)

After the consensus of experts on the probability of occurrence of basic events in the form of fuzzy
numbers, due to the large variables and extensive calculations of fuzzy numbers, fuzzy numbers
must inevitably become definite numbers. There are several methods for non-fuzzy, the most
important of which are: Center of gravity method, largest maximum method, average maximum
method, smallest maximum method, surface halving method. Then, similar to the fault tree
analysis method, the probability of top event, importance and classification of cutting sets are
minimized.
The equation for converting a trapezoidal fuzzy number to definite numbers is as follows:
1 (𝑎4 +𝑎3 )2 −𝑎4 ∗𝑎3 – (𝑎1 +𝑎2 )2 −𝑎1 ∗𝑎2 (1)
3 (𝑎4 +𝑎3 −𝑎2 −𝑎1 )
The resulting number of non-fuzzy is still a possible number. Since the fault tree is probable, the
resulting number must be converted from possibility to probability. For this purpose, the following
equation can be used (10):

1 (2)
FP= {10𝑘
0

1
1−𝐶𝐹𝑃 3 (3)
k= [ ]* 2.301
𝐶𝐹𝑃

FP: Probability of failure of any terminal event

CFP: Possible number from the non-fuzzy step
Then the determination of high probability rate, importance and classification of minimum cutting
sets is done. Using the formulas of port ((and)) (formula 4) and port ((or)) (formula 5), the
probability rate of intermediate and top events is calculated.

6
 P(E0) = ∏𝑚
𝑖=1 𝑃(𝐸1) (5)

P(E0) =1- ∏𝑚
𝑖=1(1 − 𝑃(𝐸1)) (6)

2- Assessing the risk of flyrock in blasting operations of road construction projects in hard rock
by fuzzy fault tree analysis method:
Risk assessment includes two categories, quantitative and qualitative. In this regard, various
techniques such as fault tree analysis can be used. Fault tree analysis is a quantitative evaluation
method. Of course, this is done when the assessor has sufficient information about the probability
of equipment failure rate. Fault tree analysis is one of the optimal models for risk assessment. In
this research, using the fuzzy fault tree analysis method, the possibility of risk and blasting and
explosion in the road construction project in hard rock is determined. The steps of this research
are presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2): Steps of conducting research

In this study, based on studies and surveys conducted on mountain roads in the southeastern
regions of Iran, the flyrock event was investigated. The flyrock was determined by the opinions of
experts, review of scientific records, observation and inspection of intermediate and basic events,
and the fault tree of this top event was formed according to Figures (3, 4, 5 and 6)
Figure (3): Tree chart of the flyrock top event

Figure (4): Continue the tree diagram of the flyrock intermediate event

Figure (5): Continue the tree diagram of the flyrock intermediate event

Figure (6): Continue the tree diagram of the top event of flyrock

After forming the fault tree and considering the basic events, since the necessary information on
determining the probability failure rate of the basic event was not available, fuzzy logic was used
to determine the probability rate. The steps began with the selection of a team consisting of relevant
specialists and experts. Expert opinions were collected using linguistic variables using
questionnaires. These questionnaires are given in Table (3).
Table (3): Expert Questionnaire

7
After preparing the questionnaire, this questionnaire was given to 10 blasting operations experts
and was completed by them and then collected. Expert feature score table was calculated based on
the opinion of RENJIT et al. These scores are given in Table (4). After collection, the experts'
answers were placed in a table. The experts' answers are given in Table (5).
Table (4): Scoring based on the characteristics of experts

Table (5): Experts' answers to the questions of the basic events regarding the probability rate in
the form of linguistic variables

Using Figure (1) and Table (2), the opinions of experts about each event were formulated in Excel
and the probability rate of each event was calculated. Table (6) shows the calculated probability
rates of basic events.
Table (6): Probability rate of major flyrock events in firefighting operations

After calculating the probability rate of each basic event using the formulas of ports ((and)) and
port ((or)) that were loaded in Excel software, the calculations of intermediate events and finally
the calculation of the top event of flyrock was done. The probability rate of the flyrock event was
calculated to be 0.4907. This probability rate indicates a high probability of occurrence in the
probability of occurrence of blasting operation events.
In Table (7), the probability rates of intermediate and top events are calculated using formulas (4)
and (5). Flyrock basic events is shown on the placement in the fault tree.
Table (7): Intermediate and top events of flyrock probability

3- Discussion and conclusion:

In this study, flyrock, which is one of the most important events in blasting operations, was
investigated. Identification of basic events related to flyrock was identified using three methods:
review of scientific and historical records, consultation with experts, and visits and inspections and
observations. The event fault tree was drawn and the experts who were selected to comment on
these basic events presented their views in a linguistic variable and in the prepared questionnaires.
Expert opinions were collected and by writing formulas in Excel software, fuzzy numbers became
non-fuzzy. Then they became possible numbers. Here the probability rate of occurrence of basic
events was calculated. Using ports ((and)) and (or) that were specified in the fault tree and related
formulas, the formula was rewritten in Excel software and the rate of probability of occurrence of
intermediate and top events was calculated. As can be seen from these data, the highest probability
of occurrence of intermediate events are operational errors, design errors and unforeseen natural
error errors, respectively. In operational error events, the highest probability of occurrence is

8
related to drilling carelessness with a value of 0.11641. This issue is affected by the three basic
events of long working hours (fatigue), lack of work conscience, and mental preoccupation of
manpower, respectively, from the maximum to the least impact. In the case of design hazards, the
greatest impact on increasing the probability rate of occurrence of improper delay time, improper
explosion sequence, low amount of row spacing. In the case of unforeseen natural disasters, human
error has the greatest impact on increasing the probability of its occurrence. These human errors
are also affected by the factors of long working hours (fatigue), lack of work conscience mental
preoccupation of human resources with the highest probability of occurrence.

It is suggested that due to the results and that inappropriate delay time and improper explosion
sequence and short row spacing have the greatest impact on design errors, the necessary accuracy
should be done during the calculations and calculations should be done several times and one or
more consultants should be used for calculations as much as the organization can. On the other
hand, due to human errors and at the top of them, long working hours the cause unfortunate events
and damages and interruptions in work, reduce working hours as much as possible for work
environments with difficult and harmful conditions. If it is not possible to reduce working hours
according to the project time, use more forces, so that the forces move with each other and rest in
between work and fatigue does not affect their work. Regarding the issue of work conscience, the
necessary training and the use of work advice should be provided for such people. In order for
people to have the necessary enthusiasm and motivation to work, and if this work is not repeated
and these actions are performed intentionally, the necessary and effective encounters are made
with them. For the subject of the mental occupation of the people employed in the workshop and
the managers and officials who are in direct contact with the force, some points should be observed.
These tips include: Creating peace in the workshop, establishing friendly relations with the labor
force, listening to the hearts and problems of the labor force and solving the problems that can be
solved.

References
(1) Rehak, T.R. Bajpayee, T.S. Mowrey, G.L. Ingram, D.K. (2001). “Flyrock issues in blasting.in:
proceedinngs of the 27th annual conference on explosives and blasting technique”, International
Society of Explosives Engineers (ISEE), 1, 165–175.
(2) Bajpayee, T.S. Rehak, T.R. Mowrey, G.L. Ingram, D.K. (2002). “A summary of accidents due
to flyrock and lack of blast area securrty in surface mining 1989 to 1999. In: proceedings of the
28th annual conference on explosives and blasting technique”, International Society of Explosives
Engineers (ISEE), 2, 105–118.
(3) Bajpayee, T.S. Rehak, T.R. Mowrey, G.L. Ingram, D.K. (2004). “Blasting injuries in surface
mining with emphasis on flyrock and blast erea security”, Journal of Safety Research, 35(1), 47-
57.

9
(4) Renjith, V.R. Madhu, G. Lakshmana Gomathi Nayagam, V. Bhasi, A.B. (2010), “Two
dimensional fuzzy fault tree analysis for chlorine release frome a chlor-alkali industry using expert
elicitation”, Jornal of Hazzardous Materials, 1,103-110.
(5) Lavassani, S.M. Zendegani, A. Celik, M. (2015). “An extension to Fuzzy Fault Tree Analysis
(FFTA) application in petrochemical process industry”, Process Safety and Environment
Protection, 93, 75-88.
(6) Mishra, A.K. Mallick, D.K. (2015). “Analysis of blasting related accident with emphasis on
flyrock and its mitigation in surface in mines in: proceedings of rock fragmentation by blasting,
frag blast 10”, Taylor and Francis, London, 555-561.
(7) Raina, A.K. Murthy, V.M.S.R. Soni, A.K. (2015). “Flyrock in surface mine blasting:
understanding the basics to develop a predictive regime”, Current Science, 108(4), 660–665.
(8) Kouhdarii, M. Ataii, M. Sereshki, F. Mohammadi, S. (2016). “Presenting a risk assessment
approach to investigate explosion operations in mines, 10th Iran Mining engineering student
conference”, Kashan, Kashan University.
(9) Ataii, M, (2016). Risk Management. Shahrood University of Technology Press. Shahrood.
(10) Lavastre, O. Gunasekaran, A. Spalanzani, A. (2016). “Supply chain risk management in
French companies”, Decision Support Systems, 52(4), 828-838.
(11) Hetang, W. Jia, L. Deming, W. Zonghou, H. (2017). “A novel method of fuzzy fault tree
analysis combined with VB program to identify and 5ssess the risk of coal dust explosions”, Plose
One. 1-15
(12) Vazifedan, R. Ataii, M. Khalookakaei, R. (2017), “Risk assessment in tunneling projects by
drilling and blasting method using a combined method of error tree analysis and multi-criteria
decision model”, PhD Thesis, Shahrood University of Technology.
(13) Shulei, Sh. Bingyou, J. Xiangrui, M. (2018). “Assessment of gas and dust explosion in coal
mines by means of fuzzy fault tree analysis”, International Journal of Mining Science and
Technology, 28, 991-998.
(14) Kiani, M. Hosseini, S.H. Taji, M. Gholi Nejad, M. (2019). “Risk assessment of blasting
operations in open pit mines using fahp method”, Mining of mineral deposits, 13, 76-86.
(15) Norouzi Masir, R. Ataei, M. Motahedi, A. (2020). “Risk Assessment of flyrock in surface
mines using an ffta-mcdm combination”, Journal of Mining and Environment (JME), 12(1), 191-
203.
(16) Way, F. (2020). “Ergonomic Appraisal of Blasting Activities at Majan limestone quarry
Raleke Ralus Okeke”. Journal of Ergonomics, 10(2), 260-271.

10
Figures

Figure 1

Linguistic variables used by experts (Renjith et al, 2010)

Figure 2

Steps of conducting research

Figure 3

Tree chart of the y rock top event

Figure 4

Continue the tree diagram of the y rock intermediate event

Figure 5

Continue the tree diagram of the y rock intermediate event

Figure 6

Continue the tree diagram of the top event of y rock

Supplementary Files
This is a list of supplementary les associated with this preprint. Click to download.

Tables.docx