NEW METHOD TO OBTAIN OPTIMUM PRESPLITTING DESIGN CRITERIA CONSIDERING

THE ROCK MASS PROPERTIES

Alvaro Gonzalez, Carlos Muoz1, lvaro Andrades
South Region Technical Services, Orica Mining Services-LATAM
1carlos.munoz@orica.com

Asiex 2012

Why Wall Control?

Wall Control is directly related to:
Sustainability
Mining Costs
Mining plans and opportunity cost
Productivity
Mine profitability

Typical Wall Control values

>15 MUSD/Year

The influence of rock blasting in the slope stability

Vibrations
& resonance in the far field
Pre-Split &
Buffer rows

?!

The influence of rock blasting in the slope stability

Typical blast damage
over benches

The influence of rock blasting in the slope stability

The Pre-Splitting practice-An introduction

Is the most used technique in the named controlled blasting.
Basically it consist in to obtain a pre-split plane that permit to
control the rock blasting damage.
To control and reduce seismic vibrations from the rock
blasting.
To reduce back break and reopening of preexisting geological
structures.
Safety of people and equipments working around benches.
Maintain integrity of benches, final highwalls and overall pit
slope angle.
To reduce bench remediation costs.

The Pre-Splitting practices-An introduction

Pre Split design is directly related to buffer row design

 Basically the pre-split practice consist of detonates two

simultaneous de-coupled explosives charge spaced to a S distance

The detonation of the explosive charges produces a stress that it is transmitted to the rock
massif in form of shock wave and gas pressure. The last one is considered as the responsible
for the creation of the pre-split planes.

 The objectives is to obtain a pre-split plane that permit to

reduce damage related to rock blasting

The Pre-Splitting practices-An introduction

The most used formula for to obtain the S distance between two de-coupled charges at
which the pre-split plane can be obtained is based on Sanden (1974)
Current methods consider only the static
tensile strength and a constant decay of
borehole pressure with the square of
distance.

The Pre-Splitting practices-An introduction

Current methods can not be scaled to rock massif

Dynamic method for pre-splitting design

The dynamic method to pre-split design follows the work developed for Liu and Katsabanis
(1993) and Onederra et al (2004)
The pressure decay proposed by Liu and Katsabanis;

Ro

Relation between Vp and Pre-Split Spacing

Relation between RQD and Pre-Split Spacing

Anlisis para un macizo fracturado con Vp < 3,000 m/s, RQD<65%
RCU:60 Mpa
RQD:65%
Disminucin de RQD

RCU:60 Mpa
RQD:60%

RCU:60 Mpa
RQD:<50%

Relation between density and Pre-Split Spacing

2.3 ton/mt
2.6 ton/mt
2.8 ton/mt

4.7 ton/mt
Mtodo canadiense

Application of dynamic method, case study n1

Pre-split design in argilic andesites

Current pre-split spacing = 2.2 m

Dymanic method=1.8-1.9 m

Application of dynamic method, case study n1

Case study area

BANCO 495

Filtro de precrote 65%

BANCO 480
Current pre-split design

BANCO 465

Application of dynamic method, case study n2

Pre-split design in chlorite metandesites

Current pre-split spacing = 1.8 m

Dymanic method=1.2 m

Current pre-split design

Case study area

Application of dynamic method, case study n3

Pre-split design in Qz-Sericite Granodiorite

Current pre-split spacing = 0.9-0.7 m

Dymanic method=1.3 m

Results with S=1.8 m

Results with S=1.3 m (Dynamic method)

Design achieved with S=1.3 m

Conclusion
The new method proposed considers Vp and Ed as a relevant variables into the
borehole pressure decay factor. Therefore geotechnical properties are contemplate.
Geotechnical properties of rock massif can be evaluated by cross hole techniques
(Vp).
The spacing of pre-split holes can be obtained for different geotechnical domains
follow the dynamic method.
Dynamic methods demonstrates Improvements in bench quality and bench design
achieved.

THANK YOU