Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
Initiation devices for controlling blasts have come from open trains of black powder
poured on a tunnel floor to highly sophisticated electronic systems that ensure
microsecond precision in the firing sequence.
What is of particular interest with electronic systems is the capability to incorporate all
of the advantages,
of each
advantages of the available electronic technology over what was until very recently
considered state of the art in sequential blasting practice.
Delta Caps International, a leader in electronic detonator technology, has developed
specific software and analysis techniques for incorporating the geomechanical
characteristics of the rock into a blast design. Examples will be presented from a
variety of customer experiences to demonstrate results from the application of this
technology.
Finally, a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet will be presented showing a highly simplified
method of justifying testing of electronic blasting systems in an open pit environment
Patrick McLaughlin
The Rock Mechanics, EIRL
Tripoli 140-A, Miraflores
Lima 18, Peru
241-5448, fax 241-9954
e-mail : rokmech@attglobal.net
advantages of the available electronic technology over what was until very recently
considered state of the art in sequential blasting practice.
What is of particular interest with electronic systems is the capability to incorporate all
of the advantages,
of each
When we include
downstream effects of blast success (or failure) in the equation, it boils down to the
ability to predict results.
SAFETY FUSE
In the earliest days of black powder use, miners were forced to resort to such clumsy
and dangerous methods for controlling blast initiation as :
To correct this situation, William Bickford created what has universally become known
as safety fuse. Injuries in the Cornish mines dropped 90% as a result of this seemingly
minor advance in blasting technology. In addition, the miners were given a method by
which they could actually control and predict the sequence of holes detonating in a
blast. This was, in essence, a quantum leap in blasting technology.
FUSE AND CAP
Alfred Nobel patented a fuse detonator for initiating nitroglycerine in 1855, based on
black powder. This was simply a small wooden capsule filled with fine grain black
powder,
Shortly
afterwards more sophisticated fuse caps were developed with mercury fulminate as the
base charge in a copper shell, and this basic design has changed very little to the
present day.
Fuse and cap is still the preferred method of underground developement blasting in
many areas of the world, a decision based almost entirely on the unit cost of the
assembled initiator.
ELECTRIC INITIATION
On surface projects, plagued by wandering livestock, pedestrians, passing trains and
ships, fuse blasting was simply too variable and difficult to control. This led to the
developement of a type of delay electric cap that combined an electric fuse lighter with
a short length of capped safety fuse.
bridgewire and the fuse cap, delay blasting within a relatively short period of time could
be carried out. It is interesting to note that an electric delay detonator came before
the instantaneous version.
About twenty years later the instantaneous electric blasting cap was patented. The
next step was obvious - control of the firing sequence. A variety of external timing
devices were created for shooting electric caps in sequence, based on moving contact
bars,
As a result,
sequential blasts
continued to be an adventure.
Inevitably, delay electric detonators were developed and the race was on to produce
the shortest and most accurate firing times
DETONATING CORD
With the increased use of electric detonators came the realization that they were prone
to accidental initiation from stray electrical currents, discharges of static electricity,
induced currents and ground currents generated by lightning strikes. Around 1935,
detonating cord was offered to the explosives industry as an initiation system immune
to these phenomenon.
Detonating cord has no inherant delay depending on the length of cord between holes,
since the time for the detonation front to advance over these relatively short distances
is far too short to give any appreciable relief. As a result, the timing sequence was
often created using surface connections with delay electric detonators. This simple
system was still prone to accidental intiation from stray electrical currents, etc, but the
total exposure time was much shorter than with a complete electric blast.
With the introduction of surface delay connectors by DuPont Explosives about 1950,
the risks from induced and stray currents (but not from lightning strikes!) was
overcome.
NONEL SHOCK TUBES
Operators soon realized that blasting with detonating cord carried a very high risk of
cut-offs due to ground movement during the blast. In addition, detonating cord will
initiate cap-sensitive explosives, making bottom priming impossible when the column
charge includes these products.
limitation, but it wasnt until the introduction of the non-electric shock tube system
(nonel) about 1970 that top initiating of explosive columns and energy losses from
radial deflagration were controllable.
A SYSTEM INCORPORATING ALL OF THE ABOVE
Efforts to incorporate electronic control of firing times into a detonator assembly began
as far back as 1979, but the technology available at that time was too bulky and
outright expensive for any advance into the traditional mining market. Initiation system
suppliers were concentrating heavily on converting from electric over to nonel systems,
and most research and developement on the electronic answer was kept relatively low
profile.
These range from units with factory pre-set firing times to fully field-
programable systems,
open pit blasts.
measures to eliminate or minimize the risks generally associated with electrical blasting
systems. Prices, compared to pyrotechnic systems, appear to be prohibitively high,
but on closer examination it can be seen that they can actually reduce overall drilling,
blasting and material processing costs.
POINT BY POINT COMPARISONS
Before going into the technical benefits of precise timing by presenting some case
study results,
extremely simple
Disadvantages
ELECTRIC DETONATORS
Advantages
Disadvantages
can be initiated by :
stray electric currents
induced currents in circuit
static electric discharges
DETONATING CORD
Advantages
impervious to :
stray electric currents
induced currents
static discharges
Disadvantages
NONELS
Advantages
impervious to :
stray electric currents
induced currents
static discharges
Disadvantages
ELECTRONIC
Advantages
insensitive to :
stray electric currents
induced currents
static discharges
Disadvantages
SO WHY CHANGE?
Rapid advances in the study of the fracture processes in rock under explosives
stresses have resulted in a much better understanding of the importance of individual
firing times of detonators in a sequential blast.
could be incorporated into a blast design with precise detonator times. To complicate
matters further,
influenced equally by the same firing sequence, regardless of whether we maintain all
other variables in the blast design equal.
Obviously an operator
cannot adjust a drilling pattern to suit the delay available, and a quick calculation using
the potential scatter in pyrotechnic delays proves that such a measure would be
pointless anyway. In short, currently available pyrotechnical detonators have defined
the limits of optimization achievable. This is a classic example of work being defined
by the tools available for its completion.
With the inherant precision of electronic control, and the ability to define delay intervals
based on the existing geomechanical properties of the rock,
a new dimension in
fragmentation control is opened up. Operators can now tailor the blast to specific
gradation requirements, reduce to a minimum the total energy required to produce this
material and improve drill productivity through pattern expansions without putting the
fragmentation at risk.
From the point by point comparison presented earlier, and the technical advantages
presented here, it is obvious that on both technical and safety aspects, the electronic
systems are equal or superior to anything available on the market.
However,
primarily on cost. Traditionally drilling and blasting were considered as single costitems in the total operations cost analysis.
approach to a more global view, including the downstream effect of drill and blast
performance on the total cost of mining. It is not the intention of this paper to do an allinclusive analysis of cost benefits,
An entire generation of
blasters have been affected by this transition, and are subconciously suspicious of any
blasting circuit that encompasses an electrical current.
or blasting with
detonator has failed or not been correctly tied in. In addition, the field programmable
systems give the blaster the option of changing the delay sequence to offset the effect
of a detonator which has failed to test.
The only truly complex aspect of an electronic detonator system is the circuitry inside
the detonators and control boxes themselves.
sophisticated than can be found in control systems of modern automobiles, with the
added advantage that they can be tested by the user before they are put to use.
No
underground studies have been included, but various success stories are available to
support the use of electronic blasting technology in underground operations.
New Zealand, open pit (Martha Gold Mine, Newmont)
improved fragmentation
Detonators - Sasol
United States of America (summary data, no specific mines named)
limestone quarries
approximately 30% reduction in vibration levels
improved fragmentation, more uniform
increased primary crusher through-put
crushing costs reduced up to 25%
Detonators - Daveytronics
reduced over-break
CONCLUSIONS
The gradual transition from crude, and very dangerous, initiation practices of the early
19th century to the micro-second control available today with electronic detonators has
been presented to put our collective search for control into perspective. We now have
the tools available to define the quality of our work, and have only to overcome our
own reluctance to put these tools and their supporting technology into practice.
1. Electronic detonator systems have been designed to eliminate, or at the very
least reduce to acceptable levels,
operations and rock conditions around the world and have proven that the
potential benefits of precise, user defineable timing justify the effort of a test
program.
120.00
311
16
17.5
$7.50
$131.25
EXPLOSIVES CONSTANTS
meters
mm
meters
meters
Stemming
Specific gravity
Linear charge
Explosive cost
Cost per meter
Cost per hole
7.50
0.80
60.77
$0.35
$21.27
$212.70
meters
gm/cc
kg/m
per kg
Pattern adjustments for the following comparison are limited to the spacing only.
Spacing has been expanded by 4.75% in this example.
Prices used are approximate values, based on industry averages.
Nonel
Burden
Spacing
Theoretical drill factor
Actual drill factor
Shift production
Drilling cost / m3
9.25
10.50
97.13
88.80
10656
$0.084
Primer
Initiator
Surface accessories
Explosives
Total
Blasting cost / m3
Total (drill+blast) / m3
Electronic
m
m
m3/m
m3/m
m3
Burden
Spacing
Theoretical drill factor
Actual drill factor
Shift production
Drilling cost / m3
9.25
11.00
101.75
93.03
11163
$0.081
$2.25
$2.25
$0.65
$212.70
$217.85
$0.140
Primer
Initiator
Surface accessories
Explosives
Total
Blasting cost / m3
$4.00
$17.50
$0.00
$212.70
$234.20
$0.144
$0.225
Total (drill+blast) / m3
$0.224
m
m
m3/m
m3/m
m3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Atlas Powder Company, Explosives and Rock Blasting, 1987 edition
Canadian Industries Limited, Blasters Handbook, 1950 edition
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Company, Blasters Handbook, 1942 edition
Olofsson, S., Applied Explosives Technology for Construction and Mining
Persson, P. A., et al, Rock Blasting and Explosives Engineering
Bartley, D. A. et al, Electronic detonator technology : field application and safety
approach,
J. T,
Ensign Bickford
Company
Svrd, J., Possibilities with accurate delay time, Rock Fragmentation by Blasting,
Fragblast 4, Vienna, Austria, 1993
Martin Creamers Mining Weekly Online, Double win for electronic detonators, 29
November, 2002
McClure, R. A. and Bartley, D. A., Daveytronic digital detonator cost analysis study,
Minnesotas First International Surface Blasting Conference, Duluth, 1999
Mhle, H., Improving the trough opening process at Priemier Mine using Electronic
Delay Detonators, Sixth International Symposium for Rock Fragmentation by
Blasting, Johannesburg, South Africa, 1999
Solomon, V. J., MacNulty, N.M.H.C., The application of electronic delay detonator
systems in narrow width deep level stoping, Sixth International Symposium for
Rock Fragmentation by Blasting, Johannesburg, South Africa, 1999
Ngoma, J. C., et al, Smoothwall blasting the Finsch Diamond Mine using the EZTronic electronic detonator system, Sixth International Symposium for Rock
Fragmentation by Blasting, Johannesburg, South Africa, 1999
Bosman, H. G., et al, Production blasting with electronic delay detonators at Peak
Quarry, Eigth High Tech Seminar on State of the Art Blasting Technology,
Instrumentation and Explosives Applications, Nashville, USA, 1998