EVALUATION OF SPECIFIC CHARGE PARAMETER ON OPEN-PIT BLASTING

*Abdurrahman TOSUN
1
, Grcan KONAK
2
, Ahmet Hakan ONUR
2
, Doan KARAKUS
2
, Tugce
ONGEN
2
1
Dokuz Eylul University, The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences,
Department of Mining Engineering
Buca-Izmir/Turkey
(*Corresponding author: abdurrahman.tosun@deu.edu.tr)
2
Dokuz Eylul University, Engineering Faculty,
Department of Mining Engineering,
Buca-Izmir/Turkey





EVALUATION OF SPECIFIC CHARGE PARAMETER ON OPEN-PIT BLASTING

ABSTRACT

It is very important for after blasting processes that muck pile fragmentation is predicted and
controlled during blasting. Therefore, a significant research effort has been devoted to the development
of mathematical equations that predict the value of average muck pile fragmentation. The specific
charge parameter used in all of these equations is determined as the ratio of the total mass of
explosives used to break a volume of rock. The length of blast surface and the row number of the
blasthole are ignored in the calculation of the specific charge. However, in a blasting operation,
blasthole geometry may result in additional material being impacted by a blasthole. This is due to
effect shares of in both end sides of blastholes and the back region of blasting surface. In this study, a
total of 14 blast tests, 8 at the first quarry and 6 at the second quarry of the Bati Anadolu (Western
Anatolia) Cement Factory, were performed. In each study area blast tests were designed in the same
direction continuously to provide stable structural properties of the rock. Therefore muck pile
fragmentation depended on only specific charge values for each blast tests. Specific charge values
were calculated according to both an average blasthole and also the total volume of material occurred
as a result of blasting for each blast tests. During loading until the end of blasted material the front, the
back, the arm off and the bucket off pump hydraulic pressure values occurred in hydraulic pistons of
the loader were determined with a lot of data received for each blast tests. After that the relationships
between specific charges values obtained according to two different methods and hydraulic pressure
values of the loader were established with two correlations. The relationships between specific charges
values obtained according to the total volume of material occurred as a result of blasting and hydraulic
pressure values of the loader occurred as the best results especially the blasting operations that have the
total length of blasting surfaces are short.




KEYWORDS

Specific charge, blast, muck pile fragmentation

INTRODUCTION

Muck pile fragmentation that determines efficiency of loading, hauling and crushing
operations is the most important parameter in open-pit blasting. Muck pile fragmentation predicted
before blasting operations can help control the cost of open-pit processes. Therefore, some scientists
have developed mathematical equations that predict to muck pile fragmentation before blasting in
order to manage the cost of these operations.

Langefors and Kilhstrm (1963), Holmberg (1974) and Larsson (1974) developed an equation
called SveDeFo and it predicts the value of average muck pile fragmentation as follows (Ouchterlony,
2003).

XSu = u.14S. [
Ltot
H
. |B
2
1.25
SB
]
0.29
.(
Cock
Sx.q
)
1.35
(1)

Where:
XSu =The value of average muck pile fragmentation (cm)
f = 1 + 4.67. (1
Itot
E
)
2.5

Ltot = Column charge length of explosive material (m)
B = Blasthole length (m)
B = Blast burden (m)
S = Blast spacing (m)
Ciock = The rock constant
SBx = The amount of dynamite per amount of explosive material
q = Specific charge (kg/m
3
)

Bergmann, Riggle and Wu (1973) improved an equation that predicts the value of average
muck pile fragmentation and have used the amount of energy occurred by per amount of explosive
material in the equation (Ouchterlony, 2003).

XSu =
A.B
(].c.q)
0.6
(2)

Where:
A = Rock mass factor
f = 1 + 4.67. (1
Itot
E
)
2.5

e = The amount of energy occurred per amount of explosive material (Joule/kg)

Rustan (1981) suggested an equation that calculated the value of average muck pile
fragmentation according to burden, spacing and radial cracks of blasting surface. Grady and Kipp
(1987) developed an equation as regards radial cracks of blasting surface and used in the equation that
calculated the value of average muck pile fragmentation and was suggested by Rustan. After that
Persson et al. (1994) developed the equation and suggested as follows (Ouchterlony, 2003).

XSu = constont. (Kc)
13
. ](B. S)
1
6
.
1
2[ .
1
(q.
2
)
13

(3)

Where:
Ktc = Resistance to the spread of crack in the rock
= Hole diameter (m)
= Blasting detonation velocity (m/s)

Cunningham (1983, 1987) also suggested an equation called as Kuz-Ram with respect to the
value of average muck ile fragmentation as follows.

XSu = A. c
1
6
. (
115
SAn]o
)
1930
.
1
q
0.8
(4)

Where:
c = The amount of explosive material in a blasthole (kg)
SAno = The percentage of the amount of Anfo (it is 100)

Kou and Rustan (1993) suggested another equation with respect to the value of average muck
pile fragmentation as follows (Ouchterlony, 2003).

XSu = u.u1. (pc)
0.6
. B
0.2
. (SB)
0.5
.(EItot)
0.7
/(
0.4
.q) (5)

Where:
pc = Rock density (kg/m
3
)
Chung and Katsabanis (2000) proposed another equation called as CK as follows.

XSu =
A.B
0.0S
.S
0.061
.H
0.03
q
1.193
(6)

Scientists have used rock mass factor, blasthole geometry and specific charge parameters all
of above equations that predict the value of average muck pile fragmentation before blasting
operations. Besides this, the specific charge parameter has been used all of equations effectively. In
the literature, some researchers have developed equations that calculate the specific charge value
(Heinze 1974, Langefors and Kihlstrom 1978, Toper 1988). But in these equations specific charge
calculations were based on an average blasthole. In other words, the length of blast surface and the row
number of blasthole have not been considered in these equations. A specific charge factor calculated
according to this method will not give true results if some amount of material is blasted due to the
effect of share blasthole influence in both the end sides of blastholes and the back region of the
blasting surface (Figure 1).



Figure 1 Top view of the combination of the volume of material values blasted as additional

This additional material will affect the total amount of material produced as a result of
blasting. In other words, when a blasting operation has two or more holes, the specific charge value
will be determined incorrectly. In this case, the shorter length of blasting surface is the more effect of
some materials blasted as additional to the amount of material calculated according to blasthole
geometry will be on the specific charge factor. The total amount of material volume as a result of
blasting will be the amount of material calculated according to blasthole geometry and some additional
amount of material blasted due to the effect of shared influence in both end sides of blastholes and the
back region of blasting surface. Therefore, the specific charge factor should be obtained such that the
amount of explosive material and the total amount of material produced by blasting are.

As mentioned by many researchers muck pile fragmentation is directly related to a specific
charge value and structural properties of the rock. It is important that which method specific charge
values obtained provide more accurate results so as to determine muck pile fragmentation as a result of
blasting. To determine muck pile fragmentation in generally image processing techniques have been
used (Wipfrag, Split etc.). However, it is known that there are some deficiencies in the determination
of size distribution with heap image processing technique occurring as a result of blasting. The fact
that very fine grains in the heap cannot be taken into account in the determination of size distribution
and the third dimensions of the grains cannot be seen over the heap come to the fore among these
deficiencies.

It is known from the literature that the larger the average size value of the heap increases, the
more the loader is forced. Hydraulic pressure values occurred in hydraulic pistons of the loader and
being the parameters determining whether the loader would be forced during loading of blasted
material. This situation will give some correct information about the degree of the average muck pile
fragmentation occurred as a result of blasting.

In this study some blast tests were carried out in two different limestone quarry. In each study
area blast tests were designed in the same direction continuously to provide stable structural properties
of the rock. Therefore muck pile fragmentation depended on only specific charge values for each blast
tests. Specific charge values were calculated according to both an average blasthole and also the total
volume of material occurred as a result of blasting for each blast tests. During loading until the end of
blasted material the front and the back pump hydraulic pressure values occurred in hydraulic pistons of
the loader were determined with a lot of data received for each blast tests. After that the relationships
between specific charges values obtained with two different methods and hydraulic pressure values of
the loader were established with two correlations.

FIELD STUDIES

In this study, a total of 14 blast tests, 8 at the first quarry and 6 at the second quarry of the
Bati Anadolu (Western Anatolia) Cement Factory, were performed. To load the material, backhoe-type
hydraulic loaders were used with loader bucket volumes of 3 m at the first quarry and 3.6 m at the
second quarry. The same loader operator worked on all tests to ensure that the field studies were
conducted under the same conditions. In these blast tests, the controllable parameters of the blast
operation, the front and the back pump hydraulic pressure values occurred in hydraulic pistons of the
loader during loading and also as the total amount of material that was fragmented by blasting using a
weight scale belongs to company were determined. The total amount of material fragmented by
blasting consist of only blasted material, in other words, the excavator operator did not try to dig any
additional materials for all of blast tests.

For each blast test, the controllable parameters of the blast operation were determined
accurately. These parameters included, the blasthole burden, the blasthole spacing, the blasthole
diameter, the amount of explosive material and the bench height values. The technical parameters for
the blast tests are given in Table 1. It is also given in Table 1 the amount of material values calculated
using blasthole geometry. Especially some short lengthen blasting surface operations were performed
at the second limestone quarry for the purpose of examining the.

Table 1 The controllable parameters of the blast tests measured in the field
Test No. No. holes
D
(mm)
B
(m)
S
(m)
H
(m)
Qtot
(kg)
Vtot
(m
3
)
First quarry
1 30 89 2.50 2.44 9.50 1043.75 1738.500
2 20 89 2.77 2.25 10.50 662.50 1308.825
3 20 89 2.37 2.39 10.10 637.50 1144.189
4 12 89 2.84 2.11 10.10 370.00 726.279
5 18 89 2.55 2.10 10.10 561.25 973.539
6 18 89 2.17 2.43 12.50 861.25 1186.448
7 20 89 2.39 2.33 16.00 1362.50 1781.984
8 12 89 2.18 2.64 10.00 407.50 690.624
Second quarry
1 2 127 3.06 4.80 16.0 251.25 470.00
2 2 127 3.13 4.74 16.0 251.25 474.74
3 2 127 3.82 4.80 16.0 268.75 587.52
4 2 127 3.87 4.20 16.0 276.25 520.80
5 3 127 3.96 4.30 16.0 426.88 870.24
6 2 127 4.47 3.50 16.0 301.25 500.40
D= Hole diameter
B= Average burden
S= Average spacing
H= Average bench height
Qtot= The total amount of explosive material
Vtot= The volume of material calculated using blasthole geometry

The front and the back hydraulic pressure values occurred in hydraulic pistons of the loader
and were the parameters determining whether the loader would be forced during loading of blasted
material were measured in order to determine the correctness of average size values of the heap. In all
blast tests except for the 1
st
realized at the first limestone quarry, instantaneous hydraulic pressure
values in loader monitor during the loading of the material formed as a result of the blasting were
measured with image processing (Tosun et al., 2012). Loader average hydraulic pressure values
measured during the loading of all material formed as a result of blasting in blast tests and approximate
data numbers used in the obtainment of these average hydraulic pressure values are given in Table 2.





Table 2 Values measured for determining loader hydraulic pressure values in the limestone quarries
Test No.
Average front
pump
Average back
pump
Total number
of datapoints
(kg/cm
2
) (kg/cm
2
)
(piece)
First quarry
1
2 192.46 185.83 69356
3 181.20 183.83 6906
4 189.24 193.02 6030
5 172.72 177.19 45524
6 161.10 160.85 73190
7 165.56 169.85 42914
8 169.82 176.69 29530
Second quarry
1 151.84 152.24 35880
2 152.41 155.58 126140
3 161.20 163.66 239024
4 161.30 164.10 86038
5 161.40 164.10 25764
6 158.70 159.40 157180

The material produced by blasting was transported to the crushing plant with trucks belonging
to the factory to be processed as aggregate. The total amount of material transported was measured
with a weigh scale belonging to the factory for all blast tests. The total volume of material produced by
blasting was calculated by dividing the total amount of material obtained by the unit weight of rock for
each blast test (Table 3).

Table 3 The amount and volume of material occurred as a result of blasting for blast tests
Test No
Total amount of
material as a result of
blasting (tonnes)
Unit weight of
rock
(tonnes/m
3
)
Total volume of material
as a result of blasting
(m
3
)
First quarry
1 5512
2.65
2080
2 4157 1569
3 3722 1404
4 2448 924
5 3168 1195
6 3815 1440
7 5987 2259
8 2272 858
Second quarry
1 1607
2.65
606
2 1692 639
3 2454 926
4 2428 916
5 3990 1506
6 2443 922

Specific charge values calculated according to both an average blasthole and the total amount
of material volume as a result of blasting were determined using the volume of material for blasthole
geometry and the total volume of material as a result of blasting calculated for each blast test (Table 4).


Table 4 Specific charge values calculated according to both an average blasthole and also the total
amount of material volume as a result of blasting
Test
No.
Qtot
(kg)
Volume of
material
calculated using
blasthole
geometry (m
3
)
Total volume
of material as
a result of
blasting (m
3
)
Specific charge
values calculated
according to
average blasthole
(kg/m
3
)
Specific charge values
calculated according to
total amount of
material volume as a
result of blasting
(kg/m
3
)
First quarry
1 1043.75 1738.500 2080 0.600 0.502
2 662.50 1308.825 1569 0.506 0.422
3 637.50 1144.189 1404 0.557 0.454
4 370.00 726.279 924 0.509 0.401
5 561.25 973.539 1195 0.577 0.469
6 861.25 1186.448 1440 0.726 0.598
7 1362.50 1781.984 2259 0.765 0.603
8 407.50 690.624 858 0.590 0.475
Second quarry
1 251.25 470.00 606 0.535 0.415
2 251.25 474.74 639 0.529 0.393
3 268.75 587.52 926 0.457 0.290
4 276.25 520.80 916 0.530 0.302
5 426.88 870.24 1506 0.491 0.283
6 301.25 500.40 922 0.602 0.327

EVALUATION

Relationships between specific charges values obtained according to two different methods
and hydraulic pressure values of the loader were established with correlations (Table 5, Figures 2 5).

Table 5 Specific charge values and loader hydraulic pressure values
Test No
Specific charge
values calculated
according to average
blasthole (kg/m
3
)
Specific charge values calculated
according to the total amount of
material volume as a result of
blasting (kg/m
3
)
Average front
pump
(kg/cm
2
)
Average back
pump
(kg/cm
2
)
First quarry
1 0.600 0.502
2 0.506 0.422 192.46 185.83
3 0.557 0.454 181.20 183.83
4 0.509 0.401 189.24 193.02
5 0.577 0.469 172.72 177.19
6 0.726 0.598 161.10 160.85
7 0.765 0.603 165.56 169.85
8 0.590 0.475 169.82 176.69
Second quarry
1 0.535 0.415 151.84 152.24
2 0.529 0.393 152.41 155.58
3 0.457 0.290 161.20 163.66
4 0.530 0.302 161.30 164.10
5 0.491 0.283 161.40 164.10
6 0.602 0.327 158.70 159.40
At the first quarry, the relationships between the front-back pump hydrualic pressure values of
the loader and specific charge values calculated according to the total amount of material volume
occurred as a result of blasting established were higher than specific charge values calculated
according to an average blasthole (Figures 2, 3).



Figure 2 Relationship between the front and back pump hydraulic pressure values of the loader and
specific charge values calculated according to an average blasthole at the first quarry



Figure 3 The relationships between the front -the back pump hydraulic pressure values of the loader
and specific charge values calculated according to the total amount of material volume occurred as a
result of blasting at the first quarry

At the second quarry, whereas the relationships between the front-back pump hydrualic
pressure values of the loader and specific charge values calculated according to an average blasthole
could not be established, the relationships between the front-back pump hydraulic pressure values of
the loader and specific charge values calculated according to the total amount of material volume
occurred as a result of blasting was obtained as high correlation (Figures 4, 5).



Figure 4 The relationship between the front -the back pump hydraulic pressure values of the loader
and specific charge values calculated according to an average blasthole at the second quarry



Figure 5 The relationship between the front -the back pump hydraulic pressure values of the loader
and specific charge values calculated according to the total amount of material volume occurred as a
result of blasting at the second quarry

As seen in the above figures, the total volume of material used in the calculation of specific
charge for a blasting operation, gave better results for the efficiency of the loader due to muck pile
fragmentation as a result of blasting. This situation was realized particularly some blasting operations
that have the total length of blasting surfaces are short at the second limestone quarry. Therefore
specific charge values calculated according to the total amount of material volume occurred as a result
of blasting should be used in the mathematical equations that predict to muck pile fragmentation before
blasting. The additional volume of material blasted should be calculated before blasting operations.
This will ensure that specific charge is calculated accurately especially in cases where there is a short
blasting surface.

Blasthole diameter, rock strength and discontinuity properties of blasting surface values affect
the influence of shares in both end sides of blastholes and the back region of blasting surface to a
significant degree. For this reason, additional research should be conducted in order to determine effect
of these parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, 14 blast tests were carried out in a two different limestone quarry. In each study
area blast tests were designed in the same direction continuously to provide stable structural properties
of the rock. Therefore muck pile fragmentation depended on only specific charge values for each blast
tests. The control variables were measured and the volume of material was calculated according to
blasthole geometry before blast tests. After blast tests, the total volume of material resulting from
blasting and the front and the back pump hydraulic pressure values occurred in hydraulic pistons of the
loader were measured during material loading-hauling for all of blast tests. The relationships between
hydraulic pressure values of the loader and specific charge values obtained according to both an
average blasthole and also the total amount of material volume occurred as a result of blasting were
established with some correlations. The total volume of material used in the calculation of specific
charge for a blasting operation, will give better results for the efficiency of the loader due to muck pile
fragmentation as a result of blasting. Therefore, specific charge values should be calculated according
to the total volume of material.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We wish to thank The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK)
for providing funding for this research project and Western Anatolia Cement Factory for their help
during field studies.

REFERENCES

Bergmann O. R., Riggle J. W., & Wu F. C., (1973). Model rock blasting Effect of explosives
properties and other variables on blasting results. International J. Rock Mechanics and
Mining Sciences,10, 585 612.

Chung S. H., & Katsabanis P. D. (2000). Fragmentation prediction using improved engineering
formulas. International J. Fragmentation by Blasting, 4, 198 207.

Cunningham C .V. B. (1983). The Kuz-Ram model for prediction of fragmentation from blasting. In
Proc 1st Int. Symposium on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting, pp. 439 453.

Cunningham C. V. B. (1987). Fragmentation estimations and the Kuz-Ram model four years on. In
Proc 2nd Int Symp on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting, pp. 475487.

Grady, D. E., & Kipp, M. E., (1987), Dynamic rock fragmentation. In Fracture Mechanic of Rock.
B.K. Atkinson (ed), pp. 429 475. Academic press, London.

Henze, H. et al. (1974). Hanbuch Sprencg Technik, Leibzing, GDR.

Kou S., & Rustan A. (1993). Computerized design and result prediction of bench blasting. In Proc 4th.
International Symposium on rock fragmentation by blasting. H.P. Rossmanith (ed), pp. 263
271, Balkema Rotterdam.

Langefors U. & Kihlstrm B., (1963), The modern Technique of rock blasting. Almqvist and Wicksell,
Uppsala, Sweden.

Langefors & Khlstrm (1978). The Modern Technique of Blasting, 3rd Ed, Halsted Press, Sweden.

Ouchterlony, F. (2003). Influence of blasting on the size distribution and properties of muckpile
fragments, a state of the art review. Lulea University of Technology, Swebrec.

Persson, P. A., Holmberg R., & Lee J. (1994). Rock blasting and explosives engineering. CRC Press,
Boca Raton FL.

Rustan, A. (1981) Fragmentation influencing factors in rock blasting. Technical rapport Lulea
university of Technology, Lulea, Sweden, 1981:38T

Toper, A. Z. (1988). Study on Blasting Parameters in TKI Open Lignite Mine, A Master Thsesis,
OTDU, Ankara.

Tosun, A., Konak, G., Karaku, D., & Onur, A. H. (2012). Determination of loader efficiency with
hydraulic pressure values. International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM,
Bulgaria, 531 538.