According to Norilsk Nickel (1995) the procedures for Air blast Monitoring are the

following.
Placement of the microphone relative to the structure is the most important factor. The
microphone should be placed along the side of the structure nearest the blast
The microphone should be mounted near the geophone with the manufacturers wind screen
attached.
If practical, the microphone should not be shielded from the blast by nearby buildings, vehicles
or other large barriers. If such shielding cannot be avoided, the horizontal distance between the
microphone and shielding object should be greater than the height of the shielding object above
the microphone.

If placed too close to a structure, the airblast may reflect from the house surface and record
higher amplitudes. Structure response noise may also be recorded.
Reflection can be minimized by placing the microphone near a corner of the structure. (RI 8508)
Site conditions dictate certain actions when programming the seismograph to record airblast.
Trigger level. When only an airblast measurement is desired, the trigger level should be low
enough to trigger the unit from the airblast and high enough to minimize the occurrence of false
events. The level should be slightly above the expected background noise for the area. A good
starting level is 120 dB.

Recording duration. When only recording airblast, set the recording time for at least 2 seconds
more than the blast duration. When ground vibrations and airblast measurements are desired on
the same record, follow the guidelines for ground vibration programming

According to Rio Tinto (2010) the test procedures for air blast are the following:
It is particularly important in respect of ground vibration measurement that the vibration
transducer be completed to the ground in an approved manner.

The intent of these criteria is to minimize annoyance and discomfort to persons at noise sensitive
sites (e.g. residences, hospitals, schools) caused by blasting.
The recommend criteria apply to mining, quarrying, construction and all other operations which
involve the use of explosives for fragmenting rock.
The recommended criteria apply only to the minimization of annoyance and discomfort arising
from blasting. The control of damage from blasting is the responsibility of state/Territory mines
authorities and reference should be made to these bodies to ascertain recommend damage
criteria. The recommended criteria are for guidance only and may be varied if necessary to suit
local site conditions.

Recommended Criteria
Airblast Overpressure
The recommended maximum level for airblast overpressure is 115 dB (Lin Peak).
The level of dB may be exceeded on up to 5% of the total number of blasts over a period of 12
months. However, the level should not exceed 120 dB (Lin Peak) at any time.
Experience has shown that for almost all sites PPV of less than 1 mm/
Sec is generally achieves. It is recognized that it is not practicable to achieve a PPV of this level
at all sites and hence a recommended maximum level of 5 mm/sec has been selected. However,
it is recommended that a level of 2 mm/sec (PPV) be considered as the long term regulatory goal
for the control of ground vibration.
Blasting should generally take place no more than once per day. (This requirement would not
apply to minor blast such as for clearing crushers, feed chuts.)
The restrictions on times and frequency of blasting referred to in 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 do not apply to:

- Those premises where the effects of the blasting are not perceived at noise sensitive sites;
and
- Major underground metalliferous mining operations the
- Technical basis for regulations for the control noise from new motor vehicles, other than
motor vehicles, in Australia;
- Technical basic for regulations for the control noise from in - service trucks and buses in
Australia;
- A comparison of methods for measuring the noise individual motor vehicles;

Conclusions
Measurements should be taken within the grounds of, noise sensitive sites (e.g. residences,
hospitals, schools,) for the purposes of this documents noise sensitive sites includes this the
land within 30 metres of any building.
Air blast overpressure levels may be measured at any point on (noise sensitive sites) which is
located at least 3.5m away from any building or structure.
The technical basis for the regulation of noise labelling of new pavement breakers and
mobile air compressors in Australia.
Technical basis for guidelines to minimize annoyance due to blasting overpressure and
ground vibration is caused by noise.
At Vale Mozambique according with the above information in order to mitigate the noise
problem, the ground vibration levels may be measured at any point on (noise sensitive sites)
located at least t the longest dimension of the foundations of a building or structure away
from such building or structure.

Africa
Mafumbe Coal (2012) Mine Noise Modelling Procedure
The CONCAWE prediction methodology was utilised within Sound PLAN. The CONCAWE
prediction. Method is specially designed for large facilities and incorporates the influence of
wind effects and the stability of the atmosphere.
The statistical accuracy of environ mental noise predictions using CONCAWE was
investigated by Marsh. (Applied Acoustics 15 - 1982). Marsh concluded that CONCAWE
was accurate to 2 dBA in any oneoctave band between 63 Hz and 4 kHz and 1 dBA
overall. Noise levels have been calculated for both neutral and worst case weather scenarios.

Construction and Operational Modelling Scenarios

One construction and operational mining scenarios (covering the full life of the mine) have
been modelled for this assessment. Within the noise model, operations consisted of all plant
items operating concurrently in order to simulate the overall maximum potential noise
emission. Sound PLAN in order to calculate the noise emission levels at the various noise
sensitive receiver locations, a Sound PLAN environmental computer model was developed.
Sound PLAN is a software package which enables compilation of a sophisticated computer
 model comprising a digital ground map (containing ground contours and buildings), the
location and acoustic sound power levels of potentially critical noise sources on site and the
location of receivers for assessment purposes.
The computer model can generate noise emission levels taking into account such factors in
the sources sound power levels and locations, distance attenuation, ground absorption, air
absorption and shield in attenuation, as well as meteorological conditions, including wind
effects.

Conclusion
concluding, I think this method may be difficult to applicate in Vale Mozambique, because of
the level of technology used, the cost may be high. But the method may eliminate the
problem when analyzing this sound issue on blast, helping to regulate them.

Bibliography
Norilsk Nickel (1995), Noise-and-Blasting-Impact-Assessment
http://evolutionmining.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Appendix-E-Noise-and-
Blasting-Impact-Assessment.pdf (accessed: 14/09/2016)

Rio Tinto (2010) TECHNICAL BASIS GUIBLINES TO MINIMISE ANNOYANCE

DUE TO BLASTING OVER PRESSURE AND GROUND VIBRATION
http://www.osmre.gov/resources/blasting/docs/WYBlasterCertModules/8AdverseEffects
Blasting.pdf, (accessed: 10/09/2016)

Mafumbe Coal (2012) regulation blasting noise and vibration

https://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/assets/documents/regulation/ts-gl-blasting-noise-and-
vibration.pdf (accessed: 25/09/2016)