Search Documents

By John Capers

•The IME is the Safety and Security Association of the commercial explosives industry in the United States and Canada. •Founded in 1913 •Board of Governors •5 Standing committees- 1. Technical 2. Environmental Affairs 3. Legal Affairs 4. Safety & Health 5. Transportation & Distribution

Jan 1, 2006

By E. McCullough, D. Preece, M. Ortel

Geophysical explosive charges are used in mineral resource exploration. They are detonated subsurface and radiate sonic waves into ground monitors, which detect the vibration waves and their interaction with underlying geologic strata. Geophysicists perform computer analyses of the waves reflected from the strata to determine their depth and thickness (Strobel, Berger & Schaefer, 2012). The purpose of this research is to determine how the detonating explosive charge interacts with the adjacent ground and how the induced waves propagate through the surrounding medium. Furthermore, it is necessary to optimize the location of the initiation point within the charge. Establishing both the direction and intensity of the waves will allow geoscientists to refine and optimize geophysical studies that employ explosive charges.

Jan 1, 2013

By Carl Lubbe, Ron Frye

Numerous articles have been written regarding the effects of blast control plugs in an attempt to quantify stemming ejection rates, air overpressures, fragmentation’and other parameters measured using these devices. In an effort to further attempt to understand the function of these devices, field and laboratory research conducted with various stemming devices was performed to enhance existing data sets and analyze otherphenomena that occur when these products are used.

Jan 1, 1998

By Geraldine Woods

I work for the State of Washington as an Explosives inspector. My paper will describe the mission of the Wa. State Dept. of Labor pertaining to explosives and the regulation of explosives in the State.Blasting safety is high on the public safety list and the regulation of explosive use and storage has been mandated through legislature. The Dept. considers pro-active partnering forexplosive safety preferable to after-the-fact citations for non-compliance.In some cases, the Dept. will issue civil citations with monetary penalties, meant to be a deterrant, of course, to blasters who choose not to comply with the explosive regulations of the State.The Dept. has also revoked and suspended blasting licenses. In some instances, the Dept. has allowed recipients of citations with monetary penalties to reduce the amount paid by attending technical training classes. The idea here, is to reduce the chance of reoccurence of unsafe blasting practices. The State of Washington partners with MSHA in the regulation of explosives use and storage in mines, pits and quarries in the Stateas well as working closely with law enforcement, State and local fire marshals, ATF,and is active in ISEE in part of it’s ongoing effort to promote explosive safety and establish communications in a nonadversarial way with explosives users. My paper will include some statistics on licensing in the State, pounds of explosives used, inspection numbers, numbers and types of complaints with information from the inspections resulting of these complaints. My paper will include examples of storage, both good and bad, examples and pictures of fly rock incidents, accidents, near-miss close calls, break-ins, thefts, and abandoned explosives. This paper may also include a brief summary of my opinion of explosive regulation and my job as a regulator, including examples of high and low points of the job, joys and frustrations.

Jan 1, 2002

By John Watson

New Technologies, New Challenges and New Opportunities For quite some time now, numerous explosive manufacturers have spent untold man-hours and millions of dollars trying to develop a blast initiation technology that would “once and for all” provide users with what was once believed to be only a theoretical possibility...nominal timing. Zero “cap scatter” (the amount of variation of delay timing from the targeted nominal) has been the industry’s goal ever since delays were first introduced into the marketplace. Just as adding delay time between blast-holes improved blast performance since their introduction, having the wrong delay or a poorly timed blast has proven to be very inefficient and in many cases hazardous. The question of how precise a blast initiation system needs to be still remains unanswered, but electronic detonator systems being used today indicate that significant improvements can be achieved over conventional pyrotechnic detonators. These systems can typically provide single digit millisecond ranges of variability, if not sub-millisecond in some cases.

Jan 1, 2003

By John Dean Smith

"In many operations the two most overlooked aspects in the drilling and blasting process is theblast optimization and explosive selection. Often times we find a blast design that seems to work andproduce acceptable results and will use this cut afier cut, even years. When in reality one should never become complacent and should be constantly looking for ways to improve the drilling and blasting operation."

Jan 1, 1995

By Michael S. Wieland

Charge malfunction problems result from rather universal damage mechanisms and are widespread throughout surface and underground delay blasting. Recent refinements in instrumentation technology reveal a range of charge performance difficulties, not just outright misfires. This report focuses on the U.S. Bureau of Mines research regarding desensitization and malfunction of delay detonators and cap-sensitive explosives, utilized in underground coal mining. Delay blasting generates tremendous shock waves and rifting forces that fracture and heave the surrounding stratum. The shock waves from charge explosions propagate outward in all directions through the coal, impacting neighboring charges with later delays. The impact phenomena have debilitating effects, causing degrees of reduced charge performance ranging from misfires or weak detonations to out-ofsequence detonations. Impaired charges react poorly. fracture less coal, and produce fumes with higher toxicity. Coal-mine, underwater, and simulator tests were conducted to m3re thoroughly understand the shock-wave and rift-compression damage mechanisms. Recently the U.S. Bureau of Mines partially resolved the malfunction problem by demonstrating the feasibility of formulating a rugged explosive, which could pass the requisite tests for certifying an underground coal-mine explosive. The charge formulation was not certified only because it lost initiation sensitivity too quickly from natural aging and had to be rebatched to finish the testing.

Jan 1, 1994

By Larry Schneider

I n the simplest application of a shock tube initiation system, the tubing acts as a “relay line” which passes a detonation signal from borehole to borehole. When the signal arrives at each borehole, it causes the detonator attached to it to fire. Such a single path constitutes a progressive series where each unit must function properly in order to activate the following units. Any application error, malfunction, or mistake in connecting any surface unit will stop the progression of the detonation signal through the system and result in a “cutoff” or misfire of the following charges.

Jan 1, 1995

By Roberto Folchi, Hans Wallin

Having so many norms and technical content of legislation to deal with is a problem that an explo-sives engineer has to face, especially when working at an international level. Each country has its own norms and legislation, sometimes even each other region or state, as if the physics of explo-sions, rock, concrete, and masonry characteristics would change across the borders. Both norms and laws are frequently out of date, being mainly developed at the beginning of the previous century and adjusted, piece by piece, to a technical and political context that is constantly changing, with adjustment being frequently adopted in a hurry, due to a problem arising such as that of internation-al terrorism. Sometime also, norms are not harmonized with those they intend to amend, so required explanations and new adjustments lead to a vicious circle that increases confusion, complexity and depresses the explosive industry.

Jan 1, 2015

By Jason M. Ryan

"Along with recent advances in computer technology have come cost-effective systems desiiedto evaluate fragmentation distributions through digital images of particles. In mining operations andmineral processing plants, important data from these systems is obtained through monitoring sizedistributions at key stages of the comminution process. Blast engineers apply this technology as atool for the validation of empirical fragmentation models so that predicted results are more meaningful."

Jan 1, 1998

By Charlie Brumbaugh

Antarctica with its diverse conditions such as severe cold, high winds, rock and ice structure and limited explosives available posed many obstacles. This paper will give an overall view of the methods used to overcome these obstacles on a daily basis on the highest, driest, coldest continent on earth.

Jan 1, 2000

By W. J. Birch, R. Farnfield, L. Bermingham

Whilst a significant body of research has been carried into air overpressure levels that arise as a result of the use of explosives, few published studies have actually tried to relate the movement of a quarry face to the resulting air overpressure produced. The aim of this preliminary investigation was to monitor a number of quarry blasts at two different limestone quarries. The first using multiple separately initiated deck charges in a multi borehole blast, the second using single column charges in a multi borehole blast.

Jan 1, 2008

By W B. Gregg

The rock blasting and mining industries use a system of detonators and explosives for mining operations. Many detonators use small metal bridgewires, which are heated by passing a current through the wire, heating and igniting the pyrotechnic powder in contact with the wire. Typical bridgewires require a current of at least 3 amps, applied for a few milliseconds, for an explosive output. The semiconductor bridge (SCB), in comparison, initiates an explosive in 0.01 to 0.1 of a millisecond.

Jan 1, 1994

By Harry L. Siebert

Pre-splitting was substituted for line drilling to achieve stable rock slopes and reduce excavation beyond the pay line on a Connecticut highway project in 1962-63. Changes have occurred in developing rock slopes that were not foreseen by Alan Bauer and Jim Scott who in the early days understood the relationship of explosive energy to stable slopes. Cushion blasting as currently used produces slopes designed to blend or complement the natural landscape with slope holes detonated after the main body of holes. Pre-splitting is the opposite. The best results have been achieved by detonating the pre-split line of the holes first to allow readjustment of the slope plane fracture and a separate blast for the main body of loaded holes.

Jan 1, 1998

By Yasunori Kosaka, Junya Tokita, Aramaki Shosaku, Inoue Junji

Light ANFO that satisfies blasters and customers who want to reduce the amount of explosive consumption without changing blasting effects and designs and passes Cap sensitivity test regulated by law. The reduced loading density of light ANFO reduces the amount of explosive consumption. The loading density of conventional ANFO is 0.X-0.9g/ml, while the loading density of light ANFO is 0.7-OXgiml. The detonation velocity of light ANFO is maintained not to reduce blasting effects. Detonation velocity of conventional and light ANFO using steel tube of inside diameter 36 mm are 3200 - 37OOms. detonation velocities are the same though the loading density of light ANFO is reduced by O.lg/ml. This suggests that the reactivity of light ANFO improves.

Jan 1, 2002

By Ron Glowe

This paper shows the potential of a new computer model, using the Glowe-Tech (GT) Tonnage Analyzer program to compare drilling and blasting results. This model uses the crushers and conveyors as measuring tools in aggregate quarries in the USA and Canada. All data is collected using commercially available kilowatt transducers and an analog input/output automation module. There are two areas of measurement used to compare results. The first area is the tonnage moved by key conveyors to show the split in products produced and the actual rate of production. If belt scale readings are not available then the Glowe-Tech Tonnage Analyzer can be used to convert kilowatts from the conveyor motor to tonnage. The second is the tons of rock crushed per kilowatt hour of energy consumption by the primary and secondary (optional) crushers. This modeling process works best if blasts are mucked and crushed in sequence. There are many other variables such as crusher types, crusher settings, screen sizing and actual geology in the pit that can influence the results, however if variables can be standardized then definite trends can be seen when comparing drilling and blasting results

Jan 1, 2005

By C V. B Cunningham

The assessment of blasting results under production conditions is extremely difficult. As a result, it can take months or years to establish objective and valid estimates of explosive performance in achieving rockbreaking goals. This fundamental problem often results in decisions related to the manufacture, marketing, purchase and use of explosives being largely swayed by calculated energies from detonation codes. However, these codes are by no means standardised. Different energies are given by different codes because these employ varying combinations of fundamental science and empiricism. After a basic review of code operation, important guidelines to dependability are given with reference to ICI’S state-of-the-art codes IDEX and CPEX. Distinctions are drawn between Ideal, Non-Ideal and Blasting Codes. Concepts of explosive energy are discussed in brief.

Jan 1, 1991

By Lawrence W. Gubbe

Air blast associated with detonation of explosives in mining, construction or military applications is often responsible for complaints by people who live or work in the vicinity of the activity. Most often, the complaints are based on the perception that vibration caused by the airblast damaged one or more residential buildings that may be located within several hundred feet or several miles from the blast site. The potential for airblast to cause damage is related to the amplitude and frequency of the airblast overpressure wave at the receptor. Amplitude and frequency of the overpressure wave are, in turn, dependent upon the type and amount of explosive detonated; the degree of confinement; the distance the wave travels; the topography between the blast site and the receptor; and, atmospheric conditions. It is well known that, as the result of atmospheric focusing, the amplitude of airblast overpressure that exists relatively far from the blast site may be substantially higher than the amplitude associated with the attenuated wave in an isotropic atmosphere. Two methods are available to predict baseline overpressures 1) the Sandia Laboratories, Atomic Energy Commission method as extended by the Naval Ordinance Laboratory (NOL method) and the Ballistic Research Laboratory method (BRL method). These methods are developed by different techniques, are based on different idealized atmospheres and predict widely different results. The amplification factor applied to account for the effect of focusing must be consistent with the method used to predict the baseline overpressure. Theoretically, the amplitude of the overpressure at distances several miles from the blast site could be more than 25 to 100 times the amplitude of the attenuated wave predicted by the BRL method. However, based on comparisons with measured overpressure data is probably less than approximately 3 times the amplitude of the attenuated wave as predicted by the NOL method. This paper is based on research conducted as part of investigations of airblast damage complaints associated with an accidental explosion near Eveleth, Minnesota and with the disposal of military explosives by detonation at the Sierra Army Depot near Herlong, California. The techniques available for estimating the airblast overpressure that might be generated at various distances from the blast site and criteria for evaluating the potential for damage are examined.

Jan 1, 2004

By Ralph E. Burnham, Jeff Taylor, Jonson Montgomery, J. Kelly Ratliff, Rennie Montgomery, Martin Brashear

Top priorities for all blasting companies and individual blasters are risk management, safety of company personnel and the general public, regulatory compliance, and liability protection. On a daily basis, hundreds of shots are detonated by well-trained, skilled, and experienced blasters without incident. Unfortunately, accidents inevitably occur, which is why blasting is considered an “ultra hazardous” or “inherently dangerous” activity from a legal perspective. Despite countless regulations, recent advances in technology, improved training, ongoing research, and improved communication in the industry, mistakes and the resulting incidents continue to occur during blasting operations. These result in dangerous or deadly flyrock, site security lapses, increased complaints, blast damage claims, and lawsuits, which lead to increased insurance costs and other financial tolls for blasting companies. In life, lessons learned the hard way are rarely forgotten. The same is true in blasting operations. Blasting missteps and the resulting events are often the best catalysts for improving risk management and thereby reducing accidents, liability, and financial tolls. This paper provides a summary of two incidents, one safety and the other liability related, and the errors that resulted in a fatality in one case and a multi property lawsuit in the other. The two incidents provide examples that serve as a case study for lessons learned the hard way in blasting operations and offer guidance for the considerations that blasters and blasting companies should incorporate into daily operating procedures.

Jan 1, 2018

By Nick Lewis

Farce Mining of Texas is a surface coal mine located in Laredo, Texas. Farce mines and sells approximately 600,000 tons /year of bituminous coal. A map showing the location of Laredo is provided in Figure 1. As shown, Laredo is located on the border between the United States and Mexico. The mine property runs to the Rio Grande River, the border between the two countries. Farce pumps water from the Rio Grande for use in their coal preparation plant. Laredo’s climate is quite dry with annual rainfall averaging about 12” per year. Also, due to the southern location, Laredo is quite hot. It is common for the temperature to reach 100” F in March and maintain these temperatures through September.

Jan 1, 1994