You are on page 1of 49

Single trace analysis impact on

initiation sequence optimization


for high wall control
High Wall Control Using EDD at
Anglo Gold Ashanti, Navachab Mine

Anglo Gold Ashanti, Navachab Mine

Agenda
Introduction to Mine
The Challenge
The Approach
Measuring Rock Response
Initiation System Deltadets
Timing Designs

Results
Conclusion

Introduction to the Mine


 Started June 1990
 Farm Navachab

Navachab Gold Mine

 Initially - 840 000 tons


mined per annum
 Currently - 1.3 million
tons mined per annum

Swakopmund

Windhoek

The Challenge

1st Wall Failure - June


1998, +- 15m high
2nd Wall Failure September 1999, +- 30m
high
3rd Wall Failure - March
2001, +- 50m high

Failure

Navachab Gold Mine


Failure

Micro-Seismic System

Legend
Geophones
Failure

Energy Release Rate

C u m u l a ti v e E n e r g y
(K J )

Energy Release Rate (KJ per Month)


150
100
50
0
1

10

11

Time (Months)
Slow Release Rate

Fast Release Rate

Sudden Release

12

Micro-Seismic System
Energy Release Rate
Cumulative Energy (Kj)

300

Conventional Blasting

No Mining

Linear (Conventional Blasting)

250

200

y = 1347.4x - 5E+07

150

100

50

????

-50

PPV = ?

-100

Data Recorded over 8 Months

Bench Parameters
 Bench Height 5m
 Hole Depth 6m
 Hole Diameter 115mm
 3.4m x 3.4m
 PF = 0.7
 Charge Mass / Hole Avg. 40 Kg
 12 Blasts Conducted during Trails

Peak Particle Velocity


N
Failure
Seismograph
Block
Seismograph

R
PPV = 1143

1.65

R is the distance from the blast


W is the charge mass per hole

The Approach
Manage risk
Vibration Control

Optimise Design

Rock Response Time

2 Drums Secured To High Wall


115mm Hole Charged
5m Bench; 3m Burden
Flash Activated when Hole Detonates
Drum Movement Recorded with High
Speed Camera
Time Calculated Between Flash and
movement of Drums
Rock Response Time ~ 4.1ms per m

Rock Response Time


4

Distance (m)

3.5
Drum 2

3
2.5
2
Drum 1

1.5
1
0.5
15

20

25

30
Time (ms)

9 -3512ms

40

Measuring Rock Response

Signature Trace Analysis


Individual PPV : V
500 ms delay
Hole 1
Delay : 0 ms

r1
Hole 1

r2

Hole 2
Delay : 0 to 500 ms

Hole 2

Measuring Signature Trace


Amplitude (mm/s)

0
0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

-4

-8

Time
(ms)
Delay
(ms)

60.0

70.0

80.0

Measuring Signature Trace


Optimal Delay Values
Peak Amplitude (mm/s)

20

15

9ms

60ms

10

0
0

10

20

30

40

Delay Period (ms)

50

60

70

Measuring Signature Trace


Optimal Delay Values
Conventional Blasting

Peak Amplitude (mm/s)

20

15

7.5ms 10.5ms

49.8ms 70.2ms

10

0
0

10

20

30

40

Delay Period (ms)

50

60

70

Measuring Signature Trace


Optimal Delay Values
Blasting using EDDs

Peak Amplitude (mm/s)

20

15

Minimal PPV Values Using EDDs


10

0
0

10

20

30

40

Delay Period (ms)

50

60

70

Radiation from a hole

C = function of the rock type


3000 - 6000 m/s

Risks when using precise


detonators

Risks when using precise


detonators

Risks when using precise


detonators

Risks when using precise


detonators

Risks when using precise


detonators

Risks when using precise


detonators

Risks when using precise


detonators

Risks when using precise


detonators

Risks when using precise


detonators

BlastMap Model
Allows the use of
The relative hole positions
The speed of the seismic wave

Assumes
Symmetric radiation

Ignores
Reflection and refraction

Timing Designs
Interference Patterns
N

Constructive

Constructive

Initiation System
EDD System

BlastMap
software

Field
terminal

Base
Station

Blasting
Box

Initiation System
Wireless Blasting Contributing to Safety
Manage Risk
Dets are Automatically Programmed,
which reduces exposure to risk
Blaster is out of pit when Blast is Initiated

Timing Designs
Rock Response
Time

Distance(m)

3.5
3

Drum 2

2.5
2
Drum 1

1.5
1
0.5
15

20

25

30

35

Time (ms)

23 ms

Optimal Delay Values


P
e
a
kA
m
p
litu
d
e(m
m
/s
)

20

60 ms

15

9m
s

10

60
ms

0
0

10

20

30

40

Delay Period (ms)

50

60

70

40

Timing Designs
Rock Response
Time

Distance(m)

3.5
3

Drum 2

2.5
2
Drum 1

1.5
1
0.5
15

20

25

30
Time (ms)

12 ms

Optimal Delay Values


P
e
a
kA
m
p
litu
d
e(m
m
/s
)

20

60 ms

15

9m
s

10

60
ms

0
0

10

20

30

40

Delay Period (ms)

50

60

70

35

40

Timing Designs
Rock Response
Time

Distance(m)

3.5
3

Drum 2

2.5
2
Drum 1

1.5
1
0.5
15

20

25

30

35

40

Time (ms)

9 ms

63 ms

Constructive
Constructive

Optimal Delay Values


P
e
a
kA
m
p
litu
d
e(m
m
/s
)

20

15

9m
s

10

60
ms

0
0

10

20

30

40

Delay Period (ms)

50

60

70

Results
Ground Vibration
PPV Recorded - EDD vs Pyro Blasts
Peak Amplitude (mm/s)

60

40

Timing

Timing

EDD 23x60 ms

EDD 9x63 ms

Pyrotechnic -17x42 ms
Timing

Pyrotechnic -17x42 ms

EDD Blasts

EDD 17x42 ms
Pyro Blasts

20 Pyrotechnic -17x42 ms

Number of Blasts

Results

Results
Ground Vibration
Dominant Frequency Range
Dominant Frequency (Hz)

Resonant Rock Frequency (Hz)

Frequency (Hz)

120

80

40

Date

Results
Ground Vibration
Pyro Blast

EDD Blast

Results
Cumulative Energy (Kj)

300

250

200

y = 1347.4x - 5E+07
150

100

50

????

-50

PPV = ?
-100

Data Recorded over 1 Year


Conventional Blasting

No Mining

Linear (Conventional Blasting)

Peak Particle Velocity

Failure
Failure
Seismograph
Constructive

Block
Seismograph
Constructive

Results
350

Cumulative Energy
(Kj)

y = 1074.2x - 4E+07
300

250

200

y = 1347.4x - 5E+07

-20%

150

100

50

-50

-100

Data Recorded over 1 Year


Conventional Blasting

# of Electronic Blasts

No Mining

Electronic Blasting

Linear (Electronic Blasting)

Linear (Conventional Blasting)

Rock Response Time

Optimal Delay Values


20

Peak Amplitude (mm/s)

2
Drum 1

1.5
1
0.5
15

20

25

30

35

40

15

9
m
s

10

0
0

Time (ms)

BlastMap
software

6
0
m
s

10

20

30

40

50

Delay Period (ms)

Field
terminal

Constructive
Constructive

60

70

Base
Station

Blasting
Box

350

y = 1074.2x - 4E+07
300

250

200

(Kj)

Drum 2

3
2.5

CumulativeEnergy

Distance (m)

3.5

y = 1347.4x - 5E+07

150

100

50

-50

-100

Data Recorded over 1 Year


Conventional Blas ting

# of Electronic Blas ts

No Mining

Electronic Blas ting

Linear (Electronic Blas ting)

Linear (Conventional Blas ting)

Conclusion
Purpose
Manage Risk

Method

Rock Response Time


Signature Trace Analysis
Wave Interference Modeling
Optimised Designs
EDD Blasting
Measuring
Database

Results
Reduced PPV
Reduced Energy Release Rate ?

Wall Control BHP Billiton / Xstrata plc


Douglas Coal Mine, South Africa

Wall Control Rio Tinto


Rossing Uranium Mine, Namibia

Acknowledgements
Anglo Gold Ashanti, Navachab Gold Mine
ISEE Conference

References
SRK Consulting Engineers and Scientists
ISS International
Tony Rorke, BME Blasting Specialist