Comparison of Pyrotechnic and Electronic Ii Whitehaven Coal Mine J Rock" ABSTRACT Sasol Roche Blasting Services (SRDS) has undertaken a process of ‘raling and evaluating the se ofthe SMI electronic initiating system with the specific purpose of being able to full quantify the benefits of {he system over a pyrotechnic system, After an nal tal of three shots in ni-2001, it was decided that fully quantity the system, a complete Strip would need to be fied using the system so that any losses die 0 fangs or end walls would be the sire for both scenario. The resus Jae shown a significant improvement aver the ase of pyrotechnic inane n soveral Hey rear inslading percentage cat Though these fo survey resus the inreas in est and subsequent net improvement ‘blasting has been quantified. These tals ave Set out to compare cach system in comparable situations to determine the real benefits if an, of the electronic system over the pyrotechnic one. AS the percentage cast is relatively easy 10 ‘quantify using moder survey techniques, as decided that his would be the principle method of comparison, However, while the assessment nly inluded survey rors, any improvement in fagmentation re and Consistency would have flow on effec on reduced running. and INTRODUCTION Whitehaven Coal Mine is located approximately 30 km from Gunnedah in the Namoi Valley region of New South Wales, ‘Ausiralia, The mine has an open cut reserve inthe current mine plan of just over two and a half milion tonnes with a mining Schedule of approximately 750 000 tonnes per annum. Primary ‘overburden removal is undertaken using two DIT dozers (ane witha carry dozer blade) and a Leibherr 994 with three CAT 785, Ingul ucks. As mine developer, Roelie Mining, as responsibility for the total operation of the site from mine planning and scheduling through to final rehabilitation. Drilling and blasting is undertaken by Sasol Roche Blasting Services, a joint venture between Roche Mining and Sasol Explosives of South Attica Both parent companies have built thelr reputations ona ‘commitment to excellence, innovation, quality management and a service culture. As part ofa continuous improvement program to provide easily excavated material trial was undertaken of the SMI Unitronic electronic initiation system to evaluate its Sultbilty for use at the Whitehaven mine ‘The overburden atthe Whitehaven mine varies from 40:m deep at the Northern end of the mine to around 27 m at the Southern end. This consists mainly of hard-cemented conglomerates that vary in depth from 25 m at the Southern end of the pit to 30% m at the Northern end. At the Northem end of the pit, this conglomerate overlies up to 10m of hard siltstones. The’ mine has three environmental monitoring points located at distances of 1780 m, 2850 m and 2850 m in different directions, As vibration from blasting has always been well within the required limits this, ‘was not considered a major priority of this study CURRENT PRACTICE With the mine being a compact operation, the timing of each process is critical forthe next step to commence. With drill and blast having such a significant impact upon the downstream, 1. Senior Dill and Blast Engineer, Sasol Roche Blasting Services, PO Box 7A, Singleton NSW2330, E-mail json oskroche com a Fits Large Opan Ps Mining Conference ation Systems at processes, a consistent result from blasting is very important to ensure that excavation operations can continue uninterrupted Previous study undertaken with similar systems (Brent ef al, 2003: Bartley eval, 2003) has shown that electronic initiation can hhave significant impacts on the results of a blast in terms ‘environmental impacts and muckpile profiles. Prior to this trial, blasting at Whitehaven had produced mixed results with some blasts providing excellent fragmentation and throw while others that had been loaded almost identically, resulted. in large boulders ain ly medioete results for throw. Shot design bas remained fairly consistent over the previous 18 months with the standard design along the following lines ‘© 7m burden « 9 m spacing consisting of seven rows. ‘Double stitch end row to provide elsan face for the next last © All holes angled at 15° towards the free face except for end wall holes which are angled at 20° perpendicular to the end wall End row and front row holes loaded with Softload low density product. ‘© Rows 2 to 7 loaded with a 70 per cent ANFO ~ 30 per cent Emulsion blend with a nominal density of 1.2 env. © Timing of 42:ms inter hole delav along the front row with, 109 ms inter row delay along the echelon. Additional timing is piven for the back row (151 ms) and the end wall holes (up wo 176s), Prior to the use of Electronies, the techniques used to reduce ‘oversize material and improve throw included reducing stemming heights and using Heavy ANFO in the front row. ‘The use of reduced stemming was principally aimed at having the explosive column higher inthe hole but also involved a great deal of risk as the location of neighbours meant that any error oF miscalculation would produce vibration and overpressure levels, ‘exceeding the consent limits. Stemming heights as low as 3 m Using drill cuttings were ‘tialled leading to unacceptable ‘overpressure readings without greatly reducing the quantity and size of oversize materia Heavy ANFO was utilised in the front row ofthe shot with the ‘im of maximising the amount of throw by moving the front row material as quickly as possible across the pit, This however, resulted in excessive face burst with subsequent fiyrock and ‘overpressure concems. Again, although not quantified, there was ‘no real noticeable inerease in quantity of throw other than & ‘greater amount of smaller materi a further distance from the shot OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY OF TRIAL ‘Through its intention of improving blasting performance for its clients, Sasol Roche Blasting Services has undertaken this tial and evaluation to quantify the results from using the SMI 110 Unitronie system. Given the additional costs sssuciated with the use of electronics over pyrotechnies, an indication of the cost savings that ean he realised theouph the use af the electronic system was also evaluated. As has been highlighted previously the main area evaluated was the increase in material eas algooe, WA, 35 November 2008, sROCK Shot 59> fad usig re ‘het $6 fred sing seetronice Fig 1 - Relative postion of surveyed pyrotechnic and electronic sts for st mo shots. soars Sires ‘Shreve sisrvree Fia 2 - Relative positon of surveyed pyrotochnic and electronic shots fr subsequent four shots ‘To quantify the percentage cast, pre and post blast surveys: ‘were caried out on one block each of both the pyrotechnic and electronic blasts, This was performed in the same location in the pit with identical Blast parameters so that a direct comparisr ‘ould be made as indicated by Figure 3. Following on from these trials it was decided to conduct a further fur trial shots in checkerboard fashion to provide shots of similar size and geometry as illustrated in Figure 4, These shots were kept the same size of seven rows with 15 holes er row: RESULTS Survey for all shots was conducted by an independent party using a Trimble $600 reflectorless total station from points on the low wall side of the pit opposite the shots. This was then downloaded into Surpac for calculation of volumes. ‘The calculation of percentage cast yas worked out based on current mining technique as illustrated in Figures 5.6 and 7, This {is somewhat different from standard draaline cast calculation as the dozer, which at Whitehaven has an optimal push angle of 20", moves prime material From Table I, the volume figures for shot 53 are correct to two per cent of the true value due to reduced amount of data points Being taken for this survey. It ie estimated thatthe volume of material in shot 53 not needing excavation was reduced by five per cent due to the amount of material already on mine floor prior to blasting, Taking both of these factors into account and Taste 1 Rests from rst tw shots. | [nsin volume] Swett_| Volume cast] Percentage] tem | factor them) | east Set] asa | 240% | Gos | vse000_— | 2059% | 5 Py Kelgoore, WA, 3-5 November 2003, assuming a worst ease scenario, the percentage of material cast, ito final position and not needing excavation calculates to 23.4 pet cent, The total size of shot 36 was reduced due to the mines Tequirement for shot material earlier then previously planned (G7 holes total against standied shot sizeof 112 holes) “The results ofthe survey for shot 67 were inconclusive as the post blast survey was not conducted until a day and a half ater the shat ‘The Swell factor is calculated as the percentage increase in ‘volume from the original bank volume. Ie is intended ss guide the amount of voids ereated inthe shot material “The genctal result of the shots was good with the following ‘comments about particular shots from both operators and site ‘management: © Shot $6 ~ good shot with material easily moved by Dozers. ‘and excavator, Very clean highwall and endwall with ‘minimal backbreak, ‘© Shot 63 ~ standard none! shot with acceptable amounts of ‘throw and fragmentation, ‘© Shot 64 — excellent throw with material ending up on the low-wall batter. Some blocky material from surface (ought to be duc to increased stemming) and some damage to coal The end wall was one of the cleanest ever '¢ Shot 66A ~ good throw and fragmentation withthe majority ff the dit heing very easily moved. Some blocky material in the South Fast end of the shot with a litle bit of tighter digging underneath this material (Overall the percentage cast for the Pyrotechnics shots averages fut to 25.3 per cent. The shots where electronies were utilised ‘average oul at 32.8 per cent. This equates to an average increase fof 7.5 percent east. The other area of improvement isin the area ‘of swell. With pyrotechnics, the average swell of the material was 22.4 per cent. The average swell for the material when using Electronics was 24.6 per cent indicating that electronics creates & Beater amour of voids in the muckpile making excavation casi. Fin Large Open Pit Mining ConterenceCOMPARISON OF PYROTECHINIC AND ELECTRONIC INITIATION SYSTEMS AT WHITEHAVEN CUAL MINE. Fic.6 Showing amount of east of shat when using pyrotechnics. =ith Large Open Pt ning Conference Kalgoote, WA, 3-5 November 2008,J ROCK TABLE 2 Results from the second series of tas Insite vetume] St | Volume et Percentage (em) | uw | (oem) | east ‘Shov63 (Pyro) | 240.481, Shot 64 (lect) | _235 845 Sho 7 Pyroy | 240481, Fic 8 - Showing end wall of electronic shot post blast with power trough of approximately 20 m, Note: No prespliting of walls is ‘conducted at this ste, Fis @- Showing profile and fragmentation of shot 66 In the case of throw blasting, one of the biggest drawbacks with large face heights is the unpredictability of primer fring Time in the hole. Where more than one primer is used in a blast With a free face, the classic approach has been to initiate the bottom primer firs by way of an increased delay to the upper primer(s). To initiate both primers simultaneously, the use of ‘cord down the hole of like timed non-electric dowalines has been ‘tied. Rosenstock (2003) has discussed the impact of blasting on ‘ast when utilising multiple pyrotechnic detonators ina hole. OF particular note is the improvement in explosive effcienc programming both detonators to fie at precisely the same This ercates a collision zone within the hole where the to propugation fronts meet CONCLUSION The use of elkctronic programmable detonators provides many advantages over conventional pyrotechnic detonators. Fletronie detonators provide unlimited delay times in addition to the increased accuracy over pyrotechnies. As can be seen from this investigation, based only on improvement in percentage cast, leetronies, although being more expensive than pyrotechni e than cover their cost as well as providing a substantial entive to utilise the system as soon as possible AS this study was performed purely by substituting the cleetronies for pyrotechnics without any other alterations, further Improvements in blasting are ukely by adjusting the timing. One cs of electrons over pyrotechnies is that there is fo eestrition ax to the delay timing of the shot as the detonators fare programmed according to the shot design rather than fixed supplied delays, The only method of defining optimum timing ‘and any further bene arising from this can only be determined with further utilisation and testing, This will allow op nal stops rather than taking leaps into the unknown far more reproducible asthe ero due to pyrotechnics is wed, ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author greally appreciates and acknowledges the input of Mr Colin Hulm, Project Manager for Rocke Mining at Whitehaven. In addition | would like to thank Mr Casper Dieben, Operations Manager for Roche Mining, for his continual Feedback REFERENCES Bake, G and Ekin, J, 2003, Digital Detnators Keep PA Coal Mine ‘Operating, in Proceedings ISEE 2003, oll, pp 3-21 (Intemational Society of Explosives Enginees) Brent, GF, Edmondson, M and Goswami, T, 2003, High Performance “Throw” Blasting with —I-kon™ Eleatonic Detonator in an Environmentally Sensitive Area a Statfd Coal, NSW. Australia in Proceedings SEE 2003, NOI, pp 283-295 (Intemational Society ‘of Explosives Engineers) Reserntich, 2003, Cat lasting in (electronics) Proceedings ISEE 2003, Vol I, pp 305-315 (Intemational Society of Explosives Enger) 36 Kalgoorte, WA, 3-5 November 2003 Fit Large Opon Pk Ming Conference