MAY 2010

PROJECT REPORT:

APPLICATION OF REEFMASTER ASSEMBLIES IN UNDERGROUND

DEVELOPMENT AND STOPING.

PROJECT MANAGED BY:

GEORGE ADONGO – AEL MINING SERVICES

LAWRENCE TURKSON – OBUASI (CAPTAIN DRILL AND BLAST)

CONTENT PAGE

DECLARATION 2/12
INTRODUCTION 3/12
OBJECTIVES 3/12
SCOPE OF WORK 3/12
METHODOLOGY 4/12
LITERATURE REVIEW 4/12
CONCEPT OF THE REEFMASTER ASSEMBLE 5/12
SPLITTER 6/12
ANALYSIS OF FIELD DATA 6/12
DRILLING 6/12
CHARGING OF BLASTHOLES 7/12
COMPARATIVE COST ANALYSIS 8/12
COMPARATIVE BLAST COST 9/12
THROW AND ROCK PILE PROFILE 10/12
OVERBREAKS/UNDERBREAK ANALYSIS 11/12
TIMING OF OPERATIONS 11/12
CONCLUSION 11/12
RECOMMENDATIONS 11/12
APPENDIX 12/12

Page 1 of 12
DECLARATION
We declare that the Reefmaster Project was duly executed and accepted by all parties involved.

AEL Mining Services AngloGold Ashanti (Obuasi Mine)

………………………… …………………………….
Samuel Asante Haruna Karim
(Regional Manager, AEL North) (Area Manager Drill & Blast)

Page 2 of 12
INTRODUCTION
AngloGold Ashanti (Obuasi Mine) uses the Nonel shock systems for both stoping and
development. These products are Nonel Long Period (NLP) and Nonel Millisecond (NMS) delay
systems which are supplied by AEL Mining Services. The purpose of this project is to investigate
the use of the Nonel Reefmaster® Assemblies for underground applications.

This decision came in the wake of streamlining explosive and accessories types in use and to
maximise the benefits to Obuasi. While the unit price of Reefmaster Assembly is higher than the
NLP and NMS, it is important to compare the performance of the two products so as to quantify
the possible benefits.
AEL’s technical team together with AGA drill and blast section conducted a trial on the
application of Reefmasters for development and compared the results with the existing initiation
system. The criteria of measurement were:

Advance per blast

Muck pile profile and throw

Overbreak and underbreak

Timing of operations

Total initiation system cost

OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the project are to:

Study the application of the Reefmaster Assembly in underground development

Study the performance of the Reefmaster initiation system and the existing initiation
system.

Compare the performance of the Reefmaster initiation system to the existing initiation
system.

Compare the cost of the two systems.

Determine if any benefit yields a financial benefit.

SCOPE OF WORK
This project was limited to development headings. Field results of the project were compared to
the benchmark results of the existing NLP system.

Page 3 of 12
METHODOLOGY
The methods used for this Project included:

Training of selected blast men at training school on surface

Application of Reefmaster Assembly at selected underground development as directed
by Obuasi.

Data collection from underground development ends

Analysis of data from collected results

Comparison of performance of both initiation systems

Conclusion and recommendation based on performance compared.

LITERATURE REVIEW
The Reefmaster® Assemble is a non-electric initiation system developed to give the greatest
possible simplicity in both usage and storage. The system is based on a combination of in-hole
detonators and surface connector units (Fig. 1). All drill holes in the round are charged with
detonators that have the same delay time. The initiation sequence is then determined on the
surface by means of delays in the surface connector units. Owing to the uniform delay in the in-
hole detonators, there is a sufficient time delay to initiate all blast holes before any detonation
and ground movement occurs.

In-hole Detonator

Shock Tube

Connector Block with

Surface Detonator

Figure 1: The Reefmaster Assembly

The difference between the NLP and Reefmaster is that the NLP shock tube assemblies are
heat sealed and has a Cobra clip on one end and an in hole detonator with a delay element on
other. Whereas the Reefmaster assembly has a connecting block at one end containing a

Page 4 of 12
surface delay detonator representing the inter-hole delay i.e. 176ms, and the other end has a
detonator with down-the-hole delay i.e. 4000 ms. All assemblies have the same set of inter-hole
and down-the hole delays. They are shown diagrammatically in Figure 2 and 3.
Detonator Shock tube Cobra clip

Figure 2: Nonel Long Period Delay

Detonator Shock tube connector Block

Figure 3: Reefmaster Assembly

CONCEPT OF THE REEFMASTER ASSEMBLE

Following initiation, a low energy shock wave is transmitted in both directions to the detonator
and next connecting block.

Figure 4: Principle of use for a uni-delay shocktube system

As can be seen in the sketch above, the signals comes in from the shock tube of the unit that
had been detonated first. The detonator in the connector block has a delay of 176ms signal
before it detonates the shock tube of the next unit. After detonation of the shock tube, the signal

Page 5 of 12
travels in both directions to set off the next Reefmaster connector block as well as the in-hole
detonator. Before the detonator of the connector block fires, it again has a delay of 176ms.
The in-hole detonator has a delay of 4000ms before it detonates the explosive in the hole. It
therefore takes about 23 Reefmaster connector block to detonate before the first in-hole
detonator will detonate.
An important point to note from the sketch is that each Reefmaster connector Block must be at
least 30cm from the next one when connecting up. This will ensure that there is enough run-up
time for the composition powder to intiate the delay element in the detonator.

SPLITTER
A Splitter is a non-electric initiation system which is designed for splitting a blast in multiple
sections on a blast face in underground mines. The unit consists of a 1m length of shock tube
equipped with 67ms or 176ms detonators in a connector block at both ends. Its function is to
receive a single signal and transmit it in two different directions. It is also used to simplify the tie-
up in the cut area.

Connector Blocks with dets

Figure 5: The Splitter

ANALYSIS OF FIELD DATA

Data for this project were taken from Block 8 upper and lower development faces.

DRILLING
Before the commencement of any drilling, the perimeter of the round at the face was established
using colour paints and tapes. Holes were drilled using a jack hammer at the face. Holes
diameter was 38mm with an average length of 2.4m. The drilling pattern and the heading
dimensions are presented in the table blow.

Page 6 of 12
Number of Drilled Number of holes Spacing
Heading Size Burden (m)
holes per round Blasted (m)
54 51 4m by 4m 1 1

On completion of drilling the round, all holes were flushed with compressed air to remove all
debris.
The drilling pattern and the cut are shown the figure below.

2
1m
grid

CHARGING OF BLASTHOLES
Holes were charged with ANFO using the ANFO loader. In most case the cut holes were first
primed with magnum buster while the remaining hole was not primed. This ensured improved
breakage in the cut region. All the holes were charge to the brim. No stemming was added on
top of the explosive to complete the charging.
The holes were connected with the aid of the block connector, which also contained a detonator.
The splitter was also used and it served the purpose of separating the blast into four parts. The
tie up is shown in the diagrams below.

Page 7 of 12
 2
1m
grid

Figure 6: Connection with splitters and a snap Line

COMPARATIVE COST ANALYSIS

It can be seen from the table below that the total cost of blasting with the Reefmaster Assembly
is higher than that of the NLP. The costs of ANFO, Magnum Buster are not included as they are
common products and assumed to have the same consumption and costs.

Page 8 of 12
 NLP Reefmaster
Product Quantity Cost/unit Total Cost ($) Quantity Cost/unit Total Cost ($)
No. of shock tube 52 1.57 81.64 52 3.1 161.2
Detonating Cord 16 0.37 5.92 0 0 0
Capped Fuse 1 1.31 1.31 1 1.31 1.31
Splitters 0 0 0 2 2.87 5.74
Snap Line 0 0 0 1 2.29 2.29
Total $88.87 $170.54

The prices quoted are applicable to the 2009/2010 contract period. It can be seen that the
Reefmaster Assembly system is $81.67 more expensive per blast.

COMPARATIVE BLAST COSTS.

The tabulation below demonstrates the average advances achieved per blast compared to the
planned 2.40 meter and also the cost comparisons based on 2.40 meter per blast at a cost of
$1400.00 per meter.

Planned Av.
Cost/meter Cost/Blast Actual
Advance/Blast Advance/Blast
System ($) (2.4m) Cost/Meter
(m) (m)

Reefmaster 2.40 1400.00 3360.00 2.35 1429.79

NLP 2.40 1400.00 3360.00 2.20 1527.27
Variance 0.15 -97.49

Based on the additional advance per blast generated by the Reefmaster Assembly system a
cost saving of $97.49 per blast is generated. This results in a $15.82 per blast benefit after
taking into account the higher costs of the Reefmaster Assemblies. It is important to notice that
the potential value that could have been added to your operation amounts to $139, 865.00
based on 8, 841m developed over the past 5 months.

Page 9 of 12
From the graph below, it can be seen that better advances per blast were achieved using
Reefmaster Assemblies.

Comparison of Advance per Blast Between Lp and Reefmaster

2.5

2.4

2.3
Advance (m)

2.2 Rm
Av. Rm

2.1 Av. Lp

1.9

1.8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Blast Number

THROW AND ROCK PILE PROFILE

The degree of throw of a muck pile is essential as it affects the productivity of the mucking
equipment and also can damage nearby facilities. Results of blasts with Reefmaster Assembly
are shown in the illustration below. Rock pile was thrown at an average of about 13m from the
face and had a better profile when compared to the NLP blasts.

MUCK PILE PROFILE

4

3.5

3
FACE HEIGHT (m)

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
1
3
5 S4
7
9 S3
11 S2
13
DISTANCE FROM FACE (m) S1 FACE WIDTH
(m)

Page 10 of 12
OVERBREAKS/UNDERBREAKS ANALYSIS
Full advance and sidewall control were successfully achieved as there were barrels of the drill
rods on the sidewalls after blast.

Barrels on Side Wall after Blast

TIMING OF OPERATIONS
In general, the time taken to charge with the Reefmaster is far lesser than that of the NLP’s. On
the average, it took fifty (50) minutes to charge with the Reefmaster Assemblies as against one
and half hours (1:30min) with the NLP.

CONCLUSION
1. The advance per blast was not significantly different.
2. The distance of muck pile from the face was desirable as it did not affect equipment closer to
the face.
3. There were no over break was measured and barrels of drill rod on the walls were visible.
4. Total cost of blasting a round was higher with the Reefmaster Assemblies when compared to
the NLP’s. However, the potential value the Reefmaster could have added due to the
additional advance per blast over the past 5 months amounts to $139, 865.00 which negates
the higher unit cost.
5. Time used to charge and initiate a round with the Reefmaster was fifty minutes which is much
more productive when compared to the charging time of one and half hours with the NLP’s.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The Reefmaster Assembly trail was a success and it is recommended for use across the mine.
Initially the Reefmaster Assemblies can be used selectively until all the NLP’s are phased out.

Page 11 of 12
 REEFMASTER PROJECT – APPENDIX

Average Average Designed

Blast Working No. of Burden Spacing Actual % Throw Charging
Heading Size Hole Length Overbreak/Underbreak Advance
No. Area Holes (m) (m) Advance (m) Advance (m) Time (min)
(m) (m) (m)

22# 314
1 51 3.8m by 3.7m 1 1 2.4 0 2.4 2 83% 14 55
x/c

2 21 u/r 49 3.8m by 3.7m 1 1 2.4 0 2.4 2.4 100% 14 50

30# 322
3 49 3.6m by 3.7m 1 1 2.4 0 2.4 2.4 100% 13 50
x/c
22#
4 37 4m by 2.2m 1 1 2.4 0 2.4 2.4 100% 14 30
373x/c
22#334
5 51 4m by 4.1m 1 1 2.4 0 2.4 2.4 100% 13.5 60
r/d
6 30#1 u/r 51 4.1m by 3.9m 1 1 2.4 0 2.4 2.4 100% 13 45
7 21 s/d 51 4.1m by 4.2m 1 1 2.4 0 2.4 2.4 100% 14 58
22# 386
8 51 4.6m by 4.3m 1 1 2.4 0 2.4 2.4 100% 15.5 60
u/r
32# 325
9 51 4.3m by 4.2m 1 1 2.4 0 2.4 2.3 96 15 60
x/c
10 21 s/d 51 4.1 by 4.2m 1 1 2.4 0 2.4 2.4 100% 13 60

Average Measurements 0 2.4 2.35 98 14 53

Page 12 of 12