Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020
DOI 10.1007/s12517-013-1158-0
ORIGINAL PAPER
Numerical modeling of presplitting controlled method
in continuum rock masses
Z. Aliabadian & M. Sharafisafa
Received: 17 April 2013 / Accepted: 14 October 2013 / Published online: 26 October 2013
# Saudi Society for Geosciences 2013
Abstract Controlled blasting techniques are used to control
overbreak and to aid in the stability of the remaining rock
formation. The less competent the rock mass itself, the more
care has to be taken in avoiding damage. Presplitting is one of
the most common methods which is used in many open pit
minings and surface blast designs. The purpose of presplitting
is to form a fracture plane across which the radial cracks from
the production blast cannot travel. Presplitting should be
thought of as a protective measure to keep the final wall from
being damaged by the production blasting. The purpose of this
study is to investigate the effect of presplitting on generation
of a smooth wall in a rock domain under blast process in
continuum rock mess. The 2D distinct element code was used
to simulate the presplitting in a rock slope (open pit mining).
The blast load history was applied as a function of time to
inner wall of each blasthole. Important parameters that were
considered in the analysis were stress tensor and fracturing
pattern. The blast loading magnitude and blasthole spacing
were found to be very significant in the final results.
Keywords Controlled blasting . Presplitting Method .
Continuum rock masses . Stress tensor
Introduction
Drilling and blasting continues to be an important method of
block production and block splitting. Drill and blast technique
has a disadvantage that sometimes it produces cracks in
uncontrolled manner and also produces micro cracks in the
block as well as in remaining rock, if not carefully carried out.
Z. Aliabadian (*) : M. Sharafisafa
Department of Mining and Metallurgical Engineering, Amirkabir
University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
e-mail: aliabadian2000@gmail.com
Recovery by this method is low as compared to other methods.
Therefore, attempts have been made to develop controlled
growth of crack in the desired directions. The control of
fractures in undamaged brittle materials is of considerable
interest in several practical applications including rock
fragmentation and overbreak control in mining (Fourney
et al. 1975; Fourney 1993; Kaneko et al. 1995). One way of
achieving controlled crack growth along specific directions
and inhibiting growth along other directions is to generate
stress concentrations along those preferred directions. Several
researchers have suggested a number of methods for achieving
fracture plane control by means of blasting. Fourney et al.
(1978) suggested a blasting method which utilizes a
ligamented (continuous) split-tube charge holder. Nakagawa
et al. (1982) examined the effectiveness of the guide hole
technique by model experiments using acrylic resin plates
and concrete blocks having a charge hole and circular guide
holes. Katsuyama et al. (1983) suggested a controlled blasting
method using a sleeve with slits in a borehole.
Mohanty (1990a, b) suggested a fracture plane control
technique using satellite holes on either side of the central
pressurized hole, and demonstrated its use through laboratory
experiments and field tests in rock. Nakamura et al. (1992)
suggested a new blasting method for achieving crack control
by utilizing a charge holder with two-wedge-shaped air
cavities. Ma and An (2008) conducted a numerical study to
investigate the effective parameters in blast-induced fracture
propagation such as nearby to free face, preexisting stresses,
notched and guide hole, and presplit charge holders. They
concluded that when the preexisting joint is parallel to the free
face, the block behind the joint will be well fragmented due to
nearby the free face. When the preexisting joint direction is
normal to the free face, there is no damage in the block behind
the joint. It justifies the presplitting technique, which is
designed to prevent overbreak. They also showed that charge
holder is an effective way to control the initiation and
5006
propagation of fractures. Two-slit charge holder can be used in
presplitting operation, while three-slit charge holder can be
applied in smooth blasting where more fragmentation is
desired at one side of the fractured plane.
Nakamura (1999) performed experimental model to
examine the effectiveness of the guide hole with notches. Cho
et al. (2004) performed experiments using a notched charge hole
to visualize fracturing and gas flow due to detonation of
explosives. Recently, model experiments using polymethyl
methacrylate (PMMA) specimens and electric detonators were
carried out to observe the propagation of cracks between two
charge holes in blasting (Nakamura et al. 2004). The
applicability of the guide hole method using a circular hole
having two notches between the charge holes was examined.
Cho et al. (2008) used a numerical tool to study crack growth in
notched hole and in models with guide holes. They also studied
fracture processes in laboratory-scale blasting using PMMA.
Their study showed that predominant radial cracks propagate
along different directions with different distribution pattern and
the propagation direction affects the colinearity of the fracture
plane between the charge holes. They also showed that the
propagation velocity of the opening crack decrease as the
applied fracture energy (Gf) increases. Sharafisafa and
Mortazavi (2011a) studied fracture plane control in continuum
media using numerical distinct element modeling. They
evaluated parameters which are effective in fracture propagation
in presplitting controlled blasting such as spacing between
blastholes and blast loading magnitude. Their study showed that
these parameters are very significant in terms of length and
pattern of generated fractures around the blastholes as well as
linking between fractures forming a continuous crack.
Controlled blasting techniques produce the macrocrack in a
desired direction and eliminate microcrack in the remaining
rock. Macrocrack development in desired direction is required
for extraction of dimensional stone and at the same time there
is need to reduce microcrack development in the block and
remaining rock. Blasting techniques have been developed to
control overbreak at excavation limits. Some techniques are
used to produce cosmetically appealing final walls with little
or no concern for stability within the rock mass. Other
techniques are used to provide stability by forming a fracture
plane before conducting any production blasting. On
permanent slopes for many civil projects, even small slope
failures are not acceptable, and the use of controlled blasting
to limit damage to the final wall is often required. The
principle behind these methods is that closely spaced parallel
holes drilled on the final face are loaded with a light explosive
charge that has a diameter smaller than that of the hole (Cho
et al. 2008). There are four methods of controlled blasting, and
the one selected depends on the rock characteristic and the
feasibility under the existing conditions. The four methods are
line drilling, cushion blasting, smooth-wall blasting, and
presplitting (also preshear) (Sharafisafa and Mortazavi
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020
2011a). In another study, Sharafisafa and Mortazavi (2011b)
studied effect of a fault on wave propagation. This study
demonstrated the effect of presence of a fault on extent and
length as well as direction of fractures. A major discontinuity
such as a fault can arrest the fractures and consequently
fracture plane cannot be generated in complete length, which
will result in incomplete presplitting blast. Rathore and
Bhandari (2007) studied some effective parameters on fracture
growth by blasting method such as variation of explosive
energy, hole stemming, blasthole liners, and so on. Their result
showed the variations of extent and direction of fractures with
variation of effective parameters. For example, they
concluded that by using notched hole with liner, crack was
developed in desired direction and damages were controlled in
extracted block and remaining rock.
Line drilling involves drilling holes precisely along the
required break line at a spacing of two to four holes diameters,
and then leaving a number of unloaded holes between the
loaded holes. Line drilling is only used where very precise
wall control is needed, such as corners in excavations.
When the rock is reasonably competent, smooth-wall
blasting techniques can be used to take advantages in
underground applications. Horizontal holes are charged with
small-diameter, low-density decoupled cartridges strung
together and by providing good stemming at the collar of the
hole. Charges are fired simultaneously after the lifters. If the
rock is incompetent, smooth-wall blasting may not be
satisfactory (Rossmanith and Uenishi 2008). Cushion and
presplitting blasting are the most commonly used methods,
with the main difference between the two beings that in cushion
blasting, the final row holes are detonated last in the sequence,
while in preshearing, the final line holes are detonated first in
the sequence. Cushion blasting method is a control technique
which is used to cleanly shear a final wall after production
blasting has taken place. In cushion blasting method, the
cushion holes are loaded with light, well-distributed charges.
The sole purpose of a cushion blast is to create a smooth, stable
perimeter. It offers no protection to the wall from the production
blast (Cho et al. 2008). Presplitting consists of creating a plane
of shear in solid rock on the desired line of break. It is
somewhat similar to other methods of obtaining a smoothly
finished excavation, but the chief point of difference is that
presplitting is carried out before any production blasting and
even in some cases before production drilling (Fourney et al.
1978). Presplitting utilizes a detonation before the production
blast in terms of lightly loaded and closely spaced drill holes.
The purpose of presplitting is generating a fracture plane across
which the radial cracks from the production blast cannot travel.
Secondarily, the formed fracture plane may be smooth and
allow the use of steeper slopes with less maintenance.
Presplitting should be thought of as a protective measure to
keep the final wall from being damaged by the production
blasting (Rossmanith and Uenishi 2008).
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020 5007

One of the most significant phenomenons in rock blasting

is fly rock. Fly rock is one of the most hazardous events in
Presplit holes
blasting operation of surface mines. Excessive propelling of
fragmented rock caused by the explosive energy is called fly Production holes
rock. Inadequate burden, improper stemming, deviation in
drilling, excessive powder factor, unfavorable geological
conditions (e.g., open joints, weak seams, cavities, etc.), too
much delay timing, and backbreak are considered the main
causes of the fly rock (Monjezi et al. 2012; Monjezi et al.
2011). Controlled blasting can prevent fly rock to occur as a
controlling the burden size, and rock fracturing during blast
operation have significant impact on rock fragmentation and
prevents generation of unfavorable rock dimensions.
The presplit theory is that two simultaneously fired holes
emit shock waves, which, when they meet within the web, place
the web in tension, causing cracks and shearing it. Figure 1
illustrates a diagram on how two initiated shock waves collide
each other and also shows generation of tensile zone. In
extremely weathered material, presplitting may have to be done
at very close spacing with a very small amount of explosive.
Presplit holes must be stemmed with an increased bottom charge
to move the toe (Lopez and Lopez 1995). After detonation in
presplit holes, generated waves from each hole propagate in a
spherical shape and cracks will be generated around holes.
Figure 2 shows a presplitting blast operation and rock
shearing and forming the fracture plane in presplitting
method. As can be seen from Fig. 2a, presplit blast leads to b
generating a fracture plane parallel to free face which is final
wall of temporary slope. Figure 2b illustrates a successful Fig. 2 Fracture patterns in the presplitting blast method; a location of
presplit blast with no damage in other directions. In order to presplit holes and production holes; b final fracture plane after presplit
operate a successful presplit blast, significant factors involved blast (Atlas Powder 1987)
in rock blasting should be considered and measured properly.
Understanding the blasting mechanism in rocks can be helpful largely depends on the spacing between blast holes and
in designing process of rock blasting. Blast-induced fractures explosive loading. Therefore, in this study, the spacing
are developed around blastholes in main three fractured zones. between blast holes and the explosive load are discussed as
These three zones are crushed zone, severely fractured zone, the governing parameters.
and incipiently cracked zone. Figure 3 illustrates a schematic In order to investigate the effects of significant parameters
representation of the three cracked zones around a blasthole. involved in presplitting blast method, numerical methods
In presplitting blast method, the main emphasis is placed on were applied in this study. Numerical methods are widely
incipiently cracks which are the major cracks in rock blasting used to model geomechanical structures both in open pit or
process. The developing of three blast zones in presplit holes underground mining as well as civil engineering applications.
The application of different numerical methods has significant
advantages such as nonlinear analysis, implementation of
different material behaviors, realistic simulation of geometric
dimensions, modeling static and dynamic loading as well as
hydraulic analysis, etc. Moreover, modeling of discontinuities
such as faults, joint sets, and bedding plane can be performed
easily in numerical methods. For instance, three dimensional
analyses of rock masses by means of different numerical
methods have been of interest in recent years (Ma et al. 2013;
Verma et al. 2011; Verma and Singh 2010). Furthermore, as
most of rock masses are naturally discontinuous and joints and
Fig. 1 Presplit principle (Hemphill 1981) faults present in rock formation, application of discrete element
5008
Fig. 3 Schematic illustration of
processes occurring in the rock
around a blasthole, showing
formation of crushing zone,
fracture zone and fragment
formation zone (Whittaker et al.
1992)
method in geomechanics has become popular and widely used
in recent years to better understand the discontinuous rock
masses (Sharifzadeh et al. 2013; Salari-Rad et al. 2013). The
more advanced application of numerical methods is dynamic
analysis and wave propagation through rocks and soils.
Numerical methods can be used to study dynamic behavior of
rock masses subjected to earthquake and blast loading (Sazid
and Singh 2012, Zhang et al. 2012).
There are some numerical tools available for blast
modeling in rock masses; the most widely used being the
finite element method (FEM), boundary element method
(BEM), finite difference method (FDM), discrete element
method (DEM), etc. The efficiency of DEM in blasting and
wave-fracture propagation was discussed in some studies.
Khan (2012) employed rapid failure of a test rock specimen
under cylindrical tensile wave effect. The study concluded that
the DEM can be efficient to solve dynamic problems of rock
mechanics or to control chronologically stress–strain state
(SSS) of a material. Aliabadian et al. (2012) employed 2D
distinct element code to study the effect of in situ stresses and
loading rate on blasting-induced fracture propagation. They
showed that the distinct element method can simulate the
fracture propagation and wave attenuation in dynamic
analysis in good agreement with reality. Therefore, in the
present study, two-dimensional discrete element code which
is capable to simulate the responses of rocks subjected to
either static or dynamic loadings is used.
One of the most important issues of rock engineering is
modeling and considering discontinuities. In numerical
modeling, handling the discontinuities is a challenging task.
The existence of the discontinuities in rock masses has
significant influence on the responses to either static or
dynamic loadings and renders the numerical simulations more
complicated (Cundall 1990; Hudson and Harrison 1997).
There have been some studies on dynamic fracturing of rock
using discrete element methods. Ning et al. (2011) studied
blast-induced rock mass fragmentation via advanced
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020
discretization within discontinuous deformation analysis
(DDA) framework. They focused mostly on block movement
in jointed rock mass due to blast loading in surface operations.
In addition to providing a new fracturing modeling technique,
the ability and correctness of the DDA method in the failure
treatment of complex block systems in dynamic blast loading
were also verified in fracturing modeling examples. Xia et al.
(2013) employed distinct element method for studying damage
prediction of tunnel subjected to adjacent excavation blasting.
They used VORONI joint model for simulation of rock mass
jointing pattern in a shallow tunnel in heavily jointed rock
mass. They employed dynamic discrete element method for
prediction of damage extent around underground structures
successfully in their study. Their study showed that, for a given
blasting load, the PPV and the rock damage extent decrease
with the excavation progress. Mortazavi and Katsabanis
(2001) developed DDA_BLAST code that was modified
DDA code describing the expansion of the blast chamber as
a function of blast chamber volume and time. They used the
modified DDA code to further study block movement (fly
rock) in a bench in jointed rock mass. They studied the effect
of different jointing patterns in a bench on block movement
during blast loading. They concluded that when the geological
layers were dipping away from the bench face, less movement
from the face occurred resulting in a higher muck pile profile,
increased likelihood of toe problems was observed, and less
backbreak occurred because the strata was dipping into the
wall and had a higher stiffness with regard to the blast and
gravity loading. Also, when the geological layers were dipping
toward the free face, more backbreak occurred, there was less
likelihood of toe problems because the rock mass was loose
and could be pulled off completely, and there was larger throw
of the burden and a flatter muck pile was formed as a result.
The DEM, which was developed to model discontinuous
problems, has been recognized to be a more superior
alternative for studying the mechanical behaviors of fractured
rock masses (Hart 1993). The employed two-dimensional
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020 5009

Fig. 4 Overall view of the DEM

model

Y
S

10 m
X

D= 76 mm
Blasthole

20 m

commercial numerical code can simulate the responses of
discontinuous media subjected to either static or dynamic
loadings. The discontinuum is represented as an assemblage
of discrete blocks. The internal discontinuities are treated as
boundary conditions between blocks, and large displacements
along discontinuities and rotations of blocks are allowed.
Individual blocks behave as either rigid or deformable
material. Deformable blocks are subdivided into constant
strain triangle-shaped finite difference zones, and each zone
responds according to a prescribed linear or nonlinear stress–
strain law (Hart 1993). Cho and Kaneko (2004) studied the
influence of the applied pressure waveform on the dynamic
fracture processes in rock using finite element method, but
their study just concentrated on rise and fall time influence on
fracture propagation and also the effect of free face on rock
breakage. Moreover, the application of finite element method
in rock fracturing due to its limitation in fracture modeling is
not a suitable way. On the other hand, DEM has been adopted
for fracture modeling in rock masses successfully and this
method is able to model fracture propagation in rocks under
both static and dynamic modeling.
In most blasting practices, empirical or semiempirical
techniques are used for blast design and fragmentation analysis.
These techniques are based on information obtained for certain
range of rock types and blasting conditions and cannot be
generalized for all blasting conditions. With regard to the
limitations of empirical methods, numerical methods are viable
tools to further understand and illustrate the fragmentation
process. Application of numerical methods in blasting allows
for consideration of complex boundary conditions, material
nonlinearity, dynamic material behavior, geometric nonlinearity,
and complexity associated with blasting operations. It is the
intention of this paper to take advantage of the powerful
numerical tool and simulate the significance of the presplitting
method. The rock mass fracturing pattern and stress distribution
through the rock mass are examined. At the same time, it is
essential to investigate the fracture and fragmentation mechanism
through numerical models so as to obtain a better understanding
of the dominant parameters that control blast results.
The objective of the paper is numerical modeling of
presplitting controlled blasting method by using distinct element
method. In the last decades, many efforts were placed to study
rock fragmentation subjected to blast loading in experimental
environment. Although the experimental method can present
some important results, they fail to present actual results as they
are associated with some limitations and simplifications such as
sample scale, boundary conditions, rock type, the real amount of
explosive charge, confinement, etc. On the other hand, advanced
numerical methods are able to consider all natural conditions.
Moreover, these methods can present many effective parameters
such as different stresses and strains as well as displacements in
any point in much less time. Based on our knowledge, DEM
method has not been yet employed to investigate rock breakage
in presplitting controlled method. Therefore, in this study, a
comprehensive numerical modeling is presented to evaluate
the significant parameters effecting rock breakage in controlled
blasting method in real scale.
Numerical modeling procedure
Numerical methods are useful tools to build models of complex
problems, which have complex geometry, loading condition,
and boundary condition. The rock–explosive interaction in
Table 1 Rock mass properties used as input
Parameter Density Bulk Shear Tensile Shear
(kg/m3) modulus modulus strength strength
(GPa) (GPa) (MPa) (MPa)
Value 3,160 52.4 39.6 18.8 44.16
5010
Table 2 Model numerical properties
Parameter Rounding Overlap Minimum Minimum
Length (m) Tolerance (m) contact edge
length (m) length (m)
Value 0.001 0.0005 0.00568 0.002
multi-row blasting operations is an example of such problems.
Sophisticated codes enable handling of dynamic behavior,
complex geometries, and nonelastic material behavior.
Numerical methods can be used for parametric studies aimed
at analyzing the effect of critical parameters on the structure
response. It is the goal of this section to look into the effects of
important parameters involved in presplitting blast method.
Modeling strategy and input data
As pointed out in the previous sections, the goal of this work is
to look into the effects of important parameters involved in
presplitting blast. Employing the DEM code, a 2D model of a
typical block was constructed. Figure 4 illustrates an overall
view of the model. Identical holes of 76 mm in diameter and in
0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 4 m in spacing were considered. Further
details of the blast geometry are shown on the figure. Since
the objective of the study was to look at the problem from
stress/failure mechanism point of view, the Mohr–Coulomb
material model was used to model the rock mass behavior.
All plastic models potentially involve some degree of
permanent, path-dependent deformations (failure); a
consequence of the nonlinearity of the stress–strain relations.
The different models are characterized by their yield function,
hardening/softening functions, and flow rule. The yield
functions for each model define the stress combination for
which plastic flow takes place. These functions or criteria are
represented by one or more limiting surfaces in a generalized
stress space with points below or on the surface being
characterized by an incremental elastic or plastic behavior,
respectively. The Mohr–Coulomb (MC) failure criterion is a
set of linear equations in principal stress space describing the
conditions for which an isotropic material will fail, with any
Fig. 5 Illustration of
displacement contours in the
model prior to dynamic loading
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020
(e-002)
2.40
2.00
Unbalanced forces (MN)
1.60
1.20
0.80
0.40
0.00
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40
(e-002)
Time (second)
Fig. 6 History of unbalanced force prior to dynamic analysis
effect from the intermediate principal stress being neglected.
MC can be written as a function of (1) major and minor principal
stresses or (2) normal stress and shear stress on the fracture plane
(Jaeger and Cook 1979). The Mohr–Coulomb model is the
conventional model used to represent shear failure in soils and
rocks. Mohr–Coulomb material model can be used for modeling
plastic flow in rock and soil. The advantages of the MC failure
criterion are its mathematical simplicity, clear physical meaning
of the material parameters, and general level of acceptance. This
failure criteria is implemented in many of software which are
used for geomechanical proposes. During the process of stress
wave propagation, tensile stresses or shear stresses do occur and
cause rock material to fail in tension or in shear. The Mohr–
Coulomb criterion used in this study represents rock fracturing
in terms of shear and tensile fracturing.
The problem can be treated as a plane strain case, in which
the X- and Y-axis lie on the vertical plane with the origin at the
center of the model.
In Fig. 4, S is the spacing between holes in different
calculation models. All boundaries were considered as viscous
boundaries (nonreflecting) to eliminate wave reflection. The
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020 5011

number of meshes and grid points used to discretize the model the stress wave loading phase and the subsequent gas
is 51,622 elements 29,574, respectively. This number of pressurization phase and throw was not considered.
element indicates a very fine element that allows one to model In order to estimate the generated pressure from the charge,
the fractures in a better pattern and to ensure the accuracy of experimental methods can be helpful. The magnitude of shock
numerical calculations. Triangular finite-strain elements were wave pressure is a function of velocity of detonation, density,
used to discretize the model. It should be noted that the number and charge's ingredients (Lopez and Lopez 1995). Although
of holes depends on the spacing between holes in the model and this relation is very complicated, the following equation can
Fig. 4 just shows an overall view of model. The rock type was estimate blast load:
assumed to be diorite (Paventi and Mohanty 2002). The
ρe : V D 2
materials properties are presented in Table 1. PD ¼ 432  10−6 ð1Þ
Some information relating numerical properties of the 1 þ 0:8ρe
model is presented in Table 2. The numerical procedure used
where PD is blast pressure (megapascal), ρ e explosive density
in this study is that first the model is built and material
(grams per cubic centimeter), and VD velocity of detonation
property and static boundary conditions as well as gravity
(meters per second). Putting the dynamite properties from
and in situ stresses are implemented into the model. Then
Table 3 in the above equation (Lopez and Lopez 1995):
the model is run in static condition to establish the stresses
and displacements prior to detonation. Figure 5 illustrates a 1:45  30002
view of displacement distribution within the model prior to the PD ¼ 432  10−6 ¼ 2; 610 MPa
1 þ 0:8  1:45
excavation of the blastholes and detonation.
As can be seen from Fig. 5, there is a uniform distribution of Gas pressure usually is considered half of the blast
displacement in the model indicating equilibrium state prior to pressure, e.g., (Lopez and Lopez 1995):
dynamic loading. Moreover, illustration of unbalanced forces 1
before dynamic loading can be useful to present equilibrium in PE ¼ PD ¼ 1; 305 MPa ð2Þ
2
the model. The unbalanced force is shown in Fig. 6.
Natural dynamic systems contain some degree of damping If the diameter of the explosive is equal to blasthole's
of the vibration energy such that the system would not oscillate diameter (coupled detonation), then there is no gap between
indefinitely when subjected to driving forces. DEM uses a blasthole and explosive and the related pressure can be
dynamic algorithm for the solution of mechanical problems. calculated as follows:
The damping in the numerical simulation should attempt to
r −qκ
h
reproduce the energy loss in the system when subjected to PW ¼ PE : ð3Þ
b
dynamic loading. Rayleigh damping is commonly used which
is approximately frequency-independent over certain range of where r h is hole radius (millimeters), b explosive radius
frequencies. Damping parameters are very important for DEM (millimeters), κ specific heat coefficient, and q shape factor
dynamic analyses. An important characteristic of DEM of explosive (2 for cylindrical charges and 3 for spherical
dynamic analysis is the reproduction of frequency- charges) (Bulson 1997). Therefore:
independent damping of materials at the correct level. For geo  21:2
media, natural damping is mainly hysteretic and difficult to 38
PW ¼ 1; 305 ¼ 1; 305 MPa
decide, but it commonly falls in the range 2.0–5.0 % of critical 38
damping. Herein, the fraction of critical damping of 0.02 is
specified in the present study for better results. Considering the 900
limitations of employed code in blast simulation and also the 800
complex nature of blast loading mechanisms, a simplified 700
approach was adopted for this analysis. With regard to the
Pressure (Mpa)

600
continuum nature of the analysis, the study was focused on
500

400

300
Table 3 Explosive charge properties used as input
200
Parameter Explosive Velocity of κ specific q shape P-wave 100
Density detonation heat factor velocity
(kg/m3) (m/s) (VOD) coefficient (C p ) (m/s) 0
0.00E+00 5.00E-05 1.00E-04 1.50E-04 2.00E-04 2.50E-04 3.00E-04
Time (s)
Value 1,450 3,000 1.2 2 5,764
Fig. 7 Dynamic pressure applying on the blastholes' wall
5012 Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020

Fig. 8 Variations of xx-stress at points around blasthole

On the other hand, applied dynamic pressure on blasthole's equations by Starfield and Pugliese (1968) and Duvall (1953)
wall is a function of time because of interaction between rock are widely used. According to Starfield's equation, generated
and generated shock wave. Many experimental equations dynamic pressure on the wall (P (t)) is a function of rock
have been presented to calculate this parameter, but presented density (ρ r ), explosive density (ρ e ), P-wave velocity (C p ),

Fig. 9 Variations of yy-stress at

points around blasthole
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020 5013

velocity of detonation (VD), and PW. The following equations demonstrates that firstly tensile stress develops around the
give P (t) and C p : blasthole and causes tensile fracturing of rock mass. Then
h pffiffi pffiffiffiffiffi i compressive stress leads to further development of rock mass
8ρr : C p
Pðt Þ ¼ PW: eð−Bt= 2Þ − eð− 2BtÞ & B ¼ 16338 breakage and results in excessive breakage of material and
ρr :C p þ VD: ρe
generation of crushed zone. Figure 6 shows the variations of
ð4Þ yy-stress at mentioned locations in Fig. 9. Similar to Fig. 8, the
stress magnitude in the crushed zone (closest point to the
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi blasthole) is about 116 MPa (compressive), while in the other
Cp ¼ ðK þ 4G=3Þ=ρ ð5Þ
points is about 26 MPa. Both figures indicate that stresses levels
Where K is the bulk modulus, G is shear modulus, and ρ is in the crushed zone are very high and when rock materials in
rock mass density. The explosive density (ρ e ) is 1.45 (g/cm3). the crushed zone undergo this stresses, excessive fragmentation
Therefore, for diorite: will occur. The severely fractured zone and crushed zone can be
distinguished with looking at Fig. 10. As can be observed from
C p ¼ 5764 m=s
h pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi i this figure, in the crushed zone, whole rock mass elements are
ð6Þ
Pðt Þ ¼ 2350 e−11552:7t − eð− 32676tÞ failed in a particular radius around the blasthole and there is no
distinct fracture. In the severely fractured zone, radial cracks are
Fig. 7 shows the graph drawn based on Eq. (6). initiated from the crushed zone and propagated radially, but in
As can be seen from Fig. 7, the peak pressure is about short lengths. A number of short fractures are generated in a
820 MPa. It was assumed that the explosive is of a shocky particular radius around the blasthole and beyond the crushed
type and delivers most of its energy in the form of stress wave. zone. These fractures cannot develop in long distances and do
It should be noted that as whole blastholes are detonated in the not contribute in major rock mass breakage. After severely
same time (0-ms delay), the shock wave generated from fractured zone, major cracks or incipiently fractures are
blastholes is continuous and shock waves propagate in all developed which are responsible for rock mass breakage.
directions without any time gap between them.
It should be mentioned that the shape of stress pulse
presented in Fig. 7 was used in first step of calculations which
were conducted to investigate the spacing effect between Numerical simulation results of spacing effect on fracture
holes. The second step of calculations was evaluating the plane generation
effect of the amount of pressure applied to blastholes with
the same rise and fall times. In order to better understand wave As outlined earlier, five models consist of five different spacing
propagation in presplitting method, plasticity indicators and between holes (S =0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 4 m) were conducted. All
velocity vectors were monitored as a function of stress wave
propagation/collision in each model and for comparing the
results; the monitored parameters were plotted at the same
time. Moreover, monitoring point's locations were considered
at points between holes as well as in locations lying parallel to
Y-axis around each hole.
The crushed zone is an area around blasthole (with
spherical shape in 3D and circle shape in 2D) that all elements
have failed in it and there are no radial cracks to be
distinguished. In the crushed zone, xx-stress and yy-stress
are very high and the combination of these two stresses leads
to fail all rock elements in a particular rang around the
blasthole. In this special situation, the following figures are
presented to demonstrate tangible difference between stresses
in crushed zone and intact elements (i.e., non-failed zones).
As can be observed from Fig. 8, in point located at the
immediate vicinity of the blasthole, the maximum value of
xx-stress is about 75 MPa and residual stress is about 43 MPa
(compressive stresses), while this stress decreases rapidly in
other points and the maximum and residual stress in other
points are about 20 and 10 MPa, respectively (compressive
stresses). Moreover, the red arrow in the left side of the figure Fig. 10 Difference between crushed zone and severely fractured zone
5014 Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020

models have the same dimensions in width and length as blasthole's wall was conducted. Figure 11 illustrates velocity
presented in Fig. 3. Main difference in the models is number of vectors as wave front propagating in the rock mass in the models.
holes which depend on the spacing between blastholes. After As can be seen from Fig. 11, each model has different trend
static calculation, dynamic analysis of blast load applied on of wave propagation from others. In the cases of 0.5, 1, and

S= 0.5 m
S= 0.5 m

S= 1 m S= 1 m

-0.800 -0.400 0.000 0.400

(*10^1)

S= 2 m S= 2 m

S= 3m S= 3m

S= 4 m
S= 4 m

Fig. 11 Illustration of stress wave front at 0.2 ms (S: spacing) Fig. 12 Rock mass failure and crack propagation under blast loading
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020
Table 4 Diameter of different cracked zones around the blastholes
having different spacing between blastholes
Spacing Diameter of Diameter of Diameter of
between crushed zone (cm) severely fractured incipiently cracked
holes (m) zone (cm) zone (cm)
0.5 29.3 22.4
1 24.8 28.6
2 18.1 38.9
3 14.1 39.5
4 12.85 40.2
2 m in S, before 0.2 ms, the wave fronts from each hole collide
one another and complicated interaction between wave fronts
begins, whereas in the cases of 3 and 4 m in S, wave fronts
have not collided two wave fronts raised from adjacent
blastholes. These interactions between wave fronts lead to
different fracture pattern of rock mass in each model.
Figure 12 illustrates rock fragmentation and crack propagation
in five mentioned model.
As can be seen from Fig. 12, fracturing in each model has
different trend from others which indicates effect of different
distance between holes. As mentioned earlier in Section 1,
dependent on distance between holes, different types of blast-
induced fracturing are generated around holes. Once the
spacing is too close, numerous fractures link in the plane
between holes and when the blast causes material breakage
between holes, will fall out leaving half casts protruding from
the final wall. Moreover, the most yielded zones are crushed
zones and other types of fractures such as severely fractured
zone and incipiently cracked zone are not generated. This
fracturing pattern indicates less damage to adjacent walls and
forms a straight fracture plane. This process can be seen in
Fig. 7 and in models with 0.5 and 1 m in spacing. Increasing the
spacing leads to generate longer fractures as well as decreasing
crushed zone's area. If spacing is more than 2 m and less than
4 m, severely fractured zone will be dominated fracture zone
140
incipiently
Diamater of cracked zone (mm)
120 cracked zone
100
80
fractured zone
60
40
20
0
0 1 2 3
Fig. 13 Illustration of diameter of different cracked zones around the
blasthole in models with different blasthole spacings
5015
and crushed zone will be restricted just in close distances
around holes. These fractures link in the plane between holes
and lead to generate a fracture plane which is the desired
fracture plane. On the other hand, incipiently fractures
generated from cracked zone are too short to form linked cracks
0
which means in these spacing, wave fronts interference is only
36
able to generate short cracks. Furthermore, initiated fractures
from crushed zone lead to damage to adjacent walls. Therefore,
95
if spacings are too long, a face that is generally rough in
114.3
appearance will result. In the cases with very large distance
119.8
between holes, generated wave front from each hole acts
similar to an individual blast in rock mass and complete
fracture process zone around blastholes is generated which
consists of crushed zone, severely fractured zone and
incipiently cracked zone. This phenomenon means there is no
constructive or unconstructive interference between stress
wave fronts and rock fracturing is limited around blastholes.
Therefore, initiated fractures from blastholes do not link
together which means there is no fracture plane and
applicability of presplit blast is not fulfilled. As can be observed
from Fig. 12 in the case of S =4 m, fracture plane is not
generated and just longer fractures propagate around blasthole.
As mentioned earlier, different loading will result different sizes
of cracked zones. In Fig. 12, each model has different sizes of
cracked zones around the blasthole. Table 4 presents the results
of diameter of three different cracked zones, and Fig. 13
illustrates the graph drawn based on Table 4.
As can be observed from Table 4 and Fig. 13, crushed zone
diameter decreases as the spacing increases, while the diameter
of severely fractured zone and incipiently fractured zones
increase when increasing the spacing. This trend indicated that
hole spacing plays a very significant role in rock breakage. The
generation of crushed zone is not favored in rock blasting and it
should be prevented as much as possible. On the other side, the
desired fractures are incipiently fractures which can extend to
linger distances and can result in generation of final presplit
Spacing (m)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
0
-25
-50
Stress (Mpa)
severely
-75
Sxx
-100 Syy
Crushed zone Sxy
-125
4 5
Blasthole Spacing (m) -150
Fig. 14 Histories of maximum stresses at halfway between two
blastholes
5016
20
10
0 mass fracturing. Looking at Fig. 11, 2-m spacing is the critical
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Stress (Mpa)
-10 Spacing (m)
-20
-30
S xx
-40 S yy
S xy
-50
Fig. 15 Histories of maximum stresses along blasthole center line
plane. Too short spacing results in severely crushing the rock
around blasthole and too long spacing results in damage to the
remaining wall. Therefore, in order to achieve the optimized
spacing, different analysis with different spacings should be
done for every type of rock mass to find the optimum spacing.
The timestep considered for whole models is 10 ms to
allow rock fractures to propagate in their final length and in
order to be able to compare the results at the same time. In
order to evaluate the stress states and the role of these stresses
in rock mass breakage subjected to blast load, monitoring
point's locations were placed between holes to record stresses
variations. Considering the paper scope, more meaningful
parameters (e.g., xx-stress, xy-stress and yy-stress) were
extracted and presented here to compare the differences in
stresses state in each model. Figure 14 illustrates the variation
of S xx, S yy, and S xy at halfway points between two blastholes.
As can be observed from Fig. 14, three graphs have the
same trend and increasing the spacing leads to decreasing the
stress level. On the other hand, there is a large difference
between xx-stress and other two stresses. The maximum value
of yy-stress is about 17.85 MPa and for shear stress (e.g., xy-
Crushed zone
Final wall
Crushed zone
Fig. 16 Generation of final wall at close and large spacing
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020
stress) is about 2.9 MPa, whereas the maximum value of xx-
stress is approximately 122 MPa. These levels of stresses
indicate that S xx is the major stress and responsible for rock
spacing and spacings less than 2 m lead to higher rate of
energy delivery to the rock mass which cause to severely rock
breakage in the space between holes. This phenomenon was
described earlier in the description of Fig. 12 which indicates
good agreement between stresses state and the rock breakage
pattern. Once the spacing is smaller than 2 m, higher amount
of stress leads to generate crushed zone around holes that is
due to high and fast delivery of energy to the rock mass.
Moreover, constructive interference of stress waves generated
from each hole leads to higher fragmentation locally. In the
case of 4-m spacing, maximum xx-stress, yy-stress, and xy-
stress are about 10, 1.3, and 0.127 MPa, respectively. These
magnitudes of stresses at halfway point between blastholes are
disabled to induce plastic fracturing of rock mass. Therefore,
initiated fractures from holes cannot link together to generate a
continuous fracture plane.
To further evaluate the issue, the variations of S xx, S yy, and
S xy along blasthole center line parallel to Y-axis at a distance
of 40 cm were measured and the results are presented in
Fig. 15. This figure shows crack evolution around blastholes
which depends on blasthole spacing.
This figure indicates that the most significant stress
component is the S yy with maximum magnitude in the spacing
of 4 m. The trends shown in Fig. 8 indicate that propagation of
initiated fractures from blastholes are due to yy-stress
component, and two other stresses (e.g., S xx and S xy) can
contribute to further extension of fractures. Shear stresses are
too low to fail the rock mass and do not have significant role in
the rock mass fracturing. On the other hand, in the case of
spacing more than 1 m, there is an opposite trend between S xx
and S yy. Increasing spacing between holes causes a uniform
distribution of energy in the rock mass around blasthole and
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020 5017

leads to generate a complete fracture process zone that an In order to investigate the stresses states at the points
unwanted damage to the adjacent wall of the blasthole will between holes, monitoring points were considered to record
result. In the early milliseconds of detonation, S yy causes
compressive fracturing of the rock mass and after these times
S xx causes tensile stress concentration at the tips of cracks
which will extend the cracks to longer lengths. Tensile stress
concentration at crack's tips leads to further propagation of
cracks to the undesired directions which means unwanted
fragmentation of the rock mass.
Fracture propagation is mainly dependent on spacing
between blastholes, so that final wall will be generated in
rough or flat. Figure 16 shows a schematic and numerical
illustration of fracture propagation and final wall generation at Blast load= 300 MPa
the cases with close and large spacings.
As can be observed from Fig. 16, if blastholes are
overloaded or spacing are too close, crushing of the blasthole
wall will result. If spacings are too long, a face that is generally
rough in appearance will result.

Effect of blast loading magnitude on fracture pattern

Blast load= 400 MPa
The dynamic responses of a rock mass to blast loading are
much affected by loading magnitude of the explosive charge,
which may influence the rock fracture pattern. In order to
investigate the effect of loading magnitude on the fracture
pattern, five pressure wave pulse with maximum pressures
equal to 300, 400, 500, 600, and 700 MPa, and the same rise
and fall times as shown in Fig. 6 were adopted in the
numerical simulation. These pressure wave pulses were
applied to a model with 4-m spacing to better illustrate rock Blast load= 500 MPa
fragmentation. The general model is same as Fig. 3. Figure 17
illustrates rock mass fracturing subjected to different blasts
loadings. As can be seen from Fig. 17, a higher loading
magnitude increases the number of fractures and causes the
intense stress release around the running fractures.
When the blast loading is less than 500 MPa, generated
fractures from the blastholes cannot link together to generate a
continuous fracture plane and fracture pattern is similar to
blasting in a single blasthole. When blast loading exceeds Blast load= 600 MPa
500 MPa, constructive interference of stress waves generated
from each hole leads to higher fragmentation locally. This
phenomenon occurs in points between holes and leads to link
incipiently fractures which create final fracture plane. As can
be seen from Fig. 17 in the case of 600 MPa, fractures are not
linked together entirely and linked fractures have not
generated a straight line which is unfavorable. When the blast
loading exceeds 600 MPa and reaches to 700 MPa, a perfect
fracture plane is generated that is main scope of presplit Blast load= 700 MPa
blasting performance. It should be noted that intensive blast
load leads to generate more fractures around hole which can Fig. 17 Illustration of rock failure subjected to five different blasts
damage rock mass around blasthole in unwanted directions. loading
5018 Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020

Fig. 18 Variation of S xx, S yy, and Blast loading magnitude (Mpa)

S xy at halfway point between 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
blastholes 4

-2

Stress (Mpa)
-4

-6

-8

-10

-12 Sxx2
Series

-14
Syy3
Series
-16
Sxy1
Series
-18

stresses at these points. Figure 18 shows the variation of S xx,
S yy, and S xy at halfway points between two blastholes.
As illustrated in Fig. 18, there is a meaningful difference
between S xx and other two stresses. With increasing the
applied pressure on blasthole's wall, the xx-stress increase
gradually. The red graph shows two trends. Firs trend begins
at 7.65 MPa and ends at 13.7 MPa, and the second trend
occurs between 13.7 and 16.3 MPa. In the first trend, rock
fracturing does not occur in this point, whereas in the second
trend, rock fracturing occurs. This means that to generate a
continuous fracture, 500 MPa is critical loading and blast
loading should be increased to more than this value. On the
other hand, yy-stress and xy-stress do not have significant
effect on rock breakage in this point which indicates that these
stresses do not contribute to link fractures between holes.
Figure 19 illustrates the variation of S xx, S yy, and S xy at a
point along blasthole center line parallel to Y-axis at a distance
of 40 cm. In this figure, it is clear that at points along to
blasthole center, rock breakage is due to high values of yy-
stress. There is a dramatic increase in the magnitude of yy-
stress with increasing the blast loading. It means that yy-stress
is responsible for generating fractures in directions parallel to
y-axis. Therefore, the yy-stress component mainly leads to
damage to rock mass in undesired directions. On the other
hand, xx-stress and xy-stress have approximately remained
constant and maximum value of xx-stress and xy-stress are
about 10 and 5.6 MPa, respectively.
Summary and conclusions
The 2D dynamic distinct element method was employed to
study the presplitting blast method. The rock mass was
considered to be a medium strength limestone typical of host
rock in highway cuts in northern Iran. A Mohr–Coulomb
material constitutive law was used to model the rock mass

Fig. 19 Histories of S xx, S yy, and 20

S xy along blasthole center line at a
distance of 40 cm 10

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
-10
Blast loading magnitude (Mpa)
Stress (Mpa)

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60 Sxx
Syy
-70
Sxy
-80
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020
deformation and fragmentation. Important stress components
were measured at critical points (e.g., points between holes
and along blasthole center line). The stress wave front and
rock mass fracturing due to blast loading were shown. Two
significant parameters, spacing and blast loading, were
examined to better understand the presplitting mechanism.
The numerical results show that spacing is the most significant
governing parameters which control the final fracture plane's
shape. Short spacing leads to generate a continuous and
straight fracture which is desired scope. On the other hand,
in short spacings, crushed zone is the dominate type of
fracturing and areas between holes are crushed completely.
When spacings are too long, a face that is generally rough in
appearance will result and long fractures (e.g., incipiently
fractures) are created in all directions which lead to damage
to adjacent walls. In the other word, short spacing leads to
increase crushed zone around blastholes, but no cracks in y-
axis is formed and a regular and flat boundary of the
remaining wall will appear. Long spacing leads to low crushed
zones, while longer fractures around blastholes and irregular
generated boundary are created and an uneven remained wall
is generated. The second significant factor is blast loading.
Conducted numerical study indicates that increasing the
applied blast loading in too long spacing leads to generate a
continuous fracture and low blast loads are not able to link
generated fractures around blastholes. Moreover, high
magnitudes of blast loading cause longer fractures around
blastholes which lead to damage to adjacent walls. As a
practical suggestion to rock engineers, it is suggested that
before any detonation, a comprehensive study is necessary
to estimate the extent of fracture zones and the length of main
fractures around a blasthole. The results obtained from
numerical modeling then are compared with the allowable
length of fractures and finally the optimum spacing between
blastholes are estimated. Also, the stability of remaining wall
also should be evaluated with respect to the fracture length in
the remaining wall. A graph similar to Fig. 13 can be drawn
for the achieved results.
References
Aliabadian Z, Sharafisafa M, Mortazavi A (2012) Investigation of the
effect of in-situ stresses and loading rate on blasting induced fracture
propagation. 46th US Rock Mechanics / Geomechanics Symposium,
Chacago, IL, USA
Atlas Powder Company (1987) Explosives and rock blasting. Atlas
Powder Company, Dallas, TX
Bulson PS (1997) Explosive loading of engineering. A history of research
and a review of recent developments. E & FN Spon, London
Cho SH, Kaneko K (2004) Influence of the applied pressure waveform on
the dynamic fracture processes in rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 41:
771–784
5019
Cho SH, Nakamura Y, Kaneko K (2004) Dynamic fracture process of
rock subjected to stress wave and gas pressurization. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 41:433–440
Cho SH, Nakamura Y, Mohanty B, Yang HS, Kaneko K (2008)
Numerical study of fracture plane control in laboratory-scale
blasting. Eng Fract Mech 75:3966–3984
Cundall PA (1990) Numerical modelling of jointed and faulted rock. In:
Rossmanith HP (ed) Mechanics of Jointed and Faulted Rock. A.A.
Balkema, Rotterdam
Duvall WI (1953) Strain-wave shapes in rock near explosions.
Geophysics vol 18:310–323
Fourney WL, Holloway DC, Dally JW (1975) Fracture initiation and
propagation from a center of dilatation. Int J Fract 11:1011–1029
Fourney WL (1993) Mechanisms of rock fragmentation in by blasting. In:
Hudson JA (ed) Compressive rock engineering, principles, practice
and projects. Pergamon Press, Oxford
Fourney WL, Dally JW, Holloway DC (1978) Controlled blasting with
ligamented charge holers. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 15:121–129
Hart, RD (1993) An introduction to distinct element modelling for rock
engineering. In: Hudson JA, editor. Comprehensive Rock
Engineering. Vol. 2. p. 245–61
Hudson JA, Harrison JP (1997) Engineering rock mechanics. Pergamon,
Amsterdam
Hemphill GB (1981) Blasting operation. McGraw Hill Inc, New York
Jaeger JC, Cook NGW (1979) Fundamentals of rock mechanics, 3rd edn.
Chapman & Hall, London
Kaneko K, Matsunaga Y, Yamamoto M (1995) Fracture mechanics
analysis of fragmentation process in rock blasting. J Jpn Exp Soc
58(3):91–99 [in Japanese]
Katsuyama K, Kiyokawa H, Sassa K (1983) Control the growth of cracks
from a borehole by a new method of smooth blasting. Mining Safety
29:16–23
Khan GN (2012) Discrete element modeling of rock failure dynamics. J
Min Sci 48(1):96–102
Lopez JC, Lopez JE (1995) Drilling and blasting of rocks. A.A. Balkema,
Rotterdam
Ma GW, An XM (2008) Numerical simulation of blasting-induced rock
fractures. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 45:966–975
Ma K, Tang CA, Li LC, Ranjith PG, Cai M, Xu NW (2013) 3D modeling
of stratified and irregularly jointed rock slope and its progressive
failure. Arab J Geosci 6:2147–2163
Mohanty B (1990a) Explosive generated fractures in rock and rock like
materials. Eng Fract Mech 35:889–898
Mohanty B (1990) Fracture-plane control blasts with satellite holes. In
Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Rock
Fragmentation by Blasting. Parkville, Australia, Australasian
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy p. 407–412
Monjezi M, Amini Khoshalan H, Yazdian Varjani A (2012) Prediction of
flyrock and backbreak in open pit blasting operation: a neuro-
genetic approach. Arab J Geosci 5:441–448
Monjezi M, Bahrami A, Yazdian Varjani A, Sayadi AR (2011) Prediction
and controlling of flyrock in blasting operation using artificial neural
network. Arab J Geosci 4:421–425
Mortazavi A, Katsabanis PD (2001) Modelling burden size and strata dip
effects on the surface blasting process. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 38:
481–498
Nakagawa K, Sakamoto T, Yoshikai R (1982) Model study of the guide
hole effect on the smooth blasting. J Jpn Exp Soc 43:75–82
Nakamura Y, Matsunaga H, Yamamoto M, Sumiyoshi K (1992) Blasting
methods for crack control by utilizing charge holders. J Jpn Exp Soc
53:31–37
Nakamura Y (1999) Model experiments on effectiveness of fracture plane
control methods in blasting. Int J Blast Fragment 3:59–78
Nakamura Y, Cho SH, Yoneoka M, Yamamoto M, Kaneko K (2004)
Model experiments on crack propagation between two charge holes
in blasting. Sci Technol Energetic Mater 65:34–39
5020
Ning Y, Yang J, An X, Ma G (2011) Modelling rock fracturing and blast-
induced rock mass failure via advanced discretisation within the
discontinuous deformation analysis framework. Comput Geotech
38:40–49
Paventi M, Mohanty B (2002) Mapping of blast-induced fractures in
rock. In: Proceedings of the seventh international symposium on
rock fragmentation by blasting, FRAGBLAST, vol. 7, Beijing,
China p. 166–172
Rathore SS, Bhandari S (2007) Controlled fracture growth by blasting
while protecting damages to remaining. Rock Mech Rock Engng
40(3):317–326
Rossmanith HP, Uenishi K (2008) The Cuña Problem – Reconsidered. In:
Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of International
Association for Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics.
(IACMAG). October, Goa, pp 1–6
Salari-Rad H, Mohitazar M, Rahimi Dizadji M (2013) Distinct element
simulation of ultimate bearing capacity in jointed rock foundations.
Arab J Geosci. doi:10.1007/s12517-012-0667-6
Sazid M, Singh TN (2012) Two-dimensional dynamic finite element
simulation of rock blasting. Arab J Geosci. doi:10.1007/s12517-
012-0632-4
Sharafisafa M, Mortazavi A (2011) A numerical analysis of the
presplitting controlled blasting method. 45th US Rock Mechanics /
Geomechanics Symposium, San Francisco, CA, USA
Arab J Geosci (2014) 7:5005-5020
Sharafisafa M, Mortazavi A (2011) Numerical analysis of the effect of a
fault on blast-induced wave propagation. 45th US Rock Mechanics /
Geomechanics Symposium, San Francisco, CA, USA
Sharifzadeh M, Karegar S, Ghorbani M (2013) Influence of rock mass
properties on tunnel inflow using hydromechanical numerical study.
Arab J Geosci 6:169–175
Starfield AM, Pugliese JM (1968) Compressional waves generated in rock
by cylindrical explosive charges: a comparison between a computer
model and field measurements. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 5:65–77
Verma AK, Bajpai RK, Singh TN, Narayan PK, Dutt A (2011) 3D
instability analysis of an underground geological repository-an
Indian case study. Arab J Geosci 4:1173–1188
Verma AK, Singh TN (2010) Modeling of a jointed rock mass under
triaxial conditions. Arab J Geosci 3:91–103
Whittaker BN, Singh RN, Sun G (1992) Rock fracture mechanics
principles, design and applications. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 444–
445
Xia X, Li HB, Li JC, Liu B, Yu C (2013) A case study on rock damage
prediction and control method for underground tunnels subjected to
adjacent excavation blasting. Tunn Undergr Sp Tech 35:1–7
Zhang YH, Fu XD, Sheng Q, Leng XL (2012) Study on elastic P-wave
propagation law in unfavorable geologic structures with discontinuous
deformation analysis method. Arab J Geosci. doi:10.1007/s12517-
012-0773-5