Revista Vol32 N1 ISEE PDF

The Official
Publication The Journal of

EXPLOSIVES
of the
International
Society of
Explosives
ENGINEERING
Engineers
Volume 32 Number 1
January/February 2015
4 ISEE Annual Report

30 Recovery of a Dozer Concrete Bridge P A G E
8
from a Highwall Using
Blasting Pier Removal
in an Environmentally
Sensitive River
The Journal of
EXPLOSIVES
ENGINEERING
F E AT U R E S
8 30 38 44
Cover Story: Concrete The Recovery of a Dozer Safety Talk 21st Annual Photo Contest
Bridge Pier Removal in from a Highwall Using Blasting Fumes – MSHA UTE Water Shot Still.
an Environmentally Blasting Fatality Report. Fifty-five feet of rock was
Sensitive River After a D10 dozer was drilled and blasted for the
When a new bridge was driven off the edge of a construction of a new lake
needed across the upper highwall it needed to be side water intake structure.
reaches of the Yellow- recovered. Many options
stone River in Montana, were explored including
removing the old concrete dragging, lifting, and
bridge piers became an excavation. For various
environmental concern for reasons, the only viable
the highway department option called for special-
engineers. This article ized blasting.
describes the techniques
employed in the demoli-
tion of the reinforced
concrete bridge supports,
and the method used to
contain the blasts and
remove all the debris.
D E PA RT M E N T S
4 18 22 24 26
From the
Executive
Industry News Chapter News Calendar of
Events
Explosives, 100
Years Ago, More
Inaugural Korczak Stories from Mid-Amer-
Director and Ruth Ziolkowski ica Blasting Confer- A list of or Less
ISEE Annual Drilling and Blasting ence, 9th Southeast upcoming events Dynamite grade
Report Seminar and other Mine Safety and Health in the explosives markings.
news from around Conference and the industry.
the industry. Mid-Atlantic Chapter
of ISEE.
Copyright ©2015 Society of Explosives Engineers, Inc., dba International Society of Explosives Engineers
The Journal of Explosives Engineering, published six times per year, is the official publication of the International Society of Explosives Engineers. The Society is not responsible for opinions
expressed and statements made by authors in articles or advertisements published in the Journal. ISEE assumes no responsibility for the completeness, accuracy, or conclusions reached in
any of the articles or items published in this Journal.
Since the information is unique and because each job site is different, information presented in this Journal may not apply to your specific field situation. Readers are cautioned to careful-
ly consider ideas presented and decide for themselves if the procedures described are safe and appropriate for the intended use. The International Society of Explosives Engineers cannot
be responsible for the specific application of the information presented. Also, remember to always consult the manufacturer of the product(s) you are using for recommended practices.
Mention in this publication of a commercial or proprietary product does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation for its use. Registered names, trademarks, logos, artwork,
photographs, etc., used in this publication, even without specific indication thereof, are to be considered protected by law.
Yearly subscription rates: $95 U.S.A., $115 all others (International Air Mail). All members of the Society receive a complimentary subscription.
2 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

The Journal of Explosives Engineering
Published by International Society
of Explosives Engineers
30325 Bainbridge Road
Cleveland, Ohio 44139
www.isee.org
International Society of
Publisher
International Society of Explosives Engineers
Exposives Engineers 2014
Editor
Dede Manross
explo@comcast.net
Annual Report
Reporting on Fiscal Year
Contributing Writers
Buck Hawkins
Ending Sept. 30, 2014
R.B. Hopler
By Winston Forde, Executive Director, ISEE
Board of Directors
President
Michael J. Koehler
Vice President, Administration
When an organization, individual, plished. By stopping for a moment and
Jack W. Eloranta or relationship reaches a major anniver- looking back, we see the larger picture
Vice President, Technical
sary, we often celebrate the occasion that we might miss in the daily activity
James P. Daley as a milestone. “We made it!” Such of trying to get things done. Years end-
milestones hold meaning because they ing in “0” or “5” seem to naturally ask
Treasurer
Alastair C. Torrance help us take stock of what we’ve accom- for our recognition, while somehow all
Secretary
Richard M. Hosley, Jr.
Past President
John E. Capers
Directors
Kevin J. Hachmeister
Pieter S. J. Halliday
David Harrison
Keith M. Henderson
Clifford K. H. Lim
Braden Lusk
Erin McCullough
William J. Reisz
Janeen T. Smith
Cameron F. Thomas
Hans E. Wallin
Kirk C. Whitaker
Dean A. Wiegand
Executive Director
J. Winston Forde
Director of ISEE and SEE Education Programs
Buck Hawkins
Director of Communication
Dede Manross
Director, Meetings and Conference
Lynn Mangol, CMP
Marketing Manager
Bill Wahl
Office Manager
Mary Spena-Bosch
Membership Coordinator
Ruth Schaefer
Publications Coordinator
Lauren Creneti
All correspondence should be directed to:

International Society of Explosives Engineers,
30325 Bainbridge Road, Cleveland, Ohio 44139
Telephone: (440) 349-4400. Fax: (440) 349-3788.
E-mail: isee@isee.org Website: www.isee.org

The workshop was a full day of presen-
tations covering explosives safety, vi-
bration control, electronic detonators,
blast reporting and updates from the
ATF and MSHA. Workshop attendees
qualified for blaster’s training recer-
tification hours from several states.
Hazmat was the focus on day two, as
ISEE sponsored the Class 1 Explosives
Specific Hazmat Safety Training at the
National Center for Explosives Training
and Research (NCETR).
• We supported the Brazil UFRGS Stu-
dent Chapter of ISEE by attending its
very first explosives workshop held
in Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul in
2013. With close to 250 attendees,
the industry was well represented as
educators, end-users, manufacturers,
mining companies, regulators and
consultants came together to support
the needs of the blasting community in
Brazil. It was such a success that they
held their second workshop in Octo-
ber 2014 and are planning to make it
an annual event. Additionally, they are
readying themselves to launch a pro-
fessional chapter to be headquartered
in São Paulo.
• We confronted industry regulatory
challenges by communicating our sup-
port on behalf of our members to re-
ject a petition that was filed with the
U.S. Office of Surface Mining Reclama-
tion and Enforcement (OSMRE) by an
environmental group wanting to initi-
ate rulemaking for use of explosives in
surface coal.
other years feel less significant. extend our sincere gratitude to all who • We launched a new website
Looking back over the past 40 years, have supported us throughout the years. (www.isee.org) with a layout that re-
it’s easy to see how the list of Interna- ISEE’s success is your success. solves many navigational issues. It
tional Society of Explosives Engineers The year 2014 was one with chal- also increases its functionality to work
(ISEE) programs and SEE Education lenges and growth for ISEE as we con- well with new technologies like smart
Foundation scholarships mirror the story tinued our strong financial performance. phones and tablets.The website resizes
of the explosives industry itself. From Our stability was driven by all our lines of its images to adjust to any computer
working with regulators to form sensible business. The ISEE team did an outstand- screen size. We also relaunched the
laws and supporting blasters through ing job of managing the complexities of World of Explosives website (www.
training and education to giving back to our business and delivering good results explosives.org) with updated content
the community by awarding scholarships in all facets of the organization. that was submitted by the ISEE Public
to deserving students. • Working with the Alabama, Tennes- Education/Public Relations committee.
ISEE had a very successful 2014. Many see Volunteer and Georgia Peach State • The SEE Education Foundation award-
thanks go to those who gave unselfishly chapters of the ISEE, we supported ed its largest dollar amount in scholar-
by the meticulous work put forward by blasters in the field by sponsoring the ships since its inception – from $500
our volunteers, board of directors, com- very first Southeast Blasting Workshop, awarded in 1995 to $56,000 in 2014.
mittees, members and staff. We want to which was held in Huntsville, Alabama. With 26 current endowment funds,
January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 5

we’ve awarded more than 300 schol- frames to improve building insulation. blasting community need to be 40 years
arships worth more than $380,000 • ISEE continued to grow its footprint from now? How do we get there?”
since 1995. Assisting with these ef- in the blasting community as we in- ISEE is addressing these questions in
forts is the support we received from creased the number of chapters and many ways – mainly through its strate-
members like you at the auction and stimulated global interest for starting gic plan. We’re also looking at how we
foundation t-shirt sales at the Annual an ISEE chapter. can support and grow ISEE membership
Conference on Explosives and Blasting • The ISEE team made great strides in and chapters. We’re focusing on our re-
Technique as well as your donations delivering our vision through its stra- lationships with other like organizations
throughout the year. tegic plan. in the mining industry around the world,
• We began a reinvestment program in These accomplishments and invest- collaborating with each other where it
our operating assets by investing in ments have set us up for strong revenue makes sense. We’re growing and man-
computer equipment upgrades to ac- growth for the coming years and pre- aging scholarship funds to help seize
commodate the transition from the serves important ISEE assets. opportunities and secure interest in the
now unsupported, more vulnerable For ISEE, our 40th anniversary in explosives industry for generations to
Windows XP operating system to the 2014 was not just an arrival point, it was come.
Windows 7 environment. also a pivot point. Even as we celebrated None of us at ISEE pretend to have all
• We also implemented improvements our relevant history, we also moved into the answers. We do know, however, that
to our headquarters in Cleveland, a new phase of the organization’s exis- the passion, dedication, and generosity
Ohio. The ISEE office rehabilitation be- tence. We remain just as committed to of people like you have made it possible
gan with the relocation of the HVAC the blasting community – to its chapters, for us to make it this far. We also know
units creating a safer parking and side- its donors, and its leaders – but with the that with your support, the next chapter
walk area for staff with reduced winter kind of intensity that only comes with of our history holds enormous promise
ice buildup caused by HVAC conden- four decades of experience. We’re not for the entire blasting community.
sation. Additional repairs were com- just looking at what we’ve accomplished
pleted with the doorways and window but are asking, “Where do ISEE and the
2014 ISEE COMMITTEES Nominating Georgia Peach

Chair: John E. Capers III Golden West
Audit Great Lakes
Chair: James P. Daley Planning
Chair: Michael J. Koehler Heartland
Awards Vice Chair: John “Jack” W. Eloranta Kentucky Bluegrass
Chair: John “Jack” W. Eloranta Lake Superior
Publications Mid-Atlantic
Blasters Training Chair: William J. Reisz Mississippi Valley
Chair: Lawrence J. Mirabelli
Public Education/Public Affairs New England
Board Liaison: John E. Capers III
Chair: Keith M. Henderson New Mexico Rio Grande
Chapter Development Northern Plains
Chair: Cameron Thomas Standards Ontario Trillium
Chair: Ken Eltschlager Pacific Northwest
Conference Advisory Board Liaison: Braden T. Lusk
Chair: Alastair C. Torrance Potomac
Technical, Safety and Environmental Rocky Mountain
Conference Program Co-chairs: William J. Reisz, Kirk C. Whita- Tennessee Volunteer
Chair: David Harrison ker, and Janeen T. Smith Tri-State
Vice Chair: Kevin Hachmeister Western Canada
Constitution Jamaica
2014 ISEE SECTIONS
Chair: John E. Capers III
Blast Vibration and Seismograph ISEE STUDENT CHAPTERS
Education Chair: Braden T. Lusk
Co-chairs: Braden T. Lusk and Pontifical Catholic Univ. of Peru
Hans E. Wallin Fragmentation by Blasting University of Arizona
Chair: Alastair C. Torrance Colorado School of Mines
Ethics New Mexico Tech
Chair: James P. Daley Drilling Penn State
Co-chairs: Dean A. Wiegand and So. Dakota School of Mines
Explosives Security Richard M. Hosley, Jr.
Chair: Janeen T. Smith University of Kentucky
Missouri S & T
Governmental Affairs 2014 ISEE CHAPTERS Virginia Tech
Chair: Richard M. Hosley, Jr. Australia Brazil, Federal University of Rio Grande do
International Alabama Sul (UFRGS)
Co-chairs: Pieter S.J. Halliday and Black Hills
Clifford Lim California Southwest
Chilean
Membership
Colorado
Chair: Tom Jenkins
Connecticut Valley
Board Liaison: Kirk C. Whitaker
Eastern Pennsylvania

Concrete Bridge
Pier Removal
in an Environmentally
Sensitive River
By Paul Kunze
Abstract
When a new bridge was needed across the upper reaches of the Yellowstone River in Montana, removing
the old concrete bridge piers became an environmental concern for the highway department engineers. The
location is about 50 miles downstream from the north edge of Yellowstone Park. The determination was
made by federal and state agencies charged with protecting the resource, that the old piers had to go but
the river bed had to remain unchanged. Concerns were expressed that removing the concrete presented
the potential for environmental damage to this protected portion of the river. These concerns prompted the
state to place stringent restrictions on the contractor in the way they carried out the demolition and disposal
of the piers. The reinforced concrete masses had to be removed to an elevation of at least 15 feet below the
river bed and every bit of concrete debris had to be removed from the river channel. Explosive removal was
discouraged, but the only other options of saw cutting, mechanical, or chemical breaking were not viable.
This article describes the techniques employed in the demolition of the reinforced concrete bridge sup-
ports, and the method used to contain the blasts and remove all the debris. The piers were drilled, a cof-
ferdam was built around each structure, the concrete was confined and broken with explosives, and all the
rubble was removed without adversely affecting the stream bed to the complete satisfaction of the skeptical
custodians of the river.

to replace the old narrow structure that was now on a second-
ary roadway. So the old bridge was scheduled for demolition.
The bridge crosses the Yellowstone River which is the lon-
gest undammed river in the contiguous United States. It is
about 100 miles (161 km) from the headwaters of the river
in the mountains along the continental divide in Yellowstone
Park to the bridge site in Livingston. The Yellowstone River is
internationally known as one of the premiere trout waters in
the United States. There are 11 bridges upstream from this
location that will eventually need to be replaced or removed,
as well as hundreds of bridges across the country in similar
condition and terrain that will someday have to be addressed.
As the planning of new construction was started, numer-
ous federal and state agencies and private environmental
groups took notice of the work that would be required to
build a replacement bridge at this location. In the past, when
Figure 1. The old bridge. bridges have been replaced, the removal of old piers has nor-
mally been a relatively minor part of the work. Efforts were
usually made to protect fishery resources, but debris from the
Forward old concrete was tolerated as incidental rubble on the river
In 1934 the Montana highway department contracted to beds as long as the big chunks that might hinder navigation
have a new bridge built across the Yellowstone River on the were removed. Recently however, some environmentally con-
east end of Main Street in Livingston, Montana. The 500 ft scious administrators have come to the conclusion that ran-
(154 m) long modern steel girder bridge was on Highway 10 dom pieces of broken concrete have no place in the channels
which was the main east-west route through Montana and of some of our nation’s rivers. This conclusion has achieved
across the northern edge of the country. The traffic lanes were validity among the managers at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
10 ft (3 m) wide in each direction. Seventy-five years later, the Service; the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; the Montana De-
freeway had bypassed the town and a new bridge was needed partment of Fish, Wildlife and Parks; and the Montana De-
Figure 2. Blastholes were drilled through the deck. A temporary work bridge is in the background.

Figure 3. Sheet pile cofferdams surrounding two piers.
partment of Environmental Quality. These are just some of the

agencies that were concerned with how pier removal at the
new bridge project would be managed.
Partly in response to these concerns, the highway depart-
ment had developed special construction provisions that spe-
cifically dealt with concrete pier demolition in river channels.
The new rules outlined the normal requirements and condi-
tions that were in place when explosives were required on any
highway construction project in Montana. In addition, they
included a debris containment and removal provision that
called for the contractor, to among other things, “conduct a
systematic visual examination of the river bed; (underwater
camera, high resolution sonar, divers, etc.) to insure removal
of all materials greater than 6 inches” (152 mm). The success-
ful contractor and the drilling and blasting crew needed plans
to be developed to insure that nothing, not even small pieces,
escaped containment. If it could be shown that every bit of de-
bris was kept inside of the cofferdam following the shot, then
the expensive river bottom inspection would not be required.
During the preliminary work prior to closing the bridge, the
contractor constructed a work bridge parallel to the existing
bridge. When traffic on the old bridge was finally detoured,
the first order of work was to drill the necessary blastholes
down into the old piers. The very best way to accomplish this
chore was to utilize access to the bridge deck before its remov-
al. Multiple holes were opened in the deck above each pier
to allow the rock drill access to the top of the concrete. The
drill was positioned on the deck of the bridge and six, 3 inch
(76 mm) diameter holes were drilled in a single row along the
center line of each pier. The holes were equally spaced about
3 ft (1 m) apart. When drilling was completed, the holes were
plugged and the drill was taken to the next job. This pattern
was designed to insure that no part of the pier would be more
than 3 ft (1 m) away from the explosives energy in the drill
holes.
When the drilling was completed, the deck of the old
bridge was cut into segments and was removed with cranes Figure 4. Sketch of the best distribution of explosives charges.

located on the adjoining work bridge. As each pier was ex- the concrete to this level it was anticipated that all the rebar
posed, a sheet pile cofferdam was driven about 20 ft (6 m) could be removed and that this would eliminate the need to
into the river bed around each of the concrete pillars. The dive down and cut any rebar that was protruding from the
cofferdam sheets were about 40 ft (12.3 m) long with about remaining unaffected concrete.
half that length exposed above water level. After the coffer- A volume calculation of different levels of the concrete
dam was completed the top of the pier was about 3 ft (1 mass was made to determine the best distribution of the ex-
m) below the top of the sheet piles. The next step was for plosives charges (See figure 4). The energy level required near
the contractor to remove the gravel and river rock that was the bottom of the piers, where there was more confinement
enclosed within the cofferdam between the concrete and by river bed material and water, needed to be much higher
steel wall. This was done with a clamshell bucket attached than the energy needed to break the unconfined material
to another of the cranes located on the work bridge. There nearer the top of the structure. The obvious goal was to break
was some discussion as to how important it was to get this all the concrete completely, but to not heave any portion of
packed material removed before the piers were shot. The the debris from the interior of the cofferdam. The blast de-
blasters recommended removal; the contractor did not think signer also had to be aware that employing too much energy
it was important at this stage. A perfunctory effort was made carried the risk of rupturing the wall of the cofferdam, which
to remove this material from around the first pier with the would negate all the other confinement efforts.
intention of seeing how the first shot went. The energy level chosen used somewhat more than a
The specifications called for removal of the concrete and pound (0.5 kg) of explosives per cubic yard near the confined
rebar to a level that was 16 ft (5 m) or so below the river base of the piers, grading to less than 0.5 pounds (0.23 kg)
bed. The original construction plans used to build the piers per cubic yard nearer the top of the unconfined concrete. One
indicated that the rebar in the concrete did not extend to the pound (0.45 kg) PETN cast boosters were chosen as the pri-
bottom of the piers. The drill hole depth was calculated to mary explosive because they exhibit very high shock impact
bottom 2 ft (0.6 m) below the bottom of the rebar in the with minimum material heave characteristics. These proper-
piers. The original piers were set on bedrock which meant ties seem to be close to optimum for breaking reinforced con-
that the total height of each pier was about 40 ft (12.3 m). crete away from the steel reinforcing bars while minimizing
The 35 ft (10.8 m) drill holes would leave 4 or 5 ft (1.5 m) of the flyrock potential of the broken material. The boosters cho-
unreinforced concrete in the bottom of each hole. By breaking sen for the job had two tunnels completely through the units
Next
Issue…
Featuring:
Highlights of the 41st Annual
Conference on Explosives and Blasting Technique
Drilling Practices and Techniques
To advertise, contact Dede Manross • 801.942.5650 • explo@comcast.net

www.isee.org

Figure 5. Completed explosive assembly. Figure 6. Charge assembled away from bridge. Top cartridge was located
just below the stemming.
Figure 7. Loading holes on the concrete pier.
so that the detonating cord and the nonelectric detonators Access to the top of the piers inside of the cofferdam was
could each be threaded through the cartridge. The explosive limited to a man basket via the crane on the work bridge.
charge for each hole was pre-assembled on the surface. A After the drill holes were checked and cleared, the explosives
single 25/500 nonelectric initiator was loaded into the bottom assemblies were transferred to the crew members in the cof-
cartridge and another similar detonator was placed in one of ferdam individually for each hole. In order to protect the frag-
the last cartridges near the top of the charge for insurance. A ile nonelectric initiation tubing from the weight of the blasting
wrap or two of duct tape was used to secure the cast boosters mats that would cover each pier, a wood channel was created
in the desired position along the detonating cord/nonelectric by bolting two lengths of framing lumber to the top of the
line. The length of each assembly was calculated to deter- concrete. All the wiring was kept inside of this channel and
mine where the stemming should start. The detonating cord when the hookup was complete it was covered with a nar-
did not extend up into the stemming, as it stopped at the top row piece of plywood that was nailed in place. The initiation
cartridge. sequence was designed to start with one of the center holes
The drill holes were checked for depth and blown clean firing first, then by using a 17 ms delay on one side the deto-
with a blowpipe and compressed air when it was necessary. nation progressed away from the center at 25 ms intervals.

Figure 8. Blast mats were lifted and positioned by a crane.
Vibration Considerations about 20 ft (6.1 m) into the sandstone bedrock that would
serve as the foundation of the new structure. Scheduling of
Vibration concerns had to be factored into the blast de- pier demolitions needed to be planned around the curing of
sign. There was a 100-year-old railroad bridge 170 ft (52 m) the concrete in the new piers. One of the new columns was
downstream parallel to the existing bridge. Calculations to only 27 ft (8.3 m) from one of the piers to be demolished. An
predict the vibration intensity at the bridge told us that we equation that was used to predict potential vibrations indicat-
could expect minimum levels of disturbance from the planned ed that the PPV expected could be in the 7 inch (18 cm) range.
explosive loads at that location. However, the prime contrac- Research of the appropriate literature indicated that vibration
tor who was working under time constraints, continued with levels of more than twice that amount would not cause any
building the supports for the new bridge. The plans called damage to this type of reinforced concrete structure.
for 6 1/2 ft (2 m) diameter reinforced concrete shafts drilled After the holes were loaded and the connections secured
Available in the Blasters’ Library

MICROMETER
CRACK RESPONSE A Must-Read for those in the explosives industry. Anyone
TO VIBRATION AND WEATHER dealing with the effects of vibrations will value this book!
BY CHARLES H. DOWDING Regulators
PUBLISHED BY ISEE Gain an appreciation of the degree of conservatism in the current control limits
and explore the possible use of autonomous micrometer crack measurement to
explain to the public why they are more sensitive to vibration than are structures.
Litigants
Explore the large effect of natural phenomena on crack response and its effect on
questions of causation.
Owners of Vibratory Sources
Investigate the use of graphical display of crack response to educate neighbors
about various natural phenomena that affect their house.
Engineers
Explore use of micrometer crack response to study the response of structures to
natural phenomena as well as for the control of the construction process.
Instrumentation Specialists
Learn how to measure micrometer crack response and how to integrate the
process with seismological systems and instruments.
ISEE Member: $92 Non-Member: $114

Order online at www.isee.org
ISEE • 30325 Bainbridge Road • Cleveland, OH 44139 • (440) 349-4400 • Fax (440) 349-3788

Figure 9. First blast mat being draped over the top of the structure.
Discover Renishaw’s new Quarryman® Pro

and Boretrak® blast optimization system
at
See us
015
ISEE 2
721
Booth
The benefits face profiling and borehole deviation measurement can provide:
• Optimized fragmentation reduces wastage and secondary breakage costs
• Minimising fly rock, air blast and vibration incidents reduces safety and environmental risks
• Blast design data obtained allows for more efficient use of explosive type and quantity
• Provides an audit trail of recorded pre-blast geometry for compliance and best practice
• Intuitive and easy-to-use systems and software reduce training requirements
For more information, please visit www.renishaw.com/quarryingapplications
Renishaw Inc 5277 Trillium Blvd, Hoffman Estates, Illinois, IL 60192, United States T +1 847 286 9953
Renishaw Canada 1165 Beaverwood Road, PO Box 143, Manotick, ON, K4M 1A2, Canada T +1 613 692 0132
E spatialmeasurement@renishaw.com
www.renishaw.com/quarryingapplications
ISEE_0.5pp_AD2.indd 6 03/10/2014 12:40:40

Figure 10. Results after most of the blast mats were removed. Figure 11. The cofferdam partly removed. One of the new, partly finished
piers can be seen in the background.
and protected, sections of used conveyor belting were draped was only water surrounding the concrete mass, it seemed to
over the ends of the pier. Long pieces, 30 ft (9.2 m) were have moved better, allowing easier excavation. The powder
used so that they covered the structure to within a few feet factors used seemed to be sufficient. The success of this proj-
of water level. Then six heavy rubber tire blasting mats were ect proves that given ample incentives, other similar debris
placed over the pier. Each mat was 7 ft x 14 ft (2.2 m x 4.3 m) containment projects are possible.
and overlapped the belting. The lead in nonelectric shooting
line was looped down close to water level out of the way of Acknowledgments
the heavy mats.
The author would like to commend the professionalism of Archie
After work was stopped and project personnel were re- Johnson Inc.; The Sletten Construction Company; and Paul Co-
moved to a safe distance, the seismograph was in place un- gley, PE MDT, whose combined efforts led to the success of this
der the railroad bridge and activated, the flagmen were in part of the project.
place and traffic was stopped, nearby residents were notified,
and the video cameras were focused and running–the shot
was fired. References
International Society of Explosives Engineers, 1998. ISEE Blasters’
Conclusions Handbook™, 17th Edition. Cleveland, Ohio.
The blast mat/belting cover on the concrete mass was suf- International Society of Explosives Engineers, 2011. ISEE Blasters’
Handbook™, 18th Edition. Cleveland, Ohio.
ficient to keep all the debris contained within the cofferdam.
The shot resulted in a terrific jolt against the sheet pile wall. Oriard, L. L. and Coulson, J.H., 1980. TVA’s Criteria For Blasting
A few of the sheets in the cofferdam were stretched by the Effects on Concrete. American Society of Civil Engineers Specialty
explosives energy to the point that the vibratory puller was Conference on Minimizing Detrimental Vibrations Portland, Or-
egon April, ASCE, New York.
needed when the cofferdam was removed. Removal of the de-
bris with the clam bucket was difficult. But working blind with Oriard, Lewis L., 1999. The Effects of Vibrations and Environmen-
that type of loading device is always slow. All the concrete tal Forces. ISEE. Cleveland, Ohio.
was broken to depth, but because the mass near the bottom Revey, Gordon D. PE, 2006. Managing Rock Blasting in Urban
was confined by the packed gravel and river rock, there was Environments. ASCE. New York.
no room for the pieces to be displaced by the explosion. The
debris removal from subsequent shots on the remaining piers
was somewhat easier because the contractor put in more ef-
fort to remove the packed gravel prior to the shot. When there

Excellence Through Innovative
Design and Processes
WE ARE ONE OF THE WORLDS LARGEST SUPPLIERS OF EQUIPMENT FOR
THE COMMERCIAL EXPLOSIVES INDUSTRY
Highly skilled
associates produce Superior Products
precision machining
work and structural
& Service
fabrication
Training and
Client Education
Precision CAM
equipment
On-site parts
and materials
Over 100,000 square feet Come see us at

Enhanced
of manufacturing space
ISEE 2015
BOOTH
#517
manufacturing
capabilities
and project
New Orleans
integration
TM
1590 South Gladiola Street

Salt Lake City, UT USA
ph: +1 801 568 2000
www.tradestarcorp.com
Two paint booths for

original and repaint capabilities
IndustryNews
Rockmore Launches The New
T Series DTH Hammer Class
Wilsonville, Oregon, USA–Rockmore
International has recently launched the T
series DTH hammer line and introduces
the first model in this class – the ROK
600T.
This new addition to Rockmore’s ex-
isting broad range of DTH hammers is a
breakthrough for DTH drilling technol-
ogy for mining, construction, and water-
well applications. In addition to its ultra
high performance features, the new T
series design hammers utilize drill bits
with standard shank connections that
no longer require plastic parts commonly
known as blow tubes or foot valves. The
elimination of this plastic part associated
with the drill bit offers various technical
and economical advantages.
Attendees of Wipware’s 5th Annual Seminar. “We recognized a trending demand
in the DTH drilling sector for a high per-
formance DTH tool that could utilize in-
Participants from Seven renowned Dr. Calvin J. Konya, President
dustry standard drill bits without plastic
of Precision Blasting Services and Direc-
Countries Across Four tor of the Academy for Blasting and Ex- components in order to increase reliabil-
Continents Joined Canadian plosives Technology. ity yet not compromise drilling efficien-
Attendees for WipWare’s Dr. Adrian Dance, principal metal- cy,“ comments Mr. Pejman Eghdami,
Executive Vice President of Rockmore
5th Training Seminar lurgy consultant at SRK Consulting Inc.
International.
and a leading authority on mine-to-mill
North Bay, Ontario, Canada–The sold- optimization, outlined the justification The new T series DTH hammer design
out 5th Annual WipWare Training Semi- for increasing drill and blast costs to is the result of extensive research, devel-
nar at the Canadian Ecology Centre in achieve better fragmentation in terms of opment, and field-testing. The T series
Samuel de Champlain Provincial Park, cost savings downstream in the milling is “tubeless” and achieves the goal of
Sept. 16-19, drew positive reviews from operations. using industry bit shank connections,
attendees from Australia, South Africa, Francois Robichaud, metallurgical su- but without the plastic component im-
Netherlands, United Kingdom, Brazil, perintendent at Agnico-Eagle, described bedded in the bit. Although the “tube-
Chile and the United States. his experiences using image-based bulk less” DTH hammer has been offered
This year’s pit-to-plant theme fea- material particle-size-analyzers to evalu- before, drilling performance was often
tured prominent speakers highlighting ate crusher performance and monitor compromised when designed to operate
the importance of fragmentation data SAG mill feed leading to optimized par- with an industry standard bit shank. In
on both the blasting and processing ticle sizes entering their SAG mill result- addition, other manufacturers have in-
end of operations in addition to Wip- ing in higher throughput and reduced troduced DTH hammers that utilize bits
Ware technical staff outlining software energy costs. without a plastic component, but such
features and automated system mainte- Seminar participants also received DTH bits are proprietary in design, which
nance. hands-on training with WipWare’s Wip- limit their availability.
Guest speakers covered a range of Frag and Delta software packages, and “With our emerging T class DTH
topics starting with an in-depth look at instruction on installation, use and main- hammers, we are offering the drilling
various blasting parameters and some tenance of the company’s Momentum, community a balanced solution of im-
exceptions to the kuz-ram model by the Reflex and Solo automated systems. proved reliability without compromising
any drilling performance. And impres-

sively, we have achieved this by incorpo-
rating standard industry shank connec-
tions into the overall design concept,” EXPLOSIVES INSURANCE
said Mr. Eghdami.
There are clear economical advantag-
es of eliminating the traditional plastic Unmatched service
components from the bit shank section.
Blow tube / foot valve breakage on DTH and support,
bits during drilling operations are cata-
strophic since the hammer will cease to No extra charge.
function immediately. The T series ham-
mers will alleviate such costly down time We’ll apply our 38+
by elimination of the plastic bit compo- years of explosives
nent that is susceptible to breakage. DriftShot. insurance experience
The ROK 600T is a six inch class mod- and top diagnostic
el with high performance drilling char- troducing DriftShot to the Dyno Nobel tools to your unique
acteristics rated for drilling 6.1 to 7.0 family of electronic initiation systems.
inch (155 to 178 mm) diameter holes
situation and provide you
Mines around the world want the ben-
for blast hole applications in mining and efit of electronic timing accuracy in de- with a thorough evaluation of
construction. velopment blasting that is also easy to your protection, your exposure to
As a T series design feature, the ROK use. We worked with our joint venture liability and suggest ways we can
600T accepts the industry established bit partner, DetNet, to develop a solution improve them Contact us and let us
shank model QL60, but with the blow that is just that. DriftShot detonators show you how the AGA Team can protect you.
tube / foot valve removed. Such stan- are pre-numbered, much like NONEL, so
dard bits are readily available from es- they are easy to deploy, reducing train-
tablished supply channels in mining and ing time and also bringing electronic ac-
construction. The corresponding bit con- curacy.” C
nection for this hammer is designated by Dyno Nobel has made a commit- M EXPLOSIVES INSURANCE SPECIALISTS
Rockmore as QL6T, which has an identi- ment to safety and strives for zero harm
cal shank design to the QL60, but with- for everyone, everywhere. In line with
Y
The AGA Team:
out the blow tube / foot valve. The People, The Experience,
Reduce
CM
The Service You Deserve

New Electronic Initiation
MY
System for Precise and Rapid

CY
Underground Development
Labor costs
CMY
K
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA–Dyno Nobel
has partnered with our joint venture,
DetNet, to bring another innovative Ralph Hamm Jr., CEO Fred Bangs, Pres Earl Taylor
Automate with
30 + YEARS 30+ YEARS
solution to underground development 37 + YEARS
blasting. The DriftShot electronic initia-
Ultradip Your Unbeatable Explosives

tion system is the newest addition to the
Dyno Nobel electronic initiation system Insurance Team
suite. DriftShot provides the under- automatic hole dipper
ground blaster with the advantage of Debbie Terry, CIC, ASCR
Assistant Vice President
electronic initiation while retaining the
easy tie-in characteristics similar to the - Prevent fume Ruth Bangs, CIC, CRM
NONEL® initiation system. - Improve performance Assistant Vice President
DriftShot was designed specifically to
- Reduce risk with: Jana Burchfield, CIC, CISR
provide an easy-to-use and reliable elec- Account Executive
tronic initiation system. Its electronic ac- In Hole Billy Bangs, CISR
curacy can help deliver such benefits as explosive density tester Producer
better advance rates and improved wall
and the Melinda Trevino, CRIS
stability. DriftShot has flexible timing op-
tions that assist in providing more con- Mobile QC Test Lab Account Executive
sistent fragmentation and reduced over- Matthew Morgan
break as part of optimizing underground Customer Service Representative
development blasting.
Pat Nill, global general manager elec- 800-875-9484
tronics, said, “We’re excited to be in-
Visit: www.qmagnetic.com.au www.AGA-US.com

QMagnetic V4.indd 1 11/11/2014 11:09 am
this commitment the blast control unit
for DriftShot enables blast initiation from
a remote and safe location though a
coded signal and has the ability to work
on multiple communication backbones.
It has a smart key, and a password is re-
quired to help assure safety and security.
The DriftShot initiation system was
designed with easy to use timing tem-
plates for the blaster, which can also be
customized for specific applications. The
blast control unit allows for up to 200 Learning from expert presenters in mountain view room.
detonators per channel to be fired. Drift-
Shot also offers minimal components at derful dream. What started as an invite
the face—just the electronic DriftShot from Henry Standing Bear to Korczak
detonator in the borehole and a two- Ziolkowski turned into a promise and a
wire busline. lifelong endeavor for Korczak and Ruth
The DriftShot tagger is a handheld Ziolkowski.
device that communicates with detona- This seminar honored them for their
tors and collects data. The tagger identi- persistence to start from a blank canvas
fies and tests each detonator contained and lead us to the place we are today.
in the blast. Furthermore, the tagger Monique Ziolkowski and the Moun-
has easy to use menus, is fast, and user tain crew will carry on the legacy of Ko-
friendly. rczak and Ruth in many ways, one of
which is the hope to make the seminar a
biannual event at the memorial.
Drilling and Blasting Seminar This first Korczak and Ruth Drilling
at Crazy Horse: to Honor and Blasting seminar was planned and
and Learn organized by the Crazy Horse Memorial
Mountain crew and ISEE President Mike Attendees were able to enjoy the view from the
Crazy Horse, South Dakota, USA–
Koehler. It welcomed 23 attendees from arm of Crazy Horse.
Crazy Horse Memorial hosted the In-
South Dakota, Wyoming and Missouri. Aimone Martin.
augural Korczak and Ruth Ziolkowski
Monetary support from industry drill- When the class and presenters re-
Drilling and Blasting Seminar Oct. 24-
ing and explosives businesses, Black Hills turned to the visitor center they viewed
25, 2014. The sessions started on Friday
Chapter of ISEE, Dyno Nobel, Buckley the blast from the veranda and were
morning with a greeting from Monique
Powder, Wampum Hardware and Crazy able to observe the use of the remote
Ziolkowski, daughter of Korczak and
Horse Memorial Foundation, allowed firing device.
Ruth and director of Mountain opera-
seven college students and two faculty After the Mountain blast classroom
tions and carving.
to attend the seminar. sessions, Neal Rothenbuhler, Dr. Cathy
Crazy Horse Memorial has been in
Students were able to learn from ex- Aimone Martin and Ron Eastman pre-
the drilling and blasting industry for
perts presenting topics relevant to the sented on remote firing devices, blast
many years while working on the world’s
drilling and blasting industry. Friday vibrations and airblast characteristics,
largest Mountain Carving in progress.
morning classroom topics presented by monitoring and standards, and elec-
The first blast on the Mountain, June 3,
Mike Koehler and Sarah Schmidt includ- tronic detonator use and benefits. The
1948, was just the beginning of a won-
ed final wall control, regulation updates students were also able to gain hands
from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, on experience with remote firing de-
Firearms and Explosives (ATF), and fall vices, electronic detonator programming
protection equipment and use. The equipment, and vibration and airblast
class was then escorted to the Mountain monitoring equipment.
shop where they had an informal lunch On Saturday a historical tour of the
and discussion. Learning continued af- Crazy Horse visitor complex was given
ter lunch with a demonstration by Jesse by Monique. Jim McNulty and Dr. Cathy
Wheeler on the use of fall protection Aimone Martin presented on vibration
equipment in a fall hazard zone. The monitoring which included reviews of
class then proceeded to the bench work data collected during the previous day’s
area and observed final blast prepara- blast. Lastly, a special presentation was
tions including use of fall protection given by Jeff Hermanson on the history
equipment, final hole loading, seismic of the carving of Mt. Rushmore.
monitoring equipment and its setup, Prearrangements were made to al-
and remote blasting equipment setup low seminar hours to be credited toward
presented by Jeff Hermanson, Jim Mc- various blaster continuing certification
Nulty, Neal Rothenbuhler and Dr. Cathy programs.
Korczak and Ruth Ziolkowski, 1982.

Neal Rothenbuhler demonstrates blasting device
setup.
Mike Koehler and Mark Dean listen to other presenters.
Mountain crew member Jeff Hermanson speaks to attendees about the blast set up and safety.
Mountain crew member Jesse Wheeler demon-

strates fall protection.
Proceeds from the seminar will be
used to fund scholarships for the Indian
University of North America® at Crazy
Horse, and scholarships for the Interna-
tional Society of Explosives Engineers in
the name of Korczak and Ruth Ziolkows-
ki.
-All photos in this story are the copyright ©Crazy
Horse Memorial
(Continued on page 40.)
Students get to use the electronic detonator programming machine.

ChapterNews
Mid-America Blasting
Conference
The 13th Mid-America Blasting Con-
ference was held Oct. 8-10, 2014 at the
Resort at Port Arrowhead, Lake Ozark,
Missouri. Sponsored by three ISEE chap-
ters in Missouri - Heartland, Mississippi
Valley, and Missouri S&T– this event drew
more than 150 attendees. Taking place
every other year, the next conference will
be held in the fall of 2016.
Speakers included representatives
from federal and state governments;
explosives, drill and seismograph manu-
facturers; and blaster training experts.
Winston Forde, Executive Director of ISEE,
gave the morning’s welcome address up-
dating attendees on new projects at ISEE.
Refresher training hours were available to
attendees needing to fulfull requirements
Jeff Fowler (left) presented a shotgun donated by Austin Powder for the raffle to benefit the Crazy for the Missouri blaster’s license.
Horse Memorial. Winner Keith Stoker (center) accepts the award as Jeff Hermanson (right), Crazy Jeff Hermanson, Crazy Horse Memo-
Horse Memorial looks on.
rial, presented the keynote address on
Thursday evening. A silent auction fol-
lowed which raised more than $2,000 for
an ISEE scholarship fund to be chosen by
the Heartland Chapter.
On Wednesday, the Crazy Horse Me-
morial Golf Tournament raised more than
$7,000 for the Crazy Horse Memorial.
Sixty-six golfers participated in the event
sponsored by the Heartland Chapter and
the Mississippi Valley Chapter of ISEE.
Bill Zieres from the Missouri Fire Marshal’s Office Mark Acree from Orica discussed the importance
updated attendees on the Missouri Blasting of underground perimeter control.
Safety Act.

ISEE President Mike Koehler
Speaks at Eastern PA
Chapter Meeting
The Eastern PA Chapter recently held
their quarterly meeting Thursday, Nov.
6, 2014, at the Hollywood Casino in
Grantville, Pennsylvania. Guest speak-
ers included (middle) Mike Koehler, ISEE
President and (left) Rick Lamkie, PA DEP
Bureau of Mining Programs, Chief of Ex-
plosives & Safety Section. Scott Mueller,
Eastern PA Chapter President is on the
right.
9th Annual Southeast

Mine Safety and Health
Conference
Members of the ISEE Alabama Chap-
ter teamed up with ISEE staff to exhibit
at the 9th Annual Southeast Mine Safety
and Health Conference in Birmingham,
Alabama, Nov. 4-6, 2014. The three-
day event featured speakers and experts
from the mining industry as well as sev-
eral motivational and informational pre-
senters. Among the featured speakers
was MSHA Assistant Secretary Joe Main.
This year’s conference hosted nearly
600 attendees and more than 40 exhibi-
tors. Highlights included several raffles,
a benefit auction and charity dinner for
Kids Chance, a national group that raises
scholarship money for children who had
a parent fatally injured in a mining ac-
cident.
(Left to right) Mike Getto, Jeff Zeiler, Chuck Sutton, Jack Anderson, Bill Foringer, Keith Pucalik, Jay The Alabama Chapter assisted in
Elkin, Mick Fritz, Kirk Whitaker, Dave Harrison, Tom Sproull, Mike Cave, Dale Ramsey and Dan Conn. working at the ISEE booth and provid-
Missing from the photo was Phil Berger, Jr. ed items for attendees which included
flashlights, pens and hardhat stickers.
Current and Retired Student Chapter in 2009.
The booth had over 400 attendees and
The dinner was attended by current
Members Gather for and retired chapter members which featured a continuous loop of blaster
Mid-Atlantic Chapter included founding chapter president videos.
“The event was a tremendous suc-
Meeting Mick Fritz. The location of the restau-
cess and brought awareness of not only
rant was just three miles south of the
Members of the Mid-Atlantic Chap- the chapter, but also ISEE to the confer-
old Holiday Inn in Cranberry where the
ter gathered for dinner and fellowship ence participants,” said Alabama Chap-
chapters founders meeting took place
at the Walnut Grill Restaurant in Wex- ter Secretary Doug Nickell.
in 1983.
ford, Pennsylvania Thursday, Oct.16, The ISEE is grateful to chapter mem-
The evening began with a round
2014. The chapter was founded in 1983 bers and conference attendees for mak-
robin discussion by all on how the Mid-
and served the entire state of Pennsyl- ing this a successful event.
Atlantic Chapter has impacted their ca-
vania until the formation of the Eastern
reers over the past 31 years. Fun and
PA chapter in 1995 and the Penn State
laughter was shared by all.

EventsCalendar
January 2015 March 2015 August 2015
January 5 - 7, 2015 March 12, 2015 August 13, 2015
Missouri S&T’s Blasters Training Seminar Heartland Chapter Meeting Heartland Chapter Meeting
Embassy Suites Argosy Casino Argosy Casino
St. Charles, Missouri, USA Kansas City, Missouri, USA Kansas City, Missouri, USA
Paul Worsey, pworsey@mst.edu John Bowling, jbowling@whiteseis.com John Bowling, jbowling@whiteseis.com
January 21 - 22, 2015 August 24 - 26, 2015

Mining Blasting Safety and Application March 25 - 26, 2015 11th International Symposium on Rock
Seminar Ohio Drilling and Blasting Conference Fragmentation by Blasting
Beaver, West Virginia, USA DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel Columbus/ Sheraton on the Park Hotel
www.msha.gov Worthington Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Columbus, Ohio, USA www.fragblast11.org
January 24, 2015 mangol@isee.org
Golden West Chapter
Annual Business Meeting and Dinner
Lincoln, California, USA September 2015
www.iseegoldenwest.org April 2015
September 24 - 27, 2015
January 26 - 28, 2015 April 7 - 8, 2015 Western Canada Chapter’s Annual
Tread School West Virginia Office of Explosives and General Meeting and Exhibition
Roanoke, Virginia, USA Blasting Blaster Refresher Training Coast Kamloops Hotel and Conference
jdahlgren@TreadCorp.com Holiday Inn Hotel & Suites Charleston Center
West Kamloops, British Columbia, CANADA
January 29 - 31, 2015 Charleston, West Virginia, USA www.iseewest.org
IMESAFR v2.0 Training (304) 926-0464
Sheraton New Orleans
April 22 - 24, 2015
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
28th Best in the West Drill and Blast November 2015
www.apt-research.com
Conference
November 12, 2015
January 31, 2015 Spearfish, South Dakota, USA
Heartland Chapter Meeting
ISEE Blasters Training Seminar rich.barry@gwtc.net
Argosy Casino
Sheraton New Orleans Springfield, Missouri, USA
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA April 26 - 28, 2015
EFEE’s 8th World Conference John Bowling, jbowling@whiteseis.com
mangol@isee.org
Lyon Convention Centre
November 12 - 13, 2015
Lyon, FRANCE
17th Pennsylvania Drilling and Blasting
www.efee.eu
Conference
February 2015 The Penn Stater Conference Center Hotel
February 1 - 4, 2015 State College, Pennsylvania, USA
ISEE’s 41st Annual Conference on Explo- May 2015 www.outreach.psu.edu/programs/blasting
sives and Blasting Technique
Sheraton New Orleans May 9 - 13, 2015
CIM Conference and Exhibition
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
Palais des Congrès September 2016
mangol@isee.org
Montréal, Québec, CANADA
September 26 - 28, 2016
February 15 - 18, 2015 www.cim.org
MINExpo 2016
SME Annual Meeting Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Denver, Colorado, USA May 10 - 13, 2015
ISRM Congress 2015 www.minexpo.com
www.smenet.org
International Symposium on Rock Me-
February 25 - 28, 2015 chanics
Kansas Blasters Training Palais des Congrès March 2017
Olathe, Kansas, USA Montréal, Québec, CANADA
www.isrm2015.com March 7 - 11, 2017
Conexpo - Con/Agg 2017
May 14, 2015 Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Heartland Chapter Meeting
Argosy Casino
Springfield, Missouri, USA For the latest events, see ISEE’s web
John Bowling, jbowling@whiteseis.com site at www.isee.org.

®
Micromate®. One unit. Multiple sensors. Complete picture.

Staying on top of everything affecting your project isn’t easy.
The Micromate can help.
Micromate isn’t just the smallest vibration monitoring unit you can buy, with the first
touch screen interface in the industry. It also has a variety of sensors that deliver a
complete vision of the environmental impacts on your project including temperature,
humidity, crack monitoring and sound levels.
When you need to see the big picture, you can count on Micromate to deliver the
sensors you need, all in one complete package.
Instantel®. Be Visionary.
1-800-267-9111
613-592-4642
Sales@Instantel.com
www.Instantel.com
EXPLOSIVES
• 100 years ago • (MORE OR LESS)

As much as possible, items are reproduced as
originally printed. Misspelling and usages now
considered archaic have been retained.
by Robert B. Hopler
DuPont High Explosives (Catalog)

(Second Section-Excerpts)
E.I du Pont de Nemours & Company
Wilmington, Delaware
October, 1915

Dynamite Grade Markings
The meaning of the grade designations or “percentage
strength” mark on dynamite is sometimes puzzling to con-
sumers, and often a source of misunderstanding between
manufacturer and customer. Originally a 40 per cent dynamite
meant that the dynamite contained 40 per cent actual nitro-
glycerin by weight, but as modern dynamites do not always
contain the proportion marked, a short description of modern
practice of grading may be of interest. A slight knowledge of
the history of the manufacture of high explosives may also
help to explain the situation.
The dynamite first manufactured on a large scale was
called “No. 1 Dynamite” and consisted of 75 parts by weight
of nitroglycerin and 25 parts by weight of “kieselguhr,” an
inert infusorial earth, consisting of microscopic tubes and
shells, which has the property of absorbing three or four times
its weight of nitroglycerin. This was truly a 75 per cent nitro-
glycerin dynamite, but was not as strong as the 40 per cent
strength dynamites made today, some of which may contain
even less than 40 parts in a 100 by weight of actual nitro-
glycerin. The kieselguhr acts only as an absorbent. It does not
assist in the explosion and permits making only one grade of
dynamite, that in which the kieselguhr holds nearly all the ni-
troglycerin it can. If more nitroglycerin is added, the dynamite
leaks nitroglycerin to a dangerous extent, and if less nitroglyc-
erin than 75 per cent is used the dynamite becomes insensi-
tive, so that a mixture of 40 per cent of nitroglycerin and 60
per cent of kieselguhr cannot be detonated. The kieselguhr is
chemically inert. A pound of 75 per cent kieselguhr dynamite
does exactly as much work and no more than three- fourths of
a pound of pure nitroglycerin.
The “Straight” dynamites in present use in the United
States were originally known as “active-base” dynamites, in
contradistinction to the kieselguhr dynamites which had an
inert base. The active-base dynamites at first substituted a
crude gunpowder for the kieselguhr, but as this was so poor
an absorbent it was not possible to make a dynamite contain-
ing more than 30 or 40 per cent of nitroglycerin; a mixture of
wood meal and nitrate of soda was used instead of gunpow-
der. Using these two ingredients, dynamites with a nitroglyc-
erin content ranging from 20 to 60 per cent could be made,
worked, packed and exploded.
Furthermore, with an active base like wood meal and ni-
trate of soda, a dynamite having only 40 per cent nitroglyc-
erin will develop as much power or more than a 75 per cent
kieselguhr dynamite. A definite proportion of wood meal to
nitrate of soda makes an explosive not too wet to leak nor yet
too dry to be packed into the paper shells. More wood meal
and less nitrate are used in dynamite with more nitroglycerin,
and more nitrate and less wood meal or wood meal of less
absorbing capacity like fine-grained sawdust, are used in the
dynamites containing less nitroglycerin. Using these three
ingredients with minute proportions of other non-explosive
substances required to stabilize the dynamite, a type of high
explosives known as “Straight Dynamites” was made, which
constitutes the standard of strength against which all other
dynamites are graded.

100 years ago

Other explosive substances incorporated into dynamite percentage strength marked. In many ways they are distinctly
increase its power over straight dynamite and it is necessary inferior, as they are too quick for a good deal of work, they
to reduce the amount of nitroglycerin and otherwise modify are more easily frozen and are much more sensitive to rough
the formula so that the new compound develops the same handling.
power in actual work as the standard dynamite. For instance,
guncotton dissolved in nitroglycerin makes a sticky, jelly-like RBH Note: The items in this article are examples of the wide
substance which, added to the wood meal and nitrate of variety of dynamite types and strengths available to the user
soda, makes an explosive much more powerful than one in in the early part of the 20th century. In addition to these, the
which nitroglycerin alone is used. Such an explosive, graded catalog had about a dozen permissible grades available for
on its actual content of nitroglycerin, would be so much more the coal industry. Obviously all these types and strengths were
powerful than the same grade of straight dynamite as to be unnecessary for the process of breaking rock efficiently, but
unsafe and unsatisfactory in work where the blasters were ac- they gave the explosives salesman opportunities to compete
customed to using the standard grade. with other manufacturers who were touting the same or simi-
Many explosives in the market now containing no nitro- lar products. When one considers the variety of sizes available
glycerin at all are equal to a 40 per cent straight nitroglycerin (in addition to type and strength) the explosives plants were
dynamite, and these are graded as described on the basis of producing hundreds of varieties of dynamite on a regular ba-
strength developed, not on the nitroglycerin content. Other sis. This situation continued until the early 1960’s, when dy-
powerful explosives widely used contain only small amounts namite ran into competition from other products. Today there
of nitroglycerin—from 5 to 10 per cent sometimes—which, is only one producer in North America, and dynamite is of-
nevertheless, develop as much power, weight for weight, fered in seven varieties in very few sizes. Some of these are for
as 50 and 60 per cent straight nitroglycerin dynamites. It is very specialized applications: for general usage there are only
readily seen, therefore, that a customer should not feel that about three products commonly produced.
he has been injured when he finds that the dynamite he has In addition to dynamite, duPont produced a number of
been buying as 40 per cent strength has actually less than grades of black powder for the mining industry, in approxi-
40 per cent nitroglycerin in it. While the straight nitroglycerin mately the same total number of millions of pounds as the
dynamites are still on the market, they are the only ones that dynamite products.
actually contain the same percentage of nitroglycerin as the
Mark Your Calendar!
Sheraton New Orleans
Blasters Weekend
January 31 - February 1, 2015
Register Today!
www.isee.org
For more information:
International Society of Explosives Engineers
Tel: (440) 349-4400 Fax: (440) 349-3788
Photo by Richard Nowitz

The Recovery
of a Dozer
from a Highwall
Using Blasting
By Tristan Worsey and Tyler Acorn
Introduction
A dozer operator during the night shift drove a D10
dozer up a berm and off the edge of the highwall. The
dozer fell down the highwall 60 ft (18.3 m) before the
front blade dug into a catch bench. The dozer operator
quickly left the dozer and climbed to safety after the
dozer came to a stop on the catch bench. The high-
wall the dozer drove off was at a 65 degree angle but
the dozer sat on the catch bench at a 40 degree angle.
Figure 1 shows the dozer caught on the catch bench.
At first, hooking onto the dozer’s tool bar and drag-
ging it out was suggested, but this was deemed unsafe
and damaging to the dozer. Bringing in a crane to lift
the dozer was also suggested but in order to access a
sufficient tie off point the tool bar would have to be
removed. It was deemed unsafe for personnel to do any
work on the dozer in the middle of the highwall. The
decision was made to excavate down to the bench el- Figure 1. The day after the dozer drove off the highwall.
evation in order for personnel to be able to work on the
dozer from the safety of bench elevation.
At first they tried to free dig the material but it soon
turned too hard to dig. The blast tech team knew that
blasting would be an option if we changed our nor-
mal blast design. When excavation was no longer pos-
sible the idea of specialized blasting was suggested and
management agreed.

Table 1. Pattern designs.
Methodology 0.4 lbs/ton (0.2 kg/tonne). The decision was made to double
the powder factor to 0.8 lbs/ton (0.4 kg/tonne) for the special
The whole idea of the design was to put as much of the panel shots by decreasing the burden and spacing to 13 ft x
explosive energy into breaking and casting the rock as possible 15 ft (4 m x 4.6 m) and increasing depth to 63 ft (19.2 m).
to reduce the amount of vibrations escaping the blast pat- The pounds of explosives were limited in the 63 ft (19.2 m)
tern. Explosive energy likes to take the path of least resistance. face by using a 6.75 inch (171 mm) hole instead of normal
The less contained a blast is the more energy goes into break- 7.875 inch (200 mm) hole. A buffered blend with a density
ing and casting the rock in the direction of the free face than of 1.15 g/cc was used due to reactive ground potential. Un-
goes into the material behind the blast. The bigger the bench fortunately getting nice crushed stone was not an option for
height to burden ratio, the more tensile stress is exerted onto stemming so drill cuttings were used for stemming the holes.
the rock. Rock tends to break the best under tensile stress. This The quality of the drill cuttings for stemming was decent due
is like trying to break a tall skinny pencil in half and a short fat to the damp conditions of winter and stemming ejection was
pencil in half. The tall skinny pencil is a lot easier to break. The minimal.
plan was to increase the powder factor by decreasing burden The panel shots were limited to three rows to minimize
and spacing and increasing face height. This in theory would constipation of the shot. After three rows, relief caused by
increase movement of the material, increase fragmentation, the row timing and material moving, starts to decrease. This
and decrease ground vibrations. causes an increase in vibrations going back into the wall. The
pattern designs of the drop cuts and panel shots are shown
Design in table 1. Figures 2 and 3 show a plane view of the pattern
The bench elevation that the dozer drove off was on the designs.
5,740 ft (1,750 m) elevation. The front dozer blade caught
on the 5,680 ft (1,731 m) catch bench below. This meant the Results
blast would have to fragment 60 ft (18.3 m) of material to be Unfortunately, there are no regulations on the maximum
excavated to create a pad to work on the dozer. Two types of vibrations for a D10 dozer sitting on the edge of a high wall.
blasting were designed for creating the pad, one being for the The engineers had no starting place besides trial and error.
initial drop and the other for removing the material closest to Since the material with the dozer did not fail due to weather
the dozer. conditions changing, it was assumed that the dozer could
Since we had to drop down 60 ft (18.3 m), the drop cut take quite a bit more than the regulation for structures of
was made by shooting two levels. The first level was drilled to 2 in/s (50.8 mm/s). Table 2 shows the distances away from
5,697 ft (1,736 m) and the second was drilled to the 5,677 ft the blast of the seismographs and seismograph data. Notice
(1,730 m). This was because we used normal production de- that the last three blasts had significantly more ground vibra-
sign for the drop because it was far enough away to not be as tions. This was due to the proximity of the blasts. From data
concerned with moving or hurting the dozer. This helped out collected vs. what was estimated, vibrations near the dozer
the speed of the mining cycle. were significantly reduced by using signature hole data and
Signature hole analysis was done on a 40 ft (12.2 m) bench increasing powder factor by decreasing burden and spacing
using normal production practice of down hole cord and on a and increasing hole length. Now in a perfect world the hole
60 ft bench using a down hole electronic detonator. An explo- diameter would of have been drastically reduced. This would
sives supplier was used to analyze the signature hole data and have decreased pounds per hole to be less than production
they came up with 33 ms hole to hole and 62 ms row to row and still doubled the powder factor. With this operation going
for the 40 ft (12.2 m) bench, and 25 ms hole to hole and 53 lower than 6.75 inch (171 mm) diameter was not an option.
ms row to row for the 60 ft bench. These situations simulated The first blast went well. Laser profile scans were taken be-
well at 100 ft (30.5 m) and 200 ft (61.0 m) locations from the fore and after the blast and showed minimal movement. Fig-
blasthole. ure 4 shows the first blast. Notice the dozer in the lower right
Normal production patterns used at the mine site are 16 hand corner. The dozer was 166 ft (50.6 m) away from the
ft x 18 ft x 23 ft (4.9 m x 5.5 m x 7.0 m) (burden x spacing x blast. We did not decide to bring the next pattern back from
depth) in ore and 18 ft x 18 ft x 44 ft (5.5 m x 5.5 m x 13.4 the crest edge because the scans did not show any movement
m) in overburden. The average powder factor on site is around in the material between the dozer and the blast. The blast had

Figure 2. 5,700 bench shot map.
Figure 3. 5,680 shot map.
127, 43 ft (13.1 m) holes, and 500 lbs (227 kg) of explosives 0.210 in/s (5.334 mm/s) at 9.3 Hz with the lowest frequency
per hole. The seismograph reading next to the dozer had a being 8.9 Hz at 0.180 in/s (4.572 mm/s). Little to no move-
peak reading of 2.120 in/s (53.848 mm/s) at 26.9 Hz with ment was reported from the scans for the material around the
the lowest frequency of 21.3 Hz at 1.840 in/s (46.736 mm/s). dozer and the dozer itself. The blast showed a little stemming
It was noted that normal blasting practices did send quite a ejection. This is very common when using detcord down the
bit of material down the high wall. If this design was shot by hole as an initiator. The stemming ejection caused quite a bit
the dozer it would have covered the dozer with material and of fly material that was unwanted once we got closer to the
potentially dislodged the dozer. See figure 2 for the location dozer. The third shot had 102 holes (6 dead) and was 251 ft
of the blast on Dec. 4, 2012. It is the blast bordered in red. (77 m) away from the dozer. This shot had a PPV of 1.360 in/s
The next two blasts were on the same bench as the first (34.544 mm/s) at 17.0 Hz with the lowest frequency being
with the same design and timing. These blasts are outlined in 10.2 Hz at 1.360 in/s (34.544 mm/s). The scans reported little
pink (Dec. 5, 2012) and teal (Dec. 6, 2012) in figure 2. The to no movement of the dozer from before the blast. In figure
second shot had 161 holes (8 dead) and was 529 ft (161 m) 6 the blast shows a little more violent stemming ejection.
away from the dozer. This shot had a peak particle velocity of Blast number four next to the dozer was a 20 ft (6 m) drop

Table 2. Seismograph distance from blast and data.
Figure 4. First dozer shot.
pattern to get the 5,700 ft (1,737 m) down to the 5,680 ft and after scans. All of the scans looked very similar except for
(1,731 m) elevation to fully free face the panel shot. Since this one so only two scans are shown in this article. In the scan
shot had less than half the explosives per hole than the 40 ft anything that is in blue is up to 1 ft (0.3 m) of material gain,
(12 m) drop it was decided to shoot all 402 holes (11 dead) gray is zero movement, and orange is up to 1 ft (0.3 m) of lost
in one shot. The blast shot on Jan. 2, 2013, outlined in red material. The green color means it went out of the range of
is shown in figure 3. The closest hole to the dozer was 158 -1 ft (-0.3 m) to 1 ft (0.3 m). The scan shows that the material
ft (48 m) and gave a seismic reading of 1.520 in/s (38.608 near the dozer was basically unaffected. The material that is
mm/s) max at 22.2 Hz and the lowest frequency 13.0 Hz at right next to the free face shows a little bit of loss but it was
1.280 in/s (32.512 mm/s). The dozer scans did not show any right in front of the blast and it was expected to see a little bit
significant movement near or around the dozer. This blast had of movement there. The material next to where the blast was
less ground vibrations than the first shot that was similar in located was unaffected. This means that this is a safe distance
distance but this shot had less than half the pounds per delay. (140 ft/43 m) from the high wall to put the blast once we get
This blast had a lot of stemming ejection and was also quite to patterns directly behind the dozer. Figure 9 shows the
violent as can be seen in figure 7. Quite a bit of material was fifth blast. This blast had the least amount of fly material and
cascaded down the side of the highwall and there was some only one stemming ejection that was from a hole plugging
fly material that could have hit the dozer if it had been closer. during stemming.
There was a little bit of snow that fell down the high wall in Shot number six was the second panel shot next to the
front of the dozer but no actual material fell. dozer. The blast had 12, 63 ft (19 m) holes (0 dead), and 700
Shot number five next to the dozer was the first panel shot. lbs (318 kg) of explosives per hole. The teal pattern (Feb. 1,
There was a failure in the wall that split the pattern up into 2013) in figure 3 shows shot number six. This pattern was
two shots. In figure 3 the gap in-between the pink and teal only 108 ft (33 m) away from the dozer and had more burden
shots show the area that failed. The pink pattern (Jan. 24, than designed due to the failure. This pattern also had some
2013) was the panel shot we shot first. The blast had 53, 63 short holes in the middle of the pattern. This shot gave a PPV
ft (19 m) holes, and 700 lbs (318 kg) of explosives per hole. greater than 5 in/s. Unfortunately the seismograph was set to
The closest hole to the dozer was 219 ft (67 m). This shot gave a max of 5 in/s so data was not received. The scan showed lit-
a PPV of 1.880 in/s (47.752 mm/s) at 13.4 Hz which was the tle to no movement on and around the dozer. This was a good
lowest frequency. The before and after dozer scans came back sign that the dozer was pretty well set in the catch bench and
negative for significant movement. Figure 8 shows the before as long as the material in the catch bench did not get casted

Figure 5. Second dozer shot.
Figure 6. Third dozer shot.
Figure 7. Fourth dozer shot.

Figure 12. Eighth dozer shot.
Figure 8. Before and after scan of the first panel shot.
Figure 9. Fifth dozer shot.
Figure 10. Dozer scan of the sixth shot.
Figure 11. Sixth dozer shot.
the dozer would be fine. One thing from this blast that was
noticed was the material in-between the dozer and the blast
did show a little bit of movement, as seen in figure 10. It was
then decided to pull the rest of the panels 50 ft back. Figure
11 shows the sixth shot. This shot had no fly material and no
stemming ejection.
Shots 7 (Feb. 14, 2013) and 8 (Feb. 27, 2013) were similar
in design to the first panel shot and can be seen in figure 3 in
green and yellow respectively. Shot 7 was 128 ft (39 m) away Figure 13. Dozer after final excavation.

from the dozer. This blast was done while the blasting engi- Conclusion
neers were at the 2013 ISEE conference and the seismograph
monitors were improperly set up and a valid reading was not The dozer rescue using blasting to excavate the bench to
obtained. The video was also missed, but the before and after the level of the dozer was a success. Although vibrations were
dozer scans showed little to no movement of the dozer and significantly more at the dozer with the panel shots than the
the surrounding material. This shot was slightly north of be- drop cuts, using regular production blasting design would
ing behind the dozer. Shot 8 was the last dozer shot needed have caused even more vibrations in the same location and
for equipment space to retrieve the dozer and was slightly would have casted material onto the dozer and disturbed the
south of being behind the dozer. This shot had 53, 63 ft (19 catch bench material that the dozer was sitting on, resulting
m) holes (0 dead), and 700 lbs (318 kg) of explosives. This in dozer loss. No vibration limit was established due to only
shot gave a PPV of 8.80 in/s (223.52 mm/s) at 28.4 Hz with being able to measure up to 10 in/s (254 mm/s) and the use
the lowest frequency of 4.7 Hz at 6.00 in/s (152.4 mm/s). The of laser profiles to track movement. The accuracy of the laser
scans showed little to no movement of the dozer or the mate- profiles was around 2 inches (50 mm) so if the laser profile
rial around it. Figure 12 shows the eighth dozer blast. This showed a movement of 3 inches (80 mm) or more a design
shot had some stemming ejection that was caused by using change for the next shot would have been implemented. Us-
drill cuttings and holes plugging. ing the technique of increasing powder factor by decreasing
After the eighth shot the bench was down to the dozer burden and spacing and increasing face height and casting
blade elevation and there was enough room for equipment to the rock away from the dozer did significantly reduce the im-
operate. The 50 ft (15 m) buffer zone ended up being easy to pact of blasting near the dozer.
dig. This was due to the shock wave from the blast creating
micro fractures in the rock. This was expected, but was not References
expected to work as well as it did. Figure 13 shows the dozer Unknown. (2012). Service Manual for a Cat D10 Dozer. Peoria, IL,
after final excavation of the buffer zone. The removal of the United States of America: Caterpillar Inc.
dozer was done by strapping onto the tool bar with the shovel Unknown. (2012). Orica Pocket Blast Guide. Melbourne, VIC,
and digging the material out from under it with a backhoe Australia: Orica Mining Services.
then dragging it to more stable ground. The dozer had no
Walker, J. (2010). AutoCAD Civil 3D. San Rafael, CA, United
blast damage and all of the glass was intact. Once the fluids
States of America: Autodesk.
were changed this dozer was out in the pit again working.
Display Advertising Index

AGA .....................................................................19
Apache Construction Corp..................................22
Austin Powder ................................................. OBC
Dyno Nobel ....................................................... IFC
EFEE World Conference .......................................37
Instantel ....................................................... 25, IBC
Maxam .................................................................15
Motion Metrics ......................................................7
MREL ...................................................................11
Nobel Insurance ....................................................1
Phoenix Air ..........................................................33
Reliable Tire .........................................................38
Renishaw .............................................................14
Rothenbuhler ......................................................21
QMR Blasting Analysis .........................................19
Tradestar ..............................................................17
Tread Corporation ...............................................39
Vibronics .............................................................41
White Industrial Seismology..................................3

Blasting Fumes –
SafetyTalk MSHA Fatality Report
By Buck Hawkins,
Director of ISEE and SEE Education Programs
The Mine Safe- industry wide. While countless blasts go grow its Children’s Fund; an endowment
ty and Health unnoticed each day, it is this reminder established to provide money for educa-
Administration that in order to send all employees tion expenses for children of people se-
(MSHA) recently home to their families each day, we verely injured or killed in a commercial
released a fatali- must remain vigilant in communicating explosives incident. Members may nomi-
ty report regard- hazards. Miners must train and rehearse nate recipients by contacting the ISEE.
ing two deaths emergency plans not until they get them Most importantly, our deepest heart-
as a result of right, but until they cannot get them felt sympathy goes out to the families of
blasting fumes. wrong. The society wishes to encourage the deceased and all miners involved in
In the report, discussion in establishing best practices this particular event. Through its mem-
MSHA issued several citations for unsafe in all aspects of blasting and is pursuing bers, the ISEE will continue to lead the
practices in the handling and disposing an online medium through which blast- way in developing and communicating
of deteriorated explosives located in an ers are able to share lessons learned. Ad- techniques and procedures that keep
underground silver mine in Colorado. ditionally, it is the intent of the ISEE to blasters, employees and the public safe.
The year-long investigation found that discuss the issue of blasting fumes at the The entire MSHA report can be
the mine detonated over three-quarters Industry Panel Discussion at ISEE’s 41st viewed on the MSHA website.
of a ton of explosives in an unventilated Conference in New Orleans (see page
drift. The miners died as a result of high 42). Further, the society continues to
levels of carbon monoxide and several
more were injured in the recovery ef-
fort. Although miners had undergone
training and best practices familiariza-
tion with the explosives provider as well
as other qualified instructors, the event
serves as a grim reminder that commu-
nication throughout all levels remains
critical in preventing many incidents.
Additionally, the ISEE encourages manu-
facturers, transporters, and users of ex-
plosives to not only train on the proper
handling of explosives, but also to teach
and encourage integrity throughout
their operation. Too often the industry
has witnessed preventable incidents due
to shortcuts and failure to act on sound
suggestions in improving safety. In this Suppliers of the Best
case, two miners lost their lives for those
reasons. While no operation or proce-
Blasting Mats in the Industry
dure can be completely free of risk, man-
agers and supervisors must routinely un- Why invest in lightweight mats?
dertake measures to ensure unsafe acts Preserve your investment money with our industry
or conditions are adequately addressed standard mat 10’ x 15’ x 10” at 50 lbs/sq ft.
in a timely fashion. These risks can be We are also happy to customize to suit your needs.
mitigated with training and equipment,
but most importantly, it requires a relent- Will ship anywhere! Call us for a quote. You will be glad you did!
less effort in establishing and enforcing
routine safety practices. Building the best
Toll-Free: 877-900-0724
blast mat in the www.RTRrubber.ca
The ISEE wishes to commend the industry for 20 years.
extraordinary safety record of members

2015 ANNUAL
OPERATOR TRAINING SCHOOL
January 26-27, 2015 Treadbed™ / Unibody Training
January 28, 2015 proBlast Training
Hotel Roanoke & Conference Center – Roanoke, VA
Providing superior bulk explosives handling equipment & support to the mining industry since 1957.
www.TreadCorp.com 540-982-6881 176 EastPark Drive Roanoke, VA 24019 USA
More info: JDahlgren@TreadCorp.com
Industry News
Drilling and Blasting Seminar at Crazy Horse
(Continued from page 21.)
Class gains hands on experience. Some of the seminar staff and presenters (left to right) Mark Dean, James McNulty, Jeff Hermanson,
Monique Ziolkowski, Mike Koehler, Ron Eastman, Jesse Wheeler, Neal Rothenbuhler and Cathy
Aimone Martin.
In Memory of…
Bradley Richard Langner colleagues and acquaintances for his perintendent at Edgerton Quarry.
intelligence, humor and passion for life Maurice was born October 14, 1953
Bradley Richard as well as his outspoken nature and in Portsmouth, Virginia to Gaylen Vern
Langner, 65, limitless pursuit of correcting the many and Roberta Joan (Frank) Taylor. He grew
passed away in wrongs he saw in the world. up in Gardner and was a graduate of
Mission Viejo, A celebration of Brad’s life was held Gardner High School in 1971, and then
California, on Dec. 13, 2014, at the Winchester Coun- attended Fort Hays State College with
Oct. 24, 2014, try Club, in Meadow Vista, California. an emphasis on broadcasting. Maurice
with friends For those wishing to send thoughts served in the United States Army. He
and family be- and messages, please do so care of moved to Edgerton in 1975. He served
side him, after Ms. Claudia Langner, Alpha Explo- as the Mayor of Edgerton for nine
bravely bat- sives, P.O. Box 310, Lincoln, CA 95648, years and was a member of the John-
tling cancer for 916.645.3377. Donations can also be son County Council of Mayors. Maurice
a number of made to the American Cancer Society. was a scuba diving instructor and dive
Bradley Richard Langner.
years. master at Midwest Aquatics in Overland
He was born in Sacramento, Califor-
nia, to Gladys Hill Bradley and Richard Maurice Lynn Taylor Park. He participated in Biking Across
Kansas, MS150 and enjoyed snow skiing
Bohannon Langner who preceded him in M a u r i c e and hunting. He will be dearly missed by
death. Growing up in the Meadow Vista Lynn Taylor, family and friends.
and Auburn, California areas, he gradu- 61, of Edg- Maurice is survived by Frances
ated from Placer High School and went erton, Kan- “Frankie” Cross of the home; his par-
on to become a prominent and active sas passed ents of Gardner, Kansas; children, Zach-
local business owner in the surveying, away Oct. ary and wife Michelle Taylor of Shaw-
construction and commercial explosives 19, 2014, nee, Kansas and Christy Taylor and
industries. at his home. Scott Farkus of Twin Falls, Idaho; sister,
Brad loved travel – anywhere – and Maurice was Mary Ann and husband Robert Mann
generously treated family and friends to a founding of Bonn, Germany; niece, Alexandria
exotic trips to Hawaii, Europe, Australia member of Mann; nephew, Scott Mann; step-chil-
and Africa. He loved to meet new people Maurice Lynn Taylor. the Heartland dren, Dustin Cross and Kati Robertson;
and share life stories, especially over fine Chapter of four step-grandchildren, Tucker, Abby,
wines and exquisite meals. He also loved ISEE serving as the second vice presi- Brice, Baylee and first wife, Joan Taylor
hiking, running marathons and hunting. dent and third president. With his help, of Gardner, Kansas.
Brad is survived by his loving and de- the chapter built an ongoing relation- A memorial service was held Oct.23,
voted wife, Claudia Langner, with whom ship with all of the fire departments in 2014, at Edgerton United Methodist
he enjoyed traveling the world, discover- the Kansas City metro area and began Church. Memorial contributions may be
ing and sharing “the best of the best.” the chapter’s blasters training programs. made to the American Heart Associa-
He will be greatly missed by his children, Maurice was a blaster for Reno Con- tion. Condolences may be left at www.
grandchildren, extended family, friends, struction and later became a quarry su- brucefuneralhome.com

and federal regu-
lators, indepen-
dent blasters and
industry academ-
ics in discussing
blast fume miti-
gation. The panel
will introduce
the most recent
topics concern-
ing blasters
globally as well
as research and
best practices
Industry Panel Discussion in preventing po-
tentially harmful
Blast Fume Mitigation
fumes. Several
Sunday, February 1, 2014
panelists include
10:00 a.m. – 11:30 a.m.
David Vande
Linde, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection;
The explosives industry continues, by all measures, to be
Doug Emme, Wyoming Department of Environmental Land
one of the nation’s safest. The ISEE credits this success to the
Quality Division; Ken Eltschlager, Office of Surface Mining;
professional relationship shared between explosives users,
and Alastair Torrance, Kilmorie Consulting and ISEE Board of
manufacturers, transporters and regulators. For this reason,
Director. The conversation will address current public perspec-
the ISEE hosts the Industry Panel Discussion at the Annual Con-
tives regarding safety and the best procedures and techniques
ference. The conversation is geared to not only bring industry
in keeping employees free from exposure. The discussion be-
updates to members, but also create a forum where explosives
gins with expert presentations and will include a moderated
experts can communicate issues and concerns. Join us Sun-
question and answer session. Conference attendees will not
day, Feb. 1, from 10 – 11:30 a.m. as ISEE features both state
want to miss this exclusive event.
Re ww
2015 Ohio Drilling & Blasting Conference
gis .is
w
DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel - Columbus/Worthington • Worthington, Ohio
te ee
r O .o
nli rg
March 25 - 26, 2015
ne
Preliminary Schedule of Events
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
5:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m. RECEPTION with Exhibits 12:00 p.m. LUNCH
Thursday, March 26, 2015 1:00 p.m. Demolition Blasting Case Studies and Airblast, David Harrison,
7:30 a.m. CONTINENTAL BREAKFAST Terra-Mechanics, Inc.
7:45 a.m. Welcome and Introductions, Winston Forde, ISEE; 1:45 p.m. Critical Rules for Effective Use of Bulk Explosives,
Pat Jacomet, OAIMA; Christian Palich, OCA Stuart Brashear, Dyno Nobel
8:00 a.m. Every Waveform Tells a Story, Mike Mann, ODNR 2:45 p.m. BREAK with Exhibits
8:45 a.m. Underground Blasting for Surface Blasters, Chuck Palmcook, 3:15 p.m. MSHA Blasting Incidents/Updates, Scott Hartness, Business
Austin Powder Co. Safety Services Inc.
9:30 a.m. BREAK with Exhibits 4:00 p.m. CSX Pinkerton Tunnel Daylighting, Dale Ramsey,
Senex Explosives, Inc.
10:00 a.m. Public Relations with New Twists to Defects Commonly Blamed
on Blasting, Todd Pester, Vibra-Tech Engineers, Inc. 5:00 p.m. Awards Presentation and Prize Drawings
11:00 a.m. Dealing with Cap Rock in the Stemming Zone without
Sponsored by
Creating Excessive Flyrock or Airblast, Frank Chiappetta, International Society of Explosives Engineers, Ohio Aggregates & Industrial Minerals Association,
Blasting Analysis International Ohio Coal Association, and endorsed by Ohio Department of Natural Resources.

41st Annual Conference on Explosives Registration Form
and Blasting Technique or Register Online
Sheraton New Orleans Hotel, New Orleans, Louisiana USA • February 1–4, 2015 at www.isee.org
First Name: ___________________________________ Last Name: ___________________________________________
Office Use Only
Company: ____________________________________ Nickname for Name Badge:_______________________________
Batch # _____________
Address: _____________________________________________________________ ISEE Member Number: __________ Initialed _____________
City: _________________________________________ State/Province: __________ Postal Code: ___________________ (Please print or type. Copy for
additional registrants.)
Country: __________________ Phone: _________________Fax: __________________Email: ______________________
Spouse/Guest Name Badge: First Name: ____________________________________Last Name: ____________________________________
(Badge required for all events) Personal guest only, no business associates.
First ISEE Conference: o Yes o No Conference Speaker: o Yes o No Cell Phone # Onsite: ___________________________
Conference Registration
Earlybird Before Ontime Before Late Reg.
11/30/14 1/5/2015 After 1/5/15 Total
Full Conference Registration - Sun-Wed, Feb. 1 - 4 (Blasters Training Seminar and Banquet tickets sold separately – See Special Events.)
ISEE Member $ 650.00 $ 700.00 $ 775.00 ___________
Non-Member (includes a one-year membership) $ 730.00 $ 780.00 $ 855.00 ___________
Emeritus Member $ 125.00 $ 125.00 $ 125.00 ___________
Student Member - Special Rate! $ 50.00 $ 50.00 $ 75.00 ___________
Spouse/Guest Program (includes Tours, Meals, Exhibits) $ 160.00 $ 170.00 $ 180.00 ___________
Blasters Weekend Package - Jan. 31 - Feb. 1 (If Attending Full Conf, see Blasters Training Seminar Only under Special Events.)
(includes Blasters Training Seminar, Sat Lunch, Reception, Video Roundup, Exhibits & Sun Welcome Reception)
ISEE Member $ 270.00 $ 300.00 $ 355.00 __________
Non-Member (includes a one-year membership) $ 350.00 $ 380.00 $ 435.00 __________
Blasters Weekend Spouse - Jan. 31 - Feb. 1 only __________
(Includes Saturday Lunch, Reception, Exhibits & Sunday Welcome Reception) $ 59.00 $ 59.00 $ 59.00
Special Events (Not included in Conference Registration Fee)
Blasters Training Seminar Only - Saturday, Jan. 31 $ 210.00 $ 240.00 $ 285.00 ___________
Spouse/Guest Admission Ticket to Welcome
Reception Only - Sunday, Feb.1 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 ___________
International Luncheon - Monday, Feb. 2 ___________
(This event is complimentary to attendees outside US & Canada.) $ 50.00 $ 50.00 $ 50.00
Annual Awards Banquet & Live Auction - Tuesday, Feb. 3 (not sold on site)
• With Full Paid Conference Registration or Spouse Program $ 51.00 $ 51.00 $ 51.00 ___________
• Banquet Ticket Only $ 71.00 $ 71.00 $ 71.00 ___________
Conference Tours/Events
ISEE Sporting Clays Shoot - Saturday, Jan. 31 (limited space) $ 150.00 $ 150.00 $ 150.00 ___________
Proceedings
Conf Proceedings - Printed Book $ 89.00 $ 89.00 $ 89.00 ___________
Conf Proceedings - CD $ 59.00 $ 59.00 $ 59.00 ___________
Total for Registration, Blasters Weekend, Special Events/Tour, Proceedings: ___________
Payment Information Payment must be included for registration to be processed.

o Enclosed is a check drawn on a US bank payable to ISEE. No wire transfers or international checks will be accepted.
o Please charge my credit card for the amount due: o MasterCard o Visa o Amex o Discover
Card # ________________________________________ Exp. Date ________________ CVV Code _______________
Signature: ______________________________________________________________________________________________
No Refunds after January 5, 2015. Cancellations must be in writing. A processing fee of $50 will be deducted.
No refunds for “no shows.” Registrations cannot be taken over the phone.
Mail or Fax form to: International Society of Explosives Engineers, 30325 Bainbridge Road, Cleveland, OH 44139
Tel. (440) 349-4400 • Fax (440) 349-3788 • Web: www.isee.org
21st
Honorable Mention
Annual
Photo Contest
UTE Water Shot Still
Category: Construction Blasting – Series of Photos
Submitted by: Jared Redyke
Blaster in Charge: David Hersey
Photographer: Jared Redyke
Description of Project:
Fifty-five feet of rock was drilled and blasted for the con-
struction of a new lake side water intake structure.
Photo 1.

Photo 2. Photo 3.
Photo 4. Photo 5.
Classifieds Professional
MARKETPLACE
Maine Drilling & Blasting, a leader in the
drilling and blasting industry since 1966,
is seeking qualified candidates for:
Blasters, Drillers, Commercial Drivers

All New England States &
New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia
serving Quarry and Construction markets with focus on energy-related
work, including utility, wind, marine, pipeline and hydro.
The Employer of Choice

Maine Drilling & Blasting is the Employer of Choice in the industry because we offer
career opportunities … not just another job. We want our employees to grow and
advance with the company, as owners in the company, and retire from jobs well done.
And we offer the benefits to support that.
Exceptional Benefits Package includes:

• Group Health & Dental; making it happen
• Short & Long-Term Disability Insurance;
• Life Insurance;
• ESOP (Employee Stock Ownership Plan);
• Profit Sharing Program; and
• 401K with company match.
Submit applications or resume online

through our website at
http://www.mdandb.com/positions-available-at-maine-drilling-and-blasting.cfm
Maine Drilling & Blasting is an Equal Opportunity Employer

Professional
MARKETPLACE
James M. Miller
J.M. Miller, Inc.
D & L THOMAS
301 Airport Road
EQUIPMENT CORP. Indiana, PA 15701
PO BOX 200, ROUTE 9
SPOFFORD, NH 03462
724-388-7505
603-363-4706
Air & Hydraulic Rock Drills jmiller@jmmillerinc.com
Portable Air Compressors
Air Tools - Blasting Supplies
Bits - Steel - Accessories
New & Used Equipment
Rentals - Parts - Service
US 1-800-343-0833 FAX 1-603-363-4249
NH 1-800-322-0304
Blasters Toolkit
www.isee.org
361 Horsefly Hollow Road • Lebanon Junction, KY 40150 Blasting formulas, tables, checklists, forms, training aids,
1-800-368-2628 • Fax: 502-543-2987 • www.blastingmats.com standards, guides, and more

Professional
MARKETPLACE
Wo o d s C a n
Industries Inc

Professional
Explosive Tubes
MARKETPLACE
7TIGMEPX] ,SWI
8YFMRK
CARAUSTAR has developed an explosive casing especially for the limerock
aggregate industry The durable casing is used for the containment of a
drilled hole. [ [ [ W T I G L S W I G S Q
%VI]SYTYQTMRK%2*3## Explosive Tubes

3YVERXMWXEXMGLSWIMW17,%EGGITXIHJSVYWI
YRHIVKVSYRHEW[IPPEWEFSZI Options Available:
• Waxed I.D. and O.D.
'SRXEGXYWJSVWM^IWERHEZEMPEFMPMX] • Interlocking swedging or connecting inserts.
• Shipped with ring and fiberglass screening
(stapled end of bottom tube).
&SF &IPGSYVX FFIPGSYVX$WTIGLSWIGSQ • Available in I.D. sizes: 3.5”, 4”, 4.5” and 7”.
43 &S\ 4L • Available in wall sizes: .125, .150, and .180.
1ERGLIWXIV 2, *\ CARAUSTAR has developed an explosive casing
especially for the limerock aggregate industry. CARAUSTAR
The durable casing is used for the containment 1-800-610-8837
of a drilled hole. 188 Comfort Road, Palatka, FL 32177
Options Available:
• Waxed I.D. and O.D.
• Interlocking sedging or connecting inserts. CARAUSTAR
• Shipped with ring and fiberglass screening
1-800-610-8837
(stapled end of bottom tube).
188 Comfort Road,
• Available in I.D. sizes: 3.5”, 4”, 4.5” and 7”.
Palatka, FL 32177
• Available in wall sizes: .125, .150, and .180.
* Blast Vibration Monitoring
$920 Condition Surveys
* Pre-Blast
* Forensic Damage Investigations
San Francisco 415-641-2570
Municon@municon.net
Emulsion Technology
International Marketing
We add water resistance to ANFO.
■ SafetyBreakage
Excellent Audits
■ Free Flowing
Due Diligence
■ Water-Resistant
■
Expert Witness
Economical
■ Proven Reliability
Bob Morhard
For more information on
bob@exploconsult.com
water-resistant anfo, visit our website:
Tel. + 1 610 306 4637
www.adtec.biz
Job Openings
www.exploconsult.com
Adtec, Inc. • Middle Point, Ohio • 800-262-3832
www.isee.org
March/April 2008
place uniTs on maps Track your uniTs and projecTs
View projecT info aT a glance
add noTes To reporTs idenTify eVenT Trends
Do You Have vision?

Reliable, secure, easy access to whatever data you need,
wherever you are. Your cloud-based solution.
With Instantel® Vision™, you—and your stakeholders—have up to the minute access to
vibration monitoring data, transferred automatically from your Instantel monitoring units
to the web.
• Encrypted data storage on secure Instantel • Exceedence alarm notifications.
servers. • Support for Micromate®, Minimate Pro™ and
• Cloud-based access to your event data Minimate Plus™ units.
anytime, for you and your stakeholders. • Upload your own maps and photos.
• Your company logo and colors. • Automatically upload event data.
• Configurable user accounts. • Practical, cost-effective monitoring solution.
Instantel. Be Visionary.
1-800-267-9111
613-592-4642
Sales@Instantel.com
www.Instantel.com
You don’t get a second chance
to make your first impression.
A blast takes place in the blink of an eye. When the dust has settled, it better be right. Austin Powder’s
computer-based virtual blasting program, based on evidence and careful measurement, can improve your
productivity by predicting fragmentation, muck pile shape and vibration levels. It also saves time and money
by allowing you to model different blast designs before you drill and blast. Let our state-of-the-art technology
and experienced blasters help you get it right the first time. Learn more at www.austinpowder.com.
Contact your local Austin Powder representative today or call 216.464.2400.
25800 Science Park Drive, Cleveland, Ohio, USA 44122 • Phone: 216.464.2400 • Fax: 216.464.4418 • www.austinpowder.com

Revista Vol32 N1 ISEE PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Revista Vol32 N1 ISEE PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Official

Publication The Journal of

4 ISEE Annual Report

2 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

All correspondence should be directed to:

4 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 5

2014 ISEE COMMITTEES Nominating Georgia Peach

6 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

8 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 9

partment of Environmental Quality. These are just some of the

10 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

To advertise, contact Dede Manross • 801.942.5650 • explo@comcast.net

January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 11

Figure 7. Loading holes on the concrete pier.

12 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

Available in the Blasters’ Library

ISEE Member: $92 Non-Member: $114

January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 13

Discover Renishaw’s new Quarryman® Pro

ISEE_0.5pp_AD2.indd 6 03/10/2014 12:40:40

16 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

Over 100,000 square feet Come see us at

1590 South Gladiola Street

Two paint booths for

18 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

The Service You Deserve

System for Precise and Rapid

blasting. The DriftShot electronic initia-

Ultradip Your Unbeatable Explosives

January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 19

20 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

Mountain crew member Jesse Wheeler demon-

January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 21

22 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

9th Annual Southeast

January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 23

January 21 - 22, 2015 August 24 - 26, 2015

24 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

Micromate®. One unit. Multiple sensors. Complete picture.

• 100 years ago • (MORE OR LESS)

DuPont High Explosives (Catalog)

26 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 27

28 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

Mark Your Calendar!

Sheraton New Orleans

January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 29

30 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 31

Figure 3. 5,680 shot map.

32 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

Figure 4. First dozer shot.

34 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

Figure 6. Third dozer shot.

Figure 7. Fourth dozer shot.

January/February 2015 The Journal of Explosives Engineering 35

Figure 8. Before and after scan of the first panel shot.

Figure 9. Fifth dozer shot.

Figure 10. Dozer scan of the sixth shot.

Figure 11. Sixth dozer shot.

36 The Journal of Explosives Engineering January/February 2015

%VI]SYTYQTMRK%2*3## Explosive Tubes