International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 55 (2012) 108–116

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of
Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijrmms

Predicting blasting propagation velocity and vibration frequency using

artificial neural networks
A.E. Álvarez-Vigil a, C. González-Nicieza b,n, F. López Gayarre c, M.I. Álvarez-Fernández b
a
Department of Mathematics, Mining Engineering School, University of Oviedo, Independencia 13, 33004 Asturias, Spain
b
Department of Mining Engineering, Mining Engineering, School, University of Oviedo, Independencia 13, 33004 Asturias, Spain
c
Department of Construction and Manufacturing Engineering, Engineering School of Gijon, Campus de Viesques, 33201 Asturias, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: We describe artificial neural networks used to predict the velocity and frequency of ground vibrations
Received 26 January 2011 caused by blasting in an open-pit mine. The aim was to predict peak particle velocity and frequency of
Received in revised form ground vibrations from information on the physical and mechanical properties of the rock mass, the
21 February 2012
characteristics of the explosive and blasting design. Some the parameters that could possibly have a
Accepted 1 May 2012
bearing on the prediction were considered. A distinction was drawn between two kinds of parameters:
Available online 28 July 2012
those defining the surroundings in which the wave is propagated (rock type, rock mass, distance to be
Keywords: covered by the wave and significant subsoil discontinuities) and those defining the energy of the wave
Artificial neural networks (the kind of explosive, explosive charge and blasting geometry and sequence).
Blasting
Vibrations were monitored using seismographs capable of capturing vibration data and transform-
Vibration
ing them into acceleration and frequency terms. To validate this methodology, the predictions obtained
Particle propagation velocity
Vibration frequency were compared with those obtained using conventional statistical methods. The correlation coefficients
obtained for our methodology was 0.98 for peak particle velocity and 0.95 for frequency, compared to
0.50 and 0.15, respectively, for Multiple Linear Regression.
& 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction and background
The growth in open-pit mining, motivated by a growing
demand for minerals (especially aggregates, fuel and ornamental
stone), has led to a considerable increase in the use of explosives
for blasting purposes. Explosives are an efficient source of energy
for breaking up and excavating rock. An explosive detonated
inside a blasthole immediately releases a massive amount of
energy in the form of pressure and temperature. Although there
have been important advances in explosive technology [1,2], the
yield from explosive energy has not improved to any great degree,
due to the complexity of the parameters that characterize rock
masses that need to be broken up. In fact, only a small proportion
of explosive energy is used to break up the rock mass; most
energy is dissipated in producing non-desirable effects such as
vibrations, noise, fly rock, air blast, etc.
Ground vibration is an undulating movement propagated from
the detonation point, similar to the ripple effect produced by a
stone thrown into a pond. The shock wave passing through
structures located on the ground surface transmits vibration
to these structures that makes them resonate if the vibration
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ34 985 10 42 66; fax: þ 34 985 10 42 67.
E-mail address: cgnicieza@git.uniovi.es (C. González-Nicieza).
frequency of the terrain coincides with the natural frequency of
the structure. Consequently, the amplitude of the vibration may
grow to become larger than the inducing vibration [3].
Frequency (F) and peak particle velocity (PPV) are the two
parameters most widely used to measure ground vibrations [4].
Some authors [4] underline the particular importance of fre-
quency, given that structural response depends on the frequency
of ground vibration. Ground vibration is influenced by a number
of parameters, such as the physical and mechanical properties of
the rock mass, the nature of the explosive used and the blasting
design. It is important to understand the effects of these para-
meters to be able to effectively use explosive energy and mini-
mize undesirable blasting effects. Design parameters such as the
explosive charge per blast, delay, blasthole spacing and length,
burden and blasting sequence all vary greatly with each blasting
operation. Rock mass characteristics also vary greatly from place
to place in the same quarry or mine. Consequently, blasting
design parameters and explosive characteristics need to be
optimized on the basis of the properties of the rock mass, namely,
strength, density, porosity, longitudinal wave speed, stress–strain
response and the presence of structural discontinuities.
Artificial neural networks (ANN) is a branch of science that has
developed rapidly since the 1980s and which is nowadays used to
provide insights into complex problems [5,6,7,8]. Neural networks
are capable of learning from previous events. Thus, a neural network

1365-1609/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2012.05.002
 A.E. Álvarez-Vigil et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 55 (2012) 108–116 109

trained with a suitable number of input datasets can make predic- Below we describe the most important stratigraphic, structural
tions regarding outputs associated with new input data, provided and hydrogeological characteristics of the study zone.
this is of the same kind used during training.
Given their multidisciplinary nature, ANNs are widely used by
2.1. Stratigraphy
researchers, designers, planners, etc. and are being successfully
used in many sectors of industry and research [9,10]. Neural
The carboniferous materials are the most important in the
networks are very powerful in resolving problems with many
area. They include the Olloniego and Naranco carboniferous
complex parameters, whether in the process or the results. They
formations and the mountain limestone formation.
are especially useful when the process or results are not suffi-
ciently well known but a large amount of historical data is
available. Predicting ground vibrations caused by blasting is one 2.1.1. Olloniego formation
such problem [11]. This consists of a massive series, some 2500 to 3000 m thick, of
lithostratigraphic formations as follows: the Olloniego conglom-
erate formation with poorly calibrated polygenic conglomerates,
2. Geological description of the area
sandstones and, exceptionally, limestone and coal beds; the
Esperanza formation with alternating shale and sandstone and
The study zone is located close to the town of Langreo, near
some interbedded conglomerate; the Mieres conglomerate for-
the city of Oviedo in northern Spain, in a quarry operated by the
mation mainly characterized by a puddingstone conglomerate
Bahoto Mining Company. The mine is accessed from kilometre
and forming massive banks up to 25 m thick; and the Canales
9 of the AS-243 (Oviedo–Frieres) road. Fig. 1 shows the location of
formation, a predominantly shaly sequence interbedded with
the study zone, where the highest elevation is Peña Villa (591 m).
sandstone and coal seams.
Bahoto quarry is over a limestone mountain in the Valdeteja
formation. Fig. 2 is a detailed geological map of the western part
of the formation where the open pit is located. A red line shows 2.1.2. Naranco formation
the limits of the limestone and an orange circle indicates the This carboniferous sequence, characterized by detrital-slate
open-pit mine. In terms of the paleogeographic and structural monotone sequences of thicknesses of up to about 1200 m,
characteristics of the area, the mine is located in the Cantabrian consists of the stratigraphic sets known as Paquete Los Carriles
Zone and, more specifically, in the Mesozoic–Tertiary cover. (productive) and Paquete Folgueras (non-productive).

Fig. 1. Study zone.

Fig. 2. Geological map of the quarry.

110 A.E. Álvarez-Vigil et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 55 (2012) 108–116

2.1.3. Mountain limestone formation 3. Objectives and measuring equipment

This series is composed of the Barcaliente and Valdeteja forma-
tions. The Barcaliente formation, up to 500 m thick, consists of
blackish-grey, fetid, laminated limestone in banks, measuring 15 to
30 cm thick. The Valdeteja formation, 100 to 200 m thick but
occasionally reaching 700 m and containing fossilized remains,
consists of a massive light grey limestone in the roof that is slightly
darker at the base.
Within the Silurian materials, the Furada sandstone formation
located northwest of the mine is of note because of its proximity
to the quarry. This mainly detrital formation is formed by the
superimposition of layers of quartzite and sandstone. Dolomites
also feature in the area, although this lithology is not character-
istic of the formation.
2.2. Tectonics and structure
The materials in the area are affected by two deformation
stages, originating various structures in relation to the Variscan
orogeny. The structure of the Palaeozoic materials is determined
by a series of thrusts and folds.
Our aim was to study how the vibrations transmitted by
blasting in an open-pit mine were transmitted in different
directions, so as to determine, in turn, how the vibrations affected
the different structures located in the quarry, immediately out-
side the quarry limits and in nearby villages. We selected four
zones, depicted in Fig. 3 and labelled ‘Old installations’, ‘Offices’,
‘Quarry’ and ‘Pilot mine’. As can be observed, the equipment was
located so as to account for the main blast directions. The
criterion established for the ‘Old installations’ and ‘Offices’ was
to evaluate possible damage to the buildings. The ‘Offices’ loca-
tion also represented the direction for two villages. The ‘Quarry’
location was chosen to analyse how wave propagation would
affect the existing benches and was also the direction for another
village. Finally, the ‘Pilot mine’ location was chosen to analyse
vibration impact on the rooms and pillars of a small underground
mine. This also represented the direction for another small
village. It was also useful to be able to study wave behaviour
after the wave crossed a fault existing in this area. These four
locations are now described in more detail.
3.1. Old installations

2.2.1. Thrusts This location, which consists of abandoned workings con-

The thrust laminates are perhaps the most remarkable of the structed in cement and steel, enabled study of wave transmission
cartographic structures, with a ladder geometry, large platforms in the southerly direction.
and small ramps and significantly thick sediment overlays. North-
west of the study zone is the Aramo thrust, which branches off
3.2. Offices
east of the concession. The thrust front, which runs NE–SW,
consists of Silurian materials that overlay the carboniferous
This location, consisting of the Bahoto company premises,
materials and especially the Barcaliente formation. The same
enabled study of directions towards the villages of Alperi and El
thrust, which maintains an E–W orientation north of the quarry,
Castiellu.
brings the Barcaliente and Naranco formations into contact.
Southeast of the concession area is the Veguı́n thrust, running
NW–SE, which forces the thrust consisting of the Valdeteja 3.3. Quarry
formation to overlay the materials of the upper carboniferous
Olloniego formation. This was the location of an accelerograph on one of the highest
points in the quarry zone. Covering the direction towards the
village of El Llamargu, it is at a relatively short distance from the
quarry zone where the tests were performed.
2.2.2. Folds
These broadly include the Veguı́n synform, containing in its core
the slate of the Naranco carboniferous formation, flanked by the 3.4. Pilot mine
Barcaliente formation to the north and Valdeteja formation to the
south. The Barcaliente formation, as it progresses N–S, contains a This is the location of a pilot project for underground limestone
sequence of folding synform-antiform folds with axial traces parallel mining using the room-and-pillar method. It covers the direction
to the thrusts. towards the village of La Braña. Detected in the northeastern corner

2.3. Hydrogeology

The Nalón river forms an alluvial plain with remarkably thick

deposits playing an important role in the hydrogeological and
aquifer underflow. Although this type of plain has potential for
subterranean water extraction, it typically has a fairly low storage
coefficient. Besides the river, smaller streams and surface springs
in the area indicate the piezometric level in the area. Running
near the quarry are the Ricao, close to the quarry entrance by the
pilot mine, and the Figarona.
During the Quaternary, important karst processes occurred
that affected the coal formations and especially the mountain
limestone. These modelling phenomena have resulted in a mor-
phology characteristic of fields of sinkholes and blind valleys. All
this, coupled with high rainfall, makes for optimal conditions for
the formation of caves through which water circulates. Fig. 3. Measuring device locations.
 A.E. Álvarez-Vigil et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 55 (2012) 108–116
of the study zone was a fairly large fault filled with clay that was
likely to affect the transmission of vibration waves.
Vibrations were monitored using specially constructed seis-
mographs which captured vibrations and represented them in
terms of velocity (or acceleration) and frequency. There is no
consensus regarding the most accurate and appropriate type of
vibration measuring equipment to use, especially for vibrations
measured in structures, which are the result of interaction
between the blast and the structure. In this research we used an
Etna Strong Motion Accelerograph based on Kinemetrics’ Altus
technology: triaxial stations with a high dynamic range and an
internal memory to store data.
To ensure correct data capture for the vibrations it is recom-
mended to follow the guidelines of the International Society of
Explosive Engineers (ISEE) [12], summarized as follows:
The sensor should be placed on or in the ground on the side of
the structure (i.e., the element to be protected) towards the blast.
Sensor placement should ensure that the data obtained adequately
represent the ground-borne vibration levels received at the structure
to be protected. The longitudinal channel should point directly at
the blast and the direction should be recorded (azimuth).
If the acceleration experienced in the ground as a consequence
of vibration exceeds 0.2 times gravity, the sensor may be
decoupled. Depending on the anticipated acceleration levels,
fixing the seismograph to the ground may be appropriate. For
our research, we bolted the sensors to the ground as they were
located on rocky surfaces and cement. Initially it was planned to
leave the different devices permanently installed in their loca-
tions; however, to avoid electrical, weather and security pro-
blems, it was decided to only install them during the testing
period. The accelerographs were thus installed for each test and
removed once data capture was complete. For each test, it was
ensured that the reference axes for each measuring device were
pointing in the same direction. For convenience sake, the X, Y and
Z axes were oriented to the east, to the north and vertically,
respectively.
4. Neural network architecture
The nature and intensity of the vibrations and the induced
frequency in the blasting terrain depend on many factors [13].
One group defines the characteristics of the surroundings.
(a) The type of rock and rock mass (rock mass rating, RMR), as
each terrain has a dominant transmission velocity and frequency
that favours wave propagation for that frequency [14]. The
presence of families of discontinuities and their characteristics
(essentially, aperture, fill and water) also affect transmission.
(b) The distance to be covered by the wave [4] (between the
source and the control point), as waves dampen in line with the
distance travelled. (c) The presence of significant discontinuities
(faults) [15], special geological structures such as folds, thrusts
and levels that may act as insulators (e.g., clays) (d).
Fig. 4. Artificial neural network model and sigmoidal activation function.
111
The second group of factors defines wave energy and are
related to its source, in this case, blasting. (a) The type of
explosive [4], as high-velocity explosives will generate a higher
intensity shock wave. (b) The instantaneous explosive charge [4],
which defines the amount of energy used in the generation of the
shock wave. (c) Blast geometry [4], defined by parameters such as
perforation diameter, blasthole length, spacing and burden.
(d) The blasting sequence [4], given that the waves from succes-
sive blastholes can behave in one of three ways: accumulate to
amplify the overall wave; counteract each other to minimize the
overall vibration; or act independently.
All of these parameters are interdependent, so if one para-
meter changes, all the others will also change. The input para-
meters considered initially were the following. First, RMR, which
uses six parameters to classify a rock mass: uniaxial compressive
strength of rock material, Rock Quality Designation (RQD), Spa-
cing of discontinuities, condition of discontinuities, groundwater
conditions, and orientation of discontinuities. Other parameters
include relative arrangement of the blast and the control point,
distance between the blast and control point, blasthole diameter,
blasthole length, spacing between blastholes, burden, instanta-
neous charge, total charge, number of blastholes, and explosive
detonation velocity.
In defining the output parameters of most interest for the ANN,
vibration control parameters as established by international stan-
dards should be taken into account. These include peak velocity,
understood as the maximum modulus of the vector corresponding
to particle velocity, and dominant ground frequency.
Fig. 4, left, depicts the ANN model. The values xi are the input
data and wij are the corresponding weights. The sum block builds
the linear combination of the data with the weights as coefficients
adding the optional term bi, known as the bias. The neuron output
is a function yi, obtained in the activation block through one of the
many kinds of activation or transfer functions, although the most
widely used is the sigmoidal activation function (Fig. 4, right).
A neural network can be considered as an intelligent cube with
the capacity to predict output behaviour when it recognizes input
behaviour. It is trained by processing a large number of input
behaviour patterns and shows the output behaviour patterns for
each. Following suitable training, when presented with a new
input model the neural network is capable of recognizing similar
behaviours; the result is a prediction of outputs.
Neural networks are capable of recognizing similarities in
inputs even when a particular input may never previously have
been introduced. This property equips it with an excellent inter-
pretative capacity, especially when the input data contain noise
(i.e., they are not exact). Neural networks can be used as a direct
substitute for autocorrelation, multivariable regression, linear
regression, non-linear regression and other statistical analysis
techniques. When data are analysed using a neural network it is
possible to predict important behaviours that may not detected
by experts. In other words, the neural network acts as an expert. A
particular neural network can be defined using three fundamental
112 A.E. Álvarez-Vigil et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 55 (2012) 108–116

components: the activation function, the network architecture blastholes and some 1350 m of perforation. These tests were
and the learning law. The definition of these components depends labelled A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7, A8 and A9. Results obtained for
on the type of problem to be resolved [16]. one of the tests (A1) are summarized in Table 2.
For the predictive analysis of vibrations in the Bahoto quarry,
we used a feedforward backpropagation (FFBP) network as the
most suitable model for resolving an identification problem. E4 E3 E2 E1
Generating a solution is a problem of successively generating
V1
input/output relationships until an optimum is found.
In engineering it is customary to use only one hidden layer for
25 m 25 m 25 m 25 m
this type of network (FFBP). The number of neurons in the hidden
E4 E3 E2 E1
layer, Nco, was determined using the following formula [7]: V2
ðn=lÞp
Nco ¼ ð1Þ
mþpþ1 25 m 25 m 25 m 50 m
where n is the number of training data, l is a number equal to or E4 E3 E2 E1
greater than 1, m is the number of input variables, and p is the V3
number of output variables.
Bearing in mind the aim of the project, we designed a network to 25 m 25 m 25 m 75 m
predict two outputs (PPV and F). The network architecture is
E4 E3 E2 E1
summarized in Table 1. Fig. 5 depicts the network as per MATLAB
V4
R 2006 a, v.7.2.0.232 [16], the program used for the approximation.
It was necessary to conduct fieldwork in the Bahoto quarry to 25 m 50 m 50 m 50 m
pre-select the parameters. This research is described below.
E4 E3 E2 E1
4.1. Initial tests V5

100 m 50 m 50 m 50 m
4.1.1. Tests for isolated blastholes
Detonated in each test were five isolated blastholes, each with Fig. 6. Detonation tests for isolated blastholes.
a different charge of approximately 15 kg of plastic explosive, 5 kg
of plastic explosive and 25 kg of ANFO explosive, 5 kg of plastic
explosive and 50 kg of ANFO explosive, 5 kg of plastic explosive Table 2
and 100 kg of ANFO explosive and 25 kg of plastic explosive and Results of test A1.
200 kg of ANFO explosive. These quantities were increased in
Blasthole Distance Peak velocity Dominant
successive tests. For each test the measuring devices were aligned (m) (mm/s) frequency (Hz)
with the blastholes at predetermined distances, as depicted in
Fig. 6, where E1, E2, E3 and E4 represent the positions of the V1 25 12.1 51
accelerographs and V1 and V2 to V5 represent the location of 15 kg of plastic explosive 50 8.7 30
75 8.9 73
blastholes with different charges. Nine tests were performed, for
100 2.2 25
four different directions, involving the detonation of 45 isolated V2 50 23.1 57
5 kg of plastic explosive 25 kg of 75 15.2 43
ANFO explosive 100 4.6 34
125 3.9 30
Table 1 V3 75 27.3 57
Neural network architecture. 5 kg of plastic explosive 50 kg of 100 11.3 43
ANFO explosive 125 9.7 38
No. of input neurons 11 150 6.1 28
No. of output neurons 2 V4 50 64.2 34
No. of hidden layers 1 5 kg of plastic explosive 100 kg 100 18.7 43
No. of hidden neurons 5 [7] of ANFO explosive 150 9.4 32
No. of training cycles 100 175 3.2 23
No. of training data items 40 V5 50 35 34
No. of validation items 20 25 kg of plastic explosive 200 kg 100 29.5 34
No. of test items 20 of ANFO explosive 150 8.5 24
Error 0.05 250 3.3 20

Fig. 5. Architecture of the neural network in MATLAB.

 A.E. Álvarez-Vigil et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 55 (2012) 108–116 113

Fig. 7. Measured velocities in test C2 for 15 blastholes.

Table 3 Table 4
Neural network input parameters. Neural network output parameters.

Input parameter Range Mean Unit Output parameter Range Mean Unit

RMR 65–80 72.68 – Particle peak velocity 0.9–7.7 2.57 mm/s

Blast-control point relative arrangement 4–353 246.33 (1) Vibration frequency 2–21 13.26 Hz
Distance from blast to control point 300–1100 700 m
Blasthole diameter 105–140 122.5 mm
Blasthole length 15–30 22.5 m
most sensitive part of the neuron. A value is normalized as
Spacing between blastholes 4.0–5.5 4.75 m
Burden 3–6 4.53 m follows:
Instantaneous charge 100–240 170 kg
V nor ¼ ðV2V min Þ=ðV max 2V min Þ ð2Þ
Total charge 900–10000 5450 kg
No. of blastholes 10–50 24.39 –
Explosive detonation velocity 3.7–5.4 4.29 km/s V ¼ V min þV nor ðV max 2V min Þ ð3Þ

4.1.2. Tests for five sequential blastholes
In each test, five blastholes were perforated and loaded with 25 kg
of plastic explosive and 200 kg of ANFO explosive, with the blasts
sequenced for a delay of 42 ms. Eight tests of this kind were
performed, varying the perforation diameter (between 105 and
140 mm) and blasthole spacing (between 4 and 5.5 m), for a total
of 40 detonated blastholes and 1200 m of perforation. The measuring
devices were located at the four points shown in Fig. 3. These tests
were labelled B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, B7 and B8 (Table 5).
4.1.3. Tests for fifteen sequential blastholes
The tests were the same as the previous tests, except that 15
rather than 5 blastholes were detonated. Four tests were
performed, involving the detonation of 60 blastholes and the
perforation of 1800 m. These tests were labelled C1, C2, C3 and C4
(Table 5). Fig. 7 shows an example vibration detected using this
kind of test. This figure shows the evolution of PPV (in cm/s) over
time and the frequency of the vibration.
4.2. Input and output parameters and normalization
Selected following these tests were eleven input parameters,
whose description, measurement units, variation ranges and
means are summarized in Table 3. The output parameters for
the neural networks considered were PPV and F, whose values and
characteristics are summarized in Table 4. All input and output
parameters were normalized between 0 and 1 so as to use the
5. Network training and learning
ANNs need to be trained before they interpret information. Of
the many neural network training algorithms available, the most
versatile and robust algorithm is the FFBP algorithm, which is
especially effective for networks with several layers. FFBP algo-
rithms are especially capable of resolving prediction problems, for
which reason they are particularly useful for identification pro-
blems. The FFBP neural network is always formed of an input
layer, a hidden layer and an output layer [16].
Each layer is composed of a number of elementary processing
units, called neurons. Each neuron is connected to the next layer
by means of weights, i.e., the neurons in the input layer send their
outputs as inputs to the neutrons in the hidden layer. The
connection between the hidden and output layers is made in
the same way. The number of hidden layers and the number of
neurons in each hidden layer change according to the problem in
hand. The number of neurons in the input layer is the same as the
number of input data or parameters; and the number of neurons
in the output layer is the same as the number of variables to be
predicted [16].
To distinguish between the different processing units, bias
values are included in the activation functions. The bias values are
associated with the neuron temperature. Except for the input
layer, all the neurons in a FFBP network are associated with a bias
value and an activation function. Bias is similar to weight, except
that its constant value is equal to 1, whereas the activation
function filters the sum of signals received from its neuron.
114 A.E. Álvarez-Vigil et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 55 (2012) 108–116
Fig. 8. Backpropagation neural network used.
Activation functions, which are designed to be applied to the real
output of a network neuron or layer, are simple linear or non-
linear jump functions. The application of these activation func-
tions depends on the purpose of the neural network. The output
layer produces the calculated output values corresponding to the
solution [16].
In training a network, the data are processed from the input
layer through the hidden layer until they reach the output layer
(forward propagation). In this layer, the output values are
compared with the measured values for error estimation pur-
poses. The difference between both (error) is backpropagated in
the network, with the individual weights of the connections and
bias of the individual neurons adapted accordingly [16].
The input and output data are represented as vectors called
training pairs. The process is repeated for all the training pairs
until the network error converges to a threshold value corre-
sponding to the minimum of a cost function, normally the mean
squared error (MSE) or the sum of squared error (SSE) [16].
Fig. 8 shows the FFBP network used in this approach with three
layers, eleven neurons in the input layer (data Xi;i¼1,2,y11), five
neurons in the hidden layer and two neurons in the output layer
(variables or solutions Yk;k¼1,2). The jth neuron in the hidden layer
is connected to all the neurons in the input layer and its inputs are
as follows:
X i ¼ ðX 1 ,X 2 ,:::,X n Þ
The net input value in this hidden layer neuron is as follows:
X
n is called an epoch. The process is repeated for as many epochs as
Nj ¼ X i W ij þ yj
i¼1
where xi is the input value, Wij is the weight of the connection for
the ith input in the input layer with the jth neuron of the hidden
layer, yj is the bias in the neuron (optional) and n is the number of
data points [16].
In this way, the net output of the network in said neuron of the
hidden layer is calculated using the sigmoidal activation function
[16], in other words (6):
1 tests summarized in Table 5. The quality of training and the
Sj ¼ f ðNj Þ ¼
1 þ eðNj þ yj Þ
The net total input to unit k in the output layer is as follows [16]:
X
m
Nk ¼ Sj W jk þ yk
j¼1
where yj is the bias in the kth neuron, Wjk is the weight of the
connection between the jth neuron in the hidden layer and the kth
neuron in the output layer and m is the number of neurons in the
hidden layer. Thus, the output of the kth output layer neuron is as
follows [16]:
1
Sk ¼ f ðNk Þ ¼
1 þeðNk þ yk Þ
In the learning process the network is presented with a pair of
input data and the corresponding output values or solution. The
network calculates its own solution using weight and threshold
values and compares this solution to the true or desired solution.
Hence, the error in any output layer unit is as follows [16]:
ek ¼ t k Sk ð9Þ
where tk is the correct or desired value. The total error function is
the MSE [16]:
p
1X
E¼ ðt S Þ2 ð10Þ
pk¼1 k k
where p is the number of neurons in the output layer.
Training a neural network consists essentially of optimizing
the space of the weights in the network. The steepest descent
method minimized the error by making use of the following
rule [16]:
 
@E
rW jk ¼ Z ð11Þ
@W jk
where Z is the learning speed parameter and E is the
error function, Eq. (10). Weight adjustment for step (qþ1) is
given by
W jk ðq þ 1Þ ¼ W jk ðqÞ þ rW jk ðqÞ ð12Þ
An analogous logic is applied to the connections between the
ð4Þ hidden and output layers. The procedure is repeated with each pair
of training values (set of input data and desired output values)
allocated to network training. Each run through all the sets of pairs
ð5Þ necessary until the error falls below a threshold set by the user. This
quantity is a reflection of how the network has learned [16].
Our network was trained using a training function that
updates weight and bias values according to gradient descent
momentum (0.9 constant) and an adaptive learning rate (0.01
initial value). The hidden layer consisting of five neurons and the
network was trained with 100 training epochs. We used a series
of 50 data corresponding to the initial measurement campaign
implemented over 10 months. The data are those from the 15
ð6Þ minimization of the error function (MSE) for the 60 sets of data
used are illustrated in Fig. 8a,b.
ð7Þ 6. Network calibration and training validation
To test and validate the ANN methodology, we selected sets of
new input–output data. These data were not used in training the
network. They thus validate use of the ANN methodology in a
more versatile way. The set of twenty data items used were from
the five validation tests summarized in Table 6. Fig 9.
Our results demonstrate the quality of prediction using the
ð8Þ ANN methodology [17]. The percentage of mean relative error and
the correlation coefficient between the predicted and observed
values were the measurements that we considered to be quality
indicators. The prediction was based on the input data referred to
 A.E. Álvarez-Vigil et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 55 (2012) 108–116 115

above. The predicted and measured PPV and F values for the results of multiple linear regression analysis (MLR) are:
twenty sets of data used to validate the network are given in
Table 7and 8. X
11
PPV ¼ a0 þ a i xi ð14Þ
The correlation coefficients between the ANN-predicted and i¼1
measured values were 0.98 for PPV and 0.95 for frequency. These
values, close to 1, indicate the quality of the prediction. Fig. 10a,b
show the regression graphs for the values used for the PPV and
the F tests. The mean relative error was calculated by Table 7
ANN-predicted and measured PPV and F values.
n 
 
1X xp xm  Predicted PPV Measured PPV Predicted F Measured F
RMEðxÞ ¼ ð13Þ
n k ¼ 1 xm (mm/s) (mm/s) (Hz) (Hz)

1.4 1.5 17 18
where xp is the predictor value and xm the measured value of x. 1.7 1.5 16 14
The error was 0.65 for the PPV test and 2.77 for the F test. The 6.0 6.1 5 2
2.1 2.0 10 12
2.1 1.9 11 10
1.8 1.8 18 20
Table 5 5.3 5.5 10 10
Network training tests. 6.8 6.8 11 11
1.8 1.3 14 19
Test No. of Diameter Spacing Plastic ANFO 1.9 1.9 14 17
blastholes (mm) (m) explosive (kg) explosive (kg) 1.7 1.5 19 17
1.3 1.3 20 17
B1 5 105 4.0 25 200 1.0 1.3 16 16
B2 5 105 4.5 25 200 1.8 1.7 16 16
B3 5 105 5.0 25 200 2.0 2.0 14 13
B4 5 105 5.5 25 200 4.6 4.7 12 14
B5 5 140 4.0 25 200 1.7 1.9 14 13
B6 5 140 4.5 25 200 1.3 1.5 18 18
B7 5 140 5.0 25 200 1.4 1.5 15 14
B8 5 140 5.5 25 200 2.0 1.8 12 7
C1 15 105 4.0 25 200
C2 15 105 5.0 25 200
C3 15 140 4.0 25 200
C4 15 140 5.0 25 200
Table 8
D1 40 105 4.5 35 150
Values for ai and bi values in MLR.
D2 40 140 4.5 25 200
D3 40 105 4.5 25 180
I &1 &1

0 7.3281 15.5737
Table 6 1 0.0479  0.0978
Validation test characteristics. 2  0.0102  0.0125
3 0.0024  0.0092
No. of Diameter Spacing Plastic explosive ANFO explosive 4  0.0847 0.0917
blastholes (mm) (m) (kg) (kg) 5  0.2930 0.0580
6 0.2486  0.4128
35 140 5.0 35 200 7 0.3448 0.8182
15 105 4.5 30 150 8 0.0441  0.0551
20 140 4.5 30 200 9  0.0005 0.0001
27 105 4.0 25 150 10 0.1223 0.0228
30 105 4.0 40 150 11  0.2736 1.2374

Fig. 9. (a) Training quality, (b) Error function minimization.

116 A.E. Álvarez-Vigil et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 55 (2012) 108–116
Fig. 10. (a) Correlation between ANN-predicted and measured F values. (b) Correlation between ANN-predicted and measured F values.
X
11
F ¼ b0 þ bi xi
i¼1
7. Conclusions
Using Bayesian interpolation and an optimum number of
hidden layer neurons, the mean relative errors for the prediction
of PPV and F were 0.65 and 2.77, respectively. The corresponding
correlation coefficients were 0.98 and 0.95, respectively, indicat-
ing a satisfactory prediction for PPV and F using the ANN
methodology.
The prediction made using multiple linear regression produced
mean relative errors of 2.77 for PPV and 3.27 for F. Furthermore,
the correlation coefficients obtained were very low: 0.50 for PPV
prediction and 0.15 for F, pointing to poor predictions for this
methodology. Considering the complexity of the relationships
between the input and output parameters, the results obtained
are highly satisfactory and promising. The neural network
produced predictions for new data other than those used for
training the network, as it could adapt over time to new training
data. This ensures a high level of accuracy for future predictions.
Using this approach, the monitoring aspect of blasting can be
eliminated, with the resulting savings in human resources and
material costs.
The analysis results could possibly be improved if other
techniques were used. Multiple linear regression could be com-
plemented with principal components analysis and by eliminat-
ing variables the approximation could be improved. It would also
be possible to improve the approximation using potential or even
exponential non-linear multiple regression.
References
ð15Þ
[1] Farinha AR, Mendes R, Baranda J, Calinas R, Vieira MT. Behavior of explosive
compacted/consolidated of nanometric copper powders. J Alloys Compd
2009;26:235–8.
[2] Jun D, Zhenmin L, Xiaochun W, Yoyuan H. Explosive limits of mixed gases
containing CH4, CO and C2H4 in the goaf area. Min Sci Tech 2010;20:557–62.
[3] Plaut RH. Snap loads and torsional oscillations of the original Tacoma
Narrows Bridge. J Sound Vib 2008;309:613–36.
[4] Kahndelwal M, Shing TN. Prediction of blast induced ground vibrations and
frequency in opencast mine: a neural network approach. J Sound Vib 2006;289:
711–25.
[5] Maity D, Saha A. Damage assessment in structure from changes in static
parameters using neural networks. Sadhana 2004;29:315–27.
[6] Tiryaki B. Application of artificial neural networks for predicting the cuttability
of rocks by drag tools. Tunnelling Underground Space Technol 2008;23:273–80.
[7] Seibi A, Al-Alawi SM. Prediction of fracture toughness using artificial neural
networks (ANNs). Eng Fract Mech 1997;56:311–9.
[8] Saemi M, Ahmadi M, Varjani AY. Design of neural networks using genetic
algorithms for the permeability estimation of the reservoir. J Petrol Sci Eng
2007;59:97–105.
[9] Khandelwal M, Roy MP, Shing PK. Application of artificial neural network in
mining industry. Ind Min Eng J 2004;43:19–23.
[10] Kahndewal M, Shing TN. Prediction of waste dump stability by an intelligent
approach. National Symposium on New Equipment-New Technology, Man-
agement and Safety, ENTMS-2002, Bhubaneshwar 2002.
[11] Shing TN, Kanchan R, Saigal K, Verma AK. Prediction of P-wave velocity and
anisotropic properties of rock using Artificial Neural Network technique. J Sci
Ind Res 2004;63:32–8.
[12] Field ISEE. Practice guidelines for blasting seismographs. Int Soc Explos Eng
Blast Vibr Seismograph Sect 2009.
[13] Singh DP, Singh TN, Goyal M. Ground vibration due to blasting and its effect.
Environment 1994;123:287–93.
[14] Wiss JF, Linehan PW. Control of vibration and air noise from surface coal
mines—III. Bureau of Mines, US, Report No. OFR 103 (3)—79. 1978; 623.
[15] Singh DP, Sastry VR. Rock fragmentation by blasting influence of joint filling
material. J Explos Eng 1986;3:18–27.
[16] MATHLAB v.7.2.0.232. The MathWorks, Inc. 1994-2010 &.
[17] Kuzniar K, Maciag E, Waszczyszyn Z. Computation of response spectra from
mining tremors using neural networks. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 2005;25:
331–9.