Blasting Theory PDF

European Shotfirer Standard
Education for Enhanced Mobility
– ESSEEM –
Final15/10/2010 Slide 1
ESSEEM Work Package 6
Blasting theory
worked out and giving a lecture by

University of Pardubice
Faculty of Chemical Technology
Institute of Energetic Materials
Czech Republic
Competencies required in Blasting theory
– The shotfirer should have basic knowledge of the breaking

process while blasting, such as fragmentation mechanisms,
throw mechanism and wave transmission. He/she should be
able to judge on the practical consequences of the blast.
– The shotfirer should have knowledge necessary to
understand and implement a plan for drilling, charging and
blasting and its details along with timing.
– The shotfirer should have knowledge necessary to determine
the consumption of explosives for the individual holes and the
entire round.
– The shotfirer must be familiar with the problems related to
vibration, air blast (blast wave), noise and dust while blasting.
– The shotfirer must be familiar with the risks of fly rock, fly
pieces, and with methods to establish sufficient protection.
Training plan
Time
Contents
(2 days)
1. Introductory concepts 45 min
2. Nature of explosives and detonations 1 hr 30 min
3. Confined detonations 2 hrs 15 min
4. Charges 3 hrs
5. Charges in the boreholes 1 hr 30 min
6. Ranking of the charges 45 min
7. Fragmentation and movements 3 hrs
Contents
1. Introductory concepts GOTO 1.

2. Nature of explosives and detonations GOTO 2.
3. Confined detonations GOTO 3.
4. Charges GOTO 4.
5. Charges in the boreholes GOTO 5.
6. Ranking of the charges GOTO 6.
7. Fragmentation and movements GOTO 7.
References GOTO Refs
Index GOTO Index
List of Figures GOTO Figs
List of Tables GOTO Tabs
Fundamental knowledge
Supplementary knowledge
Danger
redtext Terms referred to in Index
1. Introductory concepts
2. Nature of explosives and detonations
3. Confined detonations
4. Charges
5. Charges in the boreholes
6. Ranking of the charges
7. Fragmentation and movements
References
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables
Contents
1.1 What is an explosive GOTO 1.1

1.2 What is a detonation GOTO 1.2
1.3 The detonation wave theoretical model GOTO 1.3
1.3.1 The detonation wave complex GOTO 1.3.1
1.3.2 Visual representation of detonation wave
parameters GOTO 1.3.2
Contents
1.1 What is an explosive (1+1 slides)

1.2 What is a detonation • Two basic terms are introduced.
1.3 The detonation wave theoretical model
1.3.1 The detonation wave complex
(12 slides)
• Various1.3.2
characteristics of detonation of
Visual representation wave are described.
detonation wave
• In particular, detonation velocity and failure diameter/ critical
parameters
diameter are introduced.
Contents
GOTO 1.
1.1 What is an explosive
Definition of an explosive:
• Any chemical compound or mixture that reacts at high
speed to liberate gas and heat and thus cause high
pressures.
Classification of explosives:
• commercial/industrial explosives topic of
(usually mixtures of fuels and oxidants) our
• military explosives interest
Contents
GOTO 1.
1.2 What is a detonation
Definition of a detonation:
• An explosion in a reactive material which is
characterized by a shock wave moving at greater speed
than sonic velocity and accompanied by a chemical
reaction whose energy release supports the propagation
of the shock.
Contents
GOTO 1.
1.3 The detonation wave theoretical model
1.3.1 The detonation wave complex

• The detonation wave complex consist of
a shock wave followed by
a reaction zone which in turn is followed by
an expansion zone in which the reaction products are
relaxing to normal condition.
• The whole detonation-wave complex is illustrated
in Fig. 1.1a, b
Contents
GOTO 1.
Fig.1.1a, b. Detonation-wave profile as viewed on

a) pressure (P) - distance (or time) plane
b) pressure - specific volume (V) plane
[Ref. 2]
Contents
GOTO 1.
1.3.1 The detonation wave complex (cont.)
• The shock wave raises (jump) the pressure (P) and

temperature (T) of the initial explosive causing it to
undergo a chemical reaction.
• This reaction takes place in the reaction zone, which is
associated with pressure drop.
• Attached to the reaction zone is a region where the
products, usually in gaseous form, will expand, cool down
and, with time, bring everything back to normal pressure.
• This region is called a release wave (known as the Taylor
wave).
Contents
GOTO 1.
• Shock wave with the reaction zone is a steady

complex, it does not vary with time.
• Taylor wave expansion region is non-steady
(Fig. 1.1a).
shock wave
reaction zone
expansion
region
Contents
GOTO 1.
• The reaction zone is usually very thin and, depending on

the explosive, it varies between
 several millimeters for non-ideal explosives (most of
the commercial explosives) and
 only fractions of a millimeter for other more sensitive
“ideal” ones (most of the military explosives).
Contents
GOTO 1.
• The end of the reaction zone is known as the Chapman-

Jouguet (CJ) state, which for each explosive has
characteristic values of
 pressure (PCJ),
 temperature (TCJ),
 energy (ECJ),
 specific volume (VCJ), and
 particle velocity (uCJ).
• Also characteristic of a particular explosive is the
detonation velocity D (a phase front wave speed) at
which the whole detonation complex propagates into the
undisturbed medium.
Contents
GOTO 1.
• In Fig.1.1b the jump conditions

across the shock wave are
represented by the Rankine-
Hugoniot curve (RH, shock
adiabate, compression curve).
 This line does not include
any energy terms from
chemical reaction.
• The locus of states across
a shock wave with a completed
reaction is described by the
Hugoniot curve (H, reacted
Hugoniot).
Contents
GOTO 1.
• The steadiness of shock front

and the reaction zone is
manifested by the Rayleigh line
(R), whose slope on that plane
represents the velocity of the
wave.
• Thus, the pressure and specific
volume of the material attained
by the jump condition may be
found at the intersection of the
RH and R lines, indicated as the
von Neumann point (VN).
Contents
1.3.2 Visual representation of detonation wave GOTO 1.
parameters
• A real steady detonation in cylindrical stick we can

see in Fig. 1.2.
• Here Fig. 1.2 features
 some stream lines,
 the curved front,
 the sonic surface and
 the surface where the reaction end.
Contents
GOTO 1.
Fig. 1.2. A real model of detonation. [Ref.3]

Contents
parameters (cont.)
• The local curvature of the front determines the

initiation conditions for the reaction along the stream
line passing through this point.
• The intensity of the shock
is given by its velocity D×cosα.
• In the steady self-sustained detonation, the shock

intensity also depends on the energy delivered on the
stream line between the shock and sonic surface.
Contents
parameters (cont.)
• The energy delivered downstream between the sonic

surface and the surface of end of reactions mainly
supplies the lateral expansion too.
• As the diameter of the stick decreases, the part of
the energy delivered to sustain the shock decreases
and, finally the failure diameter (critical diameter,
Øcr) is reached.
• The steady state depends strongly on the lateral
expansion too. Generally, confined charges of
explosive have smaller critical diameter than
non-confined ones.
4. Charges
References
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables
Contents
2.1 Important properties of explosives GOTO 2.1

2.1.1 Composition GOTO 2.1.1
2.1.2 Oxygen balance GOTO 2.1.2
2.1.3 Releasable energy GOTO 2.1.3
2.1.4 Stability GOTO 2.1.4
2.1.5 Sensitivity GOTO 2.1.5
2.1.6 Density GOTO 2.1.6
2.2 Important detonation parameters GOTO 2.2
2.2.1 Velocity of detonation GOTO 2.2.1
2.2.2 Detonation pressure GOTO 2.2.2
2.2.3 Critical diameter GOTO 2.2.3
2.2.4 Detonation parameters for selected explosives GOTO 2.2.4
2.3 Test methods for explosives GOTO 2.3
2.3.1 Impact sensitivity test (Fallhammer apparatus) GOTO 2.3.1
2.3.2 Friction sensitivity test GOTO 2.3.2
2.3.3 Transmission of detonation in open air test GOTO 2.3.3
2.3.4 Lead block test, Trauzl test GOTO 2.3.4
2.3.5 Ballistic mortar test GOTO 2.3.5
Contents
2.1 Important properties of explosives

2.1.1 Composition
(17 slides)
2.1.2 Oxygen balance
• Properties
2.1.3ofReleasable
explosivesenergy
which are important for blasting technologies are
identified.
2.1.4 Stability
• In particular, releasable energy, sensitivity and density are listed.
2.1.5 Sensitivity
2.1.6 Density
2.2 Important detonation parameters
2.2.1 Velocity of detonation
(11 slides)
2.2.2 Detonation pressure
• Especially
2.2.3connections of detonation velocity and critical diameter with
Critical diameter
density 2.2.4
and confinement are described.
Detonation parameters for selected explosives
• Term ‚working capability‘ is explained.
2.3 Test methods for explosives
2.3.1 Impact sensitivity test (Fallhammer apparatus)
(10 slides)
2.3.2 Friction sensitivity test
• Brief description of methods
2.3.3 Transmission of for the determination
detonation in open airoftest
sensitivity and working
capability.
2.3.4 Lead block test, Trauzl test
2.3.5 Ballistic mortar test
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1 Important properties of explosives
2.1.1 Composition
• When explosives react they produce energy by
a process called oxidation.
• An oxidation reaction is chemical reaction that occurs
when a fuel is burning or an explosive is detonating; it
is the same in both cases.
• Most explosives (individuals and mixtures of fuel-
oxidant) consist of
 carbon (C),
 hydrogen (H),
 nitrogen (N), and
 oxygen (O)
and are called CHNO explosives.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.1 Composition
• The general formula for all CHNO explosives is

expressed as Ca Hb Nc Od,
where a, b, c, and d are the number of carbon, hydrogen,
nitrogen, and oxygen atoms, respectively, in the
explosive molecule
(or fuel-oxidant mixture).
• Then, in the zone where an explosive is detonating, the
reactant molecule (or molecules) is completely broken
down into its individual component atoms; that is
Ca Hb Nc Od → a C + b H + c N + d O (2.1)
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.1 Composition (cont.)
• These atoms then recombine to form the final products of

the reaction.
• The typical products formed are
 nitrogen (N2),
 water (H2),
 carbon monoxide (CO), and
 carbon dioxide (CO2) as follows:
2N → N2 (2.2a)
2H + O → H2O (2.2b)
C + O → CO (2.2c)
CO + O → CO2 (2.2d)
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.1 Composition (cont.)
• In all cases, the reaction hierarchy of the products formed

can be estimated by using the following rules:
 all the nitrogen forms N2
 all the hydrogen is burned to H2O
 any oxygen left after H2O formulation burns to CO
 any oxygen left after CO formulation burns CO to
CO2
 any oxygen remaining form O2
 traces of NOx (mixed oxides of nitrogen) are always
formed (less than 1%)
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.2 Oxygen balance
• For Ca Hb Nc Od explosives, we see that,

 if all the carbon could be burned to carbon dioxide,
we would need twice the number of oxygen atoms as
we have carbon atoms (or 2a of oxygen)
 and similarly, to burn all of the hydrogen to water,
b/2 oxygen is required.
• To be exactly balanced, this compound would need 2a +
b/2 atoms of oxygen.
It has d atoms of oxygen.
• Therefore, the quantity (d – 2a – b/2) is a measure of the
oxygen balance (OB) for this molecule (or mixture
oxidant - fuel).
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.2 Oxygen balance (cont.)
• When the number OB = d – 2a – b/2 is negative

d < (2a + b/2) (2.3)
it means there is less oxygen than needed for complete
detonation; therefore,
the explosive is underoxidized.
• When
d > (2a + b/2) (2.4)
there is more than enough oxygen, and
molecule (or mixture oxidant - fuel) is overoxidized.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.2 Oxygen balance (cont.)
• It is customary to express the OB in terms of the weight

percent of excess oxygen compared to the weight of
explosive according equation
OB 
d  2a  b / 2  1600 %
(2.5)
molecular weight
 The molecular weight (MW) of the explosive is the
sum of the weights of all the atoms. Therefore,
MW = 12.01 a + 1.008 b + 14.008 c + 16 d (2.6)
• When an explosive is exactly oxygen balanced,
it produces the maximum
energy output per unit OB = 0, explosive is
weight of the explosive. neither rich nor lean,
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.3 Releasable energy
• The energy, or heat, released from the chemical reaction

that occurs during the detonation of an explosive is
called heat (energy) of detonation.
 This is the heat of reaction for the reaction of the
explosive itself going to the explosive products.
 It does not include any heat generated by secondary
reaction of the explosive or its products with air.
• Usually, the term heat (or energy) of detonation is
designated as QD
QD = ∑∆Hf(detonation products) - ∆Hf(explosive) (2.7)
where Hf is the heat of formation.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.3 Releasable energy (cont.)
• In real detonation, the composition of the products is

not always the same for the same explosive.
• Factors such as
 the initial density and temperature,
 degree of confinement,
 particle size and morphology, and even
 the dimensions and shape of the charge
affect the pressure and temperature behind the
detonation front where the products are rapidly
expanding and the various equilibrium states between the
products are being quenched.
Contents
GOTO 2.
• Experimentally determined values for heat of

detonation are preferred for engineering calculation.
• When these data are not available, a reasonable estimate
of the heat of detonation can be obtained by using the
ideal product hierarchy rule of thumb (compare 2.1.1).
• all the nitrogen forms N2

• all the hydrogen is burned to H2O
• any oxygen left after H2O formulation burns to CO
• etc.
Contents
GOTO 2.
• The working capability of an explosive

(or the strength of explosive) is usually described
 by the heat of detonation
 by the experimental values obtained from the lead
block test (see 2.3.4) or from the ballistic mortar test
(see 2.3.5)
 by the detonation enthalpy H
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.4 Stability
• We know two types of stability: the physical stability

and the chemical one.
• Physical stability is connected with
 changes of volume and density,
 migration of additives,
 crystallization (at emulsion explosives),
 changes of modification (at an ammonium nitrate)
etc.
• Further we are interested in long-time
 solubility,
 wettability,
 plasticity.
• Changes of those parameters could affect parameters
of detonation, sensitivity, chemical stability and so on.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.4 Stability (cont.)
• The chemical stability is connected with decomposition

reactions when occur at a very slow rate and usually at
ambient temperatures.
• Upon decomposition, products such as
 NO,  acids,
 NO2,  aldehydes,
 H2O,  ketones,
 N2 , etc.
are formed.
• Decomposition reaction rates are affected by the
presence of other substances.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.4 Stability (cont.)
• The chemical reactions between explosives and other

substances are called chemical incompatibilities.
• These are very important in explosive systems that must
be stored for long periods of time.
• Compatibility studies are directed
 not only to address the degradation of explosives by
other materials in a system,
 but also to address the degradation of other parts of
a system caused by the explosive (for example
corrosion of the metal bridge wire, damage to printed
circuit, and subsequent failures).
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.5 Sensitivity
• The sensitivity is the important property of the industrial

explosives. The reasons are two:
(i) we need an insensitive material during manufacture,
handling, and transport,
(ii) the explosive must be sufficiently sensitive for self-
sustaining detonation.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.5 Sensitivity (cont.)
• It is known that a big part of a detonation process

consists of the local heating of deliberately created
reaction centers, “hot spots”. The most frequently used
reaction centers are air or gas bubbles introduced
into the explosive.
 By the mechanism of bubble collapse (by a
compression), energy is focused within a small
volume of the material close to and downstream of
the bubble.
 At such a hot spot, the material can reach a
temperature considerably in excess of that of the rest
of the explosive, and the reaction can then spread.
E.g. the emulsion explosives are low sensitive.
We add to them glass microbubbles, sodium nitrite,
expanded dolomite etc., which increases their sensitivity.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.1.6 Density
• The density is a very important factor for any explosive

with composition CHNO.
With increasing density,
velocity of detonation The rule is valid for individual
increases linearly, and explosives only. Compare with
the pressure increase 2.2.4, 3rd slide.
is quadratic.
 We need to know the density of explosive, so that we
can calculate a performance of charge.
• An important value of density is a theoretical maximum
density (TMD). The explosive at TMD has maximum
content of energy in a volume unit.
• Sometimes we express the density in percentage of
TMD; in this way we determine a free volume of
explosive (the centers of hot spots).
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.2 Important detonation parameters
2.2.1 Velocity of detonation

• Typical velocities of detonation for commercial explosives
range from 1900 to 7900 m/s. They are usually declared
by producers.
• This velocity, sometimes referred to as steady state
velocity, remains constant for a given explosive under
given conditions.
• It varies depending primarily on the
 composition
 particle size
 density of explosive
 degree of confinement
 diameter of explosive
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.2.1 Velocity of detonation (cont.)
• For many commercial explosives in the range of borehole

diameters used in rock blasting,
the chemical reactions that take place in the detonation
are not instantaneous, but take place during the time the
explosive does work on the material surrounding the
borehole (confinement).
• The stronger the surrounding rock is, and the higher
its density, the higher is detonation velocity.
• For such relatively slowly reacting explosives, the
detonation velocity increase with increasing charge
diameter.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.2.1 Velocity of detonation (cont.)
• When comparing the velocity of detonation data obtained

at two different densities (of the same explosive), it is
necessary to correct the density of one value to the
density of the other value.
• The best correction would be made for Dc in the form
1  1.3  c
Dc  Di  (2.8)
1  1.3  i
where Dc and ρc are the corrected detonation velocity and
density, and Di and ρi are the initial detonation velocity
and density.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.2.2 Pressure of detonation
• The ingredients of an explosive consisting of a fuel and

oxidizer combination, upon detonation, are immediately
converted to high pressure, high temperature gases.
 Pressures just behind the detonation front are in the
order of 0.9 GPa to 27.5 GPa, while temperatures
range from approximately 1650°C to 3870°C.
• Detonation pressure PD is generally expressed as a
function of the velocity of detonation D and density ρ of
the explosives as,
PD = 0.25 × ρ × D2 (2.9)
where PD ( PCJ) – in GPa,
ρ – density of an initial explosive in g/cm3 and
D ( DCJ) – in km/s.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.2.2 Pressure of detonation (cont.)
• Similarly as velocity of detonation, detonation pressure

increases with
 increasing diameter of borehole (confinement),
 stronger surrounding rock and
 higher density of explosive.
• The best correction would be made for Pc in the form
2
 c 
Pc  Pi    (2.10)
 i 
where Pc and ρc are corrected detonation pressure
and density of explosive, and
Pi and ρi are initial pressure of detonation and
density of explosive (in GPa and g/cm3).
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.2.3 Critical diameter
• Side losses cause steady-state detonation velocity to

decrease in the non-ideal region.
• With decreasing diameter, they eventually become so
dominant that a point is reached where steady-state
detonation cannot be maintained.
• At this point detonation fails;
it either suddenly slows down to below the sound speed
in the unreacted explosive or
stops altogether.
 Compare 1.3.2.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.2.3 Critical diameter (cont.)
• This point is called the failure diameter, df, it is also

called the critical diameter, dcr (Øcr).
• Failure diameter is strongly affected by
 confinement,
 particle size,
 initial density, and
 ambient temperature
of the unreacted explosive.
• With increasing the initial or ambient temperature of the
explosive df decreases. This effect is true for all
explosives.
• Decreasing particle or grain size also decreases df. The
trend is still the same for all explosive.
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.2.3 Critical diameter (cont.)
• The effect of initial density on df is not the same in all

explosives, nor at all densities.
• For most single-component high explosives (HE), such as
RDX, HMX, TNT etc., the df decreases with increasing
density.
• The second group of explosives, primarily those that
contain large amounts of ammonium nitrate (AN), behave
exactly the opposite in respect to density. Within these
explosives, df increases with increasing density
(see Fig. 2.1).
Contents
GOTO 2.
Fig. 2.1. Failure diameter versus initial density for

ANFO explosives at different grain sizes. [Ref.4]
Contents
2.2.4 Detonation parameters for selected GOTO 2.
explosives
• The detonation pressure was calculated from the

experimental values of density and velocity of detonation
 Compare the equation 2.9.
• The results of calculations are arranged in Table 2.1.
Contents
GOTO 2.
Table 2.1. Detonation parameters for selected explosives.

[Ref.1]
Density VOD Pressure Q

Explosive
g/cm3 m/s GPa MJ/kg
ANFO 0.81 3600 2.7 3.89

Emulsion 1.19 5800 10.0 4.1
Gelatin Dynamite 1.4 6100 13.0 4.26
Composition B (RDX/TNT) 1.6 7900 25.1 4.8
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.3 Test methods for explosives
2.3.1 Impact sensitivity test (Fallhammer apparatus)

• A sample of the tested explosive is subjected to the
action of a drop weight.
• The parameter to be determined is the mass of the drop
weight and the drop height (i.e. impact energy) at which
the initiation of the sample may occur.
• The BAM Impact Apparatus is presented in Figure 2.2.
Contents
GOTO 2.
Fig. 2.2. BAM impact sensitivity apparatus [Ref.11]
Contents
GOTO 2.
2.3.2 Friction sensitivity test
• Friction is created electromechanically between the

cylindrical porcelain pistil and the plate bearing the
sample.
• The mass of the weight and its position on the loading
arm determine the loading on the pistil (i.e. the normal
force between the porcelain plate and pistil).
• The BAM Friction Sensitivity Apparatus is shown in
Figure 2.3.
Contents
GOTO 2.
Fig. 2.3. BAM friction sensitivity apparatus. [Ref.11]
Contents
2.3.3 Transmission of detonation in open air GOTO 2.
test
• The term transmission of detonation or sympathetic

detonation denotes the phenomenon of initiation of an
explosive charge by the detonation of a neighboring
charge (this definition is valid for gases, liquids and solid
media).
• The method is based on the determination of the
distance between the donor and the acceptor of charge
of given masses at which transmission of failure of
detonation occurs (see Figure 2.4).
Contents
GOTO 2.
Fig. 2.4. Test setup for the determination of transmission

of detonation through the air. [Ref.11]
Contents
2.3.4 Lead block test ( for determination of GOTO 2.
the strength of explosives), Trauzl test
• This test consists in the determination of the expansion,

or volume increase, that is produced by the detonation of
a tested explosive charge in the cavity of a lead block of
a defined quality and size.
• The strength of the tested explosive also may be
expressed as a relative strength with respect to a
selected reference explosive.
• The lead block test configuration is given in Figure 2.5.
Contents
GOTO 2.
Fig. 2.5. Lead block test setup. [Ref.11]
Contents
2.3.5 Ballistic mortar test (for determination GOTO 2.
of the strength of explosives)
• A massive steel mortar enclosed by a “projectile”

(weight) is suspended from the pendulum axis by a long
pendulum arm.
• The explosive charge of a given mass is initiated in the
mortar cavity. Under the action of the detonation
products, the projectile is ejected out of the mortar,
whereas due to the counteracting force, the mortar is
swung from its position.
• The maximum swing of the mortar is recorded, and it
serves for the calculation of the strength of the explosive
tested.
• The ballistic mortar is illustrated in Figure 2.6.
Contents
GOTO 2.
Fig. 2.6. Ballistic mortar. [Ref.11]
4. Charges
References
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables
Contents
3.1 Detonation process in solid material GOTO 3.1

3.1.1 Formation of shock and stress waves GOTO 3.1.1
3.1.2 Interfaces. Acoustic impedance GOTO 3.1.2
3.1.3 Processes at the interfaces GOTO 3.1.3
3.1.4 Zones around the borehole. Dependence on
properties of material GOTO 3.1.4
3.2 Wave propagation in solid material GOTO 3.2
3.2.1 P and S waves. R and L surface (seismic) waves
GOTO 3.2.1
3.2.2 Nuclei (stress wave/flaw) theory GOTO 3.2.2
3.2.3 Vibrations. Surface movements GOTO 3.2.3
3.2.4 Air blast GOTO 3.2.4
Contents
3.1 Detonation process in solid material

3.1.1 Formation of shock and stress waves
(27 slides)
• Basic knowledge of waveAcoustic
3.1.2 Interfaces. transmission. Shock and stress wave
impedance
propagation through solid environment is described.
• Breaking3.1.3 Processes
of material at the
in zones interfacesthe borehole is described.
surrounding
3.1.4 Zones around the borehole. Dependence on
properties of material
3.2 Wave propagation in solid material
3.2.1 P and S waves. R and L surface (seismic) waves
(44 slides)
• Two types
3.2.2ofNuclei
body waves
(stressand two types of
wave/flaw) surface waves are
theory
identified.
3.2.3 Vibrations. Surface movements
• Interaction of various types of waves with solid material is
explained. It isAir
3.2.4 concluded
blast that gas pressurized radial fracturing is a
minor contributor to the overall fragmentation of rock mass.
• Problems related to vibrations and prediction of vibrations are
described.
Contents
GOTO 3.
3.1 Detonation process in solid material
• The effect of confinement, such as by a borehole wall,

influences the detonation velocity.
• Fig. 3.1 shows a detonation
in a readily compressible medium
(air, water, soft rock, or porous rock).
Note how the rarefaction

wave reduces the primary
reaction zone.
Contents
GOTO 3.
Fig. 3.1. A detonation in readily compressible

medium. [Ref.6]
Contents
3.1 Detonation process in solid material GOTO 3.
(cont.)
• As the expanding gases compress such material, energy

is lost rapidly and pressure and temperature drop sharply
in the reaction products.
 These loses are communicated to the interior of the
reaction zone as a rarefaction wave, lowering the
pressure and reaction rate, and ultimately removing
support for the propagation of the detonation front.
• This results in a detonation velocity lower than the ideal,
and a greater curvature of the shock front.
 If the diameter is close to the critical diameter, the
detonation may fail.
Contents
3.1 Detonation process in solid material GOTO 3.
(cont.)
• If the confining burden is relatively incompressible

(hard massive rock), the rarefaction wave is weaker and
a primary reaction zone at high pressure and temperature
supports the shock front. See Fig. 3.2.
• The minimum diameter to maintain a stable detonation
will obviously be smaller for such a heavy confinement.
Note that the weaker

rarefaction wave increases the
primary reaction zone.
Contents
GOTO 3.
Fig. 3.2. A detonation in an incompressible

medium. [Ref.6]
Contents
GOTO 3.
3.1.1 Formation of shock and stress waves
• In typical hole load configuration detonation progresses

along the column and the detonation shock wave is
entering into the surrounding medium adjacent to the
borehole wall.
 In other words, the shock and stress wave are
propagating throughout the rock mass.
• This disturbance or emitted pressure wave transmitted
through the rock mass results, in part, from the rapidly
expanding high-pressure gas impacting the borehole wall.
 The geometry of dispersion depends on many
factors, such as the location of the initiation point (or
points), detonation velocity, and shock wave velocity
in the rock etc.
Contents
3.1.1 Formation of shock and stress waves GOTO 3.
(cont.)
• The stress wave propagation geometry is dependent

on the shape of the charge in the borehole.
 If the charge is short, with a length to diameter ratio
of less than or equal to 6:1, then the disturbance is
propagated in the form of an expanding sphere.
 If the charge is long, with a length to diameter ratio of
greater than 6:1, then the disturbance is propagated
in the form of an expanding cylinder.
 In reality, close to the shot hole, strain wave
propagation is neither perfectly spherical nor
cylindrical but more like that shown in Fig. 3.3.
Contents
GOTO 3.
Fig. 3.3. Section through face during detonation

showing expanding stress wave front. [Ref.1]
Contents
(cont.)
• The pressure next to the borehole wall will rise quite

quickly to its peak and then rapidly decay exponentially.
 The quick decay is due to cavity expansion of the
borehole and increased gas cooling.
• Cavity expansion around the borehole can occur
 through crushing, pulverization,
 and for displacement of material
and can range
 anywhere from about 1 to 3 hole diameter,
 depending on the medium and explosive used.
• Extensive compressive, shear, and tensile failure occurs
as a region of pulverized material
 since the wave energy is at its maximum near the
borehole wall.
Contents
(cont.)
• As the stress wave front proceeds outward, it has

tendency to compress the material at the wave front
through a volume change.
• At right angles to this compressive front, there exists
another component, referred to as tangential (or “hoop”)
stress.
 The tangential, if large enough, can cause tensile
failures at right angles to the direction of propagation.
This tangential wave changes a shape of material.
• The largest tensile failures are expected to occur close to
the borehole where the tangential stress is high enough
for failure to occur.
• Both the compressive and tensile components of the
wave decay with distance from the borehole.
Contents
GOTO 3.
3.1.2 Interfaces. Acoustic impedance
• When the compressive wave front encounters a

discontinuity or interface,
 some of energy is transferred across the
discontinuity and
 some is reflected back to its point of origin.
• For the most part, the partitioning of energy depends on
the ratio of the acoustic impedance of the material on
either side of the interface,
as is illustrated in Figure 3.4.
Contents
GOTO 3.
Fig. 3.4.Final15/10/2010
Interaction of stress waves at an interface. [Ref.1]
Slide 78
Contents
GOTO 3.
3.1.2 Interfaces. Acoustic impedance (cont.)
• The acoustic impedance, Za, for any material is defined

as:
Za = ρ × c (3.1)
where
Za – acoustic impedance
ρ – density of material
c – sonic velocity of material
• At an interface of materials 1
and 2, ratio of acoustic
impedances Z1/Z2 determines
the interaction of stress
waves. See Fig. 3.4.
Contents
GOTO 3.
• When the ratio of acoustic impedance of material 1 to

material 2 is less than 1,
some of the wave energy is transferred into material 2
and some is reflected back,
but both waves remain compressive.
• When the impedance ratio is greater than 1,
then some of the energy gets transferred into material 2
as a compressive wave and
the remaining energy gets reflected at the interface as a
tensile wave.
• When the acoustic impedance ratio is 1,
all of the energy is transferred into material 2
and no reflected wave occurs.
Contents
GOTO 3.
• When a compressive wave traveling through rock

encounters an interface such as a free face,
nearly all of the energy will be reflected back
as a tensile wave.
• If the burden distance between the free face and
explosive column is relatively small in contrast to normal
burdens for a chosen explosive,
then most of the energy is consumed in spalling
at the free face.
 Note: The reflected tensile waves can be formed in
cohesive material (soil, rock) only. This tensile waves
are not formed in non-cohesive surroundings as air,
water, dry sand etc.
Contents
GOTO 3.
3.1.3 Processes at the interface
• During and/or after stress wave propagation,

the high-pressure, high-temperature gases
impart a stress field around the borehole that can
 expand the original borehole,
 extend radial cracks, and
 jet into any discontinuity.
• It is during this phase that some controversy exists over
the main mechanism of fragmentation.
Contents
GOTO 3.
3.1.3 Processes at the interface (cont.)
Mechanism of fragmentation:
• In many cases, it is the gases that have jetted into
discontinuities and the fracture network
 that is either fully developed or being developed,
along with the impulse imparted to the material
by the detonation,
that are responsible for the displacement of broken
material.
Contents
GOTO 3.
• It is not clear as to the exact travel paths that gases take

within the rock mass,
although it is agreed that
they will always take the path of least resistance.
• It means that gases will first migrate into existing cracks,
joints, faults, and discontinuities,
in addition to seams of material
that exhibit low cohesion
or bonding at interfaces.
Contents
GOTO 3.
• If a discontinuity or seam between borehole and free face

is sufficiently large, the high-pressure gases will
immediately vent to the atmosphere, rapidly reducing the
total confinement pressures, which will result in reduced
displacement of broken and fragmented material.
• It is evident that only suitably burdened and well-
confined charges can deliver their full potential of
additional gas extension fracturing and mass
movement.
Contents
3.1.4 Zones around the borehole. GOTO 3.
Dependence on properties of material
• The degree of damage

and fracturing around a
borehole can be
characterized by four
zones, as illustrated in
Figure 3.5.
Contents
GOTO 3.
Fig. 3.5. Zones of rupture radius. [Ref.1]

Contents
Dependence on properties of material (cont.)
1. In the crushed zone immediately around the borehole,

the explosive-induced pressures and stresses exceed the
dynamic compressive strength of the rock by factors
ranging from 40 to 400.
• These high pressures acting against the borehole wall
will crush, pulverize, and shatter the surrounding rock
mass causing intense damage.
• This zone is also referred to as the hydrodynamic zone in
which the elastic rigidity of the rock become insignificant.
Contents
2. Next to the crushed zone is a region defined by a

severely fractured zone referred to as the nonlinear
zone.
• Here fracturing can range from severe crushing, through
partial fracturing, to plastic deformation.
• Extension of cracks can occur from previously formed
crack by the tangential component of the shock wave,
from infiltration of gas pressure, and at flaw sites.
Contents
3.,4. In zones 3 and 4 (elastic zones), tensile failures and

crack extensions occur in a less intense mode, because
the stress wave amplitude has attenuated significantly
(much of the original energy from the detonation has
been consumed in the form of heat, friction, and
fracturing in zones 1 and 2).
• The peak amplitude of the compressive stress is now
much smaller than the compressive strength of the rock,
so no new fractures are likely in this wave type.
• However, the tangential stress component
of the wave is still substantially larger than
the tensile strength of the rock. This stress
is large enough to cause radial fractures.
Contents
5. In zone 5 the individual particles of the medium will

oscillate and vibrate about their rest positions within the
elastic limits of the rock so no permanent damage
results.
• It is this region where seismic waves are carried
considerable distances and are responsible for ground
vibrations.
Contents
• Table 3.1 gives an idea of the degree of maximum

damage found around the crushed and fractured zones in
terms of charge radii
for a number of conditions.
 For a given explosive, the rupture radius is greater in
soft rock than in hard rock.
 Given the same rock, the rupture radius is greater for
higher strength explosives than for lower strength
ones.
• Thus, the degree of radial rupture is influenced by the
explosive, material properties, and structure.
Contents
GOTO 3.
Table 3.1. Degree of damage around a borehole

in terms of charge radii. [Ref.1]
Material or rock Radius of damage in

Explosive
type charge radii
Dynamite (60%) Shale 45 – 55
ANFO Shale 15 – 22
Dynamite (60%) Pyroclastic 20 – 30
ANFO Granite 14
Contents
GOTO 3.
3.2 Wave propagation in solid material
3.2.1 P and S waves. R and L surface waves
• The main seismic wave types are

 Compressional (P),
 Shear (S),
 Rayleigh (R), and
 Love (L) waves.
Contents
3.2.1 P and S waves. R and L surface waves GOTO 3.
(cont.)
• P and S waves are often called body waves because

they propagate outward in all direction from a source
(such a detonation) and travel through the interior of the
Earth.
• R and L waves are surface waves and propagate
approximately parallel to the Earth’s surface.
• This waves we will show using 3-D geometry for area of a
elastic deformation;
of course, when strength of wave is greater than elastic
limit of material a plastic deformation is formed.
Contents
(cont.)
• Compressional (primary, longitudinal) wave P has a

typical velocity 5 – 7 km/s in Earth’s crust, ~ 1.5 km/s in
water and ~ 0.3 km/s in air.
 Particle motion is parallel to the direction of
propagation.
 See Fig. 3.6.
• Shear (secondary, transverse) wave S has a typical
velocity 3 – 4 km/s in Earth’s crust. They do not travel
through fluids, so do not exist in water or air.
 Particle motion is perpendicular to the direction of
propagation.
 See Fig 3.7.
Contents
GOTO 3.
Deformation propagates. Particle motion consists of alternating
compression and dilation. Particle motion is parallel to the direction of
propagation. Material returns to its original shape after wave passes.
Fig. 3.6. Compressional (P) wave simulation. [Ref.7]

The deformation (a temporary elastic disturbance) pro- Contents
GOTO 3.
pagates. Particle motion consists of alternating trans-
verse motion. Particle motion is perpendicular to the
direction of propagation. The transverse particle motion shown here is vertical
but can be in any direction; however the Earth’s approximately horizontal
layers tend to cause mostly SV (in the vertical plane) or horizontal (SH) shear
motions. Material returns to its original shape after the wave passes.
Fig. 3.7. Shear (S) wave simulation. [Ref.7]

Contents
(cont.)
• Rayleigh (R) wave (surface wave) has a typical velocity

2 – 4.2 km/s.
 The motion of particles is both in the direction of
propagation and perpendicular (in a vertical plane);
the motion is generally elliptical Material returns to its
original shape after the wave passes.
 See Fig. 3.8.
• Love, (L), wave (surface wave) has a typical velocity 2 –
4.4 km/s.
 It has transverse horizontal motion of particles,
perpendicular to the direction of propagation.
 See Fig. 3.9.
Contents
The deformation (a temporary elastic disturbance) propaga- GOTO 3.
tes. Particle motion consists of elliptical motions (generally
retrograde elliptical as shown in the fig.) in the vertical plane
and parallel to the direction of propagation. Amplitude decreases with
depth. Material returns to its original shape after the wave passes.
Fig. 3.8. Rayleigh (R) wave simulation. [Ref.7]

Contents
GOTO 3.
Deformation propagates. Particle motion consists of alternating
transverse motions. Particle motion is horizontal and perpendicular to
the direction of propagation (transverse). Amplitude decreases
with depth. Material returns to its original shape after wave passes.
Fig. 3.9. Love (L) wave simulation. [Ref.7]

Contents
(cont.)
Comparison of body and surface waves [Ref.7]:

Contents
GOTO 3.
3.2.2 Nuclei (stress wave/flaw) theory
• The theoretical bases of blasting started after World War

II with the simple reflection theory, then gas expansion
theory, stress waves and gas expansion theory, and
eventually the nuclei or stress wave/flaw theory.
 The last one is engaged in the following text.
• Nuclei theory was formulated on laboratory tests by
simulating many of the geologic structures and
discontinuities (joints, fractures, bedding planes) typically
found in large-scale bench blasting.
• Results showed that stress waves were quite important in
the fragmentation process and caused a substantial
amount of crack initiation at regions rather remote from
the borehole.

Contents
GOTO 3.
3.2.2 Nuclei (stress wave/flaw) theory (cont.)
• The theoretical and actual mechanisms of stress wave

propagation and interaction in flawed medium are quite
complex.
• They involve many aspects such as:
 detonation and crack nucleation around borehole
 crushed zone extension
 dynamic crack stability
 activation of flaws
 coalescence of wave velocities and strains
 branching of crack
 interaction of cracks and reflected wave systems
 instability of crack direction
 random progressive failure

Contents
GOTO 3.
• In relatively simple terms, the important points of the

theory are explained in Fig. 3.10.

Contents
GOTO 3.
Fig. 3.10. Nuclei theory. [Ref.1]

Contents
GOTO 3.
• In unflawed material, only 8 to 12 dominant cracks

emerge from a dense radial network around the borehole.
• These dominant cracks can travel significant distances
and consequently form large pie-shaped segments that
alone are not conducive for good fragmentation.
• Stress waves continuing away from the fracture zone
around the borehole result in no further damage.

Contents
GOTO 3.
• In flawed material or sections of the material that contain

flaws, fragmentation is quite different.
• Consider the P and S waves pro-
pagating away from the fracture
network around the borehole
(Fig. 3.10b,c).
• No fracturing takes place until
the flaw (joint plane) is initiated
by the P wave tail and the leading
front of the S wave (Fig. 3.10c).
• The remainder of the S wave has
sufficient energy to keep the crack
from arresting.

Contents
GOTO 3.
• A similar effect occurs as the P and S waves move past

the small flaw between the joint plane and the free face
(Fig. 3.10d).
• It is important to note that cracks
are initiated at flaw sites remote
from borehole region by the com-
bined action of the P wave tail
and the S wave front.
• Flaws initiated in the immediate
borehole vicinity of these waves
have only a small effect.
• Note also that the outward directed
P and S waves can initiate flaws anywhere independent
of the presence of a free surface.

Contents
GOTO 3.
• When a P wave encounters a

free face (Fig. 3.10d,e), it is
reflected and travels back into the
medium as a tensile wave to
meet the outcoming S wave.
• At this stage, constructive
interference can occur, which
allows for further crack initiation
or extension of cracks previously
formed.

Contents
GOTO 3.
• New wave systems

(PP, PS, SP, SS, PP, and S,
PS, and S) will also form from
original outgoing wave system
upon reflection at a free surface
or discontinuity.
• These new wave systems can
also contribute to crack
extension.
• Fig. 3.10f,g illustrate further
crack extensions when all wave
systems have been reflected
back toward hole.

Contents
GOTO 3.
The important points of the nuclei or stress wave/flaw theory

are:
• The fracture network spreads with the speed of the P and
S waves, which initiate fracture around flaws remote from
borehole.
• In highly flawed material, fragmentation results from the
nucleation of new cracks at flaws and reinitiation of old
cracks from the reflected stress wave systems.
• Gas pressurization does not contribute significantly
to the fragmentation process.

Contents
GOTO 3.
The use of explosives has an unwanted side effect in

the form of sounds and vibrations.
 The most common concern about these sounds and
vibrations is the perception of them by the occupants
of houses in the vicinity of the work.
• In order to reduce damage claims, explosives user
 keeps complete records of his operations,
 monitors vibrations and airblast,
 does what he can to inform the public, and
 minimizes drilling noise, dust, traffic noise, and other
perceptible effect.
One of the most valuable means of informing the public and proving
absence of damage is the careful inspection of residences prior to the
beginning of a project, for comparison to their conditions at a later date.

Contents
GOTO 3.
• The simplest form of vibration is the simple harmonic

movement, often called a sine (sinusoidal) vibration
x(t )  A sin(t   )
• where A is the displacement amplitude,  is the
angular frequency, t is the time, and  is the phase
angle.
• For many practical applications, the phase angle has
little significance. The vibration can then be
characterized by two parameters: the amplitude and
the frequency.

Contents
GOTO 3.
3.2.3 Vibrations. Surface movements (cont.)
Ground vibrations
• When a charge is detonated in a solid medium like rock,
a family of waves is generated.
 The waves in one group are called body waves,
which travel through the “body” of the material, as
well as on the surface.
 The waves in another group are called surface
waves, which travel only along the surface.
 Compare Section 3.2.1.
• At great distances from the source the differences in their
arrival times can make a noticeable difference in the
duration of perceived vibration.
• Figure 3.11 shows hypothetical seismograms illustrating
the spreading of waves.

Contents
GOTO 3.
Fig. 3.11. Hypothetical seismograms illustrating

P wave, S wave and R wave forms at
(1) intermediate distance,
(2) large distance. [Ref.6]

Contents
GOTO 3.
• The body waves arrive first. The fastest is a

compressional wave or P wave. The P waves will often
have the highest frequency and the smallest
displacement.
• The shear waves or S waves travel at roughly 3/5 the
velocity of the P waves. The S waves will usually have
lower frequencies and larger displacements than the P
waves.
• Last to arrive are the surface waves. The most prominent
and common of surface waves is a Rayleigh wave or
R wave. Typically, R waves travel at about 0.9 times the
velocity of the S waves. The surface waves will usually
have the lowest frequency and the largest displacement.

Contents
GOTO 3.
Factors discussed in relation to prediction graphs and formulae:

• Charge size
 Small charges will generate vibrations with
higher frequencies and smaller displacement.
 Large charges will generate vibrations with
lower frequencies and larger displacement.
• Site geology
 If the area around the blasting site is rocky, with shallow
soil cover, the vibration will be characterized by relatively
higher frequencies and smaller displacement.
 If the area around the blasting site has a deep covering of soil
(such as in an alluvial valley), the vibrations will be characte-
rized by relatively lower frequencies and larger displacement.
• Type of explosive
 There is not a large range in energy output for the most com-
mon commercial explosives, usually less than about 10-20%.
Contents
GOTO 3.
• Vibration intensity
 The explosive user only Variables of interest
needs to know the maxi- include:
mum charge weight per  maximum charge
delay and the distance to weight detonating at
the location of interest. one time
 If the charge per delay is  true distance (distance
relatively small for the the waves must travel)
distance involved, it is  geological conditions
indeed true that vibration  confinement
will not be potentially  physical properties of
damaging. the rock
 However, there are other  coupling
variables, which have an  spatial distribution
effect on either the  detonator timing scatter
intensity or the character  time of energy release
of the vibrations.     type of explosive

Contents
GOTO 3.
Propagation velocity and particle velocity

• A seismic wave such as a P wave will travel at different
velocities through different materials.
 These may be called wave propagation velocities,
wave transmission velocities, or simply seismic
wave velocities.
• We are interested also in another kind of velocity, that is,
the velocity at which the ground surface moves as a wave
passes under it.
 That velocity is called particle velocity and its
maximum value is called peak particle velocity.
• As seismic waves travel through an area, they generate
particle motions that we call vibrations.

Contents
GOTO 3.
• At the present time, the standard of practice is to use

peak particle velocity to express the intensity of ground
vibrations from blasting. The particle velocity is usually
reported in centimeters or millimeters per second
(cm/s or mm/s).
 Today, most of the seismographs used for blast
monitoring respond to particle velocity.
• For sinusoidal motion, the following relationships apply:
V  6.28  f  A (3.2)
A  V / 6.28  f
where V is the peak particle velocity,
f is the frequency in Hertz (Hz = cycles per second),
A is the displacement.

Contents
GOTO 3.
Decay of vibration intensity

• Like all force fields, seismic waves die out or decay with
distance. This decay is often called attenuation.
• Because we normally use particle velocity as a measure
of the intensity of blasting vibrations, it is to our benefit
that particle velocity is less sensitive to changes in
geological conditions than acceleration or displacement,
hence is more consistent and more predictable.
 Even though the exact vibration intensity of the next
blast may not be known, average values and upper
bound values are well known.

Contents
GOTO 3.
• The combined wave motion (ground vibration) from

typical blasting in most geological setting will die out
to about 1/3 of its former value each time the
distance is doubled.
 For example, at 61 m the vibration is about 1/3 as
intense as it is at 30 m.
 At 122 m , it is about 1/3 as intense as it is at 61 m
and about 1/9 as intense as at 30 m.
• The same relationship hold in reverse, also.
• Although the exact relationship can vary, the results are
usually close to these.

Contents
GOTO 3.
Normalizing data
• We can learn what a large blast and a small blast have in
common if we normalize the data.
 Normalizing data is combining two or more variables
to a common base in order to reduce the number of
variables
 The most common way of combining distance and
explosives energy is to divide the true distance by
the square root of the maximum charge weight
per delay, obtaining a number, which is called
normalized distance or scaled distance.
• This concept is reasonable and acceptable.
 We can expect just about the same vibration
intensity (the same particle velocity), although the
frequency characteristics of the two blast will be
different (we will see a lower frequency from
the large blast at a large distance).
Contents
GOTO 3.
Predicting the intensity

• In most cases, the peak particle velocity (mm/s) is used
to express what vibrations can be expected or what
vibrations the actual object can withstand without being
damaged when blasting is carried out.
• Three methods of prediction are given further:
1. Figure 3.12 shows the range of vibrations expected from

typical blasting operations.
• With experience, the user can learn to predict whether
the vibrations from future blasting are likely to be of
relatively low, medium or high intensity.

Contents
GOTO 3.
Fig. 3.12.
Ground
vibrations
from
blasting.
[Ref.6]

Contents
GOTO 3.
• To use the graph 3.12, we must first determine the scaled

distance.
 Suppose a blast will consist of 10 holes, each loaded
with 11.4 kg and that each hole will detonate
separately, at 25 ms intervals. The distance of
interest is 30.5 m.
 We can now determine the scaled distance, which is
the true distance (30.5 m) divided by the square root
of the maximum charge weight per
delay (11.4kg). Therefore, the
scaled distance is 9.04 m/kg1/2.
• Now we can go to the graph, find a
scaled distance of 9.04 on the hori-
zontal axis (in metric units, at the top)
and project a vertical line until it inter-
sect the prediction lines on the graph.

Contents
GOTO 3.
• Usually, we will be interested in knowing the upper

bound for typical down-hole blasting, which means that
about 90% of the time (at random sites) the vibration will
not exceed this amount. From the point where that line is
intersected, we draw a horizontal line to the vertical axis
(on the right) and find
2 in/s  50 mm/s as our prediction.
• That is, for a scaled distance of 9.04
we would expect the peak particle
velocity to remain at or below 50 mm/s
about of the time for typical down-hole
blasting for most sites.

Contents
GOTO 3.
2. A general equation for a peak particle velocity V is

1.6
 D 
V  H   1/ 2  (3.3)
W 
where V is in mm/s, D (distance) is in m, W is in kg and
H is “H factor”.
 Some of the reference values of H (in metric units)
are:
A lower bound for typical data: H = 172
Average value for typical data: H = 1140
Upper bound for typical data: H = 1725
Common bound for typical data: H = 4316
• Table 3.2 shows the examples of charge
estimated for different vibration limits.
Contents
GOTO 3.
Table 3.2. Predicted

charge per delay
in metric units
for an “Average
vibration”.
[Ref.6]

Contents
GOTO 3.
3. The investigations made show that a usable empirical

relationship between particle velocity v, weight of
charge W, and the distance R is
K
v 
 R  (3.4)
 W
 
where the constants K and  vary with the foundation
conditions, blasting geometry, and type of explosives.
• To use the empirical formula 3.4 to reliably predict the
vibration level for a determined distance, the constants
K and  should have been determined by test blasting
in vicinity of the blasting place.

Contents
GOTO 3.
Significance of 8 ms delay interval

• It has become a common practice in various regulations
to consider the maximum charge weight per delay that
which detonates within any given 8 ms time interval.
• This practice apparently dates to the early 1960’s
following a U.S. Bureau of Mines report of tests with
delay intervals of 9, 17, and 34 ms. The tests showed
them to be effective in reducing vibrations, but no tests
were conducted at that time with delays of shorter
interval.
• Later tests found 5 ms delays also to be effective.

Contents
GOTO 3.
Vibration limits
• Because the lower frequencies, larger displacements,
and longer durations tend to generate a stronger
response in buildings, there is a common misconception
that they are inherently damaging, regardless of intensity.
• What is true is that we should place more restrictive limits
on vibrations with low frequencies and long durations.
Example:
• Restrict the ground vibrations to a peak particle velocity
of 1.0 ips (25.4 mm/s) for distances in the range of 301 to
5000 ft (92 to 1524 m) where frequencies fall in the range
of 2 to 15 Hz.
• This is one half of the commonly accepted residential
vibration limit of 2.0 ips (50.8 mm/s) for blasting vibrations
which are characterized by higher frequencies.
Final15/10/2010 ips = inch per second Slide 133
Contents
GOTO 3.
Methods to reduce the vibration transmission to

building
• The vibrations (vertical) are damped when passing from
the ground to the building. The damping increases when
the foundation depth increases. The transmission number
decreases when the frequency increases (i.e. the
wavelength decreases).
• Generally, the particle velocity is lower in the foundation
of the building than in the ground. Intensification of
vibrations may occur higher in the building dependent
upon the occurrence of resonance.
charge
• By making a slot between the vibration
slot
source and the affected building object,
it is possible to further dampen the vi-
brations before they reach the building.

Contents
GOTO 3.
3.2.4 Air blast
• One undesirable side effect of blasting operations is the

generation of air blast. Air blast is the common term for
pressure waves in air emanating from explosion.
• Noise is the audible part of the air blast. It has
frequencies from 20 to 20 000 Hz.
• When an explosive charges detonates in air, the resulting
shock wave has a steep shock front (overpressure, P0),
followed by a rapidly decreasing pressure.

Contents
GOTO 3.
3.2.4 Air blast (cont.)
• Propagation of air blast waves is preferable reported as a

function of distance R, normalized using the cube root of
the charge mass W (scaled distance z)
z = R/(W1/3)
• By representing the specific wave values for pressure,
momentum, and duration as a function of the scaled
distance z, it is possible to compare these values with
each other.
• Typical profile of an air/blast wave is given in Figure 3.13.

Contents
GOTO 3.
Fig. 3.13. Typical profile of an air/blast wave. [Ref.4]

4. Charges
References
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables

Contents
4. Charges
4.1 Approach to the calculation of charges GOTO 4.1
4.2 Geometry Effects GOTO 4.2
4.2.1 Degree of Fixation GOTO 4.2.1
4.2.2 Size Relations GOTO 4.2.2
4.3 Specific charge GOTO 4.3
4.4 Charge calculations for several holes GOTO 4.4
4.4.1 Influence of Explosive Performance GOTO 4.4.1
4.4.2 Rock Constant GOTO 4.4.2
4.5 Calculation of burden GOTO 4.5
4.5.1 Burden for high benches GOTO 4.5.1
4.5.2 Examples GOTO 4.5.2
4.5.3 Burden depending on the bench height GOTO 4.5.3
4.6 Inclusion of additional effects GOTO 4.6
4.6.1 Drilling Deviations GOTO 4.6.1
4.6.2 Swelling GOTO 4.6.2
4.6.3 Practical Burden GOTO 4.6.3
4.7 Shaped Charges GOTO 4.7
4.7.1 Conical-shaped charges GOTO 4.7.1
4.7.2 Linear-shaped charges GOTO 4.7.2
Contents
4. Charges (2+25 slides)  Formula for calculation of concentrated

charge weight from burden is derived.
4.1 Approach to the calculation of charges
4.2 Geometry Effects
• Describes
4.2.1how
Degree of Fixation
breaking capacity changes when the concentrated charge is
replaced by the
4.2.2 elongated
Size Relationsone. Introduces the terms ‚sub drilling‘, ‚linear
charge concentration‘, ‚bottom charge‘, ‚column charge‘.
4.3 Specific charge (10 slides)  Specific charge as a function of burden.

4.4 Charge calculations for several holes
4.4.1
(14 slides) Influence of Explosive Performance
 Calculation formula is modified for several elongated charges.
4.4.2 of
The strength Rock Constant
explosive and rock constant are used.
4.5 Calculation of burden
4.5.1
(13 slides) Burden for high benches
 Maximum burden is calculated for various heights of bench.
4.5.2 Examples 4.5.3 Burden depending on the bench height
4.6 Inclusion of additional effects
4.6.1 Consideration
(12 slides) Drilling Deviations
of drilling deviations and swelling leads to the
4.6.2 Swelling
introduction of term ‚practical burden‘.
4.6.3 Practical Burden
4.7 Shaped Charges
4.7.1
(4 slides) Conical-shaped charges
 Basic information about conical and linear shaped charges.
4.7.2 Linear-shaped charges
Contents
GOTO 4.
4.1 Approach to the calculation of charges
• The charge calculation is the engineering design of the

blasting round. We evaluate and weigh all the factors that
influence the blasting fragmentation such as
 the type of rock mass and its strength and density,
 the available drillhole diameter,
 the depth of drilling,
 the burden and the spacing,
 the properties of the particular type of explosive
selected, and
 the time interval delay detonator system available.
• The ultimate composite charge calculation equations
become very complex when all the important factors are
considered.

Contents
4.1 Approach to the calculation of charges GOTO 4.
(cont.)
• Simplified formulae and even rules of thumb based on

experimental observations are sufficient for many
purposes.
• In order to successively outline the importance of each
factor upon the charge calculation, the variables will be
isolated one by one, to clarify how the blasting result is
affected as each variable changes.
• Finally, the variables will be connected to each other,
resulting in the basic equations of rock blasting.
 To get a proper understanding of rock blasting
engineering, the reader should not immediately
rush off to the final, simplified formulae, but first
try to understand each single step.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.2 Geometry effects
• The presence or absence of a free surface near the

charge profoundly influences the case with which the
charge can break loose and fragment the surrounding
rock.
 Without any nearby free surface, the charge can only
damage the rock immediately surrounding the
charge, hence no real fragmentation of the rock
takes place.
 If a charge is placed in a drillhole at the center of
a boulder, the entire boulder will be fragmented (if
the charge is large enough).
In the former case, we say that the charge is fixed.
In the latter case, the rock can expand freely in all directions.
• In this section, we will discuss a range of intermediate
cases.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.2.1 Degree of fixation
 The size of the charge, and the linear scale of the

rock mass to be fragmented by that charge, has an
important influence on the rock blasting capacity of a
given mass of explosive.
• If the possible motion of the rock surrounding a drillhole is
very constrained, such as
 when the distance between the drillhole and a free
surface is large
 or when the number of available free surfaces is low,
the explosive consumption for breaking loose the burden
can be very high.
• Conversely, when there are free surfaces available in all
directions from the drillhole, such as in boulder blasting,
very little explosive is needed to break the rock.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.2.1 Degree of fixation (cont.)
• Figure 4.1 illustrates a number of different geometries

and the corresponding relative charge weights needed for
breaking loose the rock.
• The burden, i.e., the distance from the charge to the
nearest free surface, has been kept constant in all these
examples.
• The relative charge weights differ considerably depending
on the geometry of the drillhole in relation to the free
surface(s).

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.1. Influence of

various geometries
upon required charge
weight for breaking
loose a burden of 1 m.
[Ref.5]

Contents
GOTO 4.
For example, the charge weight needed to blast out the

burden in crater blasting, where the drillhole is at right
angles to the single free surface, a charge weight between
2 and 20 times the charge weight used in common bench
blasting is needed.
Conversely in boulder blasting where there is a free surface
in all six directions, a charge size no greater than 25% of
that needed for common bench blasting is sufficient.
A comparison of the two examples A and C in Figure 4.1
shows that inclined holes break out the rock more easily
than vertical holes.
• This advantage with inclined holes can be used to increase the
burden and still keep the charge at the same level as for vertical
holes.
• Thus, much more rock can be removed per unit weight of
explosives and per unit length of drillhole.
• If the drilling equipment allows, it is often advantageous to use
inclined holes to reduce costs or improve fragmentation.
Contents
GOTO 4.
• For bench blasting with a fixed bottom, we can introduce

a fixation factor (= degree of fixation) f, which is defined
as a function of the hole inclination n
3
f  (0  n  1) (4.1)
3n
where the inclination n is given in m/m (horizontal meters
per vertical meter).
 n is thus the cotangent of the angle α between the
axis of the drillhole and its projection on the free
surface.
 α =90° is perpendicular to the free surface.
 n = 0 indicates a drillhole at right angles (α = 90°) to
the horizontal free surface.
 Note that the equation is only valid for holes inclined
45° to 90° relative to the free surface.
Contents
GOTO 4.
• Figure 4.2 shows how the inclination affects the fixation

factor. Empirically, it has been shown that the burden B
is proportional to the square root of the inverse of the
fixation factor f :
1
B (4.2)
f
• Thus, for the same mass of explosive, the larger n is (i.e.,
the more inclined away from the vertical the holes are)
the lower the fixation factor will be, and the larger the
burden.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.2. Fixation factor f as a function of the hole inclina-

tion n for bench blasting with a fixed bottom. [Ref.5]
Contents
GOTO 4.
4.2.2 Size relations
• As early as 1725, Belidor showed that one part of the

charge weight W0 used in blasting was proportional to the
volume excavated, and another part was proportional to
the surface area of that volume. This gives the
relationship
W 0 = k 2B 2 + k 3B 3 (4.3)
where B is the burden and the ki are constants to be
determined.
• Later, Langefors and Kihlström showed that the
concentrated charge needed for breaking the rock can be
expressed as a function of a power series by
n
W0   ki B i (4.4)
i 0

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.2.2 Size relations (cont.)
• Through calculations and experiments, they found that in

ordinary hard gneissy bedrock with geometrical
conditions as in Figure 4.3,
the charge weight can be given as
W 0 = a 2B 2 + a 3B 3 + a 4B 4 (4.5)
• Simply expressed,
the first term a2B 2 represents energy losses that arise as
new free surfaces are created,
the second term a3B 3 represents the consumption of
energy associated with the volume of rock removed and
the last term a4B 4 is the effect of gravity.

Contents
GOTO 4.
• The gravity term a4B 4 represents the energy needed to

move or lift the center of gravity of the rock being
removed against the force of gravity.
• This term is often called the swelling or throwing term
and must be taken into account separately depending on
the blast.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.3. The simple case of a concentrated charge

(W0) in a geometry with equal burden and
bench height (fixation factor = 1). [Ref.5]
Contents
GOTO 4.
• Practically all blasting operations are carried out with

elongated charges instead of concentrated charges.
 It is clearly more efficient to utilize a sizeable portion
of the length of the drillhole for charging with
explosive, rather than have a concentrated charge at
the bottom of an otherwise empty drillhole.
• Therefore, we need to understand what happens to the
breaking capacity if the concentrated charge W0 is
replaced by an elongated one of the same total weight.
• Intuitively, one would expect the breaking capacity to
decrease when the originally concentrated charge W0 is
distributed over hole length h.

Contents
GOTO 4.
• The decrease would happen if a given charge mass

were used in a drillhole of smaller diameter and it
does lead to a decrease in the burden. Figure 4.4 shows
schematically how the breaking capacity of a charge of a
given weight decreases with increasing charge length.
• Instead, if we keep the hole diameter constant and
increase the hole length, and at the same time we
observe how large (relative to the elongated charge) the
concentrated charge must be in order to perform the
same work the result shown in Figure 4.5 is obtained.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.4. Effect of breaking capacity for elongated

charges with equal weight. [Ref.5]
Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.5. Breaking capacity at the toe of

an elongated charge. [Ref.5]
Contents
GOTO 4.
• Figure 4.5 shows that, if the charge height increases from

zero to about 0.3B, there is no noticeable change in the
breaking capacity relative to that of a concentrated
charge with equal weight.
 Almost 100% of the charge with length 0.3B is useful
in obtaining breakage.
• When the charge height is increased to 0.5B,
 about 90% of that elongated charge weight is useful.
• At a charge height equal to the burden,
 only about 60% of that elongated charge is useful.
• Obviously then, it is not worthwhile to extend the
charge to a height greater than h = B since very little of
the extra energy supplied will be of use in breaking out
the rock at the toe.

Contents
GOTO 4.
• However it is possible to increase the breaking power by

subdrilling under the pit floor, thereby extending the
charge length into the subdrilling.
 A charge length of 0.3B placed below the pit floor is
utilized almost to 100%.
• In the region of the drillhole away from the bottom, the top
charge W corresponds to a concentrated charge equal to
0.6W and the subdrill charge 0.3W corresponds to a
concentrated charge equal to 0.3W.
 This implies that the total 1.3B long charge with
a weight of 1.3W has the same breaking power
as a concentrated charge with a weight of 0.9W.

Contents
GOTO 4.
• Thus, the elongated total bottom charge Wb is given by

the charge height and the linear charge concentration lb
(weight of explosive per borehole length) as
W = 1.3 ∙B ∙lb (4.6)
• This charge corresponds to a concentrated charge W0
with the weight
W = (0.6 + 0.3) ∙ lb = 0.9 ∙ lb ∙B (4.7)
• For calculation of the bottom charge for a single hole, the
linear charge concentration lb is flow given by combining
Equations 4.5 and 4.7.
0.9 ∙ lb ∙B = a2B 2 + a3B 3 + a4B 4 (4.8)
or
2
lb = 1.11(a2B + a3B + a4B ) 3 (4.9)

Contents
GOTO 4.
• Equations 4.6 and 4.9 give the bottom charge for a single
hole as
Wb = 1.3lb B  1.4(a2B 2 + a3B 3 + a4B 4) (4.10)
• Evaluation of test blasts has determined the coefficients
a2, a3 and a4 to be
a2 = 0.07 a3 = c a4 = 0.004 (4.11)
for B in meters and W in kilograms.
• The constant c corresponds to the amount of explosive
(kg/m3) needed for breaking loose the rock at the toe in a
defined blasting geometry. Since c depends on the type
of rock material in which the blasting is done, it was
therefore
called the rock constant.
c ranges from 0.2 to 0.6, with a typical value of 0.4.

Contents
GOTO 4.
• Early experiments had shown that a concentrated charge

can break the face up to a height above the pit floor equal
to the burden B.
• The equivalent extended bottom charge of length 1.3B
extending from a point 0.3B below the pit floor is able to
break both the toe and a bench height up to 2B above the
pit floor.
• Figure 4.6 shows such an arrangement.
• If the bench height is higher than twice the maximum
burden 2B, an additional charge (the column charge) will
be needed above the bottom charge to get satisfactory
breakage along the face.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.6. Favorable charge geometry for blasting

with elongated bottom charge. [Ref.5]
Contents
GOTO 4.
• For efficient utilization of the explosive charge, the

drillhole above the charge should be stemmed, i.e., filled
with coarse sand or crushed rock.
 (Often the drill cuttings are used, although a better
stemming effect is obtained with coarser material.)
 For small hole diameters (≤ 2.5 inch), it is sufficient if
the stemmed length hs is equal to B.
 For large hole diameter bench blasting in hard rock,
usually the stemmed/unloaded hole length has to be
smaller than B if satisfactory fragmentation is to be
achieved.
• A good rule of thumb, which gives satisfactory results for
large and small drillhole diameters, is to use a stemming
length equal to the square root of the maximum burden
(expressed in meters) plus 1 meter, that is, B  1.
Contents
GOTO 4.
• If the same type of explosive and the same linear charge

concentration is used for the bottom charge and the
column charge, the top part will be overcharged.
• Langefors and Kihlstrom confirmed, by test blasts in slabs
of granite that only 40% of the energy needed per meter
length of drillhole in the bottom charge is needed as a
column charge.
• This can be achieved by using smaller diameter
cartridges or an explosive with less energy per unit
volume for the column charge.
• Figure 4.7 shows such a charge distribution.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.7. Charge distribution with full bottom charge,

column charge, and unloaded hole length
at the top equal to burden B. [Ref.5]
Contents
GOTO 4.
4.3 Specific charge
In mining, it is common to use explosive consumption per

ton of ore as a measure of the blastability.
In civil engineering, it is common to use explosive
consumption per cubic meter of rock.
• The ore is sold at a price given in money-per-unit-weight.
It becomes natural to think in terms
 of explosives weight per mined-out ton or
 of material consumption per mined-out ton of ore,
etc.
• In a civil engineering project, the contractor is required to
excavate a certain volume of rock.
For him, it is natural to relate everything
 to the excavated cubic meters of solid rock,
sometimes called solid cubic meter to distinguish it
from the expanded volume of the broken rubble.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.3 Specific charge (cont.)
• Specific charge q is defined as kilograms of explosive

per cubic meter of broken rock:
q = W/V (4.12)
where q is the specific charge in kg/m3,
W is the explosive weight, and V is the solid volume of
the rock broken out.
 From Equation 4.10, it can be shown that for burdens
in the range of 1 to 10 m, almost the same specific
charge will be needed to break the burden.
 This range is the interval where the law of conformity
applies and where scaling will give reasonable
results.
 The middle term a3B 3 thus dominates in this range.
 For much smaller scale blasting, the first term a2B 2
becomes important.
 For extremely large blasts, the term a4B 4 dominates.

Contents
GOTO 4.
• We will assume a single hole in a bench loaded with

explosive to a height of B above the pit floor stemmed to
0.4B as it is shown in Figure 4.8.
• The angle of breakage 90° shown in the figure in reality
varies with the burden.
 For small burdens, the angle is larger, approaching
180°.
 For large burdens near the maximum, the angle is
often smaller.
• For simplicity, we use the value 90°, which gives the
simple result that the volume of rock removed is B 2 times
the hole length.
• In multi-hole blasting, the volume of rock removed by
each hole is B×S times the hole length.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.8. Single hole in a bench with burden B loaded

to height B above the pit floor. [Ref.5]
Contents
GOTO 4.
• From Figure 4.8, the volume of broken rock V is

2B 2B
V  1.4B (4.13)
2
and V = 1.4B 3 (4.14)
• Eqs 4.10, 4.12, and 4.14 give the specific charge q
q = a2/B +a3 + a4B (4.15)
• As an example, consider blasting in granite with a rock
constant c = 0.35. Equation 4.15 becomes
q = 0.07/B + 0.35 + 0.004B (4.16)

Contents
GOTO 4.
• Figure 4.9 shows the specific charge q as a function of

burden B according to Equation 4.16.
• It can be seen from this figure that the first term in
Equation 4.16 will become more important for very small
burdens.
• For large burdens, more energy will be needed per cubic
meter of rock to heave the rock mass sufficiently, so the
third term will dominate.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.9. Specific charge as a function

of burden. [Ref.5]
Contents
GOTO 4.
• Linear charge concentration l is often used in blasting

terminology especially when dealing with any type of
perimeter blasting. Equivalent term loading density is
used in the USA.
• The expression simply gives the amount of explosive W
used per loaded borehole meter:
l = πd 2P /4 kg/m (4.17)
where d is the drilled hole diameter (m), and P is the
degree of packing (kg/m3).
 If decoupled charges (charges in tubes that do not
entirely fill the cross-sectional area of the drillhole)
are used, d is the inner diameter of the tube.
 The degree of packing is given by mass of explosive
per volume borehole.

Contents
GOTO 4.
• Alternative quantities to the specific charge:

• Powder Factor (explosives ratio) is defined as mass (kg)
of explosive per ton of broken rock.
 This can vary from 0.12 kg/ton to as high as 0.49
kg/ton depending on the formation and the end use
of the rock being blasted. In general, most rock is
blasted between 0.25 kg/ton and 0.32 kg/ton.
• Energy factor describes the amount of explosive energy
required to fragment a given quantity of rock.
• This energy is expressed in terms of calories (or joules)
per unit of volume or weight of an explosive. Quantity of
rock broken is expressed in tons or cube meters.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.4 Charge calculations for several holes
• When more than one hole is blasted in a round, several

additional variables enter which affect the blasting results:
 the spacing of the holes,
 the number of holes, and
 the delay time between initiation of adjacent holes.
• For simple blasting operations
 where the spacing S is equal to the burden B and
 where the delay time between adjacent holes is in
the range of 6 to 15 ms/m burden,
the charge in each hole can be reduced to about 80% of
the charge needed for a single hole.

Contents
4.4 Charge calculations for several holes GOTO 4.
(cont.)
• Alternatively, if the spacing-to-burden ratio is 1.25 and, if

this is considered together with Equation 4.9, the final
equation for the linear charge concentration needed in a
row of holes in a round will be
lb = (0.8)(1.11)(1.25)(a2B +a3B 2+a4B 3) (4.19)
• Equation 4.19 can be written in the form
4
l b  K  ai B i (4.20)
i 2
where K = 1.11.

Contents
4.4 Charge calculations for several holes GOTO 4.
(cont.)
• Equations 4.19 and 4.20 are strictly valid for a row of

vertical drillholes only if they are loaded with the
explosive LFB dynamite which was used for the
evaluation of the coefficients K and ai .
• The next will be described the influence on the maximum
burden of the three parameters:
 explosive performance,
 rock constant, and
 geometry.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.4.1 Influence of explosive performance
• To provide for the use of various explosives, it is

necessary to have a basis for comparing the blasting
“strength“ of different explosives.
• Several methods have been developed to characterize
the strength of an explosive. Examples of these are:
 the calculated explosion energy,
 the result of the ballistic mortar test,
 the Trauzl lead block test,
 the brisance test,
 the weight strength concept,
 and the underwater detonation test.
• Compare with 2.1.3.

Contents
4.4.1 Influence of explosive performance GOTO 4.
(cont.)
• However, these methods should be used with caution

when stating the breaking capacity of an explosive in a
rock material.
• The strength of the explosive is in reality,
 dependent upon the type of blasting operation,
 and is different in different rock materials
 and in different blasting operations, for example,
crater blasting, bench blasting, tunneling, etc.
• Just emerging are more sophisticated methods of ranking
explosives for rock blasting by computer calculations, in
which
 the burning rate of the explosive and the equation of
state of its reaction products, determined
experimentally,
 are matched with the experimentally determined
dynamic properties of the rock mass.
Contents
(cont.)
• The best way to rank explosives, of course, would be to

measure the rock-breaking capacity in different rock
conditions with different blasting operations under
different charging conditions.
 However, such an evaluation is prohibitively costly
and time consuming.
 Instead, one is generally restricted to using one of
the aforementioned methods for the comparison of
strength.
• In Sweden, the Langefors-Kihlstrom weight strength
concept has been used extensively
for the correlation of blastability of the rock
mass with explosive strength.

Contents
(cont.)
• The relation is written as

5 Qv 1 V
s    (4.21)
6 Qv 0 6 V0
where
s is the weight strength relative to a reference explosive
(LFB-dynamite),
Qv is the explosion energy for 1 kg of the explosive used,
V is the released gas volume at STP from 1 kg of the
explosive used,
Qv0 = 5 MJ and V0 = 850 liter.

Contents
(cont.)
• Equation 4.21 is based on the fact that the expansion

work performed by an explosive depends
 primarily on the heat of explosion
 and secondarily on the volume of the released
gaseous reaction products.
• The constants 5/6 and 1/6 in the formula were
determined in field experiments.
• Table 4.1 shows the weight strength for some common
explosives calculated using Equation 4.21.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Table 4.1. Weight strength for some explosives. [Ref.5]

Contents
(cont.)
• If the linear charge concentrations l (expressed in kg

LFB/m hole length to fit the parameter values a2=0.07,
a3=c =0.35, and a4=0.04) is given by the expression
l = πd 2Ps /4 (4.23)
• then Equation 4.21 gives the weight strength s
of an explosive in LFB dynamite equivalents
(the number of kg LFB that give the same blasting effect
as 1 kg of the explosive).
 For ANFO, s =sANFO= 0.84 (in kg LFB per kg ANFO).
• If we express the weight strength in ANFO equivalents,
then
πd 2PsANFO  0.84
l kg LFB/m hole length (4.24)
4

Contents
(cont.)
• Thus, for any explosive, the strength sANFO relative to

ANFO is sANFO = s /0.84 (in kg ANFO per kg explosive).
• The weight strength concept, defined by Equation 4.21,
 strongly overestimates the blasting strength of high-
density, high-energy explosives such as aluminized
TNT slurries and plastic dynamites with high
nitroglycerin content.
 It also strongly underestimates the blasting strength
of low flame temperature, low-density explosives
such as ANFO and pure emulsion blasting agents.

Contents
(cont.)
• Methods are now being developed for obtaining a better

estimate of the blasting strength, which also take into
account the interrelationship between the blasting
strength and the detonation velocity.
 The detonation velocity for most common rock
blasting explosives decreases with decreasing hole
diameter.
 It is also influenced by the density, compressibility,
and strength of the surrounding rock material.
 The change in detonation velocity reflects profound
changes in the rate of the chemical reaction.
• In the absence of reliable weight strength data,
the assumption can be made that most standard
explosives give, to a first approximation, the same rock
blasting effect per kilogram of explosive.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.4.2 Rock constant
• Several attempts have been made to evaluate what

properties of a rock material are most important for
determining (predicting) blastability.
 In the literature, correlations have been found
between most of the material properties and the
blastability for the special type of blast performed;
however, there is no general concept that the
blasting engineer can use when judging the
blastability.
 Practical experience and skill are still major attributes
for predicting the results of a blasting operation.
• In this charge calculation concept, only one constant is
used for describing the rock conditions - the rock
constant. The rock constant c is an empirical measure of
the amount of explosive needed for loosening 1 m3 of
rock.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.4.2 Rock constant (cont.)
 The c-value can be determined by trial blasting in a

vertical drillhole with a hole diameter of about 32 mm.
The vertical bench will be about 0.5 to 1 m high, the
drillhole will have a depth of 1.3B, and the burden will
be equal to the bench height. The result is judged by
the material thrown.
• Blasting in brittle crystalline granite gave a c-value
equal to 0.2 kg/m3.
• Blasting in rock with a strata perpendicular to the
blast direction occasionally gave a c-value between 0.5
and 1.0 kg/m3.
• In practice, all other normal fissured rock materials,
from sandstone to granite, can be described by a c-value
of about 0.4 kg/m3.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.5 Calculation of burden
• Taking explosive performance and hole inclination into

account when calculating the burden, the linear charge
concentration for the bottom charge lb can be written two
ways using Equations 4.19 and 4.24:
l b  1.11(f )(0.07B  cB 2  0.004B 3 )
πd 2 (Pbsb )
lb  (4.25)
4
• The burden B can be evaluated
by solving f (B) = 0 where
 πPbd 2sb 
fn (B )  (0.07B  cB  0.004B )  
2 3
(4.26)
 4.44f 

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.5.1 Burden for high benches
• Equation 4.26 is valid when the hole length H

H ≥ 1.3B +h (4.27)
• where B is the maximum burden, and h is the stemming
length. The Newton-Raphson iteration method can easily
be used for the evaluation:
B0  40d
fn (Bn )
Bn 1  Bn  (4.28)
dfn (Bn )
dB
A small programmable calculator can be used.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.5.1 Burden for high benches (cont.)
• Equation 4.26 can be written as a simplified

equation for 1/ 2
evaluation of  
maximum  
burden: B   Pbπd 2
sb  (4.29)
  0.07  
 4.44f    c  0.004B  
  B  
or
1/ 2
d  Pbπsb  3
B  cˆ  c  0.05 f 
2 1.11fcˆ 
(4.30)
3n
• The equation is valid for normal burdens
in the interval 1 to 10 m (Figure 4.10).

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.10.
ĉ as a function of
the burden B with
the rock constant c
as a parameter.
[Ref.5]

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.5.1 Burden for high benches (cont.)
• If normal parameter values are inserted in Equation 4.30,

an easy rule of thumb for calculating the maximum
burden for a vertical hole in a bench of sufficient height
will be given.
• Using, for example,
Pb = 1000 kg/m3,
sb = 0.9, and
c = 0.4
results in
B  40d.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.5.2 Examples
Example 1. How much can the burden be increased if the hole

inclination is changed from vertical to 70°?
• From Equation 4.30: 1/ 2
d  Pbπsb  3
B  f 
2 1.11fcˆ  3n
Vertical holes: Inclined holes:
α = 90° α = 70°,
n1 = 0 m/m n2 = 0.36 m/m
f1 = 1 1/ 2 f2 = 0.89
 1 1/ 2
 1
B1  k   B2  k  
 f1   f2 
1/ 2
 f1 
B2  B1  B2  B11.12 B2  1.06B1
1/ 2
 f2 
• The burden can be increased by 6%.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.5.2 Examples (cont.)
Example 2. What can be gained by changing explosive from

ANFO to Watergel A?
ANFO Wa tergel A
s1  0.84 s2  0.77
P1  900 kg/m3 P2  1150 kg/m3
B1  k (P1s1 )1/ 2 B2  k (P2s2 )1/ 2
1/ 2
B1  P1s1  B1
   B2  1/ 2
B2  1.08B1
B2  P2s2  (P2s2 )
• The burden can be increased by 8% if a change from
ANFO to Watergel A is made.
• From explosive and drilling costs, and fragmentation
estimates, it is possible to judge for the quarry
if this is an economical benefit or not.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.5.3 Burden depending on the bench height
• If the bench height K is small compared to twice the

burden for the hole diameter d chosen
 (for example in open pit mines where the bench
height K needs to be kept low for safety and mucking
reasons)
then Equation 4.26 will not be valid.
• Generally, when
H < 1.3B + hs (4.31)
where B is maximum burden, and hs is the stemming
height,
there is no place for a full bottom charge.

Contents
4.5.3 Burden depending on the bench height GOTO 4.
(cont.)
• If a full bottom charge cannot be used, it is necessary to

reduce the burden if satisfactory breakage at the toe is to
be achieved.
• Figure 4.11 shows how the stemming height hs , the
charge length B, and subdrilling 0.3B vary with hole
diameter d.
• The line at H = 1.3B + hs is the line below which reduced
charge and burden has to be adopted.
• It then becomes somewhat more complicated to calculate
the burden, the subdrilling, and the explosive weight.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.11. Some common relations between

bench heights and hole diameter. [Ref.5]
Contents
4.5.3 Burden depending on the bench height GOTO 4.
(cont.)
• Figure 4.12 shows the algorithm for this special case

(H < 1.3B + hs).
 In Figure 4.12,
Wbmin is the minimum charge weight required for
breakage,
Wb is the bottom charge weight,
hs is the stemming length,
hb is the height of the bottorn charge, and
Pb is the degree of packing for the bottom charge.
• Figure 4.13 shows how the charge lengths vary for
different hole diameters when drilled in a 10 m high
bench.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.12. Flow chart for calculation of burden B

when H < 1.3B + hs . [Ref.5]
Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.13. The charge lengths for various hole diameters when a
constant bench height of 10 m is used. Hole diameters are
0.01, 0.04, 0.07, 0.1, 0.15, 0.2, 0.3, 0.5 and 1 m. [Ref.5]
Contents
GOTO 4.
4.6 Inclusion of additional effects
4.6.1 Drilling deviations

• A blasting operation can be totally spoiled if the drilling
precision is bad.
 Too large a burden in the bottom part of a round
results in insufficient toe breakage and can result in
floor protrusions (moguls) that have to be secondary
blasted to satisfy a smooth floor.
 Too small a burden in the bottom part results in
sometimes dangerous throw and flyrock.
• When the practical burden B is calculated (see section
4.6.3), the drilling deviations must be considered.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.6.1 Drilling deviations (cont.)
• The drilling deviation can be regarded as the sum of the

three deviations:
a. The collaring deviation a1 (m) caused by miss-
positioning the drill on the rock surface
b. The angular deviation a2 (m/m) caused by incorrect
initial drilling direction
c. The hole deviation a3 (m) resulting from a curved drill
hole
• The three types of deviations are illustrated in Figure
4.14.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.14. Three types of drilling deviations. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 4.
• The collaring deviation depends on the precision of the

marking of the hole on the rock surface prior to drilling
and on the care taken by the drilling crew when the drill
rig is positioned.
 A normal value for the collaring deviation is typically
no more than three times the hole diameter.
• The angular deviation depends upon how carefully the
drilling crew can align the feeder and, of course, upon the
stiffness of the drill rig.
• The hole deviation depends on the ratio between hole
length and hole diameter, and often increases with
increasing feeder pressure.

Contents
GOTO 4.
• The standard deviation for the samplings was up to 2.5°

or 0.0425 m/m drillhole depth.
• For a bench 10 m high, this means that
 66.7% of all holes were drilled not more than 0.425 m
away from the planned position,
 while the rest of the holes (33.3% of all holes) were
drilled further away.
• If not more than 5% of the drilled holes are allowed to
exceed the maximum burden
it can be shown statistically that
one must calculate an angular deviation of
4.1° or 0.07 m/m when the practical burden
is to be determined from the calculated
maximum burden.

Contents
GOTO 4.
• When automatic alignment equipment was installed at the

drill rig, the drilling precision was very much improved.
• The sampling showed a standard deviation of 1.1° or
0.019 m/m. If 5% of the holes are allowed to exceed
the maximum burden, we have to calculate an angular
deviation a2 = 1.85° or 0.032 m/m.
 This value is probably also the limit of achievement
of manual alignment.
• The hole deviation is usually of less concern when large-
diameter, relatively shallow holes are drilled.
 For example, in open pit mining where 10 to 15 in
diameter holes are drilled to a maximum depth of 18
m, there is no need to correct for the hole deviation.

Contents
GOTO 4.
• However, in sublevel stoping where 6 in holes can be

drilled up to 100 m, it is very important to map the holes.
• Also, when small hole diameters (<100 mm) are used in
high benches (10 to 30 m), it is important to control the
drilling deviation, especially in dipping formations with
zones with various hardness.
 If no stabilizers are used to guide the drilling,
deflections can easily occur as the drill bit passes
through a transition zone of rocks with different
hardness.
 Long inclined holes tend to bend more and more
upwards due to the bending of the drillrod which
rests on the lower borehole wall during drilling.
• Long holes have a tendency to curve
toward the ground surface.

Contents
GOTO 4.
• The total drilling deviation F for a vertical hole is given by

F = a1 + Ha2 +a3 (4.31)
where H denotes the hole length.
• In the formulae used for bench blasting, we will only
consider and the burden must be reduced according to
BP1 = B - (a1 + Ha2) (4.32)

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.6.2 Swelling
• In multiple-row bench blasts, it is important to consider

the fact that, the more rows that are blasted in the
same round the harder it will be to break out with
the last rows of holes.
 This is due to the swelling of the rock mass upon
fragmentation which increases the load of rock in
front of each new row.
• The swelling factor can be up to 40% for blasted material.
Either one has to increase the charge successively in the
rows or reduce the burden to achieve a controlled
fragmentation and throw.
• For high benches, as in sublevel stoping, there also is a
need for extra charge to compensate
for gravitational forces at the toe.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.6.2 Swelling (cont.)
• It has been shown as the easiest way to compensate for

these effects is to reduce the burden.
• In these calculations, the maximum burden B will be
reduced by
B
BP 2 
 N  1  K 
1    (4.33)
 N  3  33 
where N is the number of rows, and K is the bench height
in meters.

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.6.3 Practical burden
• The practical burden BP , which is the right-angled

distance between the holes at the surface (see Figure
4.15), is given by
BP = min (BP1, BP2)
where BP1 and BP2 are calculated by Equations 4.32 and
4.33, respectively.
• In order to make it easier for the drilling crew, it is better
to give them the burden projected on the horizontal Bpr
BP
Bpr 
cos(arctan(n ))
where n is the hole inclination given in m/m.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.15. Practical and projected burden. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.7 Shaped charges
4.7.1 Conical-shaped charges

• The shaped charge is generally a conical shape (see
Figure 4.16).
• The liner material is usually copper, aluminum, or mild
steel and the explosive is usually pressed or cast.
• The charge works by explosively collapsing the liner,
which forms a high-velocity jet of liner material.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.16. Conical-shaped charge. [Ref.12]

Contents
GOTO 4.
4.7.2 Linear-shaped charges
• The linear-shaped charge differs from the conical in that

the jet is formed from the collision of two plates rather
than the collapse of a cone (see Figure 4.11).
• The jet formed from the linear-shaped charge is like a
long knife blade.
• Linear-shaped charges are used extensively in demolition
work for cutting plates and girders, and assemblies where
water is excluded from the jet-forming area.
• They are used in maritime salvage operations for cutting
ships into manageable pieces.

Contents
GOTO 4.
Fig. 4.17. Linear-shaped charge. [Ref.12]

4. Charges
References
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables

Contents
5.1 General GOTO 5.1

5.2 Charge calculation GOTO 5.2
5.2.1 Input assumptions GOTO 5.2.1
5.2.2 Procedure of calculation GOTO 5.2.2
5.3 Charging the blasthole GOTO 5.3
5.3.1 Bottom charge GOTO 5.3.1
5.3.2 Column charge GOTO 5.3.2
5.4 Stemming GOTO 5.4

Contents
5.1 General
5.2 Charge calculation
5.2.1
(3+25 Input
slides)
• Formulas
assumptions
to calculate maximum burden for bench blasting are
introduced.
5.2.2 Procedure of
• Charge calculation procedure is explained and illustrated.
calculation
5.3 Charging the blasthole
(105.3.1
slides)Bottom charge
• Terms
5.3.2‚specific
Columndrilling‘
charge and ‚specific charge‘ are explained.
5.4 Stemming
(2 slides)
• The importance of confinement is stressed.

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.1 General
• Bench blasting is the most common blasting work.

• It can be defined as blasting of vertical or close to vertical
blastholes in one or several rows towards a free surface.
 Bench blasting can also be made with horizontal
holes, horizontal benching.
• Most types of blasting can be considered as bench
blasting.
 Trench blasting for pipelines is also a kind of bench,
but as the rock is more constricted, it requires a
higher specific charge and more closely spaced
drilling.
 In tunneling after the cut has been blasted, the
stoping towards the cut is a type of bench blasting.

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.1 General (cont.)
• Rock is a material with widely varying properties.

 Its tensile, compressive and shearing strengths vary with
different kinds of rock and may vary within the same blast.
 As the rock‘s tensile strength has to be exceeded, its
geological properties will affect its blastability.
• Rock formations are rarely homogenous.
 The rock formation in the blast area may consist of
different types of rock.
 Furthermore, faults and dirt-seams may change the effect
of the explosive in the blast.
 Faulty rock containing voids, where the gases penetrate
without giving full effect, may be difficult to blast even
though the rock may have a relatively low tensile strength.

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.1 General (cont.)
• The requisite specific charge (kg/m3), provides a first-rate

measure of the blastability of the rock.
 By using the specific charge as a basis for the
calculation, it is possible to calculate the charge
which is suitable for the rock concerned.
• The distribution of the explosives in the rock is of the
utmost importance.
 A closely spaced round with small diameter
blastholes gives much better fragmentation of the
rock
 than a round of widely spaced large diameter
blastholes, provided that the same specific charge is
used.

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.2 Charge calculation
• The following calculations are based on a specific charge

of 0.4 kg/m3 of EMULITE or Dynamex in the bottom part
of the round.
• In the constricted bottom part of the blasthole, this
specific charge is needed to shatter the burden,
• but in the column part of the hole considerably less
explosives are needed to break the rock.
 The average specific charge of the round (hole) will
be less than 0.4 kg/m3.
 The value applies to burdens between 1.0 and 10.0
m and can be used for most kinds of rock.

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.2 Charge calculation (cont.)
• The basis of the computations of bench blasting will be

Langefors formula:
d ps
Bmax  See section 4.5
33 cˆ  f  S / B (e.g. the Equation
where: 4.29) to understand
Bmax = maximum burden (m) its origin.
d = diameter in the bottom (mm)
p = packing degree (loading density) (kg/liter)
s = weight strength of the explosive (Emulite .95) (kg/m3)
c = rock constant
ĉ = c + 0.05 for B between 1.4 and 15.0 meters
f = degree of fixation, 1.0 for vertical holes and
0.95 for holes with inclination 3:1
S/B = ratio of spacing to burden

Contents
GOTO 5.
 Bergqvist has used the specific charge to simplify the

calculation of the maximum burden.
• By using the amount of explosives that is filled into 1 m of
the blasthole and the specific charge needed to fragment
the rock the following geometric relation may be defined:
lb lb
q 
S  B S / B  B2
where:
q is the specific charge
lb is the charge concentration Bergquist formula
S is the spacing between the holes
B is the burden
lb lb
B 2
B
S / B q S / B q

Contents
GOTO 5.
lb
B
S / B q
• If the relation S/B is set to 1.25 and q to 0.4 the result will
be:
B  2  l b  1.42 l b
• With explosives like Emulite and Dynamex an acceptable
fragmentation can be obtained with lower specific charge
than 0.4 kg/m3 while when using Prillit (ANFO) a higher
specific charge is needed.

Contents
GOTO 5.
• Experience has given the following guide values for

calculation of the maximum burden:
Bmax  1.47 l b for Dynamex
Bmax  1.42 l b for Emulite100
Bmax  1.45 l b for Emulite150
Bmax  1.36 l b for ANFO
where lb is the requisite charge concentration (kg/m) of
the selected explosive in the bottom part of the blasthole.

Contents
GOTO 5.
• It is very important for the blasting result that the charge

concentration obtained by the calculations is achieved in
practice.
• The formulae used in the calculations are empirical, but
are based on information from thousands of blasts. The
experience of Langefors‘ calculations is so good that it
could be considered unnecessary in most blasting
operations to make trial blasts.
• However, local conditions may make it necessary for the
practical operator to test the theoretical calculations in the
field.

Contents
GOTO 5.
• In addition to the term maximum burden

 which denotes the maximum burden distance with a
breakage,
also the term critical burden is used.
• Critical burden Bc (m) is the minimum burden distance
with no breakage and displacement.

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.2.1 Input assumptions
• The bench height K >2Bmax. For other values of hole in-

• The rock constant is 0.4. clination and rock constant
correction factors are used.
• As the maximum burden, Bmax is dependent
on the fixation degree at the bottom part of the blasthole,
drilling with inclination 3:1 is assumed.
• Following explosives are involved: Dynamex, Emulite,
ANFO, which are explosives with differing characteristics
regarding weight strength and density.
• It is assumed that Dynamex is packed
to a density of 1.25 kg/l, Emulite to 1.15 kg/l
and ANFO to 0.80 kg/l.

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.2.1 Input assumptions (cont.)
• The charge concentration depends on the diameter of the

blasthole and the utilization of the hole.
 Explosives in paper cartridges, which are normally
tamped with a tamping rod in small diameter
blastholes, can be tamped to a utilization of up to
90% of the blasthole if tamping is carried out after the
introduction of each cartndge.
If tamping is carried out after every 2 or 3 cartridges,
the charge concentration will be considerably lower.
Pneumatic charging machines give good tamping of
paper cartridges with high utilization of the blasthole
volume.
 Explosives in plastic hoses were introduced for the
convenience of fast charging and easy handling.
Dropped into the blasthole, they are intended to fill
up the hole well.
Contents
GOTO 5.
5.2.1 Input assumptions (cont.)
 However, different tamping characteristics of different

explosives give varying results.
Emulite cartridges in plastic hoses, which are cut
along the side, fill up the hole almost completely by
impact, while dynamites and watergels with their
stiffer consistency do not fill up the hole that well,
especially in the winter.
It is important when charging wet blastholes that the
holes are flushed and cleaned before charging. Bulk
explosives which are pumped, augered or poured in-
to the blasthole utilize the blasthole volume to 100%.
• The packing degree (utilization of the blasthole) of the
explosive in the bottom part of the blasthole is assumed
to be 95% for Emulite in plastic hoses and 90% for
Dynamex. Poured ANFO and pumped Emulite fill up the
hole to 100 %.
Contents
GOTO 5.
Fig. 5.1. Notions and quantities used in the

calculation [Ref.9]
Contents
GOTO 5.
5.2.2 Procedure of calculation
Assumptions made for the calculations:
K is equal to, or higher than 2×Bmax

Explosive: Emulite Dynamex ANFO
Packing degree: 95% 90% 100%
1.15 kg/l 1.25 kg/l 0.8 kg/l
Rock constant c: 0.4 0.4 0.4
Hole inclination: 3:1 3:1 3:1
Figure 5.2 describes the calculation

procedure of Bmax .

Contents
GOTO 5.
Calculation procedure:
The maximum burden in
the bottom of the blasthole
depends on:
• weight strength of the
actual explosive (s)
• charge concentration (lb)
• rock constant (c)
• constriction of the
blasthole (R1)
Fig. 5.2. Procedure of calculation of Bmax . [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.2.2 Procedure of calculation (cont.)
• The maximum burden Bmax is calculated from Bergqvist‘s

formula, which has been simplified to:
for Dynamex Bmax  1.47 l b  R1  R2
for Emulite 100 Bmax  1.42 l b  R1  R2
for Emulite 150 Bmax  1.45 l b  R1  R2
for ANFO Bmax  1.36 l b  R1  R2
where
lb = charge concentration, kg/m
R1 = correction for hole inclination other than 3:1
R2 = correction for rock constant other than 0.4

Contents
GOTO 5.
• As Figure 5.2 states, the maximum burden in the bottom

of the blasthole depends on weight strength of the
explosive, charge concentration, rock constant, and
constriction of the blasthole.
• Preceding formulae include the weight strengths of
selected explosives, the typical rock constant and the
typical constriction (given by the inclination).
• Three following steps have to be performed
to finish the calculation of Bmax:
1. Determination of charge concentration, lb
2. Correction of Bmax for different hole inclinations.
3. Correction of Bmax for different rock constants.

Contents
GOTO 5.
1. Determination of charge concentration, lb:

 Figure 5.3 can be used.
2. Correction of Bmax for different hole inclinations:

 Inclination Vertical 10:1 5:1 3:1 2:1 1:1
 R1 0.95 0.96 0.98 1.0 1.03 1.10
3. Correction of Bmax for different rock constants c:

 c 0.3 0.4 0.5
 R2 1.15 1.00 0.90

Contents
GOTO 5.
Fig. 5.3.
The influence
of charge
concentration
on maximum
burden Bmax .
[Ref.9]
Contents
GOTO 5.
Subdrilling
= 0.3 × maximum
burden,
at least 10 × d.
• The subdrilling is
necessary to avoid
stumps above the
theoretical grade.
Fig. 5.4. Subdrilling. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 5.
Depth of the hole

= bench height +
subdrilling + 5 cm/m
of the depth of the
blasthole due to 3:1
inclination.
H = K + U + 0.05(K +U)
H = 1.05 (K + U) (m)
• Inclined holes have a
favorable angle of
breakage between the
holes and the intended
bottom, thus decreasing
the constriction in the
bottom part of the holes.
Fig. 5.5. Depth of the hole.
[Ref.9]
Contents
GOTO 5.
Faulty drilling
• It has to be taken into account that it is impossible to drill
a hole exactly in accordance with theoretical
computations.
• Both the machines used and the skill of the operator
affect the accuracy of the drilling.
• The error should not be allowed to exceed E as
calculated in accordance with the following formula.

Contents
GOTO 5.
Faulty drilling consists of:

• Collaring error
= d (in mm)
• Alignment error
= 0.03 m/m of
the blasthole depth.
d
E  0.03  H (m)
1000
Fig. 5.6. Inclination. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 5.
Practical burden
• The burden is the distance from the blasthole to the
nearest free face at the instant of detonation. In multiple
row blasts new faces are created at each detonation.
• When the practical burden is calculated, the error in
drilling has to be deducted.
• The rule of thumb, B = d, where B (burden) is expressed
in meters and d (blasthole diameter) is expressed in
inches, can be used to check the calculations.

Contents
GOTO 5.
Practical burden
B = Bmax – E (m)
Fig. 5.7. Practical burden. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 5.
Practical hole spacing

• Spacing is the distance between the adjacent blastholes
in a row.
• If the ratio S/B is changed without the specific drilling or
the specific charge being changed it will result in the
following:
S/B > 1.25, finer fragmentation
S/B < 1.25, coarser fragmentation

Contents
GOTO 5.
Practical hole spacing S

is calculated from the
relation
S = 1.25×B (m)
Fig. 5.8. Practical spacing. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.3 Charging the blasthole
Specific drilling
• can be expressed as:
nH
b (m/m3 )
n B S K
for quarries and open pit mines.
• In road cuts etc. where blasting is performed within a
limited area, the specific drilling is calculated per row:
nH
b (m/m3 )
w BK
• where w is the width of the round.
• The latter value will be higher due to
the influence of the edge holes.

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.3 Charging the blasthole (cont.)
Specific drilling
• is the drilling needed to
blast 1 m3 of rock.
Fig. 5.9. Specific drilling. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.3.1 Bottom charge
• In order to loosen and break

the rock in the constricted
bottom part of the blasthole,
the charge concentration lb
used for the calculation of
Bmax should be used:
• Height of the bottom
charge:
hb = 1.3 × Bmax
Fig. 5.10. Height of the bottom

charge. [Ref.9]
Contents
GOTO 5.
5.3.1 Bottom charge (cont.)
The bottom charge will

then be:
Qb = lb × hb
where lb = charge
concentration used for
determination
of Bmax.
Fig. 5.11. Bottom charge. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.3.2 Column charge
• To break the rock

above the bottom
charge, a column
charge is applied.
• As this part of the
blasthole is less
constricted, the
column charge
concentration may
be less:
lc = 40 to 60% of lb
(kg/m)
Fig. 5.12. Column charge

concentration. [Ref.9]
Contents
GOTO 5.
5.3.2 Column charge (cont.)
The height of the

column charge
is the remaining part
of the blasthole.
hc = H – hb – ho
Fig. 5.13. Height of the column

charge. [Ref.9]
Contents
GOTO 5.
The column charge

is then
Qc = lc × hc
Fig. 5.14. Column charge. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 5.
The total charge

per hole is the bottom
charge plus the column
charge.
Qtot = Qb + Qc
Fig. 5.15. Total charge. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 5.
The specific charge q may be calculated in the same

manner as specific drilling b.
n  Qtot
q (kg/m3 )
n B S K
for quarries and open pit mines.
• In road cuts etc. where blasting is performed within a
limited area, the specific charge is calculated per row:
n  Qtot
q (kg/m3 )
w BK
where w is the width of the round.
The value of the specific charge will be higher
due to the influence of the edge holes.

Contents
GOTO 5.
Specific charge
• is the charge needed to
blast 1 m3 of rock.
Fig. 5.16. Specific charge. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.4 Stemming
The stemming
should consist of sand or gravel with a particle size of 4 to
9 mm.
Research has shown that this size gives the best
confinement of the explosives gases.
Drill fines should be avoided.
• If ho < B, the risk of flyrock from the upper surface
increases, but the amount of boulders decreases.
• On the other hand, ho > B, it will give more boulders but
superficial throw will be less or eliminated.

Contents
GOTO 5.
5.4 Stemming (cont.)
The stemming,
the unloaded part of the
blasthole, is normally
equal to the burden:
ho = B (m)
Fig. 5.17. Stemming. [Ref.9]

4. Charges
References
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables

Contents
6.1 Drilling patterns GOTO 6.1

6.2 Firing patterns GOTO 6.2

Contents
6.1 Drilling patterns

6.2 Firing patterns
(3+12 slides)
• Knowledge necessary to understand and implement a plan for
drilling, charging and blasting and its details along with timing.
• Drilling patterns especially for bench blasting are described.
• Delay times between blastholes and between rows are discussed.
• Firing patterns providing the best fragmentation with low risk of fly
rocks are described.

Contents
GOTO 6.
6.1 Drilling patterns
• The typical drilling pattern has a spacing/burden ratio

of 1.25, which has proved to give good rock
fragmentation in multiple row blasting. See Figure 6.1.
 In the ‘70s, tests were carried out in Sweden with S/B
ratios greater than 1.25.
 The results of the tests showed improved
fragmentation up to an S/B ratio of 8. See Figure 6.2.
 The method is now common practice in Swedish
quarries.
• The burden and spacing must be normal in the first
row, otherwise the burden will be too increasing the risk
of flyrock. See Figure 6.2.

Contents
GOTO 6.
Fig. 6.1. Normal drilling pattern. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 6.
Fig. 6.2. Wide-space blasting. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 6.
6.2 Firing patterns
• Bench blasting is normally carried out as short delay

blasting. The firing pattern has to be designed so that
each blasthole has free breakage.
• The delay time between blastholes and between rows
has to be long enough to create space for the blasted
rock from the succeeding rows.
 Larsson has studied the effect of the delay time on
multiple row blastings.
 He states that the rock must be allowed to move 1/3
of the burden distance before the next row is allowed
to detonate.

Contents
GOTO 6.
6.2 Firing patterns (cont.)
• The delay time between the rows may vary

 from 10 ms/m (hard rock)
 to 30 ms/m (soft rock)
but generally 15 ms/m of the burden distance is a good
guide value.
• This length of delay gives good fragmentation and
controls flyrock.
• It also gives the burden from the previously fired holes
enough time to move forward to accommodate the
broken rock from subsequent rows.
 See Figure 6.4.

Contents
GOTO 6.
• If the delay between the rows is too short, the rock

from the back rows tends to take an upward direction
instead of a horizontal.
 See Figure 6.3.
• On the other hand, too long a delay may cause flyrock,
airblast and boulders, as the protection from previously
fired rows disappears due to too great a rock movement
between detonations.
 The increase in boulders is due to the fact that the
blast in this case may be compared with a single
from row blast.

Contents
GOTO 6.
Fig. 6.3. Too short a delay between rows. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 6.
Fig. 6.4. Perfect delay between rows. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 6.
• Simple firing pattern for a laterally constricted multiple

row round is shown in Figure 6.5.
• All holes in the row have the same delay
except the perimeter holes,
which are delayed one
interval number to avoid
excessive overbreak
outside the limits of
the excavation.

Contents
GOTO 6.
Fig. 6.5. Firing pattern, multiple row blasting. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 6.
• The firing pattern from Figure 6.6 gives better

fragmentation. The ratio between true spacing and true
burden, S/B, becomes more favorable.
 (Compare with wide-space drilling pattern,
Figure 6.2).
• One disadvantage with the above firing pattern is the
risk that the center hole in the second row of the blast
may detonate before the detonators in the front row with
the same delay number, due to the scatter within the
delay interval.
 The hole will then be quite constricted causing
incomplete breakage which will form boulders and
possible butts above the theoretical grade.

Contents
GOTO 6.
Fig. 6.6. Firing pattern. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 6.
Fig. 6.7. This firing pattern provides separate delay times for
practically all blastholes and gives good fragmentation as well
as good breakage in the bottom part of the round. [Ref.9]
Contents
GOTO 6.
• Too short or too long a delay time between the blastholes

may also cause flyrock. The traveling distance is
relatively limited.
• A more serious hazard appears when the delay time
between the blastholes is too long.
 In a correctly designed firing pattern, the rock is held
together and the rock from the front rows acts as a
protection when the charges in the following rows
detonate.
 If the delay between the rows or single blastholes is
too long, the protective effect is not achieved.
• Delay times between adjacent blastholes must not
exceed 100 ms if the burden is
less than 2 m.

Contents
GOTO 6.
• When large diameter blastholes are used, longer delay

between rows/ holes must be used due to the sluggish
movement of the large rock mass between the
rows/holes.
• Blasting of low benches, leveling, normally causes
flyrock because of the fast movement of the rock mass.
The low benches and the short burden make it necessary
to use short delay times between the blastholes.
 Leveling blasts should always be covered with heavy
cover as well as light splinter-protective covering.

4. Charges
References
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables

Contents
7.1 Swelling GOTO 7.1

7.2 Influence of rock properties GOTO 7.2
7.2.1 Connection between properties and fragmentation
GOTO 7.2.1
7.2.2 More about the connection between structure and
fragmentation GOTO 7.2.2
7.2.3 Description of fragmentation GOTO 7.2.3
7.2.4 Connection between acoustic impedance and
fragmentation GOTO 7.2.4
7.2.5 Connection between stratification and volume of blasted
material GOTO 7.2.5
7.3 Causes of flyrock GOTO 7.3
7.3.1 Mass movement GOTO 7.3.1
7.3.2 Flyrock GOTO 7.3.2

Contents

(4 slides)
7.1 Swelling • How to compensate for swelling in bench blasting.
7.2 Influence of rock properties
7.2.1
(34 Connection between properties and fragmentation
slides)
• 7.2.2 More about
Summarized the connection
description between structure
of fragmentation mechanism andand
fragmentation
throw
mechanism, especially
7.2.3 Description for bench blasting.
of fragmentation
• Many factors that influence fragmentation are discussed.
7.2.4 Connection between acoustic impedance and fragmentation
• Also, connections of structure, acoustic impedance, and
7.2.5 Connection
stratification between stratification
to fragmentation and volume of blasted
are explained.
material
7.3 Causes of flyrock
(357.3.1 Mass movement
slides)
• Summarized
7.3.2 Flyrockdescription of the hazards of fly rock, fly pieces, and of
methods to establish sufficient protection.
• Typical fire conditions and related mass burden movements
encountered in bench blasting are described.
• Additional factors contributing to fly rocks are discussed.
Contents
GOTO 7.
7.1 Swelling
 (See also Section 4.6.2.)

• When the rock is fragmented by a blast, its volume
increases considerably, up to 50%‚ this is known as the
swelling. See Figure 7.1.
• The increased rock volume needs more space and if
there is not space enough in front of the round, the rock
must move upwards.
 The same applies to long blasts where the rock piles
up in front of the round as the blast proceeds row by
row.
• Charge calculation, the specific charge should be
increased if the blastings are carried out without mucking
between the blasts.

Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.1. Swelling. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 7.
7.1 Swelling (cont.)
• The requisite extra specific charge to compensate for

the elevation of the blasted rock masses
 is 0.04×K (bench height) if the inclination of the
blasthole is 2:1.
• If the hole inclination is steeper, the compensation of the
specific charge has to be increased and
 is 0.08×K at a hole inclination of 3:1.
• When no excavation is carried out between the blasts,
the hole inclination must not be less than 3:1.

Contents
GOTO 7.
7.1 Swelling (cont.)
• Furthermore, the bench must not be too high.

 High benches must have such a high specific charge
to compensate for the swelling that the risk of flyrock
makes it prohibitive.
• For long blasts, the rule of thumb is that the elevation of
the swelling has to be considered when the length of the
blast exceeds 50% of the width.
 Experienced blasters usually compensate for the
swelling by increasing the charge in the back rows.

Contents
GOTO 7.
7.2. Influence of rock properties
7.2.1 Connection between properties and fragmentation

Small rock fragmentation
• Good rock fragmentation is a subjective matter and
depends on the end use of the rock.
• The desired of fragmentation also depends upon of the
type and size of equipment which is used for the
subsequent handling of the rock.
 Large loaders, trucks and crushers can allow larger
fragmentation, but it is a common misconception that
larger fragmentation can be allowed because large
loading, transport and crushing equipment is used.
 The large size equipment is designed to handle large
volumes of material, not large size material.

Contents
7.2.1 Connection between properties and GOTO 7.
fragmentation (cont.)
• The ideally fragmented rock is the rock that needs no

further treatment after the blast.
• Therefore the parameters for the subsequent operations
are the guide lines for deciding on the of the rock.
 If the rock is just to be transported to a dumping area
it should be easy to load and transport.
 If the rock is intended for crushing, the size of the
largest boulders should not exceed 75 per cent of the
length of the shortest side of the opening of the
primary crusher, thus allowing a free flow through the
plant.
• Since the size of the broken rock is of the utmost
importance for the subsequent operations, all possible
efforts have to be made to keep
the size down.

Contents
• As explained in Chapters 4 and 5, explosives

distribution is generally the most important factor in
determining fragmentation.
• It is controlled by the diameter of the holes and the
burden and spacing of the holes.
• However, distribution of the explosives within the
individual holes is also important factor.
 In most formations, the burden at the toe or bottom
of the holes is the area that requires the most
explosive energy in order to be moved out with
adequate velocity.
• In general, the maximum energy should be located in the
bottom of the hole with a graduated decrease in energy in
the upper portion of the hole.

Contents
• In bench blasting, the fragmentation is influenced by the

following factors:
* The geology of the rock (faults, voids etc.)
* Specific drilling
* Specific charge Test blasting of some
rows is a good way to
* Drilling pattern (see also 6.1.) obtain some impres-
* Firing pattern (see also 6.2.) sion of the blasting
characteristics.
* Hole inclination
* Hole deviation (see also 4.6.1, 5.2.2.)
* Size of the round
• By considering the above factors However, it is not pos-
during the drilling and blasting sible to make a com-
operation, it is possible to pletely reliable calcu-
influence the fragmentation. lation beforehand.
Contents
• The geology of the rock frequently affects the

fragmentation more than the explosive used in the blast.
The properties that influence the result of the blast are
compression strength, tensile strength, density,
propagation velocity, hardness and structure.
• Most rocks have a tensile strength which is 8 to 10
times lower than compression strength. This property is
an important factor in rock blasting. The rock‘s tensile
strength has to be exceeded otherwise rock will not
break. Compression and tensile strengths of different
rocks are shown below.
Compression strengths tensile strengths
Granite 2000 – 3000 100 – 300
Diabase 2900 – 4000 190 – 300
Marble 1500 – 1900 150 – 200
Limestone 1300 – 2000 170 – 300
Sandstone (hard) approx 3000 approx 300
Contents
• Rock with high density is normally harder to blast than a

low density rock because the heavier rock masses
require more explosives for the displacement of the rock.
• The propagation velocity varies with different kinds of
rock. Hard rocks with high propagation velocity are best
fragmented by an explosive with high velocity of
detonation (VOD).
In consequence a rock with low propagation velocity may
be blasted with explosives with low VOD.
 EMULITE and DYNAMEX with a VOD of 5000 to
6000 m/sec. are suitable for blasting granite, marble
and diabase (propagation velocity 4000 to 7000
m/sec.)
 while ANFO is suitable for limestone, sandstone etc.
with low propagation velocities.

Contents
• The hardness or brittleness of the rock can have a

great effect on the blasting result. Soft rock is more
“forgiving“ than hard rock.
 If soft rock is somewhat undercharged, it will still be
muckable and if it is somewhat overcharged,
excessive throw rarely occurs.
 On the other hand, undercharging of hard rock
frequently results in a tight and blocky muckpile (pile
of broken material or dirt) that is tough to excavate.
Overcharging of hard rock may cause flyrock and
airblast.
• The design of blasts in hard rock requires tighter control
than in soft rock.
 Granite, gneiss and marble represent the hard rock
while soft limestone and shale are considered soft.
Contents
• The structure of the rock should be documented before

the blasting works start.
• The direction, severity and spacing between the joint sets
should be mapped out so that drilling and firing patterns
can be adjusted to the prevailing conditions.
 The planning of the drilling with respect to the
direction of the joints is very important.
• Figure 7.2 compares two structures of the rock.

Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.2. Comparison of two structures of the rock. [Ref.9]

Contents
• When the rock is full of faults and incompetent zones,

much of the explosive‘s energy is lost in the faults instead
of being used to break the rock. Alternate zones of
competent and incompetent rock normally result in too
blocky fragmentation.
 Higher specific charge will rarely correct this
problem; it will only increase the risk of flyrock.
• The best way to lessen the problem is to use smaller
blastholes with a closer drilling pattern in order to obtain
better distribution of the explosives in the rock.
• The explosive charges should be concentrated in the
competent rock. The faults and incompetent zones
should be stemmed if possible (Fig. 7.3).

Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.3. Stemming of incompetent zones. [Ref.9]

Contents
• The collar part of the blasthole, which contains the

stemming, has an unfavorable effect on the rock
fragmentation. As a general rule a collar distance equal to
the burden is left uncharged.
 In tough rock and rock with horizontal planes the
uncharged part of the hole will cause problems in
form of an increased amount of boulders.
• To improve the blasting result:
* Shorten the collar distance, thus charging higher
in the blasthole.
* Drilling of relievers in the stemming section of the
blast.
• Higher charges in the blasthole increase risk of flyrock.

Contents
• Occasionally a small charge in the stemming section of

the blasthole can improve the result of the blast.
• The drilling of relievers between the main blastholes
helps to break the upper part of the round.
 The relievers are short holes, normally with smaller
diameter than the main blastholes.
 The drilling of relievers between the blastholes not
usually make economic sense.
 More often than not, it is advisable to tolerate a
certain amount of boulders from the blast and break
them by secondary blasting or other method.
 See Figure 7.4.

Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.4. Relievers between the main blastholes. [Ref.9]

Contents
Specific drilling
• The size of the blasthole is the first consideration of
any blast design.
• The blasthole diameter together with the explosive used
will determine burden, spacing and hole depth.
• Practical hole diameters for bench blasting range from 30
mm to 400 mm.
 Generally the cost of large diameter drilling is
cheaper per cubic meter rock than small diameter
drilling.
 Furthermore, cheaper blasting agents can be used in
large diameter blastholes.
• The large diameter blasthole pattern gives a relatively low
drilling and blasting cost.

Contents
 However, in geologically difficult situations the

blasted material will be blocky, resulting in high
mucking, transport and crushing cost as well as
requiring more secondary breakage.
• The geological structure is a major factor determining the
blasthole diameter.
 Joints and planes tend to isolate large blocks of rock
in the burden area.
 The larger the drilling pattern, the greater the risk
that these are left unbroken.
• Higher specific drilling with smaller diameter blastholes
distributes the explosives better in the rock resulting in
better rock fragmentation.

Contents
• Lately, button bits have replaced insert bits to a great

extent thanks to their excellent drilling characteristics and
convenience in use:
 easier sharpening,
 longer intervals between the grindings
 life span which is twice that of an insert bit.
• Because of the construction of the button bit, the
diameter decreases with wear and when the bit is worn
out, the diameter is up to 15 mm smaller than that of a
new bit.
 If the same burden and spacing is maintained during
the entire life span of the bit,
 the fragmentation tends to be blockier at the end
of the life span, due to the smaller diameter
resulting in a smaller specific charge.

Contents
Hole inclination
• The constriction of the rock in the bottom part of the hole
decreases if the holes are inclined.
 By inclining the holes the shock wave energy is better
exploited. The angle of breakage becomes such that
the shock wave reflects against a longer free face.
 If the holes are vertical, a lot of the shock wave
energy in the bottom part goes out into the rock
without being reflected and does not break the rock.
See Fig. 7.5.
• The rock fragmentation becomes The hole inclination
better with inclined holes. is important in
 An inclination of 3:1 is recom- operations when the
mended as the drilling then can
be done with acceptable preci- rock is extremely
sion and a good utilization of the constricted like in
shock wave energy is obtained. pipeline blasting.
Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.5. Hole inclination affects the utilization

of the shock wave energy. [Ref.9]
Contents
7.2.2 More about the connection between GOTO 7.
structure and fragmentation
• It is mentioned at Figure 7.2 that the planning of the

drilling with respect to the direction of the joints is very
important.
• This and other joint parameters influencing the
fragmentation of rock are discussed here.
Joint number and joint filling material
• It is a big difference in stress wave propagation, crack
appearance (orientation and length) and size of the
crushing zone around the borehole for closed, open or
filled joints.
 Closed joints have a diminishing influence whereas
open joints affect the stress wave transmission.

Contents
structure and fragmentation (cont.)
• The transmission completely stops when the joint width

is similar to the critical joint width, which leads to an
increased fragmentation on one side of the joint and
boulders on the other side respectively.
• The hard joint filling materials create more fine
fragments than weak filling materials do.
• The friction properties and the shear strength of the filling
material have a big influence on the blastability and
fragmentation.
 In this case it is remarkable to mention the
unanimous opinion that mud as a joint filling material
causes more problems than any other geological
structures.

Contents
Joint orientation
• Blasting in rock mass with dominant joints parallel to
the bench face leads to less back-break, big over-break
from the side, maximum blasted mass and uneven floor
conditions.
• Whereas blasting in rock mass with dominant horizontal
joints leads to large and long cracks.
 This results in a fine fracture network and good
fragmentation.
• If dominant joints dip into the bench face in thin
layered rock mass smoother floor conditions can be
obtained.
• Steep dipping joints cause excessive back-break,
uneven floor conditions and more
uniform fragmentation.

Contents
• Whereas in contrast, flat layers lead to a coarse

fragmentation and severe over-break.
 In combination with slippery joint filling materials
unstable bench faces occur (security problems).
• Where dominant joints dip away from the bench face
severe toe problems and large back-breaks may occur.
 In addition to that, overhanging walls, which are a
security problem, are observed.
• When blasting in rock mass with joints perpendicular to
the bench face with increasing burden the average
fracture size and the amount of the blasted mass
increases.

Contents
• In case joints dip steeply and perpendicular to the

bench face the blasting results depend strongly on the
layers inclination.
• The more flat the layers the bigger the blocks are.
• Overhanging walls represent a security problem at the
outcropping side of the layer.
 Therefore a change of the bench face to a favorable
direction is recommended.
• Table 7.1 summarizes, based on the literature review, the
influence of rock and rock mass parameters on the
blastability and fragmentation.

Contents
GOTO 7.
Table 7.1. Influencing rock and rock mass para-

meters (Y – yes, N – no). [Ref.8]

Contents
• According to the literature review summarized in Table

7.1
 first of all the mechanical/structural rock parameters
and
 secondly the joint filling material and the joint status
have a dominant effect on the blasting result.
• But these rock mass parameters are not integrated in the
most widely used blasting models.
• This leads to “general” rock mass parameters which rely
on the descriptions such as “very soft rock”, “soft rock” or
“hard homogeneous rock”.

Contents
GOTO 7.
7.2.3 Description of fragmentation
• A particle size distribution of a blast can be linearized by

a distribution line in a Rosin-Rammler-Sperling plot (RRS
plot, see Figure 7.6) to derive characteristic parameters,
which describe the particle size distribution.
• Uniformity index n determines the inclination of the curve
in a RRS plot.
 Commonly varies between 0.5 and 2.0.
 High values indicate uniform fragmentation whereas
low values reflect a higher amount of coarse and fine
material.
• Coefficient of uniformity K75/K25 describes the particle
size distribution of 50% of the material passing the
sieves.
 Its value is larger than 1.

Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.6. Fragment

size distribution in
a RRS plot.
[Ref.10]

Contents
GOTO 7.
7.2.3 Description of fragmentation (cont.)
Example:
 Let us say that 75% of weight of fragmented
material has particle size over 3 cm and 25%
over 15 cm.
 Then, the particle size distribution is described by a
distribution line connecting two points (0.75, 3) and
(0.25, 15) in the RRS plot.
Corresponding inclination = [log(0.75) -
log(0.25)]/[log(15)-log(3)]  tg(34°).
Hence, the uniformity index n  0.68.
 Also, 75% of particles is under 15 cm and
25% under 3 cm.
 I.e. the coefficient of uniformity
K75/K25 = 15/3 = 5.

Contents
7.2.4 Connection between acoustic impedance GOTO 7.
and fragmentation
• Acoustic impedance Z (see Section ) is an important

factor for rock blastability characterization.
• General “material law” (specific blasting effect Sg) was
developed which is dominated by explosive and
geometric parameters, but includes the acoustic
impedance as a single rock mass parameter:
Lg  ξ  Qex  ρs  Avg  Wzg (7.1)
Sg 
Zs  ASg  Afg  t g
with
aB  q  hw
Avg  2  lB  w   w  aB  nB  Wzg 
w2
Afg  w  aB  nB   lB  aB  nB  ASg  lB  aB  nB 

Contents
and fragmentation (cont.)
where
Sg = specific blasting effect of total blast installation
(Ns/m3) Lg =total charge (kg)
ξ = ratio of explosive volume to borehole volume
Qex = heat of explosive (J/kg)
ρS = density of explosive (kg/m3)
Avg = surfaces under stress in total blast installation (m2)
Wzg = average fragmentation ratio (kg/m3)
Zs = acoustic impedance of rock (kg/m2s)
ASg = remaining surface of total blast installation (m2)
Afg = free surface of total blast installation (m2)
tg = delay time of total blast installation (ms)
aB = spacing (m)
q = specific charging (kg/m3)
w = burden (m)
lB = borehole length (m)
nB = borehole number (/)
hw = bench height (m)
Contents
and fragmentation (cont.)
• The size of the specific blasting effect Sg enables to

describe the influence of the rock mass on blastability
according to the blasting goal and can be defined as:
0,01 – 1 Ns/m3 → controlled contour blasting
1 – 35 Ns/m3 → fragmentation blasting
> 35 Ns/m3 → flyrock danger
• Good correlation was found from model test, between the
acoustic impedance and uniformity index (fragmentation
gradient) n. Quantity n is introduced in Section 7.2.3.
See Fig. 7.7.

Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.7. Correlation between acoustic impedance

and uniformity index. [Ref.8]
Contents
7.2.5 Connection between stratification and GOTO 7.
volume of blasted material
Specific charge
• Rock will be broken up more if the specific charge is
increased and the drilling pattern maintained.
• The bottom part of the blast usually has the optimal
specific charge and the fragmentation in this part is
normally satisfactory.
• The increase in specific charge can only be done in the
column and stemming parts of the blast.
• The fragmentation will then be better but a greater
forward movement of the rock has to be expected as well
as an increased risk of flyrock.

Contents
GOTO 7.
7.3 Causes of flyrock
7.3.1 Mass movement

• Mass movement of material is the last stage in the
breaking process.
• The majority of fragmentation has already been
completed through
 compressional and tensile stress waves,
 gas pressurization,
 or a combination of both.

Contents
GOTO 7.
7.3.1 Mass movement (cont.)
• However, some degree of fragmentation, although slight,

occurs through in-flight collisions and also when the
material impacts the ground.
 Generally, the higher the bench height, the greater is
this type of breakage because of increased impact
velocities of individual fragments when falling onto
the bench floor.
• Similarly, material ejected from opposite rows of a “V
shot“ design upon head-on collisions can result in
increased fragmentation.
This phenomenon was documented with

the use of high-speed photography.

Contents
GOTO 7.
• Mass burden movement of fragmented material is

shown in Figures 7.8 to 7.15 for a number of typical
face conditions encountered in bench blasting
operations.
• Face profiles and velocities are based on the results of
high-speed photographic analysis.

Contents
GOTO 7.
• Where no
subdrilling is
utilized, two
types of face
movement
may be
encountered
(Figures 7.8
and 7.9).

Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.8. Mass movement, illustration 1. [Ref.1]

Contents
GOTO 7.
• In Fig. 7.8, the entire length of face burden, directly in

front of the explosive column,
moves out similar to a plane wave
and the face velocity at any point
is constant.
• This behavior is usually
encountered where material is
 very competent,
 quite brittle, and
 structured with well-defined, largely spaced joints,
much greater than the spacings or burdens
employed in blast designs.

Contents
GOTO 7.
• When the material is

 soft,
 highly fissured, and or
 closely jointed as might be found in coal and some
sedimentary deposits,
face profiles resembling that
of flexural rupture is more likely.
• In this case, the greatest
displacement and velocity
occur adjacent to the center
of the explosive column with
the least amount of move-
ment occurring at the toe
and crest. See Fig. 7.9.

Contents
GOTO 7.

Contents
GOTO 7.
• When identical conditions are assumed and when

subdrilling is employed, face movement results in much
the same way,
• except that the toe burden
is displaced upward faster
and at a greater angle
to the horizontal.
See Figure 7.10.

Contents
GOTO 7.

Contents
GOTO 7.
The first three cases assumed a relatively straight face

between the crest and toe.
• However, in many bench blasting operations, the
condition is more like that illustrated in Fig. 7.11, where
toe burden is considerably greater than the crest
burden.
• The toe burden is too great
for the explosive selected.
• Hence very little movement
occurs at the toe, while the
greatest displacement results
in the upper half of the bench.

Contents
GOTO 7.

Contents
GOTO 7.
• Three options are available to increase toe movement:

1. Employ angle drilling in an attempt to maintain
constant burdens from the crest to the toe.
2. Use a higher energy bottom charge in the current
vertical drill holes.
3. Decrease the burden with the current vertical drill
holes.

Contents
GOTO 7.
• In selecting the third option, care should be exercised so

as not to decrease the burden to the point of obtaining
the condition shown in Fig. 7.12.
• The toe burden is now correct for the explosive selected,
but the crest burden is substantially reduced
.
This may bring about many adverse conditions, such as
flyrock, blowouts, and increased air blast complaints.
• Because confinement pressures are released near the
crest, restricted toe movement will result.

Contents
GOTO 7.

Contents
GOTO 7.
• It is better to use the same burden,

but with a higher energy bottom charge
near the toe (= the second option).
• This load configuration, as shown In Figure 7.13,

tends to pressurize more of the burden mass
for longer periods without adverse effects,
and adequate toe movement generally results.

Contents
GOTO 7.

Contents
GOTO 7.
• Where large leftover muckpiles

are left against the face (Fig. 7.14),
toe movement will be restricted
and increased ground vibration
levels are likely.
• Unless the situation requires a buffer,
 such as when blasting in the vicinity of mining
equipment
 or to avoid dilution of an ore blast adjacent to a waste
muckpile,
it should be avoided.

Contents
GOTO 7.

Contents
GOTO 7.
• Where large seams

are encountered in a blast
(Fig. 7.15), tremendous gas
ejections with velocities up to
600 ft/sec ( 180 m/s) can occur.
• When such gas venting occurs, it will prevent other parts
of the burden from displacing adequately and will
inevitably lead to poor overall blasting results.
• A stemming deck immediately adjacent
to the seam will give better results.

Contents
GOTO 7.

Contents
GOTO 7.
7.3.2 Flyrock
Flying debris
• As described in Section 6.2, too short or too long a
delay time between the blastholes may also cause
flyrock:
 Delay times between adjacent blastholes must not
exceed 100 ms if the burden is less than 2 m.
 When large diameter blastholes are used, longer
delay between rows holes must be used.
 The low benches and the short burden make it
necessary to use short delay times between the
blastholes.

Contents
GOTO 7.
7.3.2 Flyrock (cont.)
• Various investigations, both in the U.S.A. and Sweden

indicate that flyrock is more frequent when the
blasthole is top-initiated than when it is bottom
initiated. See Fig. 7.16.
• Detonating cord with high core load top-initiates the
explosive and tends to blow part of the stemming material
out of the hole thus lowering the confinement of the
explosive.
• The stemming should have a particle size of 4 to 9 mm
for best confinement. The best material for stemming is
crusher run.

Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.16. Crater effect, vertical holes without

free breakage. [Ref.9]
Contents
GOTO 7.
• Flyrock is often caused by incompetent rock where the

gases may break through easily due to less resistance
than in the more competent parts of the rock.
 Necessary care must be taken during the charging of
the blast, especially the first row.
• The incompetent zones may be natural but also caused
by the previous blast, especially in the heavily charged
bottom part of the hole.
• For exhaustive list of flyrock causes see Figure 7.17.

Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.17. Causes of flyrock. [Ref.9]

Contents
GOTO 7.
• If the blastholes are drilled with poor precision so that

the burden is considerably smaller than the calculated
one in the first row, the specific charge will locally be
high.
 Aberration of 1 m for a 76 mm blasthole decreases
the burden from 2.7 m (Emulite 150) to 1.7 m.
 The specific charge will locally be increased from
0.40 kg/m3 to 0.63 kg/m3 average for the hole.
• Most of the flyrock comes from the surface, but it is also
possible to obtain crater effects from the front of a round
if the burden is reduced because of inhomogenities.
 Figure 7.18 shows examples of how crater effects
could occur in bench blasting.

Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.18. Crater effects that could cause flyrocks

in bench blasting. [Ref.9]
Contents
GOTO 7.
How to avoid flyrock:

1. Clean the rock surface from loose stones which may
eject easily if vent through the collar of the blasthole.
2. Avoid stemming shorter than the burden distance. Too
short stemming may create rater effects.
3. Use good stemming material: No drillfines.
4. Check that the drilling pattern is correct and that the
blastholes are drilled with correct inclination.

Contents
GOTO 7.
5. Design the firing pattern so that each blasthole has free

breakage and adequate delay time between each other.
6. Look out for incompetent zones and voids and charge
with care, stem incompetent parts of the holes.
7. Check that the right amount of explosives is used. When
flyrock is a problem, do NOT use free flowing explosives
unless confined in plastic hoses and weighted.
8. Leave rock from the previous blast in front of the face, up
to 1/3 of the bench height.
9. In built-up areas, cover the blast.

Contents
GOTO 7.
Fig. 7.19. Rock from previous blast in front of the

face prevents flyrock from the heavily
charged bottom part of the hole. [Ref.9]
Contents
GOTO 7.
Covering
• The general rule for covering a blast is that the covering
material should have the same weight as the blasted
rock.
 This is valid for low benches, leveling, when small
rock masses are loosened and the distance from the
charge to the rock surface is short.
• For normal bench blasting, where the bench height is
more than twice the maximum burden it is hardly possible
to use such a heavy covering.
• What we have to strive for in this case is to shorten the
forward movement of the rock mass and to avoid flyrock.

Contents
GOTO 7.
 The forward movement may be shortened by well-

balanced charging of the blast and by leaving blasted
rock from the previous blast in front of the rock face.
 The flyrock can be stopped by placing covering
material.
• Two types of covering should be used together:
heavy covering,
splinter protective covering.
 The heavy covering is intended to hold the blast
together so that no part of it escapes when the round
is fired.
 The splinter protective covering is intended to
prevent flyrock from the surface section of the round.

Contents
GOTO 7.
Heavy covering material: These blasting mats are

 Rubber blasting mats heavy and energy
made of scrap tires which absorbing (at least the
are cut into sections and rubber mats). The gases
twined together with steel
produced by the blast
wires.
The size of the blasting vent through the mats
mat should be approxi- without displacing them to
mately 3 × 4 m and have any greater extent.
a weight of around 1 ton.
Smaller mats which can Splinter protective
be connected together to covering material:
larger units can also be • industrial felt
used. • tarpaulins
 Mats made of logs • mesh nets
shackled together. • trawling nets
Contents
GOTO 7.
• The heavy covering should be placed closest to the rock

surface with the lighter splinter protective covering on top.
 The covering with heavy mats should start from the
back of the blast and work forward, each mat
overlapping the previous one.
 When the blast is fired, the mats ripple and do not
follow the blast forward, which may happen if the
blast is covered from the opposite direction, leaving
the back rows without cover.
 For smaller-scale works small rubber mats may be
used, but must be connected together with hooks to
form covering units that are large enough.
 The splinter protective material is then placed on top
of the heavy covering, starting from the back and
working forward.

4. Charges
References
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables

Contents
References
1. Explosives and rock blasting, Field technical operations, Atlas

Powder Company, Texas, USA, 1987
2. Urtiew P.A., Hayes B., Empirical estimate of detonation parameters
in condensed explosives, J. Energ. Mat., 1991, 9, 297
3. Davis D.C., Fanquignon C., Classical theory of detonation, Journal
de Physique IV., 1995, 5, C4-3
4. Cooper P.W., Explosives Engineering, Wiley-VCH, N.York, USA,
1996
5. Persson P.A., Holmberg R., Lee J., Rock blasting and explosives
engineering, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, 1993
6. Blasters’ Handbook, (17th Edition), ISEE, Ohio, USA, 1998
7. http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~braile/edumod/waves/WaveDemo.htm

Contents
References (cont.)
8. Reichholf G., Moser P., The influence of rock and rock mass
parameters on the blasting results in terms of fragmentation, in
Holmberg R. (ed.), Explosive and blasting technique, p. 171, A. A.
Balkema, Rotterdam, 2000
9. Olofsson S. O., Applied Explosives Technology for Construction
and Mining, Arla, Sweden, 1988
10. Moser P., Cheimanoff N., Ortiz R., Hochholdinger R., Breakage
characteristics in rock blasting, in Holmberg R. (ed.), Explosive and
blasting technique, p. 165, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, 2000
11. Sućeska M., Test Method for Explosives, Springer-Verlag, New
York, 1995
12. Cooper P. W., Kurowski S. R., Introduction to the Technology of
Explosives, VCH Publishers, New York, 1996

4. Charges
References
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables

Contents
Index
acoustic impedance 3.1.2, 7.2.4 charge concentration 4.2.2

air blast 3.2.4 chemical stability 2.1.4
alignment error 5.2.2 chemical incompabilities 2.1.4
angular deviation 4.6.1 CHNO explosives 2.1.1
attenuation 3.2.3 coefficient of uniformity 7.2.3
ballistic mortar test 2.3.5 collaring deviation 4.6.1, 5.2.2
bench blasting 5.1 collar part 7.2.1
Bergquist formula 5.2 column charge 4.2.2, 4.2.2, 5.3.2
blastability 4.4.1, 4.4.2, 5.1 compression strength 7.2.1
blasting mat 7.3.2 compressional wave 3.2.1
body waves 3.2.1, 3.2.3 concentrated charge 4.2.2
bottom charge 5.3.1 confinement 2.2.1, 5.4, 7.3.2
breaking capacity 4.2.2 conical-shaped charges 4.7.1
brittleness 7.2.1 covering 7.3.2
burden 4.2.1, 4.5 crater effect 7.3.2, 7.3.2
cavity expansion 3.1.1 critical burden 5.2
Chapman-Jouquet state 1.3.1 critical diameter 1.3.2, 2.2.3

Contents
Index (cont.)
crushed zone 3.1.4 elongated total bottom charge 4.2.2

c-value 4.4.2 energy factor 4.3
decay of vibration intensity 3.2.3 energy of detonation 2.1.3
degree of fixation 4.2.1 explosive 1.1
delay time 6.2 explosive performance 4.4
density 7.2.1 explosives ratio 4.3
depth of the hole 5.2.2 failure diameter 1.3.2, 2.2.3
detonation 1.2 faults 7.2.1
detonation pressure 2.2.2 faulty drilling 5.2.2
detonation velocity 1.3.1 firing pattern 6.2
detonation wave complex 1.3 fixation factor 4.2.1
displacement 3.2.3 flexural rupture 7.3.1
disturbance 3.1.1 flying debris 7.3.2
drilling pattern 6.1 flyrock 6.2, 7.3.2
eight ms delay interval 3.2.3 fragmentation 3.1.3, 3.2.2, 7.2.1
elastic zones 3.1.4 fragmentation gradient 7.2.4
elongated charge 4.2.2 friction sensitivity test 2.3.2

Contents
Index (cont.)
full bottom charge 4.2.2 loading density 4.3

gravity term 4.2.2 longitudinal wave 3.2.1
hardness 7.2.1 Love wave 3.2.1
heat of detonation 2.1.3 L wave 3.2.1
heavy covering 7.3.2 mass movement 7.3.1
hole deviation 4.6.1 maximum burden 4.5.1, 5.2, 5.2.2
hole inclination 4.2.1 muckpile 7.3.1
horizontal benching 5.1 nonlinear zone 3.1.4
hot spot 2.1.5 normalized distance 3.2.3
Hugoniot curve 1.3.1 nuclei theory 3.2.2
impact sensitivity test 2.3.1 overpressure 3.2.4
inclination 4.2.1, 7.2.1 oxygen balance 2.1.2
Langefors formula 5.2 packing degree 5.2.1
lead block test 2.3.4 particle velocity 3.2.3
leveling 6.2, 7.3.2 peak particle velocity 3.2.3
linear charge concentration 4.2.2, 4.3 physical stability 2.1.4
linear-shaped charges 4.7.2 powder factor 4.3

Contents
Index (cont.)
practical burden 4.6.1, 4.6.3, 5.2.2 scaled distance 3.2.3, 3.2.4

practical spacing 5.2.2 seam 7.3.1
pressure wave 3.1.1 secondary wave 3.2.1
propagation velocity 7.2.1 seismic wave velocity 3.2.3
primary wave 3.2.1 sensitivity 2.1.5
projected burden 4.6.3 shaped charges 4.7
pulverized material 3.1.1 shear wave 3.2.1
P wave 3.2.1 shock intensity 1.3.2
Rankine-Hugoniot curve 1.3.1 shock wave 1.3.1
rarefaction wave 3.1 solid cubic meter 4.3
Rayleigh line 1.3.1 spacing 5.2.2
Rayleigh wave 3.2.1 spacing/burden ratio 6.1
reaction zone 1.3.1 specific blasting effect 7.2.4
release wave 1.3.1 specific charge 4.3, 5.1, 5.3.2, 7.2.2
rock constant 4.2.2, 4.4.2 specific drilling 5.3, 7.2.1
RRS plot 7.2.3 splinter protective covering 7.3.2
R wave 3.2.1 steady state velocity 2.2.1

Contents
Index (cont.)
stemming 4.2.2, 5.4 total bottom charge 4.2.2

stemming length 4.2.2 transverse wave 3.2.1
strength of explosive 2.1.3, 4.4.1 Trauzl test 2.3.4
stress wave 3.1.1 uniformity index 7.2.3, 7.2.4
stress wave/flaw theory 3.2.2 utilization of hole 5.2.1
structure 7.2.1 velocity of detonation 2.2.1
subdrilling 4.2.2, 5.2.2, 7.3.1 vibration damping 3.2.3
surface waves 3.2.1, 3.2.3 vibration intensity 3.2.3
S wave 3.2.1 vibration limits 3.2.3
swelling 4.2.2, 4.6.2, 7.1 vibrations 3.2.3
sympathetic detonation 2.3.3 vibrations expected 3.2.3
tangential stress 3.1.1 von Neumann point 1.3.1
Taylor wave 1.3.1 wave propagation velocity 3.2.3
tensile strength 7.2.1 wave transmission velocity 3.2.3
test methods 2.3 weight strength 4.4.1, 4.4.1
theoretical maximum density 2.1.6 working capability 2.1.3
throwing 4.2.2 zone 5 3.1.4

4. Charges
References
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables

Contents
List of Figures
Fig. 1.1a, b. Detonation-wave profile as viewed on a) pressure – distance (or

time) plane; b) pressure – specific volume (V) plane. [Ref.2] GOTO
Fig. 1.2. A real model of detonation. [Ref.3] GOTO
Fig. 2.1. Failure diameter versus initial density for ANFO explosives at different
grain sizes. [Ref.4] GOTO
Fig. 2.2. BAM impact sensitivity apparatus [Ref.11] GOTO
Fig. 2.3. BAM friction sensitivity apparatus. [Ref.11] GOTO
Fig. 2.4. Test setup for the determination of transmission of detonation through
the air. [Ref.11] GOTO
Fig. 2.5. Lead block test setup. [Ref.11] GOTO
Fig. 2.6. Ballistic mortar. [Ref.11] GOTO
Fig. 3.1. A detonation in readily compressible medium. [Ref.6] GOTO
Fig. 3.2. A detonation in an incompressible medium. [Ref.6] GOTO
Fig. 3.3. Section through face during detonation showing expanding stress
wave front. [Ref.1] GOTO
Fig. 3.4. Interaction of stress waves at an interface. [Ref.1] GOTO
Fig. 3.5. Zones of rupture radius. [Ref.1] GOTO

Contents
List of Figures (cont.)
Fig. 3.6. Compressional (P) wave simulation. [Ref.7] GOTO

Fig. 3.7. Shear (S) wave simulation. [Ref.7] GOTO
Fig. 3.8. Rayleigh (R) wave simulation. [Ref.7] GOTO
Fig. 3.9. Love (L) wave simulation. [Ref.7] GOTO
Fig. 3.10. Nuclei theory. [Ref.1] GOTO
Fig. 3.11. Hypothetical seismograms illustrating P wave, S wave and R wave
forms at (1) intermediate distance, (2) large distance. [Ref.6] GOTO
Fig. 3.12. Ground vibrations from blasting. [Ref.6] GOTO
Fig. 3.13. Typical profile of an air/blast wave. [Ref.4] GOTO
Fig. 4.1. Influence of various geometries upon required charge weight for
breaking loose a burden of 1 m. [Ref.5] GOTO
Fig. 4.2. Fixation factor f as a function of the hole inclination n for bench
blasting with a fixed bottom. [Ref.5] GOTO
Fig. 4.3. The simple case of a concentrated charge (W0) in a geometry with
equal burden and bench height (fixation factor = 1). [Ref.5] GOTO
Fig. 4.4. Effect of breaking capacity for elongated charges with equal weight.
[Ref.5] GOTO

Contents
Fig. 4.5. Breaking capacity at the toe of an elongated charge. [Ref.5] GOTO
Fig. 4.6. Favorable charge geometry for blasting with elongated bottom charge.
[Ref.5] GOTO
Fig. 4.7. Charge distribution with full bottom charge, column charge, and
unloaded hole length at the top equal to burden B. [Ref.5] GOTO
Fig. 4.8. Single hole in a bench with burden B loaded to height B above the pit
floor. [Ref.5] GOTO
Fig. 4.9. Specific charge as a function of burden. [Ref.5] GOTO
Fig. 4.10. ĉ as a function of the burden B with the rock constant c as a
parameter. [Ref.5] GOTO
Fig. 4.11. Some common relations between bench heights and hole diameter.
[Ref.5] GOTO
Fig. 4.12. Flow chart for calculation of burden B when H < 1.3B + hs . [Ref.5]
GOTO
Fig. 4.13. The charge lengths for various hole diameters when a constant
bench height of 10 m is used. [Ref.5] GOTO
Fig. 4.14. Three types of drilling deviations. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 4.15. Practical and projected burden. [Ref.9] GOTO

Contents
Fig. 4.16. Conical-shaped charge. [Ref.12] GOTO

Fig. 4.17. Linear-shaped charge. [Ref.12] GOTO
Fig. 5.1. Notions and quantities used in the calculation [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.2. Procedure of calculation of Bmax . [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.3. The influence of charge concentration on maximum burden Bmax .
[Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.4. Subdrilling. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.5. Depth of the hole. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.6. Inclination. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.7. Practical burden. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.8. Practical spacing. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.9. Specific drilling. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.10. Height of the bottom charge. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.11. Bottom charge. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.12. Column charge concentration. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.13. Height of the column charge. [Ref.9] GOTO

Contents
Fig. 5.14. Column charge. [Ref.9] GOTO

Fig. 5.15. Total charge. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.16. Specific charge. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 5.17. Stemming. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 6.1. Normal drilling pattern. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 6.2. Wide-space blasting. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 6.3. Too short a delay between rows. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 6.4. Perfect delay between rows. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 6.5. Firing pattern, multiple row blasting. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 6.6. Firing pattern. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 6.7. This firing pattern provides separate delay times for practically all
blastholes and gives good fragmentation as well as good breakage in the
bottom part of the round. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 7.1. Swelling. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 7.2. Comparison of two structures of the rock. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 7.3. Stemming of incompetent zones. [Ref.9] GOTO

Contents
Fig. 7.4. Relievers between the main blastholes. [Ref.9] GOTO

Fig. 7.5. Hole inclination affects the utilization of the shock wave energy. [Ref.9]
GOTO
Fig. 7.6. Fragment size distribution in a RRS plot. [Ref.10] GOTO
Fig. 7.7. Correlation between acoustic impedance and uniformity index. [Ref.8]
GOTO
Fig. 7.8. Mass movement, illustration 1. [Ref.1] GOTO

Contents
Fig. 7.16. Crater effect, vertical holes without free breakage. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 7.17. Causes of flyrock. [Ref.9] GOTO
Fig. 7.18. Crater effects that could cause flyrocks in bench blasting. [Ref.9]
GOTO
Fig. 7.19. Rock from the previous blast in front of the face prevents flyrock from
the heavily charged bottom part of the hole. [Ref.9] GOTO

4. Charges
References
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables

Contents
List of Tables
Table 2.1. Detonation parameters for selected explosives. [Ref.1] GOTO

Table 3.1. Degree of damage around a borehole in terms of charge radii.
[Ref.1] GOTO
Table 3.2. Predicted charge per delay in metric units for an “Average vibration”.
[Ref.6] GOTO
Table 4.1. Weight strength for some explosives. [Ref.5] GOTO
Table 7.1. Influencing rock and rock mass parameters (Y – yes, N – no). [Ref.8]
GOTO

Contents
End of presentation
ESSEEM Work Package 6
Blasting theory

Blasting Theory 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

Blasting Theory PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

European Shotfirer Standard

Education for Enhanced Mobility

worked out and giving a lecture by

– The shotfirer should have basic knowledge of the breaking

1. Introductory concepts GOTO 1.

1.1 What is an explosive GOTO 1.1

1.1 What is an explosive (1+1 slides)

1.3.1 The detonation wave complex

Fig.1.1a, b. Detonation-wave profile as viewed on

• The shock wave raises (jump) the pressure (P) and

• Shock wave with the reaction zone is a steady

• The reaction zone is usually very thin and, depending on

• The end of the reaction zone is known as the Chapman-

• In Fig.1.1b the jump conditions

• The steadiness of shock front

• A real steady detonation in cylindrical stick we can

Fig. 1.2. A real model of detonation. [Ref.3]

• The local curvature of the front determines the

• In the steady self-sustained detonation, the shock

• The energy delivered downstream between the sonic

2. Nature of explosives and detonations

2.1 Important properties of explosives GOTO 2.1

2. Nature of explosives and detonations

2.1 Important properties of explosives

• The general formula for all CHNO explosives is

• These atoms then recombine to form the final products of

• In all cases, the reaction hierarchy of the products formed

• For Ca Hb Nc Od explosives, we see that,

• When the number OB = d – 2a – b/2 is negative

• It is customary to express the OB in terms of the weight

• The energy, or heat, released from the chemical reaction

• In real detonation, the composition of the products is

• Experimentally determined values for heat of

• all the nitrogen forms N2

• The working capability of an explosive

• We know two types of stability: the physical stability

• The chemical stability is connected with decomposition

• The chemical reactions between explosives and other

• The sensitivity is the important property of the industrial

• It is known that a big part of a detonation process

• The density is a very important factor for any explosive

2.2.1 Velocity of detonation

• For many commercial explosives in the range of borehole

• When comparing the velocity of detonation data obtained

• The ingredients of an explosive consisting of a fuel and

• Similarly as velocity of detonation, detonation pressure

• Side losses cause steady-state detonation velocity to

• This point is called the failure diameter, df, it is also

• The effect of initial density on df is not the same in all

Fig. 2.1. Failure diameter versus initial density for

• The detonation pressure was calculated from the

Table 2.1. Detonation parameters for selected explosives.

Density VOD Pressure Q

ANFO 0.81 3600 2.7 3.89

2.3.1 Impact sensitivity test (Fallhammer apparatus)

Fig. 2.2. BAM impact sensitivity apparatus [Ref.11]

• Friction is created electromechanically between the

Fig. 2.3. BAM friction sensitivity apparatus. [Ref.11]

• The term transmission of detonation or sympathetic

Fig. 2.4. Test setup for the determination of transmission

• This test consists in the determination of the expansion,

Fig. 2.5. Lead block test setup. [Ref.11]

• A massive steel mortar enclosed by a “projectile”