International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 25 (2015) 675–680

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Mining Science and Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmst

In-hole velocity of detonation (VOD) measurements as a framework

for the selection type of explosive
Mesec Josip a,⇑, Žganec Stjepan b, Kovač Ivan a
a
University of Zagreb, Geotechnical Faculty in Varaždin, Hallerova 7, Varaždin 42000, Croatia
b
Minervo d.d., Letališka 27 a, Ljubljana 1000, Slovenia

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

Article history: Velocity of detonation (VOD) is one of the most important properties of explosives and indicates perfor-
Received 17 December 2014 mances of explosives in real time. With the development of blast monitoring systems, continuous VOD
Received in revised form 11 January 2015 monitoring systems are recently available. The VOD measurement in holes helps in comparing and eval-
Accepted 17 February 2015
uating relative performances of explosives. The purpose of this paper is a framework for selecting the
Available online 6 June 2015
type of explosives.
This paper analyses the results of VOD measurements, carried out at the limestone quarry Črnotiči
Keywords:
(Črni kal), Slovenia. Experiments were conducted to measure VOD in blast holes which were loaded with
Explosives
Velocity
ANFO, heavy ANFO and emulsion explosives. The explosives are produced at the point of use with mobile
Detonation equipment. In this study, resistance wire continuous VOD measurement system MicroTrap, VODSYS-4
VOD from MREL was used and framework for selection the type of explosives has been suggested.
In-hole measurements Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of China University of Mining & Technology.

1. Introduction With the development of blast monitoring systems, continuous

The explosives are characterised by their properties such as
strength, density and velocity of detonation (VOD). The rate at
which the detonation wave travels through an explosive column
is called the velocity of detonation. VOD is one of the most impor-
tant properties of explosives. As the explosive pressure is directly
proportional to the VOD of an explosive, VOD measurements indi-
cate the performance of explosive in real time.
VOD is specified by explosive manufacturers in their product
literature. Usually these VOD values are based on the measurement
in laboratories. However, the laboratory values do not match with
the VOD measured in the hole. Evaluation of a blast design is car-
ried out with the assumption that the explosives have performed
as per the specifications, which may not be true in all cases. A
reduction in the VOD will produce a reduction in the detonation
pressure as well as in the availability of the shock energy of the
explosive [1].
It is important that the explosive detonates at its optimum rate
and induces sufficient detonation pressure leading to good frag-
mentation. The VOD of an explosive can, therefore, be used as
one of the indicators of its performance.
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +385 914089014.
E-mail address: jmesec@yahoo.com (J. Mesec).
VOD monitoring systems are also recently available [2–5]. The VOD
measurement in the hole helps in comparing and in evaluating the
relative performance of explosives. Blasting performance is directly
related to the characteristics and efficiency of the explosives used.
The selection of the proper explosive for a particular blast condi-
tion and objectives depend on the ability to characterise the per-
formance of different explosives.
The explosives are where produced at the point of use whit
mobile equipment [6]. Experiments were conducted at the lime-
stone quarry Črnotiči (Črni kal), Slovenia. A total of 135 blasts were
monitored of which 117 events successfully recorded were anal-
ysed to complete the wide range of experiments stated in the
objectives, and to determine the influence of various parameters
on VOD of explosives. Experiments were carried out to test VOD
and their performance for bulk explosives: ANFO, heavy ANFO
and emulsion [7].
2. Field investigations
During 2001–2010, most of the VOD measurements were car-
ried out for bulk explosives ANFO, heavy ANFO and emulsion. All
the blasts were initiated with NONEL detonators and cartridge
explosives (Fig. 1). Hole lengths were from 7.0 to 22.0 m, the drill
hole diameter 82 and 85 mm, and the charge weight per delay
was from 8 to 140 kg [7].

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2015.05.024
2095-2686/Ó 2015 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of China University of Mining & Technology.
676 J. Mesec et al. / International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 25 (2015) 675–680

Operation is based on the basic Ohm’s law, (E = RI), where

Fig. 1. General field set-up and operation for the resistance wire VOD technique (1
– VOD recorder microtrap, 2 – coaxial line, 3 – resistance wire, 4 – connector block,
5 – primer explosive Danubit).
During blasting for the purpose of these studies the following
primer cartridges explosive (VOD specified by explosive manufac-
turer) were used:
E = Voltage, R = Resistance and I = Current.
When the current is held constant against a shortened (i.e. deto-
nated) wire of known resistance per unit length, a voltage drop can
be measured instantaneously at any point in time. The voltage drop
is equivalent to the length of resistance wire consumed in the deto-
nation. Resistance wire probes actually consist of two wires which
must be physically shorted out by the detonation through ionisa-
tion. Some resistance wire probes consist of just two insulated wires
twisted together and other probes consist of one coated wire placed
inside of a small metal tube which acts as the second wire. Providing
that the wires are adequately shorted during the detonation, the
resistance wire method does provide a truly continuous VOD along
the explosive column due to the high sampling rates ranging from
1.25 MHz to over 10 MHz. If the wires are not adequately shorted
in a continuous and reliable fashion, erroneous results, excessive
electronic noise and severe drop outs are the norm [2–5,8]. The
details of the experimental hole are shown in Fig. 2.

3. Results and analysis

 powder Amonal, amount 1.5 kg, VOD 4200–4500 m/s,
 emulsion Lambreks, amount 2.25 kg, VOD 5400–5900 m/s,
3.1. In-hole velocity of detonation (VOD) measurement
 gelatin Danubit, amount 2.5 kg, VOD 6400–6900 m/s.

The results of extensive in-hole VOD measurements in this

The detonation velocity (VOD) measurements were conducted
study stand out the measurement model.
in boreholes which were loaded with the following explosives:

 Powder Amonal (primer cartridges explosive) () ANFO,

 ANFO
heavy ANFO 1, heavy ANFO 2, heavy ANFO 3, emulsion (explo-
 heavy ANFO 1
sive charge), see Figs. 3–7. Tables 1–5 show all the results
– the addition of 10% emulsion to the ANFO mixture,
in-hole VOD measurements [7].
 heavy ANFO 2
– the addition of 15% emulsion to the ANFO mixture,
 heavy ANFO 3
3.1.1. Powder Amonal (primer) () ANFO (explosive charge)
– the addition of 20% emulsion to the ANFO mixture,
 emulsion
– 70% emulsion.
3.1.2. Powder Amonal (primer) () heavy ANFO 1 (explosive charge)
2.1. Resistance wire continuous VOD measurement system microtrap

The continuous resistance wire method was developed in the

early 1960s by the United States Bureau of Mines (USBM). 3.1.3. Powder Amonal (primer) () heavy ANFO 2 (explosive charge)

M N
3.1.4. Powder Amonal (primer) () heavy ANFO 3 (explosive charge)
Stemmin g

3.1.5. Powder Amonal (primer) () emulsion (explosive charge)

19 3147.7 m/s
L
l1

18
17
Distance (m)

16
15
a
14
13
12
b
c 11
32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
Fig. 2. Details of the experimental hole (M – probe cable, N – Nonel tube, L – hole Time (ms)
length, l1 – explosive charge length, a – explosive charge, b – primer, c – NONEL
detonator). Fig. 3. Measured VOD, Table 1, event no. 7.
 J. Mesec et al. / International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 25 (2015) 675–680 677

15.0 3.2. Analysis of results

12.5
3.2.1. Influence the percentage of emulsion on the detonation velocity
Distance (m) 10.0 3607.4 m/s
From the measurement data given in Tables 1–5 diagram
7.5 dependency of the percentage emulsion in the explosive charge
on the detonation velocity was constructed, see Fig. 8.
5.0

2.5

0 3.2.2. Type influences of the primer on the detonation velocity of the

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 explosive charges
Time (ms) From the measurement data given in Tables 1–5 the diagram
type influences of the primer cartridge explosives on the detona-
Fig. 4. Measured VOD, Table 2, event no. 7. tion velocity of the explosive charges was also constructed, see
Fig. 9.

3.3. Statistical data processing

10
9
8 Statistical analysis of measurement results is given in Table 6.
7 3789.5 m/s Compared with other values given in Table 6, the values of
Distance (m)

6 range, standard deviation and coefficient of variation are the great-

5 est for the combination of powder Amonal-ANFO (0% emulsion).
4
For conducted measurements in which the explosives were manu-
3
2
factured at the point of use it can be concluded that the ANFO
1 explosives are a very non-homogeneous mixture. The cause of this
0 may be in unbalanced periods of mixing and dosing components,
-27 -26 -25 -24 -23 -22 -21 -20 -19 -18 -17 lower porosity of granules or crushing of granules in the technolog-
Time (ms) ical process. During long storage periods the effect of segregation
of oil in ANFO explosives takes place and these result in reduction
Fig. 5. Measured VOD, Table 3, event no. 12.
of detonation velocity [1,6].

5500
Amonal
5000 Lambreks
20.0 Danubit
4500
VOD (m/s)

17.5
4000
Distance (m)

3899.0 m/s
15.0 3500

12.5 3000

10.0 2500
0 20 40 60 80
Percentage of emulsion (%)
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
Fig. 8. Diagram dependency of the percentage emulsion in the explosive charge on
Time (ms) the detonation velocity.

Fig. 6. Measured VOD, Table 4, event no. 11.

5500

15.0 5000

12.5 4500
4664.4 m/s
VOD (m/s)

4000
10.0
Distance (m)

3500
7.5
3000 0%
5.0
10% 20%
2500
2.5 15% 70%
2000
0 400 450 500 550 600 650 700
-2.5 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 VOD of the primer cartridges explosive
Time (ms)
Fig. 9. Diagram type influences of the primer cartridge explosives on the detona-
Fig. 7. Measured VOD, Table 5, event no. 9. tion velocity of the explosive charges.
678 J. Mesec et al. / International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 25 (2015) 675–680

Table 1
Measured detonation velocity ANFO explosives, quarry Črnotiči (Črni kal), Slovenia.

Primer 1.5 kg powder Amonal Primer 2.25 kg emulsion Lambreks Primer 2.5 kg gelatin Danubit
Event Explosive charge Measured VOD Event Explosive charge Measured VOD Event Explosive charge Measured VOD
no. amount (kg) (m/s) no. amount (kg) (m/s) no. amount (kg) (m/s)
1 33 3482 1 95 3519 1 46 3508
2 25 3163 2 45 3578 2 45 3507
3 28 3513 3 44 3578 3 35 3517
4 25 2970 4 55 3478 4 28 3673
5 15 3344 5 32 3504 5 20 3598
6 27 2988 6 35 3487 6 45 3549
7 27 3148 7 90 3398 7 25 3578
8 45 3298 8 52 3601 8 25 3563
9 27 3397 9 47 3537 9 30 3566
10 17 2802 10 52 3548
11 20 3410
12 15 3076
13 25 3563
Average VOD 3243 m/s Average VOD 3523 m/s Average VOD 3562 m/s

Note: ANFO composition = 94.6% AN (ammonium nitrate), 5.4% fuel oil.

Table 2
Measured detonation velocity heavy ANFO 1 explosives, quarry Črnotiči (Črni kal), Slovenia.

Primer 1.5 kg powder Amonal Primer 2.25 kg emulsion Lambreks Primer 2.5 kg gelatin Danubit
Event Explosive charge Measured VOD Event Explosive charge Measured VOD Event Explosive charge Measured VOD
no. amount (kg) (m/s) no. amount (kg) (m/s) no. amount (kg) (m/s)
1 25 3591 1 35 3736 1 50 3786
2 28 3606 2 35 3737 2 30 3768
3 35 3589 3 55 3670 3 75 3792
4 30 3600 4 45 3706 4 75 3773
5 30 3617 5 40 3764 5 72 3785
6 27 3571 6 37 3686 6 65 3774
7 71 3607 7 35 3645 7 43 3791
8 44 3696 8 40 3759 8 48 3712
9 53 3630 9 45 3742 9 35 3737
10 50 3644 10 29 3757 10 8 3731
Average VOD 3615 m/s Average VOD 3720 m/s Average VOD 3765 m/s

Note: ANFO 1 composition = 84.6% AN, 5.4% fuel oil, 10% emulsion.

Table 3
Measured detonation velocity heavy ANFO 2 explosives, quarry Črnotiči (Črni kal), Slovenia.

Primer 1.5 kg powder Amonal Primer 2.25 kg emulsion Lambreks Primer 2.5 kg gelatin Danubit
Event Explosive charge Measured VOD Event Explosive charge Measured VOD Event Explosive charge Measured
no. amount (kg) (m/s) no. amount (kg) (m/s) no. amount (kg) VOD
1 68 3774 1 58 3854 1 35 3877
2 60 3803 2 50 3847 2 40 3862
3 55 3799 3 0 3825 3 110 3895
4 80 3784 4 70 3837 4 25 3907
5 40 3778 5 50 3842 5 120 3900
6 50 3816 6 85 3847 6 43 3902
7 20 3781 7 55 3841 7 45 3906
8 50 3795 8 82 3833 8 95 3914
9 30 3770 9 50 3935 9 26 3826
10 41 3801 10 40 3850 10 65 3907
11 44 3765 11 52 3867
12 55 3790
13 27 3820
Average VOD 3790 m/s Average VOD 3853 m/s Average VOD 3890 m/s

Note: ANFO 2 composition = 79.9% AN, 5.1% fuel oil, 15% emulsion.
 J. Mesec et al. / International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 25 (2015) 675–680 679

Table 4
Measured detonation velocity heavy ANFO 3 explosives, quarry Črnotiči (Črni kal), Slovenia.

Primer 1.5 kg powder Amonal Primer 2.25 kg emulsion Lambreks Primer 2.5 kg gelatin Danubit
Event Explosive charge Measured VOD Event Explosive charge Measured VOD Event Explosive charge Measured VOD
no. amount (kg) (m/s) no. amount (kg) (m/s) no. amount (kg) (m/s)
1 45 3911 1 55 3958 1 50 3977
2 35 3896 2 45 3949 2 47 4015
3 45 3909 3 40 3940 3 67 4010
4 40 3913 4 40 3948 4 32 3977
5 42 3878 5 37 3953 5 35 4025
6 60 3913 6 45 3924 6 75 4018
7 45 3871 7 40 3941 7 40 4090
8 105 3919 8 45 3934 8 40 4042
9 60 3898 9 50 3950 9 5 3991
10 105 3904 10 55 3982 10 55 4001
11 62 3899 11 50 3962 11 115 4034
12 30 3803 12 50 3996 12 40 3910
13 60 3907 13 100 3972 13 45 3910
14 25 3971 14 33 4033
15 60 4009
16 55 3990
Average VOD 3894 m/s Average VOD 3956 m/s Average VOD 4002 m/s

Note: ANFO 3 composition = 75.2% AN, 4.8% fuel oil, 20% emulsion.

Table 5
Measured detonation velocity emulsion explosives, quarry Črnotiči (Črni kal), Slovenia.

Primer 1.5 kg powder Amonal Primer 2.25 kg emulsion Lambreks Primer 2.5 kg gelatin Danubit
Event Explosive charge Measured VOD Event Explosive charge Measured VOD Event Explosive charge Measured VOD
no. amount (kg) (m/s) no. amount (kg) (m/s) no. amount (kg) (m/s)
1 120 4743 1 120 5024 1 125 5162
2 130 4651 2 130 4969 2 135 5098
3 140 4685 3 135 4876 3 140 5074
4 135 4692 4 35 4972 4 137 5058
5 46 4704 5 40 5011 5 50 5071
6 60 4694 6 93 4877 6 40 5134
7 35 4753 7 50 5124
8 60 4632
9 97 4664
Average VOD 4665 m/s Average VOD 4955 m/s Average VOD 5103 m/s

Note: Emulsion composition = 28.3% AN, 1.7% fuel oil, 69.3% emulsion, 0.7% micro droplets.

Table 6
Results of statistical analysis.

Note: r – Standard deviation, and V – Coefficient of variation.

4. Conclusions  VOD measurement results were in the range of 3243–5103 m/s.

 Velocity of detonation (VOD) of explosive charge increases
The velocity of detonation (VOD) of ANFO, Heavy ANFO and
Emulsion bulk explosives was tested at limestone quarry Črnotiči
(Črni kal), Slovenia. For this purpose resistance wire continuous
VOD measurement system, MicroTrap from MREL was used. The
following conclusions are drawn from this study:
 A total of 135 blasts were monitored of which 117 events suc-
cessfully recorded were analysed. The probability of successful
recording happens to be 87% which is reasonable for the field
condition.
with increasing amounts of emulsion in the ANFO explosives.
Furthermore, the primer cartridge explosives with higher
VOD increase the VOD of explosive charge. The lowest VOD
of the bulk explosive charges is measured using a primer with
the detonation velocity 4200–4500 m/s (powder Amonal),
medium using primers with the detonation velocity 5400–
5900 m/s (emulsion Lambreks), and the highest VOD using pri-
mers with the detonation velocity 6400–6900 m/s (gelatin
Danubit).
680 J. Mesec et al. / International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 25 (2015) 675–680
 The values of range, standard deviation and coefficient of varia-
tion showed the greatest dispersion for the combination of
powder Amonal-ANFO (0% emulsion). The reasons for reduction
of detonation velocity in ANFO explosives are given in
Section 3.3.
 Based on the in-hole VOD measurement, framework for selec-
tion the type of explosives is suggested in Section 5.
5. Recommendations
(1) Efficient and successful performance of an explosive in a
rock mass requires that its properties be compatible with
those of the subject rock mass. An empirical correlation of
the preferred explosive type for a range of rock mass proper-
ties [9] indicates that ANFO is suitable for use in a wide
range of rock mass conditions and the application of high
energy explosives is justified only in strong and massive rock
formations. The following factors should be taken into con-
sideration while selecting explosives:
 In massive rock, explosive is required to create a large
number of new surfaces. For this, high density and high
VOD explosives such as slurries and emulsion should be
used. High VOD will give high shock wave, which will
induce micro cracks, resulting in better fragmentation.
 In highly jointed rock, few new cracks are needed; most
of the required fragmentation is achieved when explo-
sion gases jet into and wedge opens the structural dis-
continuities. For this, low density and low VOD
explosives such as ANFO are more efficient than high
strain energy explosives as the extension of radial cracks
are terminated at joints [10,11].
Detonation velocity of the explosive can be used to calculate the
impedance of an explosive which is defined as the product of the
density and the detonation velocity of the explosive. For good
blasts, it is reported that the impedance of the explosive should
match with that of the rock. Berta [12] mentions that the transfer
of energy to the rock is a function of both the characteristics of the
explosive and the rock. According to him, the energy transferred is
influenced by impedance factor, If.
ðIe  Ir Þ2
If ¼ 1 
ðIe þ Ir Þ2
where Ie = impedance of explosive = density of explosive detonation
velocity, (kg/(m2 s)). Ir = impedance of rock = density of rock seismic
wave velocity, (kg/(m2 s)). The above equation indicates that the
energy transfer is maximum when Ie = Ir.
(2) A step-by-step procedure is suggested for selection of explo-
sives for a mine considering the advantages and disadvan-
tages of the cartridges and bulk systems, the rock
properties, the environmental conditions such as water in
the blast holes, the performance evaluation of explosives
for a given condition [13], and the unit cost of production.
References
[1] Lambert DE, Stewart DS, Yoo S, Wescott BD. Experimental validation of
detonation shock dynamics in condensed explosives. J Fluid Mech
2005;546:227–53.
[2] Žganec S, Dobrilović M. In situ measurements of the velocity of detonation and
comparison of ANFO and heavy ANFO explosives produced at the point of use.
In: Proceedings of the 5th international carpathian control conference ICCE.
Poland; 2004. p. 171–76.
[3] Žganec S, Ester Z, Dobrilović M. Comparison of continuous and discontinuous
method of detonation velocity measurement in mining drills (vod). In:
Proceedings of the 8th seminar new trends in research of energetic
materials. Pardubice; 2005. p. 923–30.
[4] Žganec S, Dobrilović M, Ester Z, Stanković S. Means of initiation and velocity of
ANFO explosives. In: Proceedings of the 12th seminar new trends in research
of energetic materials. Pardubice; 2009. p. 515–25.
[5] Edmonds E, Hazelwood A, Lilly T, Mansell J. Development of in-situ surface
area analysis for detonators. Powder Technol 2007;1:42–5.
[6] Žganec S, Džananović N, Zabukovec M. Preparation (production) of explosives
by mobile unit (truck with an upgrade) for production of explosives on the
place of use. In: Proceedings of European conference of raw building materials
and coal, Sarajevo; 2004.
[7] Žganec S. Establishing of technical specifications of ANFO and emulsion
explosives, stemming and delay times by measuring of detonation in boreholes
with continuous method. Zagreb: University of Zagreb; 2010.
[8] Žganec S, Ester Z, Dobrilović M. In situ measurements of the velocity of
detonation and comparison of heavy ANFO produced in the field and cartridge
explosives. In: Proceedings of the 7th seminar new trends in research of
energetic materials. Pardubice; 2004. p. 730–36.
[9] Brady BHG, Brown ET. Rock mechanics for underground
mining. London: Chapman and Hall; 1993.
[10] Mesec J. Selection of optimum type of explosive for blasting the different types
of rocks. Zagreb: University of Zagreb; 1987.
[11] Mesec J. Dependence of ground vibrations on engineering geological rock mass
properties caused by blasting in sediment rock deposits. Zagreb: University of
Zagreb; 2005.
[12] Berta G. Explosives: an engineering tool. Italesplosivi 1990;6:639–45.
[13] Mesec J, Kovač I, Soldo B. Estimation particle velocity on the basis of the blast
event measurements at the different rock units. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng
2010;30:1004–9.