Applied Mechanics and Materials Online: 2013-09-03

ISSN: 1662-7482, Vols. 405-408, pp 2346-2350

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.405-408.2346
© 2013 Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland

Regression and Fitting Analysis of Flyrock Prediction Formulae for

Loosening Blasting
Jianjun SHI 1, a, Huaming AN 1, Chunping WU 2
1
Key Laboratory of Ministry of Education for Efficient Mining and Safety of Metal Mines
University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing, China
2
Beijing General Research Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Beijing, China
a
keyan@ces.ustb.edu.cn

Keywords: Flyrock; Loosening blasting; Burden; Specific charge; Prediction formula

Abstract. With so many complex influence factors of blasting flyrock, there is no critical formula for
prediction the flying distance of blasting flyrock which was adapted by most of the scholars. Widely
existing influential prediction formulas are mainly aimed at ordinary blasting technology, using the
statistical law or mechanics analysis to get the prediction. The calculated data for flyrock distance are
different distinctly. Predictive values are different largely between various formulas. Moreover, when
loose blasting, the values predicted by those formulas will be larger than the actual data. This
situation wastes lots of human and financial resources for blasting alert. In view of the present
situation, the field experiment of loosening blasting was carried and the impacts of blasting
parameters to the flyrock distance in loosening blasting were considered respectively. Some blasting
parameters were regressed to get a prediction formula. The correlation analysis indicates that the
formula for loosening blasting is good for flying distance.

Introduction
The main hazards in the blasting are blasting vibration, flying rock, air blast, noise, dust, etc., of
which the flying rock is the one of the most dangerous hazards.
Blasting flyrock refers to stones scattering from the blasting area with a larger distance and it is the
main causes of equipment damage and casualties. The flyrocks are mostly caused by the unreasonable
blasting design and charging improperly.The existing prediction formula is mainly refers to ordinary
blasting. There is no corresponding prediction formula for loose blasting charged less 0.5 kg/m3.
According to the field experiments, this article using regression analysis method has fitted out
flyrock distance prediction formula of loose blasting.

Empirical formula of blasting flyrock

The cause of flyrock has lots of chances. The distance, direction, mass and other phenomena are all
have relationships with property of explosive, rock structure, hole arrangement, charge form and so
on. Because of many uncertain factors, it is difficult to forecast the ejection distances of flyrocks.
However, based on dynamics analysis, statistical regularity, there are still many scholars who put
forward some prediction methods. The following three are commonly used prediction equation.
Prediction formula based on charge diameter and specific charge. According to the specific charge q
of every cubic meters and diameter d, Lundborg[1,2] and other people predicted the following
formula.
 L = 143d ( q − 0.2)

 Lmax = 260d 3
2

(1)
Where ：
L—ejection distance ，m；
L max—maximum ejection distance ，m；
d— Hole diameter, inch；
q—specific charge of every cubic meters，kg·m-3

All rights reserved. No part of contents of this paper may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of Trans
Tech Publications, www.ttp.net. (#69711871, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, USA-13/09/16,00:35:19)
 Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols. 405-408 2347

Prediction formula based on general ballistics theory. According to the general ballistic theory,
without consideration of factors such as air resistance, the throwing angle theta θ, where V0 flyrock
original speed and acceleration of gravity g, the flyrock ejection distance calculation is:
 L = V02 sin 2θ g

 Lmax = V0 g
2
(2)
Where:
L—Horizontal flying distance；
V0— flyrock initial velocity ，m·s-1；
Lmax—maximum ejection distance，m；
g—acceleration of gravity9.8 m·s-2；
θ—ejection angle of flyrock .
This formula need to measure the initial mass ejection velocity, velocity measurement is very
difficult, but some scholars [3,4] measured it by high-speed photography technology, the results of
velocity between 30 ~ 66 m/s.
Prediction formula based on minimum resist line and charge. According to the resistance line and
linear meter charge, Workman et al. [4] gave three kinds of flying rock thrown distance calculation
formula. Under the condition of blasting funnel, blocking high can replace the line resistance. If
charging length less than 1 m, you should use the actual charge estimates. The following forecasting
formulas are under the process of the free surface blasting, crater blasting and stuffing jet blasting
with the maximum distance.
( )
2.6
Lmax = k 2 M B g
Free surface blasting ： (3)
( )
2.6
Lmax = k 2 M H g
Crater blasting： (4)
( )
2.6
L =k 2
M H sin θ g
Stuffing jet blasting： max (5)
Where：k—constant ；θ—Drilling Angle ； Lmax—maximum ejection distance，m；M—linear
meter charge ， kg/m ； H—Filling height ， m ； g—acceleration of gravity ， 9.8 m·s-2 ；
B—resistance line，m.
Prediction formula of deep hole step blasting. Sweden's De Dan Nick research foundation [5] has
proposed the following empirical formula to estimate the flyrock distance of deep hole step blasting.
Lmax = Kφ ⋅ d
(6)
where：
Lmax—maximum ejection distance，m；
Kϕ
—Factor of safety，between 15~16；
d—Hole diameter cm.
This type is applicable to the blasting when the unit explosive consumption is 0.5 kg/m3 .Practice
has proved that the normal distances of rockfly are generally less than calculated according to the type
of distance
From these several prediction formula, all those results are based on the ordinary blasting. There
are no prediction formulas for the loose blasting and control forecasting, specifically for the security
partition. With the above a few loose blasting flyrock distance formula calculation, the result of the
calculation are often bigger than the actual value, so the error is very big.

The distance of loose blasting flyrock and analysis

Experimental results of blasting flyrock. In a loose blasting of a certain iron ore experiments, a few
data were measured, including frying distance, minimum resistance line, total charge and other
blasting parameters. All the experimental observation results are shown in Table 1.
2348 Progress in Industrial and Civil Engineering II

Table 1. Results of flyrock distance in experiments

Minimum resistance Total Unit explosive Single most explosive Step Flying
Item
line charge consumption quantity height distance
unit [M] [kg] [kg.m-3 ] [kg[ [m[ [m]
sign B M q Q H L
1 2 252 0.329 12 6.5 14.6
2 2 540 0.361 13.5 6 5.8
3 2 360 0.433 12 5.6 25
4 1.5 432 0.496 12.5 5.4 9.6
5 2.0 612 0.476 12 6 30
6 2.5 276 0.343 12 6 17.8
7 1.8 19.8 0.345 1.8 3 14.5
8 2 132 0.315 10 5.5 18
9 2.1 150 0.379 6 3.5 20
10 2.3 472.5 0.306 9 5.5 18
In the experiment, the hole is 80mm in diameter, charge diameter is 64mm, and rock powdery
emulsion explosive was used in the experiment. Block height is not counted.
Blasting parameters correlation analysis. Influence factors of blasting flyrock distance including :
unit explosive consumption, minimum resistance line, step height, single biggest explosive quantity
and so on.
This article select parameters such as minimum resist line, explosive unit consumption to analysis.
Figure 1~5 is the linear relationship of parameter and flyrock distance.
In the following diagram, the blasting parameters and flyrock distance of linear fitting process
contains 95% confidence zone and 95% forecast zone. There are deviation between the measured
data and the fitting line. Table 2 lists linear fitting formula of the various blasting parameters and
flyrock distance and the corresponding data of goodness of fit.
40 40

35

30 30
95% forecast zone
95%confidence zone 25 95%confidence zone
9
20
20

15
Flyrock distance[m]
Flyrock distance[m]

10
10
95% forecast zone
5
0
0

-5
-10
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700
1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6

Minimum burden [m] Total charge [m3]

Fig.1. Relationship between the minimum burden Fig.2. Relationship between the total charge mass
and flyrock distance and flyrock distance
40
45

40

30
95% forecast zone
35

30 9 95%confidence zone
95% forecast zone 95%confidence zone
25 20
Flyrock distance[m]

Flyrock distance[m]

20

15 10

10

5 0

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 13 14
-5
0.30 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.40 0.42 0.44 0.46 0.48 0.50 Maximum charge of a blasthole [kg/m3]
Specific charge( [kg/m3] 3

Fig.3. Relationship between the specific charge Fig.4. Relationship between the maximum charge
and flyrock distance of a blasthole and flyrock distance
 Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols. 405-408 2349

35

30
95% forecast zone

Flyrock distance[m]
25

20
95%confidence zone
飞 15

10

3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5

Bench heigt ([m]

Fig.5. Relationship between the bench height and flyrock distance

Table 2. Linear relationship between blasting parameters and flyrock distances
Blasting parameters unit sign Linear fitting formula revised R2

Minimum resistance line m B L=1.0239+8.07233B -0.01801

Total charge kg M L=16.21365+0.00344M -0.11487
unit explosive consumption kg.m-3 q L=7.38411+26.29102q -0.05235
Single most explosive quantity kg Q L=18.32071-0.09828Q -0.12204
step height m H L=16.71425+0.11618 H -0.1246

2
Among them, the determination coefficient R2 and the revised value R are judgment of fitting
curve and the size of the measured data of goodness of fit one judgment [6]. The formulas are
following respectively [7]:
RSS
R2 = 1 −
TSS (7)
2 RSS df Errow
R = 1−
TSS dfTotal
(8)
2
By the analysis of figure 1~5 and table 2, because the goodness-of-fit judgment R is smaller, so
with minimum resistant line, the total charge, specific charge, single most explosive quantity or step
height, it can't fit out satisfactory flyrock prediction formula.
Flyrock distance prediction formula regression analysis. According to the above judgment, after
comprehensive consideration the blasting parameters, loose blasting flyrock distance prediction
formula can be achieved:
L = −94.80 + 22.33B − 0.01M + 141.50q − 3.54Q + 9.96 H (9)
where，L—flying distance，m；
B—Minimum resistance line，m；
M—Total charge ，kg；
q—unit explosive consumption，kg.m-3；
Q—Single most explosive quantity，kg；
H—step height，m.
Among them, the formula of the determination coefficient R2 = 0.70747, the revised R2 = 0.34181.
Table 3 is calculated results according to the formula (9).
Table 3. Calculated data for flyrock distance
measured value 14.6 5.8 25 9.6 30
measured value 16.2 7.5 20.8 14.1 28.4
measured value 17.8 14.5 18 20 18
measured value 24.1 17.5 12.5 17.8 18.1

Relation curve is obtained by the above calculated value of forecast values and measure values,
then it can be used to judge the goodness between the measured data and predications. As showed in
figure 6:
2350 Progress in Industrial and Civil Engineering II

Fig.6. Correlation between the actual and calculated flyrock distances

Among them, figure 6 removes some of deviate from the fitted curve, the resulting deterministic
coefficient R2 = 0.9081, revised R2= 0.89279. The picture shows flyrock distance has high
inosculation the predicted and the measured values. So, the formula (9) can reflect the loose blasting
flyrock distance from actual condition, and can be used to predict loose blasting flyrock distance.

Conclusion
In this paper, we study flying distance of loose blasting when the unit charge is below 0.5kg.m-3 .
According to the above analysis, the following conclusions can be achieved:
Fitting's formula can better reflect the loose blasting flying distance from actual conditions, and
the formula of flying distance has good alignment between forecast values and measure values.
This formula reflects flying distance influence of the minimum resistance line, the total charge,
unit charge, single most explosive quantity and the step height. But influence factors should include
the blasting slugging material, initiation system, blast hole diameter, petrophysical properties, and so
on and so forth. For a more accurate prediction formula, the other influence factors analysis of the
experiment should be strengthened.

Acknowledgements
This work was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(51208036) and “the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities(FRF-TP-12-009A)”

References
[1] Lundborg, N. The hazards of flyrock in rock blasting. Swedish Detonic Research Foundation,
Reports DS, Stockholm.1974:12.
[2] Lundborg N, Person N, Ladegaard-Pedersen A, et al. Keeping the lid on flyrock in open pit
blasting [J]. Eng. Min. Journal, 1975:95-100.
[3] Chiappetta R F, Borg D G. Increasing productivity through field control and high-speed
photography[C]//Proc., 1st Int. Symp. on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting. Lulea, Sweden,
1983:301-331.
[4] Workman J L, Calder P N. Flyrock prediction and control in surface mine blasting[C]//Proc. 20th
Conf. on Explosives and Blasting Technique. Austin, Texas, 1994:59-74.
[5] Stig.O.Olofsson. Applied explosives technology for construction and mining [M]. Nora
Boktryckeri AB, Sweden. 1988.
[6] Xiao Xin. Origin 8.0 Practical Course-Technology mapping and analysis [M]. Beijing: China
Electric Power Press, 2009.
[7] OriginLab Corporation. Origin 8 User Guide[DB/OL]. www.OriginLab.com.