Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Monte Carlo Simulation As A Tool To Predict Blasting1
Monte Carlo Simulation As A Tool To Predict Blasting1
Abstract
Rock fragmentation is considered the most important aspect of production blasting because of its direct effects on the
costs of drilling and blasting and on the economics of the subsequent operations of loading, hauling and crushing. Over
the past three decades, significant progress has been made in the development of new technologies for blasting
applications. These technologies include increasingly sophisticated computer models for blast design and blast
performance prediction. Rock fragmentation depends on many variables such as rock mass properties, site geology, in
situ fracturing and blasting parameters and as such has no complete theoretical solution for its prediction. However,
empirical models for the estimation of size distribution of rock fragments have been developed. In this study, a blast
fragmentation Monte Carlo-based simulator, based on the Kuz–Ram fragmentation model, has been developed to
predict the entire fragmentation size distribution, taking into account intact and joints rock properties, the type and
properties of explosives and the drilling pattern. Results produced by this simulator were quite favorable when
compared with real fragmentation data obtained from a blast quarry. It is anticipated that the use of Monte Carlo
simulation will increase our understanding of the effects of rock mass and explosive properties on the rock
fragmentation by blasting, as well as increase our confidence in these empirical models. This understanding will
translate into improvements in blasting operations, its corresponding costs and the overall economics of open pit mines
and rock quarries.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
This work is meant to particularly address the issue of Mineral processors are generally familiar with this
variation and uncertainty in rock mass properties equation, expressed as
through the use of Monte Carlo simulation. Because n
rock mass conditions vary across a blast, the resulting R ¼ eðX =X c Þ , (5)
fragmentation should vary as well. where R is the mass fraction larger than size X, X the
diameter of fragment (cm), Xc the characteristic size
2.1. The Kuznetsov equation (cm), n the Rosin–Rammler exponent, and e the base of
natural logarithms, 2.7183.
Kuznetsov (1973) formulated a semi-empirical equa- The characteristic size, Xc, is approximately the 36.8%
tion based on field investigations and a review of size retainment point on the size distribution function.
previous published data that related the mean fragment The Rosin–Rammler exponent, n, is known as the
size to the mass of explosive, the volume blasted and the uniformity coefficient. A wide variety of size distribu-
rock strength. The Kuznetsov equation, given below, tions can be modeled with the Rosin–Rammler equation
relates the mean fragment size and the applied blast by simply changing the value of n to fit the curve.
energy per unit volume of rock (i.e. referred to as the Cunningham (1987) notes that the uniformity coefficient
powder factor) as a function of rock type. n usually varies between 0.8 and 1.5.
0:8 Since the Kuznetsov formula gives the screen size Xm
V0 1=6
Xm ¼ A QT , (1) for which 50% of the material would pass, substituting
QT
X ¼ X m and R ¼ 0.5 (see Fig. 2) into Eq. (6) one finds
where Xm is the the mean fragment size (cm), A the rock that
factor, V0 the rock volume (m3) broken per blastho-
le ¼ burden spacing bench height, QT the mass (kg) Xm
Xc ¼ . (6)
of TNT containing the energy equivalent of the ð0:693Þ1=n
explosive charge in each blasthole.
Cunningham (1983) shows how the basic equation can Given that the Kuznetsov equation accounts for
be modified to treat various types of explosives relative explosive strength and rock mass characteristics, and
to the performance of ANFO (ammonium nitrate—fuel that the mean size is related to the characteristic size of
oil, the most common bulk mining explosive) mixtures the Rosin–Rammler distribution, the only unknown left
with the use of the following equation: is the uniformity coefficient. Cunningham established
the applicable uniformity coefficient through several
SANFO investigations, taking into consideration the impact of
QT ¼ Qe , (2)
115 such factors as: blast geometry, hole diameter, burden,
where Qe is the mass of explosive being used (kg), SANFO spacing, hole lengths and drilling accuracy. The ex-
the relative weight strength of the explosive relative to ponent n for the Rosin–Rammler equation is estimated
ANFO. as follows:
The equation can also be stated as a function of the
powder factor or specific charge K (kg of explosives/m3 B 1 þ S=B 0:5 W L
n ¼ 2:2 14 1 , (7)
of rock) using D 2 B H
V0 1
¼ . (3)
Qe K
Eqs. (2) and (3) can be rewritten to calculate the mean
fragmentation size Xm for a given powder factor as
115 19=30
X m ¼ AðK 0:8 ÞQe1=6 . (4)
S ANFO
Cunningham (1983, 1987) and later Lilly (1986) provide
methodologies for evaluating the rock factor A based on
the geomechanical properties of the rock mass to be
blasted, typically in the range of 8–12.
where B is the blasting burden (m), S the blasthole tion (Sobol et al., 1994; Fishman, 1996). Monte Carlo
spacing (m), D the blasthole diameter (mm), W the simulation methods are primarily used in situations
standard deviation of drilling accuracy (m), L the total where there is uncertainty in our inputs and where the
charge length (m), and H the bench height (m). calculated uncertainty of results accurately reflects the
The above parameters are illustrated in Fig. 3. uncertainty of the input data.
It is normally desired to have uniform fragmentation; It is generally recognized that natural materials like
so high values of n are preferred. Experience by rock tend to show considerable variety of properties.
Cunningham (1987) has suggested that the normal Rock strength, fracture spacing and orientation within a
range of n for blasting fragmentation in reasonably given rock mass can and do vary. Drilling itself can
competent ground is from 0.75 to 1.5, with the average introduce variability with deviations in drill hole
being around 1.0. More competent rocks have higher spacing, burden and alignment. The end result of such
values. a variation is that the resulting fragmentation size
The modified Kuznetsov Eq. (4), the Rosin–Rammler predicted by the Kuz–Ram model will also show
Eq. (5) and the estimate of the Rosin–Rammler variability.
exponent forms the basic of the Kuz–Ram formulation This observation is particularly important if blasting
for blast fragmentation prediction model. The Kuz–- is meant to achieve a specific purpose other that
Ram model can be applied in a variety of ways breaking up the rock mass. For example, the width of
depending on the design objective. If it is possible to conveyor systems is typically dimensioned using the
vary the blast design to achieve a constant mean typical fragment size to be moved. If rock oversize is
fragmentation size (Xm), or the powder factor (K) can encountered more frequently than expected, the con-
be held constant, thus predicting the resulting size veyor system will not perform as expected. Another
distribution. example involves the sizing of the throat for a rock
crusher. If the blasted material is coarser than expected,
the crusher will be undersized, if the material is finer
than expected, the crusher will be underutilized.
3. Monte Carlo-based simulation and fragmentation
One last example involves the production of riprap, a
prediction
rock-based erosion control measure used in dam and
water channel construction. A contractor wishing to
First coined by Metropolis and Ulam (1949), Monte
blast riprap that must meet design specifications might
Carlo-based simulation methods have gained the status
find that the rock mass is incapable of producing such
of a full-fledged numerical method capable of addressing
material, or that crushing and screening might be
complex problems. Monte Carlo simulation can be
required after blasting. The extra handling will be costly
loosely described as a simulation method where the
and should be factored in the contractual bid.
simulation results are based on a model where the input
Monte Carlo-based simulation using the Kuz–Ram
values are selected at random from representative
model can provide insight into all of these problems and
statistical distribution functions that describe those
help the engineer create a suitable blast design to meet a
inputs. The simulation is repeated n-times and the
required goal.
results themselves now described a statistical distribu-
A linear relationship is assumed between lower bound Italy. Costiolo is an open pit mine located near Bergamo
and most likely value as well as upper bound and most (Milano). The Ghisalberti Lime S.p.a. Company has a
likely value. Also, the cumulative frequency (from zero concession to mine Triassic limestone for producing
to 1) can be calculated. Using a random-number hydrated lime.
generator with a range set between zero and 1, it is The data consist of five specific gravity tests, 19 elastic
possible to work backwards and calculate UCS values modulus and UCS tests, as well as discontinuity analysis
for substitution into the Monte Carlo simulator and the and the blast design itself. The actual fragmentation
analysis of one scenario. To guarantee the maximum obtained from the blast design was measured using
randomness of this ‘‘scenario’’ and the independence screen (sieve) analysis.
between the parameters, seven values were generated On average, the specific gravity value is estimated to
from the seven triangular distributions, producing seven be 2.68 (g/cm3). The discontinuities data were obtained
different random numbers. from scanlines surveyed on the rock mass.
The Kuz–Ram model produces three parameters for
defining the degree of fragmentation and the relative 6.1. Constant powder factor analysis
percentage for each size:
In this approach, the fragment size distribution and
Oversize as the upper bound of the fragmentation; its the mean fragment after blasting is predicted using a
percentage will represent the coarser part after constant and known powder factor (i.e. calculated from
blasting of the fragmentation curve. a defined drilling pattern (burden, spacing) and mass of
Optimum-size as the most likely size; it is the size explosive). Under the ‘‘constant powder factor’’ analy-
through which will pass value to the mineral sis, the simulator uses the powder factor as an input. The
processing chain (loading, crushing, hauling) results of the simulation are compared with those
Undersize as the lower bound size and it is the finer observed in the field to verify that the simulator
part of the fragmentation curve. predictions are essentially congruent and physically
correct.
Table 1 lists the triangular distribution information
used by the simulator. Note that drilling accuracy was
6. Application of simulator to a case study
assumed to be very high. The face dip direction parameter
was measured from a map. The drilling pattern used in the
The simulation application has been designed to
actual blast was entered in the simulator.
answer two types of problems regarding the application
Within the simulator, a drop box named ‘‘explosive
of the Kuz–Ram model:
properties’’ contains the relative weight strength and the
density (kg/m3) of the most common explosives used in
Calculate the powder factor required to obtain a the industry and can be used to select an explosive other
certain mean fragment size than ANFO. Explosive strength values and densities
Calculate fragment size distribution while the powder have been extracted from the commercial literature. If
factor is held constant no information is available about the explosive strength,
that parameter can be calculated relative to ANFO if the
As described above, the first approach is referred to as heat of explosion is known.
the ‘‘constant mean fragmentation’’ and the second one The simulator offers an ‘‘initial blast design’’ as
as the ‘‘constant powder factor’’. another helper tool to aid the user in selecting the
To validate the model, the simulator was compared to appropriate blasthole burden or spacing. The number of
data obtained from a quarry, the Costiolo open-pit in simulations was set to 100,000 and the results of each
Table 1
Triangular distribution data for case study