Blast Movement Thesis

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/298964904
Measurement of blast-induced rock movement in surface mines by application

of magnetic geophysics
Article in Transactions of the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, Section A: Mining Technology · September 1999
CITATIONS READS
16 3,189
3 authors, including:
Geraint Harris Pierre mousset-jones

Orme Mineral Services Ltd University of Nevada, Reno
4 PUBLICATIONS 32 CITATIONS 29 PUBLICATIONS 110 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Pierre mousset-jones on 28 August 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

i
University of Nevada, Reno
BLAST INDUCED ROCK MOVEMENT MEASUREMENT

FOR GRADE CONTROL AT THE PHOENIX MINE
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Master of Science in
Mining Engineering
by
ANANTA LAKSHMI YENNAMANI
Dr. Pierre Mousset-Jones/Thesis Advisor

August 2010
ii
University of Nevada, Reno
August 2010
iii
ABSTRACT
Controlling ore loss and dilution is critical for most mining operations. Typical grade
control procedures rely on blast hole samples to determine the ore grade and establish the
digging polygon boundaries. If the boundaries are wrong, this can cause a considerable
revenue loss each year due to dilution and reduced mineral recovery. Movement of the
initial polygon boundaries due to blasting, unless corrected for, has the potential to
severely diminish the accuracy of even the most precise ore production estimates. This
paper discusses a practical method, using 3-D data, to measure the rock movement due to
blasting called “Blast Movement Measurement (BMM)”. This method has been
developed to measure the movement of the rock due to the blast, and to modify the pre-
blast location of the digging polygons based on the results, in order to improve grade
control. BMM uses a series of transmitters (BMM balls), a detector to locate the BMMs
after the blast, and the BMM software that gives the movement vectors. The transmitters
(BMMs) are activated, programmed and installed in the drill holes prior to the blast, and
the detector locates the transmitters after the blast. The software then calculates and
summarizes the movement of each BMM. This information helps in redefining the ore
boundaries and enabling improved ore and waste selection, resulting in a genuine step
change in grade control, which leads to better blast design. The thesis will include results
from a measurement program at Newmont’s Phoenix mine in Nevada.

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research project was initiated by Dr. Pierre Mousset-Jones who contributed
greatly to the success of the project. His assistance with revising the thesis is very much
appreciated. Many thanks are due for the considerable support and guidance throughout
the project from Drs. Jaak Daemen and Robert Watters.
Many thanks are due to the considerable support received from Mark Evatz, Mine
Manager, Kathy Steele, Chief Engineer, Salvador Aguirre, Blasting Engineer, Anna
Gilmore, Geologist and the other engineering and survey staff at the Phoenix Mine. Tom
Lyon, Ore Control Engineer, deserves special thanks for his valuable input and insight
into conditions at the Phoenix Mine, as well as the considerable time he spent advising
me.. Funding for this project was provided by the Phoenix Mine, Newmont Mining
Corporation, and their support is gratefully acknowledged. Special thanks to the Darren
Thornton of Blast Movement Technologies, for providing the essential equipment and
ongoing guidance.
My greatest thanks to my parents for giving me the strength and unconditional
support without which this would not have been possible. Finally, I thank my fiancé
Hari Kishore Nune, for his encouragement and support.

v
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ iv
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vii
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... viii
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Blast design considerations and optimization .................................................................. 1
1.2 Research objectives .......................................................................................................... 6
2 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 8
3 THE PHOENIX MINE .......................................................................................................... 24
3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 24
3.2 Geology and mineralization of the Phoenix Mine ......................................................... 26
3.3 Blasting practices ........................................................................................................... 32
3.4 Ore control practices ...................................................................................................... 34
4 BLAST MOVEMENT MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY ............................................... 37
4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 37
4.2 Instrumentation .............................................................................................................. 38
4.3 Research Procedure ........................................................................................................ 48
4.3.1 Drill and Blast considerations ................................................................................ 51

4.3.2 Pre-blast procedure - Installation ........................................................................... 51
4.3.3 Post-blast procedure - Detecting the BMM ball .................................................... 53
4.3.4 Locating the Peak Signal........................................................................................ 54
4.3.5 Orientation of the detector ..................................................................................... 55
vi
5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS .......................................................................................... 57
5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 57
5.2 Results of the blast movement measurements ............................................................... 60
5.2.1 Blast PX014306 ..................................................................................................... 60

5.2.2 Blast PX013911 ..................................................................................................... 68
5.3 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS ........................................................................................... 75
5.3.1 Depth v’s BMM ball movement ............................................................................ 75

5.3.2 Initial depth v’s BMM ball movements in different rock types ............................. 78
5.4 Moving the ore polygons using AutoCAD .................................................................... 83
5.4.1 Moving the ore polygons using Surpac.................................................................. 86

5.5 Sampling results after the blast ...................................................................................... 93
5.6 Batch test and results ..................................................................................................... 96
5.7 Sample test using pie pans ........................................................................................... 101
6 Cost analysis of the BMM balls ........................................................................................... 108
7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 111
7.1 Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 115
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 120
Appendix A - Blast Details .......................................................................................................... 124
Appendix B - Moving the digging polygons using Surpac .......................................................... 202
Appendix C – Analysis of alternative sampling results for Blast No. PX015303 and
PX0150010204 ............................................................................................................................ 213
Appendix D – Spectral Imaging .................................................................................................. 225

vii
List of Tables
Table 1: Estimated loss due to blast movement ............................................................................... 2
Table 2: Blast induced dilution for ore polygons, Coeur Rochester Mine..................................... 11
Table 3: Lost revenue at Porcupine Mine ...................................................................................... 22
Table 4: Results of the rock movement at Barrick Goldstrike ....................................................... 22
Table 5: Delay times ...................................................................................................................... 40
Table 6: Final Summary of the Blast Movement Measurement software ..................................... 51
Table 7: Summary of the PX013909 pattern ................................................................................. 65
Table 8: Summary of the PX013911 blast ..................................................................................... 71
Table 9: Summary of the BMM ball measurements of all the blast .............................................. 74
Table 10: Summary of the blast movement (PX015303)............................................................... 84
Table 11: Results of the grab samples after the blast ..................................................................... 94
Table 12: Summary of blast movement of PX014510 ................................................................... 96
Table 13: Batch test results for gold assays ................................................................................. 100
Table 14: Batch test results for silver assays ............................................................................... 100
Table 15: Batch test results for copper assays ............................................................................. 100
Table 16: Comparison between pan samples and conventional samples..................................... 103
Table 17: Paired t-test results for top and bottom benches .......................................................... 104
Table 18: Cost analysis of BMM balls......................................................................................... 109

viii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Movement v’s Loss .......................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2: Generalized mass movement model; cross-sectional views before and after the blast
(Gilbride 1995) ................................................................................................................................ 5
Figure 3: Post-blast polygons adjustment ...................................................................................... 10
Figure 4: Three dimensional polygonal ore block movement ....................................................... 11
Figure 5: Two dimensional average movement profile of the rock ............................................... 13
Figure 6: Magnetic gradiometer targets evaluated during field testing ......................................... 15
Figure 7: Finished type targets (Harris, 1997) ............................................................................... 17
Figure 8: Pre (left) and post-blast (right) locations of the targets .................................................. 18
Figure 9: Dilution and reconciliation issues at the Porcupine Mine .............................................. 21
Figure 10: Pre and post-blast ore polygons .................................................................................... 21
Figure 11: Movement of the digging polygons .............................................................................. 23
Figure 12: Map showing the location of mines in Nevada ............................................................ 25
Figure 13: Overview of the Phoenix Mine, NV ............................................................................. 25
Figure 14: Map showing directions to the Phoenix site ................................................................. 26
Figure 15: Tectonostratigraphic column - Phoenix Mine (as of May 2005).................................. 28
Figure 16: Plan map of the geology ............................................................................................... 30
Figure 17: A typical blast pattern in the F1 pit .............................................................................. 33
Figure 18: Hand sampling of a drill hole cuttings ......................................................................... 35
Figure 19: Blast Movement Measurement balls ............................................................................ 39
Figure 20: Inside the BMM ball..................................................................................................... 41
Figure 21: Blast Movement Measurement activator ...................................................................... 42

ix
Figure 22: Blast Movement Measurement detector ....................................................................... 44
Figure 23: Blast Movement Measurement detector-front panel .................................................... 45
Figure 24: A quick reference of the BMM Assistant software from BMM manual ...................... 47
Figure 25: Detection of ball after dropping into the blast hole (before the blast) .......................... 49
Figure 26: Foreman and engineer walking on the muck pile in search of BMM ball ................... 50
Figure 27: An example showing the detection of the ball after the blast from BMM manual (from
BMT manual) ................................................................................................................................. 55
Figure 28: Position of the detector on flat surface and sloped surface (from BMT manual)......... 56
Figure 29: BMM Assistant software .............................................................................................. 59
Figure 30: Results from the BMM assistant (PX01390911B) ....................................................... 60
Figure 31: Blast holes with numbers and BMMs’ pre and post-blast position .............................. 62
Figure 32: Direction of the movement ........................................................................................... 63
Figure 33: Result of the blast movement from BMM assistant ..................................................... 64
Figure 34: Original polygons on the upper bench of the pattern ................................................... 66
Figure 35: Original polygons on the lower bench of the pattern ................................................... 67
Figure 36: Three dimensional view of the blast movement ........................................................... 68
Figure 37: Blast holes with numbering and BMM position and their movement .......................... 69
Figure 38: Direction of the movement of the pattern..................................................................... 70
Figure 39: Result of the blast movement from BMM assistant ..................................................... 71
Figure 40: Original polygons on the upper bench of the pattern ................................................... 72
Figure 41: Original polygons on the lower bench of the pattern ................................................... 72
Figure 42: Initial depth Vs horizontal and vertical movements of the blasts................................. 76
Figure 43: Effect of initial depth on horizontal and vertical movement (top bench) ..................... 77
x
Figure 44: Effect of depth on horizontal and vertical movement (bottom bench) ......................... 78
Figure 45: Horizontal and vertical movements in Antler formation .............................................. 79
Figure 46: Horizontal and vertical movements in Harmony formation ......................................... 80
Figure 47: Horizontal and vertical movements in Lower battle .................................................... 80
Figure 48: Horizontal and vertical movements in Virgin Fault .................................................... 81
Figure 49: Horizontal and vertical movements in Pbl/Cha ............................................................ 82
Figure 50: Horizontal and vertical movements in Vfz/Cha ........................................................... 82
Figure 51: Original polygons of the pattern PX015303 ................................................................. 84
Figure 52: Pre and post-blast ore polygons (PX015303) using AutoCAD .................................... 86
Figure 53: Pre and post-blast ore polygons (PX015303) using Surpac ......................................... 87
Figure 54: Pre and post-blast ore polygons (PX015303) using AutoCAD and Surpac ................. 89
Figure 55: Pre and post-blast individual polygons in PX015303 pattern (no scale) ...................... 91
Figure 56: Rock movement at different levels (no scale) .............................................................. 92
Figure 57: Points showing the grab samples locations after the blast............................................ 93
Figure 58: Original polygons in PX014510 pattern ....................................................................... 97
Figure 59: Moved polygons in pattern PX014510 ......................................................................... 99
Figure 60: Drill hole with pie pans (no scale).............................................................................. 102
Figure 61: Histogram for average of pan1 and pan2 top half – Copper ...................................... 105
Figure 62: Histogram for average of pan1 and pan2 bottom half – Copper ................................ 105
Figure 63: Histogram for conventional top half – Copper ........................................................... 106
Figure 64: Histogram for conventional bottom half – Copper..................................................... 106
Figure 65: Smart Tag (Metso)...................................................................................................... 117

xi
Figure 66: Pattern sampling before and after the blast ................................................................ 118
Figure 67: Thermo Scientific NITON XL3 500 .......................................................................... 119

1
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Blast design considerations and optimization
Most open pit gold mines in Nevada are disseminated deposits (Geological
Survey of Nevada, 1987). The success of the comminution process of the rock is of
paramount importance to the mining operations and mineral processing (Tunstall et al.,
1997). However, rock fragmentation, rock mass displacement, environmental effects and
efficient initiation and detonation are the major issues on which the success of a blast is
dependent. Typically, the mineralization is highly irregular and offers little or no visual
distinction between ore and waste. Under these circumstances ore is discriminated from
the waste by conceptual criteria, which have no corresponding observable physical
identity in the field. The ore and waste boundaries are determined by sampling the blast
holes and assays from the blast holes are input into a resource extraction model which
interpolates the borders of the digging polygons. Ore reserve models receive frequent
scrutiny in a continual effort to adapt to changing geology.
The optimization practices in ore production, theoretically, have proved very
beneficial in many circumstances (Scott et al., 1996), but other contributing tangential
factors may have reduced the impact of these refinement. In this regard, the importance
of the powder factor and its impact on the rock movement and fragmentation resulting
from blasting is of crucial concern at a growing number of Nevada mines. Estimation of
the movement of the digging polygons from the pre-blast boundaries has the potential to
improve the accuracy of precise ore production estimates. Controlling ore loss and
2
dilution is critical for most mining operations. Wrong estimation of the polygon
movement can result in a considerable loss of revenue. Case studies (Gilbride, 1995),
(Harris, 1997), and (Taylor 2003) have shown that by accounting for the blast movement,
there is a potential to increase mineral recovery by as much as 25% for individual blasts
for only a modest cost increase. An example of the potential loss at $1150/oz is shown in
Table 1 and Figure 1 (Aguirre, 2010).
Movement at 45° Ore tons Lost Oz Loss $ % Lost
0 6,750 0 0 0
5´ 5,333 29 33,350 21
10´ 4,083 54 62,100 39
15´ 3,000 76 87,400 55
Table 1: Estimated loss due to blast movement

3
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000 0.015 oz/ton

0.020 oz/ton
$ Lost
0.025 oz/ton
$100,000 0.030 oz/ton

0.035 oz/ton
0.040 oz/ton
$50,000
$0
5 10 15 20 25 30
Horizontal Movement (ft)
Figure 1: Movement v’s Loss
In order to establish the ore/waste boundary, assay values from blast holes which
are spaced regularly are used. These assay values are interpolated and two dimensional
digging polygons are located on the muck pile based on their pre-blast bench locations.
Rock movement due to blasting is of major concern in terms of ore grade control. The
term “ore dilution” implies that some ore within the production area of a blast is mined as
waste, due to the impingement of waste material into the designated ore regions. Blast
movement dilutes ore with waste resulting in varying degrees of rock mass displacement.
The movement of rock can move the ore beyond the flagged digging polygons which are
established according to the pre-blast locations. Due to this movement of rock, the ore is
4
mined as waste and the waste is mined as ore, which results in increased cost of
operation.
The magnitude and direction of the blast movement depend on the following factors:
• Blast design and geometry
• Bench geology and geometry
• Mineralization
The primary goal of ore grade control is to provide accurate information
about the location of ore and waste boundaries. First the surveyors examine the blast area
and plan the blast holes in a logical sequence according to the historic blast hole data and
production data from the preceding benches, taking into consideration the rock type,
faults, formations and alterations. After the blast holes are drilled, the samples are
collected and assayed with the block/mineralization model of the deposit. Both the
surveyors’ data and the assay data are used to estimate the areas of specified grade
content within the bench. After the blast, wooden stakes with colored flags are used to
show the pre-blast locations of the polygon boundaries on the surface of the muck pile,
thus showing the digging limits for the load operators. Geologists, by mapping the pit
geology provide the geological information to the ore grade control engineer. Figure 2
illustrates the cross-sectional views of the movement of the rock before and after the
blast.
5
Figure 2: Generalized mass movement model; cross-sectional views before and after the
blast (Gilbride 1995)
Some mines realize that rock movement is one significant factor which impacts
the accuracy of mining ore and waste. They try to use a small powder factor to constrain
the rock movement in order to improve grade control. This results in poor fragmentation
which affects the normal production (and vice-versa). Therefore, a compromise is needed
between the rock movement and fragmentation. A number of mines are not really
concerned about the blast movement as it appears to be quite small or it is too
complicated to consider its impact on ore grade control.

6
1.2 Research objectives
Estimation of the movement of the digging polygons from the pre-blast
boundaries has the potential to improve the accuracy of precise ore production estimates.
Several methods including markers (Taylor 1995), empirical and numerical models
(Gilbride 1995), magnetic geophysics (Harris 1997), colored bags (Zhang 1994), etc.,
were preliminarily implemented. This thesis report discusses and presents five principal
aspects of the blast movement study at the Phoenix Mine:
1. Identifying and developing the appropriate metrics for the measurement of

success in the way of progress analysis and mine to mill grade reconciliation.
2. Participating in recording and analyzing the results after each blast.
3. Participating in modifying post-blast location of digging polygons based on

measured rock movement.
4. Recording and analyzing the results from the digging polygons modification to
determine the extent of improvement in grade control at the Phoenix mine.
5. To recommend, if needed, additional investigations into blasting practice,

movement measurement, computer modeling, excavation process, sampling,
digging polygon contours, etc. which may benefit the grade control activity at the
mine.
The ultimate intention of this research project is to measure the blast movement
using the Blast Movement Measurement (BMM) technologies, analyze the results and
7
modify the post-blast location of the digging polygons based on the movement of the
rock to minimize dilution and improve grade control.

8
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
A considerable research has been made during the past two decades on the blast-
induced movement which may be considered very much a new branch of knowledge
within mining engineering. Various methods have been employed in the past to measure
the magnitude and direction of the rock movement for the purpose of ore control. The
literature review demonstrates the awareness of the blast-induced movement in modern
grade control practices and the measuring techniques which were used.
The aim of the rock excavation in an open pit mine strategies is to produce an
optimum mill feed with minimum dilution and mixing between various ore and waste
blocks to maximize recovery at a minimum operating cost. Little and Van Rooyen (1988)
were the first to identify the blast-induced dilution as a significant grade control problem.
The delineation of blocks of different grade and the ability to mine those blocks
separately is termed as ‘selective mining’ and the approaches used for the control of the
grade are called control techniques. This activity has increased with the latest upsurge in
the gold mining industry (Little and Van Rooyen 1988). In their paper, the grade control
techniques used to define the ore blocks and the strategies to minimize dilution are also
discussed.
The current practices and strategies at the Eastern Goldfields in Australia are
described as: 1) Paddock (fully-buffered) and horizontal free face blasting to restrict the
rock movement in the vertical direction with both selective and non-selective digging,
9
2) Bench or free face and blasting with selective digging and individual block blasting
within a pattern. Most common to Australian gold mining is bench blasting of ore and
waste separately, followed by non-selective digging of each block, ore or waste, as it is
blasted (Little and Van Rooyen 1988). Similarly, selective blasting was used to enhance
grade control, at Pegasus Gold’s Zortman and Landusky mines in Montana (Kunze and
Short 1986).
A number of papers discussed and developed several blast prediction models
(Cherry 1967, Langefors and Kihlstorm 1979, Favreau 1980, Cunningham, 1983,
Schamaun 1983, Harries 1987, Yang and Kavetsky 1989 & 1990). Modeling technology
was relatively a success in predicting the effect of a blast in the field and the blast
parameters, i.e. rock fragmentation, rock movement and muck pile shape. Only a few
projects consider blast induced rock movement and ore grade control (Yang and
Kavetsky 1989 &1990, Lucas and Nies 1990).
Yang and Kavetsky (1989) developed a two-dimensional model with a simple
kinematic approach for predicting the muckpile shape in bench blasting. This model can
be calibrated in a straight-forward manner using the blast parameters and the results can
be used to analyze alternative blasting designs. An extension to the model was developed
in 1990 which resulted in a three-dimensional model of muck pile formation and grade
boundary movement in bench blasting. These models include the blast design geometry,
initiation and explosive energy. Limited data from a case study were used to calibrate the
models. Lucas and Nies (1990) implemented two programs at Homestake McLaughlin
10
Mine, one to minimize the ore displacement, ground vibration and maintain good
fragmentation with sequential timing and the second to evaluate the orientation of delay
pattern to the apparent rock structure. By reducing the powder factor in proportion with
small blast holes, the explosives energy distribution was completed.
Zhang (1994) and Zhang et al., (1994) investigated the blast-induced rock
movement and its impact on grade control at Rain mine and Coeur Rochester mine.
Figure 3 illustrates the expected movement of the rock in a bench, which assumes that the
bottom bench moves more than the top bench. Six blasts at Rain mine and twelve blasts
at Coeur mine were monitored and the conclusions were as follows:
• The powder factor and the magnitude of the movement of the blast pattern
are directly related
• The primary horizontal blast movement direction is approximately parallel
to the initiation direction of each blast.
Figure 3: Post-blast polygons adjustment

11
A further example of expected three dimensional movements is shown in Figure
4, and Table 2 shows the percent dilution calculated from measuring blast movement at
the Coeur Rochester mine (Taylor 1995).
Figure 4: Three dimensional polygonal ore block movement
Table 2: Blast induced dilution for ore polygons, Coeur Rochester Mine
12
It was also suggested that in order to minimize the grade dilution, it is necessary
to direct the blast in the deposit’s strike direction with a single initiation point. The
following methods were recommended for future investigation:
• To carry out a series of systematic measurements of the rock movement to
identify the direction and amount of rock displacement
• To develop empirical rock movement models based on powder factor,
blast hole geometry, rock type, initiation pattern and characteristics of
internal rock movement
• To adjust the location of the pre-blast digging polygons by developing a
new method in order to reduce dilution
Taylor (1995) proposed the survey of pre and post-blast positions of solid marker
objects. Solid markers are bags filled with rock-dust and placed in blast holes within the
bench. Extra holes were drilled along with the normal drill holes with their known pre-
blast locations. Usually these extra holes were drilled near the ore/waste boundary. The
marker bags were placed in the extra holes which were devoid of explosives. After the
blast, the rock was excavated and the post-blast positions of the bags were surveyed.
Figure 5 shows the average movement of the rock. The following were the results:
• This technique provided accurate and reliable blast movement information
• Material in the lower portion of the bench had more horizontal movement
than the upper portion of the bench. This was due to the powder column
13
being situated in the lower portion of the bench and providing more
explosive energy
• Shorter time intervals between rows decreased the horizontal movement
and possibly decreases the vertical movement
• Larger ore blocks with their longest axis parallel to the initiation direction
reduced the risk of dilution within the blast pattern
• An explosive with high shattering effect produced a low amount of gas
expansion resulting in good fragmentation and less blast-induced rock
movement.
Figure 5: Two dimensional average movement profile of the rock
However, this method has several disadvantages which limit its effectiveness. It is
labor intensive and time consuming, particularly the post-blast survey, extra drill holes
are needed which increases the drilling cost. There can be low recovery of the markers,
due to difficulty in:

14
i) seeing the bags in the muck pile during the night shift
ii) incorrect identification of marker bags by shovel operators
iii) delayed movement information for correcting the digging polygons
iv) efficiency of the technique is dependent on the ability of the shovel operators
to discover the targets in the muck pile after the blast
Gilbride (1995) used Itasca’s Universal Distinct Element Code 2.0 (UDEC) to
predict the blast movement by empirical computer prediction and numerical modeling.
Blast design parameters and rock properties are the only information required to calibrate
the magnitude and direction of sub-surface movement of a particular blast. The scope of
the study was to perform a focused and detailed study of the blast-induced rock
movement to develop a comprehensive model in order to either suppress the movement
or compensate the movement with improved grade control practices. The research
activities include monitoring of bench blasts for rock movement and geomechanical
characterization of the benches at the Coeur Rochester open pit mine. Magnetic targets
were used and Figure 6 illustrates the three types of targets, which were located using a
magnetic gradiometer.
15
Figure 6: Magnetic gradiometer targets evaluated during field testing
The blast simulation results consist of graphical output representing numerical
values generated by UDEC. UDEC had failed to construct the 2-dimensional cross-
section model of a bench and was successful in demonstrating the ability to simulate the
gas pressure loading of blast hole. Due to long run-times per simulation, neither an
accurate blast simulation nor a complete projectile motion of the rock mass was achieved
and the post-blast grade boundary locations were not predicted. The horizontal blast
movement measured at the Coeur Rochester mine averaged about 11 ft, and concluded
that:
• the direction of the blast movement was parallel to the initiation direction of the
blast
16
• the blast movement may be minimized by smaller powder factor in conjunction
with better explosives energy distribution
• the direction of the blast should be parallel to the strike direction of deposits
• the use of blast movement markers in holes could be employed in ore to guide the
operators
• the numerical simulation of the blast movement using UDEC 2.0 had failed to
construct a two-dimensional cross-sectional model of bench with the geometrical,
geomechanical and explosive properties
• re-development of the code and use of much faster computer can accomplish for
increase in a speed solution for UDEC
A dramatic increase in horizontal displacement was measured at the interface,
between the material on the same vertical level as the stemming and that on the same
vertical level as the explosives. The relationship between the surface features and internal
movement was predicted by the empirical model that:
i) A large free-face ramp indicated large horizontal movement in the ramp direction
ii) A trough indicates large-scale horizontal movement of lower-level material out
from beneath the trough
iii) Vertical swell on a muckpile surface is inversely proportional to the horizontal
movement of the rock mass beneath that location

17
Gilbride recommended that, in future the blast movement research should be
concerned with (1) augmenting the number of movement case studies, (2) developing
empirical models, (3) developing numerical simulations to predict the grade boundary
displacement, (4) evaluation of the benefit of preventing or compensating for movement.
Harris developed better magnetic targets (Harris 1995), and Figure 7 shows the
targets used for measuring the blast movement measurement. These targets consist of
Ceramic Magnet Dipole Composite – 3 pairs of ceramic disks and Cattle Magnet Dipole
Composite – 12 pairs of magnets.
Figure 7: Finished type targets (Harris, 1997)

18
Harris also used an improved gradiometer and software to interpolate the location
of the magnetic targets. Figure 8 shows the pre- and post- blast locations of the targets
and a test carried out by Firth at the Lone Tree mine, (Firth 2003), which excavated a
target in the post blast rock pile using a backhoe, found the target was close to its
estimated position. Further work on developing improved software to locate the magnetic
targets was stopped, since a new movement measurement unit, using a radio signal, was
developed (Thornton 2004).
Figure 8: Pre (left) and post-blast (right) locations of the targets
Computer simulation of open pit bench blasting is a significant challenge for the
mining industry. Firth, I. R. and Taylor, D. L. (2001) described the combination of
numerical blast models with conventional mine planning software and the practical use of
those results by simulating a two-dimensional bench blast using UDEC. In this case an
19
attempt was made to use Surpac mine planning software to transfer the blast model data
into usable mine planning information. It was concluded that a three-dimensional
numerical model would be able to determine the accurate grade boundaries from the blast
modeling data.
In 2004, Adam and Thornton described that the movement of ore within a blast
can have significant economic impact on open pit mines. Blasting of the valuable
disseminated mining blocks causes movement of the rock and is detrimental to the
accurate delineation of the ore and waste regions within the muckpile. They used the
electronic blast movement monitor developed by JKMRC, which provides 3-dimensional
movement vectors following a production blast. With this information, the ore block
boundaries in the blasted bench were adjusted to compensate for the measured movement
and ore recovery. They concluded that “the development of JKBMMs shown the system
to be reliable, easy to use and predict the blast movement. The horizontal movement was
greatest and most predictable in the body of the blast, and smaller and less predictable in
the centre of a ‘V’ or centre lift blast. Similarly, the vertical movement was greatest in the
centre of the ‘V’, and downward movement was measured in the power trough.”
Various methods including poly-pipes, sandbags and magnets were used to assess
the muckpile movement, but these have been inaccurate (Adam and Thronton, 2004). The
principle research activity of this project is to provide a preliminary quantification of the
blast movement and information that will enable Phoenix Mine to assess current blasting
practices and the benefits of adjusting ore boundaries to account for blast-induced
20
displacement. It is important to understand that due to the variable nature of the blast
movement, it is unlikely that the data collected from this project will be sufficient to
develop an accurate model or template of blast movement. Research by the University of
Queensland has demonstrated that it is not yet possible to accurately model blast
movement and for most sites, the best solution is to directly measure it (Darren Thornton,
2005).
In 2005, the blast movement monitoring was conducted by Placer Dome Inc., at
Porcupine mine (Alain Mainville, 2005). The major things considered while designing
BMM holes were the size and shape of the pattern, the amount and location of ore and the
direction of the blast. The BMMs were used on a regular basis almost in every blast with
ore in it. It was observed that the direction of the movement was fairly predictive but the
distance of the movement had some significant variations. An average horizontal
movement of 15 to 20 ft was considered for moving the ore polygons and the maximum
movement was up to 40 ft. Only the horizontal movement was corrected and the vertical
movement correction was not done as the BMM’s do not have unique ID’s.
The movement of the bench was considered and Figure 9 illustrates the movement
of the rock considering the 3-dimensional movement. A series of batch tests were
conducted through the mill to ensure that the mill grades were the same as the expected
grades and the movement of the digging polygons was quite successful. Figure 10
illustrates the original and moved polygons in a pattern and Table 3 shows the revenue
lost if no correction was made for the blast movement.

21
Figure 9: Dilution and reconciliation issues at the Porcupine Mine
Figure 10: Pre and post-blast ore polygons

22
Table 3: Lost revenue at Porcupine Mine
In 2008, the BMM technology was used at Barrick Goldstrike (Goldstrike Mine,
2008). The rock movement was measured and the results of the horizontal distances
moved are shown in Table 4. The results concluded that the movement was random along
the centre line of a chevron timing configuration, and power trough.
Horizontal distance traveled.

Position of (ft.)
monitor Avg. Low High
4 Back 24.3 19.8 26.9
6 Sides 14.2 1.2 24.6
6 Front 17.8 8.0 33.0
5 Center 8.6 0.4 18.9
4 Body 15.0 -2.3 26.1
25
Table 4: Results of the rock movement at Barrick Goldstrike
In 2009, BMM was used by Barrick Gold Corporation, at Ruby Hill Mine
(Hilkewich, 2009). The geology at the mine consists of oxide ore and sulphide ore. Three
test blasts were performed and 20 ft benches in a 20 ft × 20 ft square pattern were used.
Based on the results, batch test was performed and only the horizontal component of the
movement was analyzed. The higher grade boundaries were moved into a lower grade
23
polygon and this increased the size of the ore block and decreased the size of the waste
block. Figure 11, shows a turquoise colored polygon which was the original high grade
polygon and it was moved into the pink colored low grade polygon.
Figure 11: Movement of the digging polygons
For this reason, after the movement, more tons were accounted for. The results of
the test resulted in:
• average horizontal movement of the three blasts was 9.9 ft
• the minimum and maximum movement of 6.7 ft and 21.1 ft respectively
• improvement of 3.7 % increase in recoverable ounces
• improvement of 12.7 % increase in ore tons

24
3 THE PHOENIX MINE
3.1 Introduction
The Phoenix open pit gold and silver mine, operated by Newmont Mining
Corporation is located in the high desert of Nevada, development started in 2004 and
production commenced in 2006. The mine is located in north-central Nevada,
approximately 15 miles southwest of the town of Battle Mountain, in Lander County,
Nevada. The town of Battle Mountain is located on US Highway 80 approximately 220
miles north east of Reno, Nevada, 54 miles south east of Winnemucca, Nevada and 300
miles west of Salt Lake City, Utah. Figure 12 illustrates the Newmont Nevada
Operations’ sites, including Phoenix and Figure 13 shows the overview of the Phoenix
Mine. At year-end 2009 ore reserves for the Phoenix pit were 288 million tons of mill ore
at an average grade of 0.020 opt Au, 0.265 opt Ag and 0.156 % Cu.
25
scale: 1inch= 2000 ft
Figure 12: Map showing the location of mines in Nevada
Figure 13: Overview of the Phoenix Mine, NV

26
The Phoenix Mine can be reached from U. S. Highway 80 at the town of Battle
Mountain by travelling approximately 15 miles south on Nevada State Route 305, and
then west a short distance on a county access road. Newmont’s McCoy/Cove Mine is
approximately 17 miles by road south of the Phoenix Mine site and is accessible via
Nevada State Route 305, which passes by the Phoenix site going to/from the town of
Battle Mountain, shown in Figure 14.
Figure 14: Map showing directions to the Phoenix site
3.2 Geology and mineralization of the Phoenix Mine
The Battle Mountain Mining District consists of three Paleozoic rock assemblages
that have been intruded by Cretaceous and Tertiary intrusive rocks, and are locally
27
overlain by Cenozoic volcanic rocks and alluvium. Two of the Paleozoic assemblages,
the Ordovician, Silurian and Devonian siliceous sequence and the Mississippian,
Pennsylvanian and Permian Havallah sequence are part of the Roberts Mountains and
Golconda allochthons, respectively. The third assembly, the Penn-Permian Antler
sequence is autochthons and part of the overlap assemblage of the Antler orogeny (Jeff,
et al., 2000).
A fairly coherent stratographic sequence is present in the Phoenix pit. It includes
the Harmony Formation, the Antler sequence and the Havallah sequence from the bottom
up, with the bulk of gold mineralized rock hosted in the Antler sequence rocks. The
tectonostratigraphic column at Phoenix Mine, as of May 2005 is illustrated in Figure 15.
The lithologies of the formation include arkosic sandstone, siltstone and lesser argillite,
greenstone and conglomerate. Alteration in the Harmony includes biotite and siliceous
hornfels with subordinate calc-silicate hornfels and skarn developed in greenstone and
clastics with calcareous matrix components. The Antler sequence consists of the Battle
Formation, Antler Peak Limestone and Edna Mountain Formation (Jeff, et al., 2000).
Only the Battle Formation is present in the East of the Virgin fault, whereas in the West,
all the three formations are present. The Battle Formation consists of inter-bedded
calcareous to siliceous and sandstone with lesser calcareous siltstone and shale. The
lower unit is composed of sandy, matrix-supported conglomerate with sandstone and
siltstone. The upper unit and the middle unit consist of medium to thin bedded,
conglomerate, sandstone and siltstone (Roberts, 1964).

28
Figure 15: Tectonostratigraphic column - Phoenix Mine (as of May 2005)

29
The Antler Peak Limestone at Copper Canyon is mostly marble or skarn
and it hosts 25 % of the ore in the Phoenix pit. The Edna Mountain Formation consists of
chert-pebble conglomerate, calcareous sandstone and siltstone. Thickness of the
formation is highly variable, with the thickness ranging from 23 to 250 ft. Almost 5 % of
the Phoenix pit ore is hosted by Edna Mountain Formation. The Havallah sequence
consists of thin-bedded siltstone, sandstone and argillite as well as lesser chert and chert-
pebble conglomerate. The 38-Ma Copper Canyon granodiorite porphyry stock crops out
in the center of the Phoenix project area (Theodore, et al., 1973). The rock contains
quartz, feldspar and minor biotite. Figure 16, shows a plan map of the geology of the
existing mine and the surrounding area.

30
Figure 16: Plan map of the geology
At Phoenix, the 820 to 1600 ft wide primary corridor of mineralization is bound
by two regional scale north-south-striking faults, on the west by the Canyon fault zone
and to the east by the Virgin fault zone (Roberts, 1964 & Theodore and Blake, 1975).
31
These faults dip west 55° to 65° with apparent dip-slip displacements of ~1800 and ~900
ft, respectively. The Virgin fault zone is the main ore controlling structure in Copper
Canyon, with Au, Cu and Ag mineralization in both the footwall and hanging wall and
over 3 miles strike of length. West of the Virgin fault are the north-striking and west-
dipping Echo and F3 normal faults with 200 and 150 ft of dip-slip displacement,
respectively. Both of these faults are well mineralized in the Phoenix deposit.
The mineralization within the Phoenix project can be classified as either being
bedding or structurally controlled. The bedding type is a flat lying or gently dipping
tabular skarn, dominantly controlled by carbonate-rich units. The structural type is
steeply-dipping to the west at ~ 60° and controlled by numerous fault sets and
intersections that crosscut the sedimentary and intrusive rocks. Gold bearing ore is mostly
associated with sulfide-bearing, prograde skarn and also moderately associated with
biotite and quartz-rich hornfels, retrograde skarn, Fe-oxide-rich argillized fault breccias-
gauge zones, or granodiorite porphyry. Petrographic studies of Au have found Au is
coarse grained (59 ×27 microns) and determined that about 64 % of Au grains are present
at gangue-gangue grain boundaries, in sulfide-gangue grain boundaries and in quartz,
pyroxene, epidote and K-feldspar. The remaining 36 % are present as inclusions of
sulfide minerals that include pyrite, and pyrrhotite and lesser arsenopyrite, chalcopyrite
and sphalerite (Johnson, 2000).
The sulfide content of Phoenix project ores range from 0 – 25 % by volume and
its minerals occur as disseminations within calc-silicate and silicate gangue, as massive
32
replacements of carbonate-rich beds. The sulfide minerals are dominated by pyrrhotite
and pyrite with minor marcasite, chalcopyrite, chalcocite, arsenopyrite, sphalerite and
galena. Other minerals like tatrahedrite, native Au, native bismuth, etc. are found with
electron microprobe (Knipe, 1999 & Myers, 1990 and 1994).
3.3 Blasting practices
The production benches at the Phoenix Mine are 40 ft high with a sub-drill of 5 ft.
The diameter of the drill holes are 6.75 inch with spacing and burden varying from 10 ft
to 17 ft. The burden and spacing for a pattern are normally decided depends on the rock
type, rock quality and explosive load. The Phoenix Mine schedules four production blasts
per week, Monday through Thursday with an average of 200 to 500 holes per pattern,
yielding approximately 40,000 tons of blasted material. A typical blast pattern is shown
in Figure 17. Generally, the weaker the rock, the greater the hole spacing and the less the
powder factor. The initiation direction of the blast is designed in such a way that it is
perpendicular to the faults and also to coincide with the strike of existing mineralized
structures (Harris, 1997). The initiation of the pattern depends on the free face and may
be a V, echelon or centre lift.

33
Figure 17: A typical blast pattern in the F1 pit
The production holes are drilled vertically to a depth of 45 ft, with 27ft of
explosives column, 13 ft of stemming (crushed rock - 3/8 inch) and 5 ft of sub-drill and
are spaced either on a staggered or a square pattern. The design of a square or staggered
pattern depends mostly on the hardness of the rock. The square pattern is always used in
soft rock and in hard rock, staggered pattern. An emulsion/ANFO, at an average ratio of
25 % emulsion to 75 % ANFO is used as the primary blasting agent. The powder factor
ranges from 0.57 lb to 0.90 lb. The types of explosives used for blasting are 458 HANFO,
462 HANFO, 458ANFO, 462 ANFO and 290C. 458 HANFO stands for Heavy ANFO,
which is a blend of Emulsion and ANFO, 458 has 26%Emulsion and 74%ANFO and 462
has 32%Emulsion and 68% ANFO. Generally, at operating mines, there is a tendency to
use small blasts in ore and large blasts in waste (Zhang, 1997). Pattern timing and layout
34
are designed to promote the vertical movement of the rock and also to minimize the
horizontal rock movement in order to reduce ore dilution.
Blast holes are loaded with ANFO mechanically and are initiated with a one
pound cast booster using Ikon down-hole delays and detonating cord on the surface. The
detonating cords are used in patterns with soft rock and no faults and also when there is a
change of formations. Electronic detonators are used with hard rock and when there is
change of formations within a zone. As a rule of thumb, electronic detonators are used
when there is fault.
3.4 Ore control practices
At Phoenix, 40 ft benches are drilled and blasted and 20 ft benches are
excavated separately. Each blast hole is manually sampled by a sample crew. The
samplers estimate the contact between the upper and lower bench material in the cuttings
pile and sample the upper and lower benches separately as shown in Figure 18. The mine
assays the samples primarily for gold, silver and copper. Additional assay data includes
cyanide soluble copper, acid soluble copper, total sulfur and carbon, sulfide sulfur,
carbonate carbon and lime requirements to neutralize the acid potential of the sulfides.
35
Figure 18: Hand sampling of a drill hole cuttings
When the assay results are received by the mine, an ordinary kriging blast hole
model is created. The blast hole block model size is 4'×4'×20' bench height. The cut-off
grade at the mine is based on a dollar value. To determine this value, the in-house
software uses many factors including metal prices, milling costs and recoveries of each
metal. The recoveries are calculated depending upon: which rock formation, alteration
type, copper ore type and metallurgical zone exist in the bench to be blasted, e.g.1)
argillite (clay) results in no recovery, 2) A copper ore type hypogene with a skarn
alteration in the Antler Formation is assigned certain recoveries of each metal. The
milling cost is derived from a number of factors such as the grinding rate in tons per hour,
which effects for hard, medium or soft rock or any combination. Summing the value of
the metals contained with their respective recoveries, less milling costs, generates the net
revenue/loss for each drill hole sample. The cut-off revenue value of $ 2.00 or more is
considered ore, but they can vary. Another consideration is the copper content in the blast
36
hole samples. The mine separates ore into low, medium and high copper content
categories along with high total sulfur, and a manual override for “hard” ore. All the ore
types are stockpiled separately and are blended to achieve a constant or loss erratic
copper content into the mill, which floats copper sulfides.

37
4 BLAST MOVEMENT MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY
4.1 Introduction
Blast Movement Technologies (BMT) is a revolutionary, innovative and cost
effective method of determining material movement during blasting in order to minimize
ore loss and dilution and thereby increasing revenue. This technology is used to improve
the ore grade control in surface mines and enhance recovery of natural resources in the
earth. It is also an excellent tool for understanding how blasted rock volumes move in
three dimensional spaces. The benefit of this system is that it accurately quantifies post
blast translation of ore blocks in the field, minimizing ore loss and dilution. Reduced ore
loss results in increased revenue for the same operating cost.
The BMT system is simple to use by site personnel and enables a step-change in
grade control. It consists of directional transmitters (Blast Movement Monitors) placed in
special holes within the blast pattern prior to blasting and then located with detector after
the blast. The location of the BMMs prior to, and after the blast is recovered, downloaded
and processed with proprietary software that calculates the movement vector of each
BMM in x, y and z. This data is used to redefine the ore boundaries after the blast.
38
4.2 Instrumentation
The measurement and analysis of the rock movement using BMM, the collection of
the data from the site, and the final results of the grade control will require the following
equipment:
(1) BMM ball
(2) BMM activator (that provides signal radius).
(3) GP4 100 BMM detector
(4) Surveyor (GPS, compass, etc.).
(5) Finding the depth of the ball using BMT software
(6) A computer with AutoCAD and BMM software
(1) The BMM ball, shown in Figure 19 is made of plastic and contains a directional radio
signal transmitter. It is a 6 inch (150mm) diameter ball that is dropped in a dedicated non-
blast hole within the blast pattern. Depending on the blast pattern and predicted ore
boundaries, a ball is dropped into each of the BMM drill holes which are drilled to pre-
determined depth. The minimum distance between each ball should be 2-3 times the
depth of the hole into which the ball is dropped. On an average the number of BMM balls
dropped in each blast pattern was 6 and the average recovery was 5 BMM balls.
39
Figure 19: Blast Movement Measurement balls
The BMM transmits a strong signal for 8 hours for location detection and accurate
depth determination. After 8hours the signal gradually decreases and the ball can no
longer be detected. If there are any problems like lightning, safety reasons etc., at the
mine which delay the time of the blast, the activation of the BMM can be delayed with
the BMM activator. The activated delay time is set in multiples of 4 hours for 36 hours as
shown in Table 5. Once a BMM is activated for delayed start-up it cannot be changed.
Blast Movement Monitors (BMMs) are delivered to the mine site with the
transmitter in a low power hibernation state. The BMM transmitter must be switched on
before installation into the drill hole. The BMM can only be switched on by a specially
40
coded signal which eliminates accidental activation. The ball is activated before it is
dropped into the drill hole. There is a possibility of giving separate time delays for the
BMM balls dropped in a pattern, so that the signals do not cross each other.
Multiples of 4 Hours of delay
0 No delay
1 4 hours
2 8 hours
3 12 hours
4 16 hours
5 20 hours
6 24 hours
7 28 hours
8 32 hours
9 36 hours
Table 5: Delay times
A BMM ball was recovered after a blast at the Phoenix Mine and opened to view
its contents. Figure 20 shows the parts that make up the radio transmitter in the ball. The
black colored plastic unit inside the ball is the transmitter which has a winding around it
of copper wire. The battery and electronics can be seen inside the unit.
41
Figure 20: Inside the BMM ball
(2) The BMM activator is a hand held remote control device that provides the signal to
not only turn the transmitter on but also to assign a delayed start-up time. It is also useful
to quickly determine if a BMM is transmitting. The BMM activator consists of a tough
ABS plastic case with a sealed low-profile keypad and supplied with a rubber boot for
added protection as shown in Figure 21.

42
1. Power button
2. Set button (yellow)
3. BMM ball activator (green)
4. Test on/off button (grey)
5. Delay time (white)
6. Transmit LED (green)
7. Receive LED (red)
8. Radial signal
Figure 21: Blast Movement Measurement activator

43
It is small enough to slip into a pocket and the rubber boot can be easily removed
to make it less bulky if desired. To use it, pull the lower end of the stand out of its
clips and rotate until it stops. To replace, fold the stand into its recess and press firmly
to clip in place. The battery compartment can be accessed by removing the back of
the case. An alkaline or rechargeable NiMH 9 volt battery provides the power source.
(3) The GP4100 BMM Detector shown in Figure 22 is designed specifically to detect
and interpret the signal produced by the Blast Movement Monitors (BMMs). The
GP4100 control box is water and dust resistant but should not be immersed in water
since the charging socket is not waterproof. The detector continuously displays the
signal strength and can quickly locate local peak signals of the transmitting BMM.
Local peaks occur directly above each BMM and the signal strength is used to
determine the depth of the BMM and therefore its position in 3-dimensional space.
The BMMs initial pre-blast position is recorded so a 3-dimension movement vector
can be determined. The detector can only locate the BMM and record its depth.
Surveyors are needed to determine the x and y data for the pre and post-blast BMM
locations.
44
Figure 22: Blast Movement Measurement detector
The GP4100 BMM Detector is supplied in a sturdy case with padded insert to
protect the components during rough transportation, especially between sites. Figure
23 shows the BMM detector. It sits on top of the lower foam with the flat bottom
facing upward. The cable is located in the staff recess and the protruding cable duct is
located in the hole for the control box mounting cap. The raised strips on the coil
45
where the staff attaches are fitted into the centre of the staff recess. The controls on
the front panel of the detector are shown in Figure 23.
Figure 23: Blast Movement Measurement detector-front panel
(4) Before the blast, a surveyor with a GPS instrument, along with the blasting
engineer, obtains easting and northing of the drill hole collar in which the BMM ball
is dropped and the detector records the depth of the ball in the hole. After the blast,
the surveyor is asked to walk over the blasted rock surface and identify the pre-
location of the hole. The blasting engineer knowing the approximate direction of the
blast movement from the initiation sequence and deviation travels in that direction
46
until the strongest signal from the ball is read on the detector. The signal is recorded
and the surveyor determines the N/S and E/W coordinates of the post location of the
BMM ball.
(5) After collecting all the readings in the field, the blasting engineer receives the pre
and post x and y coordinates of the BMMs from the survey. The surveyor arranges
this data as a text file and sends the file to the blasting engineer. The data from the
detector is transferred into the computer using a USB cable. A quick reference of the
BMM Assistant software is shown in Figure 24.

47
Figure 24: A quick reference of the BMM Assistant software from BMM manual
48
(6) All numerical calculations and analyzing are performed on a computer. The
following software is required for the research project: (a) BMT software
(bmm_setup_061010.exe) (b) Microsoft EXCEL, (c) Microsoft Word, (d) Auto
CAD. (e) Surpac
4.3 Research Procedure
The principle research activity of this project is to provide a preliminary
quantification of the blast movement and information that will enable Phoenix Mine
to assess current blasting practices and the benefits of adjusting ore boundaries to
account for blast-induced displacement. It is important to understand that due to the
variable nature of blast movement, it is unlikely that the data collected from this
project will be sufficient to develop an accurate model or template of blast movement.
Research by the University of Queensland has demonstrated that it is not yet possible
to accurately model blast movement and for most sites, the best solution is to directly
measure it (Darren Thornton 2005).
Before drilling the first thing to determine is the location of the extra non-blast
holes into which the BMMs will be placed within the regular blast hole pattern. This
depends on the depth of the regular blast holes, type of blast, blast pattern, burden,
spacing, geology, estimated ore, polygon shape, etc. to find the movement when
dropped at different depths. The drill and blast foreman is provided with all the maps
and data concerning the blast design no later than 24 hours before drilling. After the
pattern is drilled and before the blast, the BMMs are activated and dropped into the
49
measurement holes and their depth is recorded with the detector as shown in Figure
25. The surveyor records the x and y coordinates of these pre-blast locations. These
holes are later backfilled with stemming.
Figure 25: Detection of ball after dropping into the blast hole (before the blast)
After the blast, the blast foreman gives the signal that it is safe to walk out
over the blasted muck pile to locate the BMM balls. The blast can result in up to 45 ft
of heave of the blasted muck pile and sloping edges. The blasting engineer and
surveyor go on to the muck pile and the surveyor is asked to show the pre-location of
the BMM drill hole. Using GPS, the surveyor locates the pre-blast location and the
blasting engineer moves from that location along the general movement direction
50
until the BMM ball is found by using the BMM detector. Once the blasting engineer
finds the post-blast location by the peak signal from the BMM ball, the surveyor
records the coordinates of that position on the muck pile and saves the information
with an appropriate BMM identification value. This process continues until the
blasting engineer finds all the BMM balls. Sometimes it is difficult to find the post
location of the ball due to some reasons such as damage of the ball, wrong time
delays, etc. In the office all the data from the BMM detector is transferred into the
PC computer using a USB cable and the surveyor provides the coordinate data for the
BMM locations. Figure 26 illustrates the foreman and blasting engineer walking on
45 ft muck pile in search of the post location of the BMM ball.
Figure 26: Foreman and engineer walking on the muck pile in search of BMM ball
51
The BMT software is used to obtain the three dimensional movement vectors
of the BMMs. BMT software gives the movement of the BMMs. Table 6 shows the
final result of a blast with the vertical distance, horizontal distance, inclination and
3D distance vector. AutoCAD or “Orecon” software is used to create digitized shapes
to estimate the displaced ore polygons into where they are now estimated to be
located within the blasted muck pile. If this process is correct it will result in the
shovel correctly digging the ore polygons in their new positions.
Initial Initial Initial Final Final Vertical

Depth Surface BMM Surface BMM Direction Horizontal Distance 3D Inclination
BMM # (ft) RL (ft) RL (ft) RL (ft) RL (ft) (deg) Distance (ft) (ft) Distance (deg)
1 20 6159 6139 6174.1 6146.4 322 23.9 7.4 25 17.3
2 16.7 6159 6142.3 6171.5 6146.9 317 22.8 4.6 23.2 11.4
3 20.4 6159 6138.6 6171.3 6146.8 309 25.8 8.2 27.1 17.6
4 20.6 6159 6138.4 6175.7 6146.9 290 22.4 8.5 24 20.7
Table 6: Final Summary of the Blast Movement Measurement software
4.3.1 Drill and Blast considerations
The blasting engineer and ore control engineer decide where to drill the BMM
holes. The estimated waste polygons are generally not considered to be an important
target. Sometimes, irrespective of the ore and waste areas, the balls are placed just to
study the movement depending on the rock type and the faults in the blast pattern.
Typically, BMM drill holes are drilled prior to the day before the blast or earlier in
order to monitor them.
4.3.2 Pre-blast procedure - Installation
Installation of BMM’s consists of these four steps:

52
i. Measure the depth of the hole using a tape measurer
ii. Activate the BMM
iii. Drop the BMM into the hole
iv. Backfill the hole (done by the blasting crew)
While installing the BMMs, each ball is saved with a number in the detector.
It is possible for the detector to lock up when a BMM is activated too close to the
detector’s coil. It is necessary to take note of the display before recording the pre-
blast signal data. There is also a chance of detecting another BMM if one is placed
close to the detector and resetting the detector helps to rectify the problem.
Note: When arriving at a new BMM hole, it is important to put the detector on the
ground with the coil oriented vertically and away from the BMMs. This minimizes
the “shock” to the electronics when the BMM is switched on.
The following points should be kept in mind when detecting the BMM ball.
• Always monitor the descent of the BMM with the detector. Hold the detector
stationary above the hole and the signal strength decreases as the BMM
descends. When the signal becomes constant, the BMM has reached the
bottom of the hole. Note that the detector does not have to be at the hole
collar.
53
• Once the BMM is at the bottom of the drill hole (recorded by the detector),
drop several rocks into the hole to lock it in place. There have been instances
when the BMM has gone to the bottom but then as the hole was backfilled
with stemming, the BMM stayed above the rising stemming column. This is
more likely to happen in large diameter holes since the stemming can flow
around the BMM without locking it.
4.3.3 Post-blast procedure - Detecting the BMM ball
After the blast, the location of the post BMM ball should be straight forward.
Detection of the wrong position results in ore loss and dilution. As soon as the
surveyor shows the pre-blast position of the BMM, the blasting engineer starts
searching for the signal from the transmitter. The best way to search is to walk
straight from the pre position, in the indicated direction of the blast. At some point the
signal will increase and when the signal fades, return to then turn either left or right
until the signal is maximum. Wherever the signal is maximum, the point is marked
and the easting, northing and elevation of that point are recorded.
It is relatively easy to locate the BMM signal on a reasonably flat and well
fragmented muck pile. But when there are steeper and blockier terrains, it gets more
challenging. In such situations double checking the correct BMM location, can
consume a lot of time but it is important to get an accurate BMM location.

54
4.3.4 Locating the Peak Signal
It is very important to locate the peak signal. The following steps are
necessary while locating the peak signal.
(a) Switch the detector from auto mode to manual mode. The detector detects the
BMM only when the BMM is within 20 m (65 ft) limit from the detector. It is easier
to find the post-blast location of the BMM when the detector handle is straight and
the bottom disk is horizontal. The signal increases as the BMM gets closer.
b) When the signal is detected, keep going in that direction until the signal starts to
decrease. Return to about where the maximum value returns. Slowly walk back and
forth to locate the peak signal (say in east-west direction in position 1). Turn 90°
(north-south direction in position 2) and move the detector. Decrease in the signal
strength indicates moving in the wrong direction and vice-versa. Illustration of peak
signal detection is shown in Figure 27, (1) and (2). The X-symbol in position (2)
indicates not to move in the east-west direction after you obtain peak signal.
c) Move the detector coil in a straight line at a constant elevation to locate a
maximum value.
d) Turn 90° and repeat the technique to locate the maximum signal strength.
e) Repeat the steps above as necessary to pinpoint the BMM.

55
Figure 27: An example showing the detection of the ball after the blast from BMM
manual (from BMT manual)
Following is a list of things to keep in mind while searching for a BMM:
a) Where are the BMMs expected to be?
b) Is another BMM within range? This will result in superimposed signals and
the “valley” could be greatly elevated such that the local peak is not much
higher than the surrounding field.
c) What is the signal strength expected to be? There is a chance of locating
another similar BMM which is not the same one.
d) When working on the side of a slope, detecting the side of the field and the
interaction between the receiver and the field at this location is quite difficult.
4.3.5 Orientation of the detector
The signal strength measured by the detector is affected by the distance from
the transmitter and the angle between the detector coil at the field lines. Moving away
56
from the BMM decreases the signal strength. When the detector is placed directly
above the transmitter with the coil horizontal, the peak signal is obtained. The
detector is moved horizontally because of constantly changing elevation but not
parallel to the surface even on a slope as shown in Figure 28.
Figure 28: Position of the detector on flat surface and sloped surface (from BMT
manual)
57
5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
5.1 Introduction
The main purpose of using the Blast Movement Technology is to measure the
blast-induced rock movement and adjust the location of the digging polygons to
account for this movement within the blast in order to minimize dilution. The results
obtained in the blast tests at the Phoenix Mine using the BMM equipment and
software are presented in this chapter. The aims of these tests were:
• To monitor the blast induced rock movement in the blast pattern
• To predict and provide 3-dimensional rock movement information
• To move the location of the pre-blast digging polygons to their post-blast
position
• To improve the ore control and minimize dilution
In summary, the BMM balls were activated and placed into the drill holes and
blasting is initiated. The post-blast BMM positions in the muck pile were determined
using the detector. After receiving the pre and post-blast x and y coordinates of the
BMM ball positions from the surveyor, this together with the pre and post-blast data
from the detector, was downloaded into a computer through a USB cord. All the data
was saved in .txt file format. The BMM assistant software was provided with all the
details of the blast such as:

58
i) blast ID
ii) blast date
iii) hole diameter (in)
iv) bench height (ft)
v) spacing and burden (ft)
vi) delay timing (ms)
vii) powder factor (lb/ton)
viii) explosives
ix) type of initiation
x) rock type
xi) hole depth (ft)
xii) stemming(ft)
Using blast PX01390911B as an example, all these values were input into the
BMM software for rock movement analysis. Figure 29 show a window from the
BMM assistant software and Figure 30 shows the output indicating the movement of
the BMMs. All the Phoenix Mine blasts were designed on a 40 ft bench with a 5 ft
sub-drill. In Figure 30, the green colored holes indicate the pre-blast position of the
BMMs and the red colored holes indicate the post-blast position of the BMMs and the
blue line in between the respective red and green holes is the initiation direction of
the blast. A total of six BMMs were placed in this pattern and only four BMMs (1, 2,
3 & 4) were recovered. The post-blast positions of the remaining two BMMs (5 & 6)
were not found. This was probably due to radial signal failure of the BMMs.
59
Figure 29: BMM Assistant software

60
Scale: 1 inch = 27 ft
Figure 30: Results from the BMM assistant (PX01390911B)
5.2 Results of the blast movement measurements
Two blasts at Phoenix Mine, PX014306 on bench 6160 and PX013911 on
bench 6240, are shown to illustrate the movement measurement process.
5.2.1 Blast PX014306
This shot was blasted on 6160 bench. The following data was required as input
for the BMM assistant.
• Blast ID – PX014306
• Date of blast – 07/23/09
• Bench height – 40 ft
• Sub-drill – 5 ft
61
• Stemming – 13 ft
• Hole diameter – 6.75 inch
• Burden and spacing – 15 × 15 ft
• Powder factor – 0.6 lbs
• Initiation – Echelon
• Explosive – 458
• Rock type – Virgin Fault (Vfz)
The pattern had two free faces and the initiation was Echelon. A total of 272
holes were drilled along with the BMM holes. A total of six BMMs, four on the top
bench and another two on the bottom were placed in the pattern. All of the BMMs
were recovered and the average horizontal and vertical distances moved by the
BMMs were 16.2 ft and 8.15 ft, respectively. The position of the BMMs placed in the
holes, movement direction, and the results of the movement from the BMM assistant
are shown in Figures 31, 32 and 33 respectively and the results are shown in Table 7.
The red colored lines in Figure 31 are the delay times, which provide the
burden relief. The yellow colored arrows in Figure 32 indicate the direction of the
movement of the blast in the pattern. In Figure 33, the green colored holes were the
pre-blast BMM positions and the red colored holes were the post-blast BMM
positions. Six BMMs (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 in Figure 31) were placed in the pattern and all
of the BMMs were recovered after blasting. The three dimensional movement of the
blast is shown in Figure 36.

62
Figure 31: Blast holes with numbers and BMMs’ pre and post-blast position
63
Figure 32: Direction of the movement

64
Figure 33: Result of the blast movement from BMM assistant

65
Initial Initial Final Final Vertical

Initial Surface RL BMM Surface BMM RL Direction Horizontal Distance 3D Inclination
BMM # Depth (ft) (ft) RL (ft) RL (ft) (ft) (deg) Distance (ft) (ft) Distance (deg)
1 15 6201.3 6186 6216 6197.5 201 9.8 11.2 14.9 49
2 30 6201.7 6172 6213.5 6177.5 226 23.7 5.8 24.4 13.8
3 16 6201.3 6185 6215.9 6194.7 223 26.2 9.3 27.8 19.6
4 20 6201.5 6182 6210.9 6188.7 233 16.3 7.3 17.8 24.1
5 33 6202.1 6169 6213.8 6171.7 249 9.4 2.6 9.8 15.3
6 16 6201.9 6186 6213 6198.6 214 12 12.7 17.5 46.6
Table 7: Summary of the PX013909 pattern
The polygons on the upper and lower benches of the pattern are shown in Figures
34 and 35.
66
Figure 34: Original polygons on the upper bench of the pattern

67
Figure 35: Original polygons on the lower bench of the pattern

68
Figure 36: Three dimensional view of the blast movement
5.2.2 Blast PX013911
The following data is required as input for the BMM assistant.
• Burden and spacing – 15 ft × 15 ft
• Powder factor – 0.9
• Initiation – Center lift
• Rock type – Lower battle (Pbl)

69
The pattern had no free face and the initiation was center-lift. A total of 189
holes were drilled along with the BMM holes. Six BMMs were placed in the pattern
and five were recovered. The blast holes, movement direction and the results from the
BMM assistant are shown in Figures 37, 38 and 39 respectively and the results are
shown in Table 8. The red colored lines in Figure 37 are the delay times, which
provide the burden relief. The yellow colored arrows in Figure 38 indicate the
direction of the movement of the blast in the pattern.
Figure 37: Blast holes with numbering and BMM position and their movement
70
Figure 38: Direction of the movement of the pattern
In Figure 39, the green colored holes were the pre-blast BMM positions and
the red colored holes were the post-blast BMM positions. Six BMMs (1, 2, 3, 4, 5 &
6) were placed in the pattern and five were recovered. One BMM was not recovered
due to radial signal failure.

71
Initial Initial Final Horiz. Vert. 3D

Initial surface RL BMM RL surface RL Final BMM Direction Distance Distance Distance Inclination
BMM# depth (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) RL (ft) (deg) (ft) (ft) (ft) (deg)
1 21 6281.3 6260.3 6304.5 6270 357 13 9.6 16.2 36.5
2 20 6279.6 6259.6 6295.9 6272.2 65 37.8 12.6 39.8 18.5
3 20 6279.2 6259.2 6291.2 6267.8 64 23.8 8.7 25.3 20
4 19 6280.6 6261.6 6290.8 6267.8 106 17.2 6.2 18.3 19.7
5 20 6280.1 6260.1 6298 6268 120 36.1 7.9 36.9 12.3
Table 8: Summary of the PX013911 blast
The polygons on the upper and lower benches of the pattern are shown in figures
40 and 41.
72

73
A total of 38 blasts were measured and the information for the other blasts, for
the upper and lower benches is shown in Appendix A.
Table 9 shows the summary of the blasts at the Phoenix Mine from March
2009 to March 2010. The table contains the following information:
i) Bench elevation (ft)
ii) Blast ID, date of blast, and total no. of drill holes
iii) No. of BMMs placed in each pattern and on upper and lower benches
iv) No. of BMMs recovered in each pattern and on upper and lower
benches
v) Geological formation of the bench
vi) No. of ore and waste polygons in each pattern on both benches
vii) Cost of each BMM and cost of BMMs per blast
viii) Total tons of ore and waste in each pattern (both top and bottom
benches)
ix) Grades of gold (opt), copper (%) and silver (opt)
x) Powder factor (lb/ft)
xi) Average horizontal and vertical movement (ft) in each pattern

74
Cost analysis
Cost of each BMM ball = $ 345.00
Cost of drilling per foot = $ 2.50
Lease fee for BMM detector and software = $ 1500/month
No of months till date = 12 (approximately)
Blast
No. of balls No. of balls No. of balls No. of balls Powder direction
Total no. of drill placed in top placed in bottom recovered on recovered on Formatio factor No. of polygons in each blast (top No. of polygons in each blast (bottom (no. of free Silver grade Horizontal Movement range
Pit Bench Blast ID Date of Blast holes bench bench top bench bottom bench n (lbs/ft) bench) bench) Cost of each ball Cost of balls per blast* faces) Top bench Ore (tons) Top bench Waste (tons) Top bench Total tons Gold grade (oz/ton) Copper grade (%) (oz/ton) Bottom bench Ore (tons) Bottom bench Waste (tons) Bottom bench Total tons Gold grade (oz/ton) Copper grade (%) Silver grade (oz/ton) (ft) Vertical Movement range (ft)
Hi grade ore Low grade ore Waste Hi grade ore Low grade ore Waste
F1
6280 PX013728 3/16/2009 323 3 3 3 3 Pbl 0.6 3 6 3 3 4 3 $345.00 $2,070.00 1 63,048.0 81,929.0 144,977.0 0.011-0.019 0.116-0.409 0.154-0.451 53,378.9 111,695.3 165,074.2 0.009-0.024 0.106-0.604 0.138-0.555 13.6-30.8 0.5-13.8
6240 PX013909 3/25/2009 331 3 3 3 1 Pbl 0.8 8 2 1 8 1 - $345.00 $2,070.00 - 17,902.0 104,829.0 122,731.0 0.012-0.038 0.073-0.216 0.167-0.314 5,996.0 97,605.0 103,601.0 0.015-0.046 0.093-0.357 0.181-0.594 25.9-65.5 (40.3)-17.4
PX013911 3/17/2009 189 6 0 5 0 Pbl 0.6 5 3 2 5 3 - $345.00 $2,070.00 - 92,372.0 14,530.0 106,902.0 0.013-0.033 0.089-0.191 0.175-0.277 117,319.4 0.0 117,319.4 0.014-0.037 0.090-0.196 0.197-0.298 13.0-37.8 6.2-12.6
PX013914 6/4/2009 332 2 1 2 1 Cha 0.8 3 - 1 1 1 1 $345.00 $1,035.00 1 18,977.0 95,099.0 114,076.0 0.007-0.021 0.031-0.136 0.116-0.383 2,526.0 124,033.0 126,559.0 0.006-0.020 0.042-0.087 0.119-0.195 32.9-53.6 (91.9)-13.7
PX013915 4/8/2009 322 1 2 0 0 Pbl/Cha - 7 - 3 4 1 2 $345.00 $1,035.00 1 69,536.0 53,108.0 122,644.0 0.007-0.029 0.020-0.235 0.096-0.376 52,982.0 71,914.0 124,896.0 0.006-0.026 0.042-0.263 0.119-0.368 NA NA
PX013917 4/20/2009 315 1 2 0 1 Pbl 0.7 8 4 6 7 4 4 $345.00 $1,035.00 1 100,035.0 37,136.0 137,171.0 0.009-0.022 0.072-0.364 0.159-0.380 121,915.5 18,281.0 140,196.5 0.009-0.025 0.062-0.257 0.189-0.642 21.00 3.60
PX013918 4/16/2009 317 2 0 1 0 Pbl 0.6 4 1 4 3 2 3 $345.00 $690.00 1 97,821.0 33,377.0 131,198.0 0.009-0.030 0.099-0.134 0.143-0.276 106,495.0 26,556.0 133,051.0 0.008-0.027 0.064-0.134 0.152-0.270 25.20 10.90
PX013920 4/28/2009 333 3 0 3 0 Pbl 0.6 4 3 4 7 4 3 $345.00 $1,035.00 2 60,423.0 54,932.0 115,355.0 0.007-0.039 0.078-0.583 0.177-1.097 80,757.8 91,253.0 172,010.8 0.009-0.026 0.111-0.515 0.205-1.058 44.1-54.8 9.6-17.3
PX013930 5/11/2009 354 2 2 2 2 Pbl/Cha 0.6 1 - 4 1 1 4 $345.00 $1,380.00 2 36,384.0 156,329.0 192,713.0 0.011-0.014 0.127-0.538 0.211-0.483 49,523.0 157,230.0 206,753.0 0.006-0.014 0.069-0.509 0.185-0.478 9.80-26.3 2.3-4
6200(Metso) PX014103 6/10/2009 310 9 15 7 14 Pbl 0.7 2 2 2 3 4 2 $345.00 $8,280.00 3 110,535.0 14,081.0 124,616.0 0.009-0.022 0.124-0.207 0.214-0.259 96,607.9 21,147.0 117,754.9 0.008-0.021 0.094-0.362 0.180-0.420 9.80-49.8 (15.7)-20.3
6160 PX014306 7/23/2009 272 4 2 4 2 Vfz 0.6 5 3 1 6 - 2 $345.00 $2,070.00 2 91,195.8 53,987.0 145,182.8 0.010-0.026 0.053-0.609 0.223-0.483 45,300.0 99,949.0 145,249.0 0.009-0.026 0.039-0.527 0.198-0.444 9.40-26.2 2.6-12.7
PX014308 8/3/2009 304 2 3 2 3 Cha 0.72 1 4 4 3 4 1 $345.00 $1,725.00 1 45,660.0 78,921.0 124,581.0 0.007-0.021 0.030-0.240 0.116-0.403 40,777.0 68,961.0 109,738.0 0.009-0.021 0.038-0.326 0.092-0.523 14.30-34.3 9.7-21.3
PX014309 5/8/2009 302 3 1 3 1 Cha 0.78 1 3 3 2 2 1 $345.00 $1,380.00 2 17,902.0 104,829.0 122,731.0 0.007-0.018 0.043-0.167 0.116-0.304 5,996.0 97,605.0 103,601.0 0.009-0.025 0.057-0.321 0.166-0.474 18.90-45 (19.5)-21.5
PX014310 6/8/2009 391 1 3 1 2 Cha 0.75 6 3 3 6 3 1 $345.00 $1,380.00 2 131,859.0 18,372.0 150,231.0 0.009-0.022 0.077-0.268 0.162-0.423 95,541.0 24,764.5 120,305.5 0.009-0.032 0.057-0.527 0.166-0.474 19.90-53.5 1.2-7.1
6120 PX014503 8/20/2009 353 1 2 1 2 Vfz - 6 2 1 9 - - $345.00 $1,035.00 1 99,230.0 41,480.0 140,710.0 0.009-0.035 0.034-0.147 0.129-0.794 161,745.0 0.0 161,745.0 0.017-0.035 0.044-0.154 0.189-0.778 NA NA
PX014508 8/31/2009 256 0 5 0 4 Cha 0.8 6 - 1 3 - 3 $345.00 $1,725.00 2 44,986.0 103,786.0 148,772.0 0.005-0.029 0.021-0.095 0.089-0.323 50,921.0 79,087.0 130,008.0 0.008-0.025 0.035-0.115 0.146-0.316 12.60-42.4 (119.3)-13.6
PX014510 9/10/2009 328 4 0 4 0 Cha 0.64 5 3 8 5 - 4 $345.00 $1,380.00 1 70,814.0 70,308.5 141,122.5 0.007-0.024 0.090-0.587 0.169-0.534 63,564.0 81,596.0 145,160.0 0.007-0.043 0.069-0.687 0.160-0.553 22.40-25.8 4.6-8.5
PX014513 9/14/2009 317 3 2 3 2 Cha 0.6 4 1 5 7 3 2 $345.00 $1,725.00 2 58,221.0 81,321.0 139,542.0 0.006-0.023 0.108-0.867 0.210-0.568 61,746.0 74,112.0 135,858.0 0.006-0.023 0.105-0.460 0.182-0.854 31.50-38.5 (72.7)-(1.8)
PX014514 9/22/2009 255 4 0 3 0 Vfz - 5 4 2 4 - 1 $345.00 $1,380.00 2 61,218.0 52,488.0 113,706.0 0.011-0.033 0.064-0.409 0.219-0.616 61,935.0 46,674.0 108,609.0 0.008-0.044 0.084-0.420 0.241-0.562 NA NA
6080 PX014702 6/10/2009 281 3 1 3 0 Vfz 0.6 14 2 1 17 - 3 $345.00 $1,380.00 - 182,963.5 7,295.0 190,258.5 0.007-0.035 0.052-0.210 0.192-0.542 166,856.3 20,521.8 187,378.0 0.006-0.033 0.0465-0.292 0.186-1.177 21.1-25.3 11.3-12.3
PX014707 8/10/2009 340 4 0 3 0 Vfz 0.8 6 4 4 4 3 2 $345.00 $1,380.00 1 88,434.6 66,781.0 155,215.6 0.007-0.033 0.075-0.297 0.100-0.520 122,933.4 19,224.0 142,157.4 0.006-0.019 0.079-0.332 0.154-0.454 15.6-19.8 6.5-9.1
6040 PX014906 11/6/2009 261 0 3 0 3 Cha 0.6 2 2 2 2 - 1 $345.00 $1,035.00 1 53,360.3 37,234.6 90,594.9 0.007-0.015 0.151-0.523 0.100-0.217 30,806.8 52,962.8 83,769.6 0.007-0.015 0.187-0.440 0.090-0.299 21.3-41.6 (120.7)-12.8
PX014907 11/25/2009 299 0 6 0 5 Antler 0.7 7 1 4 7 2 $345.00 $2,070.00 1 97,169.8 11,589.0 108,758.8 0.008-0.032 0.162-1.309 0.066-0.296 96,336.6 15,371.8 111,708.3 0.007-0.035 0.187-1.400 0.072-0.349 10.3-16.4 2.9-7.2
PX014908 11/18/2009 317 0 8 0 8 Vfz 0.7 5 1 2 4 1 2 $345.00 $2,760.00 1 98,522.0 34,703.0 133,225.0 0.009-0.028 0.196-0.383 0.072-0.163 102,465.0 31,703.0 134,168.0 0.009-0.026 0.201-0.465 0.068-0.186 20.7-27.4 5-19.9
(Metso) PX014909 11/23/2009 279 6 3 5 2 Antler 1.3 1 - - 1 - - $345.00 $3,105.00 1 86,328.0 0.0 86,328.0 0.03 0.40 0.12 77,619.0 0.0 77,619.0 0.04 0.40 0.11 26.7-52.4 (17.5)-37.3
PX014910 10/12/2009 384 0 5 0 4 Cha 0.7 4 - 1 3 - 3 $345.00 $1,725.00 1 65,456.0 95,083.0 160,539.0 0.008-0.015 0.190-0.396 0.077-0.254 87,454.4 73,316.9 160,771.2 0.007-0.015 0.178-0.406 0.069-0.279 15.7-24.8 (6)-7.3
PX014911 12/2/2009 343 0 3 0 3 Pbl 0.6 7 3 2 7 - 1 $345.00 $1,035.00 2 62,180.1 32,062.0 94,242.1 0.007-0.034 0.181-0.560 0.072-0.183 61,825.2 31,869.8 93,695.0 0.007-0.035 0.185-1.4 0.090-0.398 13.0-21.5 4.5-10.5
PX014916 12/3/2009 234 0 3 0 3 Vfz 0.6 6 1 2 1 - - $345.00 $1,035.00 1 69,512.4 6,808.2 76,320.6 0.008-0.027 0.198-0.389 0.053-0.104 64,198.2 0.0 64,198.2 0.007-0.039 0.187-0.455 0.076-0.148 10.5-12.9 2.3-3.7
6000 PX015103 1/5/2010 232 0 5 0 3 Vfz/Cha - 6 - 1 5 1 1 $345.00 $1,725.00 1 59,217.0 24,322.0 83,539.0 0.008-0.027 0.215-0.861 .101-0.252 75,455.5 10,737.4 86,192.9 0.008-0.032 0.194-1.672 0.099-0.420 8.4-20.4 2.6-9.5
PX015106 1/6/2010 247 0 6 0 6 Vfz/Cha - 5 1 3 5 1 1 $345.00 $2,070.00 1 76,549.7 9,857.0 86,406.7 0.006-0.038 0.223-0.541 0.095-0.281 61,411.2 24,790.0 86,201.2 0.007-0.033 0.223-0.716 0.106-0.211 14.5-29.2 (53.2)-7.00
(Metso) PX015107 1/14/2010 154 4 3 0 0 Antler - 1 - 1 - - $345.00 $2,415.00 1 48,421.0 0.0 48,421.0 0.04 0.42 0.17 47,278.0 0.0 47,278.0 0.04 0.46 0.19 NA NA
PX015110 1/18/2010 216 4 0 4 0 Cha 0.7 6 - 2 2 2 2 $345.00 $1,380.00 1 75,545.0 20,926.0 96,471.0 0.006-0.017 0.164-0.345 0.066-0.281 71,225.0 26,032.1 97,257.1 0.007-0.012 0.176-0.267 0.063-0.186 24.7-50.1 11-19.7
5960 PX015303 2/17/2010 311 4 0 4 0 Antler 0.9 4 1 2 $345.00 $1,380.00 1 97,575.0 16,800.0 114,375.0 0.006-0.031 0.171-0.565 0.050-0.183 123,412.0 45,672.0 169,084.0 0.006-0.031 0.168-0.552 0.061-0.185 38.7-55.2 13-25.4
PX0153010204 2/23/2010 499 2 2 2 2 Vfz/Cha 0.8 4 3 3 $345.00 $1,380.00 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 27.5-38 (4.4)-16.5
F2
5860 PX025803 8/27/2009 316 0 5 0 0 Antler - 2 - 1 4 - 1 $345.00 $1,725.00 1 58,287.9 15,363.0 73,650.9 0.007-.022 0.046-0.170 0.290-0.522 58,574.3 16,481.0 75,055.3 0.007-0.021 0.043-0.161 0.210-0.465 NA NA
5900 PX025609 3/8/2009 185 4 2 0 0 Antler - 2 1 1 2 2 2 $345.00 $2,070.00 2 41,691.2 29,902.7 71,593.9 0.007-0.018 0.024-0.093 0.149-0.324 46,727.2 29,783.2 76,510.4 0.005-0.024 0.023-0.080 0.129-0.333 NA NA
PX025610 2/4/2009 211 0 2 0 2 Pbl 1.2 2 1 - 1 1 1 $345.00 $690.00 2 64,156.1 0.0 64,156.1 0.006-0.011 0.057-0.098 0.170-0.261 75,881.1 46,627.0 122,508.1 0.005-0.020 0.040-0.054 0.150-0.248 3.9-6.3 (20.7)-9.4
PX025612 3/26/2009 221 0 1 0 1 Pbl 1.1 3 1 1 2 3 1 $345.00 $345.00 1 64,673.3 10,206.8 74,880.1 0.006-0.030 0.051-0.101 0.169-0.231 65,488.6 14,182.5 79,671.0 0.007-0.032 0.039-0.171 0.067-0.177 11.90 -38.10
Total 85 104 68 80 $65,205.00
189 148 *The cost of foreman is not included
Table 9: Summary of the BMM ball measurements of all the blast

75
5.3 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
The results of the blasts are analyzed according to initial depth at which the
BMMs were placed, the horizontal and vertical distances moved by the BMMs.
Figure 42 shows the results of the horizontal and vertical movements of all blasts at
the Phoenix Mine from February 2009 to March 2010. All the details of the blasts and
results are shown in Table 9. A total of 38 blasts took place and 189 BMMs were
used for all the test blasts. There were 85 balls placed in the top bench and 104 in the
bottom bench for a total of 189 balls. The ball recovery was 68 from the top bench
and 80 from the bottom bench.
5.3.1 Depth v’s BMM ball movement
The horizontal movement of the rock was not less than 9 ft. The maximum
horizontal movement is 65.5 ft and the minimum horizontal movement was 9.4 ft.
The average horizontal movements on top bench and bottom benches were 32.6 ft and
25 ft respectively. The maximum vertical movement of the ball was -120.7 ft and the
minimum vertical movement was 37.3 ft. The vertical movements which were above
-60 ft, for e.g.-120.7 ft were not considered for analysis because the maximum heave
of the muck pile was around 70 ft, so the movements were considered to be the result
of measurement error. Allowing for this, these average vertical movements on top and
bottom benches were 9.6 ft and 6.7 ft respectively.

76
80
60
40
Distance (ft)
20
0
10
10
13
14
15
15
15
16
18
19
19
20
20
21
23
24
25
25
26
28
29
29
30
30
32
-20
-40
-60
Initial depth (ft)
Horiz.Distance Vert.Distance
Figure 42: Initial depth Vs horizontal and vertical movements of the blasts
From Figure 42, no conclusion can be drawn about the horizontal and vertical
movements on both top and bottom benches, as they are independent no matter what
the initial depth was. The rock movements do not follow a particular trend.
The effect of the initial depth on the horizontal and vertical movements of the
top bench is illustrated in Figure 43. The horizontal and vertical movements ranged
from 15 ft through 65 ft and -20 ft through almost 40 ft respectively. All the values
were scattered with no particular trend of distribution.

77
Effect of initial depth on horiontal and vertical movement

70
60
Horizontal and vertical movement (feet)

50
40
30
20
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
-10
-20
-30
Initial depth (feet)
Figure 43: Effect of initial depth on horizontal and vertical movement (top bench)
The effect of the initial depth on the horizontal and vertical movements of the
bottom bench is illustrated in Figure 44. The horizontal and vertical movements
ranged from 9 ft through 55 ft and -40 ft through around 20 ft respectively. The
horizontal values do not follow any trend, but the vertical values for the bottom bench
were mostly confined in between 0 ft and 20 ft.

78
Effect of initial depth on horizontal and vertical movement

60
50
Horizontal and vertical movement (feet)

40
30
20
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
Initial depth (feet)
Figure 44: Effect of depth on horizontal and vertical movement (bottom bench)
5.3.2 Initial depth v’s BMM ball movements in different rock types
Depending on the rock type and the initial depth, the BMM ball movements
were analyzed. Four types of geological formations exist at the Phoenix Mine and
blast movement in each formation was analyzed separately. This is shown in Figures
45-50 each figure shows movement of all the balls placed at different depths in the
blasts that took place in the designated rock type. The Antler formation, the
horizontal and vertical movements decrease with an increase in initial depth of the
BMM ball as shown in Figure 45. The horizontal and vertical movement of the rock
was greater on the top bench compared to the movement on the bottom bench. The
maximum horizontal and vertical movements were 55.2 ft and 37.2 respectively.
79
60 1.3
50 1.1
40 0.9
0.7
Powder factor (lb/ton)

30
Distance (ft)
0.5
20
0.3
10
0.1
0
-0.1
11 15 19 24 26 31
-10 -0.3
-20 -0.5
-30 -0.7
Initial depth (ft)
Horiz.Distance Vert.Distance Powder Factor (lb/ton)
Figure 45: Horizontal and vertical movements in Antler formation
In the Harmony (Cha) and Lower Battle (Pbl) formations, there was no
particular trend between the increase in initial depth of the BMM ball and the
horizontal and vertical movements. Figure 46 and 47 shows the horizontal and
vertical movement of the BMM balls in the Harmony and Lower battle formations
respectively. In the Harmony formation, a greater number of vertical movements
were observed, whereas in the Lower Battle formation, both horizontal and vertical
movements were observed.

80
60 0.8
50
0.6
40
30 0.4

Distnace (ft)
20
0.2
10
0 0
13 14 14 15.3 17 20 20.6 23 24 25 27 30
-10
-0.2
-20
-30 -0.4
Initial depth (ft)
Figure 46: Horizontal and vertical movements in Harmony formation
70
1.1
60
50 0.9
40 0.7

30 0.5
Distance (ft)
20 0.3
10
0.1
0
-0.1
-10 10 10 14 15 20 25 28 29 30
-20 -0.3
-30 -0.5
-40 -0.7
Initial depth (ft)
Figure 47: Horizontal and vertical movements in Lower battle

81
In the Virgin Fault (Vfz) formation, both the horizontal and vertical
movements tend to decrease with an increase in initial BMM ball depth, but not
always. The vertical movement of the rock was not more than 20 ft and there was no
downward movement as can be seen in Figure 48.
35 0.8
0.7
25 0.6

0.5
Distance (ft)
0.4
15
0.3
0.2
5 0.1
0
15
16
16
19
19
19
19
20
20
21
23
24
25
25
27
28
30
30
31
33
18.5
-5 -0.1
Initial depth (ft)
Figure 48: Horizontal and vertical movements in Virgin Fault
Two blast patterns had a combination of two formations. Firstly, the Lower
Battle and Harmony formations, the horizontal movement was greater on the top
bench and less on the bottom bench. The vertical movement does not follow any
trend on either top or bottom benches, and there was no negative or downward
movement vertically. Secondly, in the Virgin Fault and Harmony formations, the
vertical movement increased with increase in initial depth. Figures 49 and 50
illustrate the horizontal and vertical movements.

82
35 0.9
30 0.8
0.7

25
0.6
Distance (ft)
20 0.5
15 0.4
0.3
10
0.2
5 0.1
0 0
14 15 29 30
Initial depth (ft)
Figure 49: Horizontal and vertical movements in Pbl/Cha
0.8
35 0.7
0.6

25 0.5
Distance (ft)
0.4
15 0.3
0.2
5 0.1
0
19 19 21 23
-5 -0.1
Initial depth (ft)
Figure 50: Horizontal and vertical movements in Vfz/Cha

83
From the discussion, it can be concluded that the horizontal and vertical
movements relative to the powder factor and BMM ball depth for the top and bottom
benches, were inconclusive. However, considering the average of the movements, the
top bench moved more than the bottom bench. The horizontal and vertical
movements were independent and different from formation to formation. No two
formations have similar horizontal and vertical rock movement. A correlation
analysis for the different formations was carried out between the initial depth of the
balls and the resulting vertical and horizontal movement after blasting. No correlation
of any significance was found.
5.4 Moving the ore polygons using AutoCAD
The BMT assistant software was used to obtain the three dimensional
movement vectors of the BMMs. Using the results from the BMM assistant software
and AutoCAD; the pre-blast ore polygons were relocated. The original polygons of
the pattern are shown in Figure 51. The green colored ‘+’ marks indicate the pre-blast
and the pink colored ‘+’ marks indicate the post-blast locations of the BMMs. The
summary of the results of the ball movements are shown in Table 10.
84
Figure 51: Original polygons of the pattern PX015303
Initial Initial Final Final Vert.

Initial Direction Horiz. 3D Inclination
BMM # Surface RL BMM RL Surface RL BMM RL Distance
Depth (ft) (deg) Distance (ft) Distance (deg)
(ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft)
1 19 5999.6 5980.6 6017.5 5993.6 280 38.7 13 40.9 18.6
2 19 5999.4 5980.4 6028.2 5994.6 247 46 14.2 48.1 17.2
3 19 5999.6 5980.6 6022.3 6000.3 205 55.2 19.7 58.6 19.6
4 18 6000.6 5982.6 6008.9 6008 180 49.5 25.4 55.7 27.2
Table 10: Summary of the blast movement (PX015303)

85
The average of the horizontal movement and inclination was considered in
order to move the ore polygons, and the post-blast polygon positions were relocated.
The polygons were moved only in 2-dimensions. Figure 52 shows the position of the
pre and post-blast ore polygons. The black colored lines indicate the original
polygons and the green colored lines indicate the post-blast or new ore polygons, the
polygon 162 was not moved. The ore polygons which are moved along the direction
of the blast are shown in Figure 52. The new ore polygon positions were flagged on
the muck pile according to the grade of the polygon. The new polygon location data
was sent to the shovel operator and this resulted in minimizing dilution by correctly
loading and hauling ore to the mill and waste to the waste dump. A batch test was
carried out to verify the expected benefits of analyzing the digging polygons location
for movement caused by the blasting.

86
Figure 52: Pre and post-blast ore polygons (PX015303) using AutoCAD
5.4.1 Moving the ore polygons using Surpac
To compare the accuracy of moving polygons using AutoCAD, the ore
polygons were moved using Surpac. From the results obtained from BMT assistant
software, the three dimensional movement vectors of the BMMs were known. The
BMT software provides the movement of the BMMs. The direction, the horizontal
87
movement and inclination are considered to move the ore polygons and the post-blast
ore digging positions were relocated. Figure 53 shows the position of the pre-blast
and post-blast ore polygons. The blue colored lines indicate the original polygons
and the pink colored lines indicate the post-blast or new ore polygons. A tutorial for
moving the polygons using Surpac is provided in Appendix B.
Figure 53: Pre and post-blast ore polygons (PX015303) using Surpac
88
Figure 54 illustrates the ore polygons which were moved using AutoCAD and
Surpac. In both cases, the polygons were moved in two dimensions. The blue colored
polygons were the original ore polygons, the green colored polygons were the moved
polygons at the mine using AutoCAD, and the red colored polygons were the moved
polygons using Surpac. The direction of the blast was towards the south-west and all
the BMM balls moved in the predicted direction. In AutoCAD, the polygons were
moved manually, by changing the shape of the polygons according to the horizontal
movement and the inclination within the free face boundary. The polygons 162 and
163, see Figure 51, towards the west corner were not relocated in AutoCAD as it is
far from the pre and post-blast BMM ball locations.
In Surpac, the polygons were moved towards the direction of the BMM balls.
The average of the two or three nearest BMM balls’ horizontal distance, direction or
bearing, and the dip or the gradient, were considered for moving a polygon. For
example, to move polygon 157, see Figure 51, the average of the 2nd and 3rd BMM
readings were taken into account.
From Figure 54, it can be observed that the movement adjustment of the
polygons using AutoCAD and Surpac results in different shapes and locations in the
bench. The reason there is a significant difference between these two cases was
because when moving the polygons in AutoCAD, the shape of the ore polygons was
changed since, in this case, the movement could not extend beyond the free face. In
89
Surpac, the shape of the ore polygon remains the same. In addition, the gradient or
dip was not considered in AutoCAD to move the polygons.
Figure 54: Pre and post-blast ore polygons (PX015303) using AutoCAD and Surpac
90
Movements of all the polygons individually are shown in Figure 55. The blue
colored polygons indicate the original, the green colored were moved polygons using
AutoCAD and the red colored were moved polygons using Surpac. The polygons
which were far from the BMMs, i.e. numbers 162 and 163, were not moved in
AutoCAD whereas in Surpac each and every polygon was moved based on the
average of two or three nearest BMM movements.

91
Figure 55: Pre and post-blast individual polygons in PX015303 pattern (no scale)
92
From the discussion, it can be concluded that when the polygons were moved in
AutoCAD, movement beyond the free face could potentially impact on the movement
of the polygons, with change in the shape of the polygon. However, in Surpac, the
polygons were moved based on the three dimensional BMM movements. How to
adjust the polygons in a consistent manner needs further investigation. For example,
Zhang discussed the three dimensional rock movements at different levels (Zhang,
1994). According to Zhang, the movement of rock at different heights or levels has
different amounts of movement and the post-blast ore boundaries were adjusted to the
movement at each level. The dilution of the blast was expressed as the mean of the
dilution occurring at each level as shown in Figure 56. The horizontal movement in
the middle of a level was used as the average horizontal movement for that level.
Pre-blast location
Post-blast location
Figure 56: Rock movement at different levels (no scale)

93
In summary, it appears that the method used and assumptions made to move the
polygons to adjust for the measured movement requires more attention to ensure the
best results. It is suggested that a standard method should be developed for moving
the polygons to allow for different horizontal and vertical movement and rotation.
5.5 Sampling results after the blast
Sampling test was conducted after the blast for PX015303 and PX0153010204
patterns. The grab samples were collected from polygons 154, 157, and 158, as
shown in Figure 57. Twenty sample points were selected randomly in the polygon,
collected into bags, and the sample bags were sent to Carlin lab for testing. The
sampling results of the three polygons are shown in Table 11.
Polygon 157
Polygon 154
Polygon 158
Figure 57: Points showing the grab samples locations after the blast
94
*Estimated grade of polygon from drill hole sample and resource model
Sample
Tag Number Number GOLD SILVER COPPER
OPT OPT PERCENT
PX010158282 1 0.018 0.265 0.066
PX010158281 2 0.035 0.504 0.120
PX010158280 3 0.003 0.461 0.110
PX010158279 4 0.034 0.419 0.130
PX010158283 5 0.022 0.471 0.059
PX010158284 6 0.023 0.437 0.138
PX010158285 7 0.046 0.970 0.225
PX010158286 8 0.018 1.037 0.226
PX010158278 9 0.015 0.500 0.161
Average 0.0237 0.5627 0.1372
Variance 0.0002 0.0678 0.0036
Polygon C154* 0.0156 0.4054 0.1219
%Difference
between grab
sample and
estimated value 51.8% 38.8% 12.6%
PX010158298 10 0.008 0.249 0.092

PX010158296 11 0.012 0.222 0.087
PX010158295 12 0.009 0.226 0.099
PX010158287 13 0.036 0.243 0.056
PX010158297 14 0.042 0.256 0.098
PX010158288 15 0.030 0.234 0.070
PX010158289 16 0.036 0.246 0.123
Average 0.0245 0.2394 0.0893
Variance 0.0002 0.0002 0.0005
Polygon C157* 0.0270 0.1708 0.0497
%Difference
between grab
sample and
estimated value -9.3% 40.2% 79.6%
PX010158290 17 0.314 0.393 0.120

PX010158291 18 0.025 0.316 0.143
PX010158294 19 0.030 0.235 0.124
PX010158292 20 0.018 0.274 0.145
PX010158293 21 0.027 0.283 0.140
Average 0.0827 0.3002 0.1344
Variance 0.0185 0.0045 0.0732
Polygon C158* 0.0314 0.2903 0.1360
%Difference
between grab
sample and
estimated value 163.5% 3.4% -1.2%
Table 11: Results of the grab samples after the blast

95
From Table 11, the average of the sample points for each polygon was higher
than the original grade of the polygon. In polygon 154, the estimated grade was less
than the average of the sample grade for gold, silver and copper. In polygon 157, the
estimated grade was higher than the average of the sample grade for gold and less for
silver and copper. The estimated grade was higher than the average of the sample
grade for copper and less for gold and silver in polygon 158.
Even though the grab samples were collected after moving the polygons, there
was not much change in the grade because all the polygons were all designated as ore
with no distinction between low and high grade. An ore polygon surrounded with
waste can make it easier to estimate the amount of dilution and the recovery of the
ore. Sampling before and after the blast, provides a way of verifying whether an ore
boundary really exists where it was estimated to be.
While these results show that the excavated rock had at least similar or higher
grades than the estimated values, this does not prove that adjusting for blast
movement worked. For this to be possible, it is necessary to measure the grade of the
material surrounding polygons 154, 157 and 158. If the surrounding grade is shown to
be waste then this sampling test would show the value of blast movement adjustment.
If the surrounding grade is above cut off then this test does not necessarily support the
advantage of adjusting for blast movement. The problem lies in the fact that the
polygons are estimated from the resource model and there is no way of knowing
whether or not the grade boundary actually exists in the bench without using some
96
method to check if there is a measurable grade difference at the pre-blast polygon
boundaries.
5.6 Batch test and results
The pre and post-blast data was used to redesign the pre-blast ore polygons to
align with the post-blast movement. Not all the blast polygons were moved and only
one blast pattern was batched. A pattern was selected in the Fortitude pit that had
been modeled to establish the ore and waste boundaries. Blast PX014510 polygons
were moved and batched and the original polygons are illustrated in Figure 58. The
blue lines indicate the movement of the BMMs. The summary of results of the blast
movement is shown in Table 12.
Initial Initial Final Final Horiz. Vert.

Initial Surface RL BMM RL Surface RL BMM RL Direction Distance Distance 3D Inclination
BMM # Depth (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (deg) (ft) (ft) Distance (deg)
1 20 6159 6139 6174.1 6146.4 322 23.9 7.4 25 17.3
2 16.7 6159 6142.3 6171.5 6146.9 317 22.8 4.6 23.2 11.4
3 20.4 6159 6138.6 6171.3 6146.8 309 25.8 8.2 27.1 17.6
4 20.6 6159 6138.4 6175.7 6146.9 290 22.4 8.5 24 20.7
Table 12: Summary of blast movement of PX014510

97
BMM1
BMM2
BMM3
BMM4
Figure 58: Original polygons in PX014510 pattern

98
Four polygons from the pattern were selected and each polygon was batched
separately. The individually batched polygons are illustrated in Figure 59 as follows:
i) Polygons in cyan was Batch 1
ii) Polygons in violet was Batch 2
iii) Polygon in magenta was Batch 3
iv) Polygon in red was Batch 4
v) The blue colored lines indicate the pre and post-blast movement direction.
The four polygons moved an average distance of 25 ft in a NW 45 degree
direction based on the indicated displacement. The moved ore zones were separated
into four batches for sampling and processing. Batches 1 and 2 were stockpiled on the
crusher pad. Batches 3 and 4 were stockpiled on the Natomas Waste Dump. These
stockpiles were sampled and sent to the Carlin lab for analysis. Batch 1 was the
leading section of the moved ore zone and Batch 2 was the trailing edge. Batches 3
and 4 were in waste areas to determine whether the ore zones were moved enough.
Batches 1 and 2 were processed separately in the mill and batch 3 and 4 were not
processed. The grab samples grades were collected after blasting.

99
Figure 59: Moved polygons in pattern PX014510

100
The batch test results for gold, silver and copper grades are illustrated in
Tables 13, 14 and 15 respectively. The results show that the mill grade is significantly
higher than the estimated grade.
Estimated
Grab sample Mill grade % change
Batch polygon grade
grade (opt) (opt) mill/estimated
(opt)
1 0.0175 0.0156 0.0256 31.64

2 0.0231 0.0301 0.0253 8.70
Table 13: Batch test results for gold assays
Estimated
polygon grade Grab sample Mill grade % change
Batch (opt) grade (opt) (opt) mill/estimated
1 0.258 0.268 0.367 29.7
2 0.252 0.33 0.389 35.2
Table 14: Batch test results for silver assays
Estimated
Grab sample Mill grade % change
Batch polygon grade
grade (% ) (% ) mill/estimated
(% )
1 0.204 0.195 0.16 27.5
2 0.171 0.201 0.19 10
Table 15: Batch test results for copper assays
From the batch test results, a conclusion cannot be drawn since the pre blast
movement polygon and surrounding areas were not sampled, therefore, whether or
not an ore/waste boundary existed was not known. Without this information it is
101
difficult to know whether or not the blast movement correction was worthwhile. More
batch tests should be carried out to verify the effect of blast movement correction, but
appropriate sampling across ore/waste polygon boundaries before and after the blast
would make it easier to interpret the results. The grab samples should be collected at
the same positions before and after the blast. It is important to ascertain whether or
not, the estimated ore/waste boundary actually exists in the bench.
5.7 Sample test using pie pans
Each blast hole was manually sampled by a sample crew. The samplers
estimate the contact between the upper and lower bench material in the cuttings pile
and sample the upper and lower benches separately. To verify whether the
conventional sampling was giving the correct assay data, sample verification testing
using pie pans was conducted. For the test, pattern PX014510 shown in Figure 60,
with a total hole count of 328 was selected and a portion of the pattern containing 260
drill holes was outlined for the test. The sampling of these holes was done during the
drilling process on dayshift while sampling personnel were available.
Two rectangular pans were placed on either side of the hole from the back of
the drill, in order to catch a portion of the drill cuttings as shown in Figure 59. After
drilling 20 ft, the drilling was stopped and the two sample pans were pulled and
emptied into individual sample bags. The pans were then replaced in their original
location to catch the next 20 ft sample. The drilling stopped at 40 ft in order to collect
the bottom 20 ft sample before proceeding to the sub-drill. After the hole was
102
completed, a conventional sample was collected from the front of the drill cuttings
pile. During collection of the conventional samples, the cuttings from the sub-drill
were included in the material for the bottom bench. A total of five separate sample
bags were collected for each drill hole and sent to the lab for testing.
Figure 60: Drill hole with pie pans (no scale)
Both the pan samples and the conventional samples were compared and
statistical analysis was done between these samples. The average, variance and
standard deviation of the samples of gold, silver and copper for the top and bottom
20ft benches are shown in Table 16.

103
Pan Samples
Gold Top Half Bottom half Conventional sample
Bottom
USER Avg. of Avg. of Top Half
Half
SAMPLE_ID Pan1 Pan 2 pan 1&2 Pan1 Pan2 pan 1&2
Average 0.0134 0.0163 0.0148 0.0183 0.0117 0.0149 0.0165 0.0152
Variance 0.0001 0.0007 0.0002 0.0115 0.0002 0.0029 0.0012 0.0022
Std. Deviation 0.0105 0.0257 0.0151 0.1069 0.0155 0.0533 0.0342 0.0466
Silver
Average 0.3175 0.3169 0.3172 0.2569 0.2566 0.2567 0.3060 0.2762
Variance 0.0412 0.0420 0.0402 0.0484 0.0389 0.0370 0.0360 0.0451
Std. Deviation 0.2030 0.2049 0.2005 0.2199 0.1971 0.1925 0.1896 0.2125
Copper
Average 0.2700 0.2644 0.2672 0.2079 0.2251 0.2165 0.2647 0.2205
Variance 0.1160 0.1018 0.1068 0.0881 0.1583 0.1079 0.0890 0.0692
Std. Deviation 0.3406 0.3190 0.3268 0.2968 0.3979 0.3284 0.2983 0.2630
Table 16: Comparison between pan samples and conventional samples
A paired t-test was done using the formula as shown in Equation 1 and the
results of the paired t-test are shown in Table 17.
pan 2 − pan1
t= [1]
2 2
S S
+
pan 2 pan1
N pan 2 N pan1
where,
pan2 is the average of pan 2 samples
pan1 is the average of pan 1 samples
2
S pan 2 is the standard deviation of pan 2 samples
2
S pan1 is the standard deviation of pan 1 samples
N pan 2 is the total number of samples in pan 2
N pan1 is the total number of samples in pan1

104
Paired t-test between Gold Silver Copper

Top Pan 1 & pan 2 1.44 -0.03 -0.17
Pan 1 & avg. of pans 1,2 1.02 -0.01 -0.08
Pan 2 & avg, of pans 1,2 -0.71 0.01 0.09
Pan 1 & Conv. Top half 1.21 -0.57 -0.16
Pan 2 & Conv. Top half 0.07 -0.54 0.01
Avg. of pans 1,2 & Conv. Top half 0.65 -0.56 -0.08
Bottom Pan 1 & pan 2 -0.87 -0.01 0.48

Pan 1 & avg. of pans 1,2 -0.41 -0.01 0.27
Pan 2 & avg, of pans 1,2 0.82 0.01 -0.23
Pan 1 & Conv. Bottom half -0.39 0.87 0.44
Pan 2 & Conv. Bottom half 1.01 0.93 -0.13
Avg. of pans 1,2 & Conv. Bottom half 0.06 0.94 0.13
Table 17: Paired t-test results for top and bottom benches
The histograms of copper between the conventional sample and pie pan
samples are shown in Figures 61, 62, 63 and 64. The histograms and semi-variograms
for copper, silver and gold are shown in Appendix C.

105
Figure 61: Histogram for average of pan1 and pan2 top half – Copper
Figure 62: Histogram for average of pan1 and pan2 bottom half – Copper
106
Figure 63: Histogram for conventional top half – Copper
Figure 64: Histogram for conventional bottom half – Copper

107
From the results, it can be observed that the samples are statistically significant
between the values. There is a small difference between the pie pan samples and the
conventional samples in silver and copper, whereas in gold, there are more
differences between the samples. It is interesting to see that the sill of the gold semi-
variogram for the conventional sample method is somewhat higher than for the pan
samples. This could impact on the resource modeling of a bench.

108
6 Cost analysis of the BMM balls

The cost of measuring the blast-induced rock movement should be considered to
see how economical the measurement helps in recovering the ore ounces and tons. For
this research, the Phoenix Mine rented the BMM equipment and has been using it since a
year. Extra holes were drilled along with the normal drill holes to drop the balls. The
rental details of the equipment and the drilling costs are the following:
• Lease fee for BMM detector and software - $ 1500/month
• Cost of BMM ball - $ 345/ball
• Cost of drilling - $ 2.50/foot
• No. of months rented to date - 13 months
In each blast, 4 to 6 BMM balls were placed in the top and bottom benches, around
the ore polygons. To measure the BMM ball movement, a blasting engineer and a
surveyor are required.
• Cost of blasting engineer - $ 30/hour
• Cost of a surveyor - $ 15/hour
• Time required to drop a ball - 3 minutes
• Time required to read a ball - 10 minutes
• Total time required to drop the ball before blast and read the ball after the blast -
13 minutes
109
The more BMM balls dropped for each blast; the higher is the personnel cost. Table
18 shows the cost of foreman for each blast depending on the number of balls dropped in
each pattern.
Time to drop Time to read Cost of engineer Cost of surveyor Total personnel cost
No of balls
(min) (min) per hour per hour for each blast
1 3 10 $30 $15 $10
2 3 10 $30 $15 $20
3 3 10 $30 $15 $29
4 3 10 $30 $15 $39
5 3 10 $30 $15 $49
6 3 10 $30 $15 $59
7 3 10 $30 $15 $68
8 3 10 $30 $15 $78
189 3 10 $30 $15 $1,843
Table 18: Cost analysis of BMM balls
For example, consider a blast pattern, PX015303 in which the BMM balls were
dropped. In this pattern, 4 BMM balls were used and all the four were recovered.
• Cost of BMM equipment and software per day = $ 50.00
• Cost of four balls used in the pattern = $ 1,380.00
• Cost of drilling the four extra holes = $ 187.50
• Cost of personnel (From Table 18) = $ 39.00
Total cost for blast movement for blast PX015303 =$ 1656.50

110
The cost of all the blasts in which the blast movement was measured was $ 1,842.75
+ $ 65,205.00 (from Table 9) = $ 67,047.75, (sum of total personnel cost and total cost of
balls used in all 38 blasts).
The cost of drilling for all the blasts is the depth of the in which the ball was dropped
multiplied by the cost of drilling per foot, therefore, the total cost of drilling was
$ 6945.00.
Average personnel and ball cost per blast: $ 1765.00
Average drilling cost for ball placement per blast: $ 183.00
Total average cost per blast for blast movement: $ 1948.00

111
7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The main object of the thesis project was to investigate the use of the “Blast
Movement Measurement Technology” to improve ore grade control and minimize the
dilution due to the blast-induced rock movement. The conclusions and recommendations
in this chapter are based on the results and analysis of results discussed in Chapter 5 and
Chapter 6.
The research undertaken at the Rain Mine (Newmont Mining Company) and the
Coeur Rochester Mine (Coeur d’ Alene Mines) (Zhang, 1994) indicated that to mitigate
the blast induced grade dilution, blasts with low powder factor and little movement
should be considered rather than blasts with high powder factor and large movement.
Unfortunately, to get adequate fragmentation at the Phoenix mine relatively high powder
factors are needed, which makes the potential for blast movement dilution quite high. In
essence, there is a tradeoff between the need to minimize dilution and maximize
fragmentation to improve mill recovery and throughput. Zhang’s conclusions suggested
the development of a detailed movement database and numerical model.
Taylor (1995) sought to define the effect of movement on grade dilution and to
propose solutions to develop measures to either minimize the blast-induced movement or
compensate for this movement with improvements in grade control practices.

112
The following conclusions were reached about the nature of the blast-induced rock
movement and minimizing dilution at the Phoenix Mine:
• Dilution impacts the economics of the mine in two ways:
• Potential waste or low-grade ore is treated as ore, which results in
unnecessary processing costs in the mill.
• The ore moved beyond a digging line due to blasting is mined as waste,
which results in reduction of gold ounces for the mine.
• The direction of blast-induced rock movement was parallel to the direction of the
initiation and perpendicular to the primary free face.
• The secondary free face tended to provide sufficient relief to bias blast movement
towards the initiation direction.
• The actual movement follows the predicted direction with just ±5° inclination.
• The blasting of an area of ore into a waste zone results in an overlay of the top
portions of the ore zone on the waste zone, which makes separation of zones
impossible and causes dilution.
• The magnitude of the blast-induced movement measured at the Phoenix Mine
differed between top and bottom benches.
• The average horizontal movements on top and bottom benches were 32.63
ft and 24.99 ft respectively.
• The average vertical movements on top and bottom benches were 9.66 ft
and 5.95 ft respectively.

113
• The movement of the rock changes for different rock formations and initial
depths.
• In Antler and Virgin fault geological formations, the horizontal and
vertical movements of the top bench were more than that of the bottom
bench.
• The batch test was inconclusive in terms of showing the benefit of blast
movement correction.
• Blast movement correction should be considered since high powder factors are
required at the Phoenix Mine to obtain adequate fragmentation.
• Minimum dilution can be achieved by adjusting a digging polygon according to
the magnitude and direction of rock movement.
• The most important factor effecting blast movement is the powder factor. The
presence of faults can affect the timing necessary for the shot, but has a small
effect on blast movement, since blasting was carried out perpendicular to the
faults.
• Fractures and bedding planes could affect the blast movement. Fractures at the
Phoenix Mine tend to be steeply inclined, with large apertures; whereas the
bedding planes are gently to moderately incline with smaller apertures.
• In many cases where geology is similar, the blast movement measurement with
BMM balls may not be necessary for every bench. However, as mining is done
through the west dipping strata in the F1 pit, which is crosscut by steeply dipping
114
north and northeast faults, the geology varies from bench to bench, and will
require more frequent blast movement measurements.
• Losing all BMMs in a blast is possible under certain circumstances. There are two
main reasons for not detecting the balls:
1) Electronics Failure – A muck pile during a large blast is a very harsh
environment, and the electronics of the BMM appear to be not able to take
such energy loadings. The factors which affect the ball survival are distance
from blast holes, powder factor, depth, fragmentation, and a flat battery.
2) Human Error
a. When two BMMs ended up close to each other, i.e. less than 65 ft, it
was difficult to separate them.
b. When the operator did not look in the right location
c. When the transmitter was not turned on
d. When unsafe to access the BMM if close to the pit edge or an
underground void
• The electronics failure tends to be probabilistic, whereas the human error is
generally due to poor planning and/or training.

115
7.1 Recommendations
The following recommendations are made to assist the Phoenix Mine to reduce the
blast induced dilution that is experienced at the mine, and these can be applied at other
sites, depending upon the situation at the site.
• To use BMM balls with unique IDs in order to identify them individually in the
muck pile. (These are being developed by the manufacturer.)
• A detector with an integrated GPS would reduce the cost of the surveyor.
• At all times, correction of polygons on both top and bottom benches should be
carried out. Of the 189 balls placed in all the blasts 104 balls were placed in the
bottom bench but this information was not used.
• For modified ore control procedures, a standard method should be developed to
relocate the digging polygons automatically with the blast movement data, taking
into account vertical and horizontal movement and rotation.
• Avoid ore zones oriented parallel to free face and located in an energy trough.
• Try to avoid a buffer where one type of material will be blasted into another type.
• Based on the sampling tests using pie pans in patterns PX015303 and
PX0153010204, it appears that the use of pie pans provides a more representative
grade of the drill cuttings, which will result in better estimation of the polygon
boundaries.
• In order to minimize the number of variables when analyzing blast movement, it
is recommended that there is more consistency in the depths chosen to place balls
116
in a bench, to provide comparable movement results at different depths for both
the upper and lower parts of the bench.
• It is recommended that consideration be given to using the blast movement
modeling software developed by Orica and/or participating in the development of
the HSBM (Hybrid Stress Blasting Model) software which is a joint project with
Itasca and The W.H Bryan Research Center in Queensland, funded by Industry.
The advantage of using this software in the Phoenix mine, if verified by
measurement in the mine, is that in similar geology, the prediction of movement
by the software will replace actual movement measurement until geological
conditions change. In which case, another measurement will be needed to verify
the validity of the software blast movement prediction for the new conditions.
• It is recommended that Metso Smart Tags and detection equipment be leased or
acquired to assist in determining how effective is the blast movement
measurement and digging polygon relocation, in improving grade control at the
mine. Smart tags shown in Figure 65, which can be individually identified, can be
placed in the pre-blast locations of ore and nearby waste polygons, and also in the
post blast polygons after movement correction. Knowing which Smart tags arrive
at the crusher, will provide information on how effective is the blast movement
correction and loading process in the mine.

117
Figure 65: Smart Tag (Metso)
• In order to verify the estimated polygon boundaries actually exist in a bench, the
following methods should be considered:
a) Sampling across the polygon boundaries:
For example, select a pattern with an ore polygon surrounded by waste polygons.
Collect the samples along the red colored line as shown in Figure 66. After the blast and
after relocating the polygons collect the samples along the same line and at same
positions.
118
Figure 66: Pattern sampling before and after the blast
b) Spectral Imaging:
Spectral imaging might be applicable at the Phoenix mine to locate the mineral
boundaries. It might help to verify the location of the adjusted digging polygons. Spectral
imaging can be used to scan the side face and top of a bench before and after the blast. It
can detect mineral types. Recently a test was done at a Copper Mine in Nevada (Kruse
2010) and the results of spectral imaging at that mine are shown in Appendix D. Spectral
imaging has the advantage that it can scan the whole surface of a bench or the digging
face of the bench, which makes it quicker and easier to use.

119
c) Xray fluorescence e.g. Thermo Scientific NITON XL3 500:
The Xray fluorescence analyzer such as Thermo Scientific XL3 500 shown in
Figure 67, can be used to supplement other sampling methods and might provide a cost-
effective solution to confirm ore/waste polygon boundaries in the bench. It should be able
to measure, at least, the copper grade of the pre- and post-blast bench rock surfaces in the
Phoenix mine, and the drill hole cuttings.
Figure 67: Thermo Scientific NITON XL3 500
• More batch tests incorporating some of the recommendations from this study will
provide further evidence on whether or not blast movement correction is
economic.
120
REFERENCES
• Adam, M. & Thornton, D.M. 2004, A new technology for measuring blast
movement, in proc. of Innovative Mineral Developments - Achievements in a
Changing World, Sydney, 6 Oct 2004. Sydney: Australasian Institute of Mining
and Metallurgy.
• Aguirre, S., 2010, Estudio de movimiento de voladuras y poligonos para reducer

dilucion en La Mina Phoenix de Newmont, SME annual meeting, February 28-
March 3, 2010, Phoenix, AZ.
• Cary, J., 2000, Geology, skarn, alteration and Au, Cu and Ag mineralization of
the Phoenix project, Lander County, Nevada. Proceedings of Geological Society
of Nevada, 2000.
• Firth, I.R. and Taylor, D.L., 2001, Bench blast modeling using numerical
simulation and mine planning software, SME Annual Meeting, February 26-28,
Denver, Colorado.
• Firth, I.R 2003 Unpublished report, Mackay School of Mines, University of
Nevada, Reno, U.S.A.
• Geological Survey of Nevada, 1987, A symposium on Bulk Mineable Precious
Metal Deposits of the Western United States. April 6-8, Reno.
• Gilbride, L.J., 1995, Blast induced rock movement modeling for bench blasting in
Nevada open pit mines, M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Mining Engineering,
Mackay School of Mines, Reno, Nevada, August.

121
• Goldstrike Mine, 2008, presentation on “Blast Movement Monitoring”, Barrick
Gold Corporation.
• Harris, G.W., 1997, Measurement of blast-induced rock movement in surface
mines using magnetic geophysics, M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Mining
Engineering, Mackay School of Mines, Reno, Nevada, May.
• Harris, G.W., Mousset-Jones, P. and Daemen, J., 2001, “Blast Movement
Measurement to Control Dilution in Surface Mines”, CIM Bulletin, Vol 94, No.
1047, pp 52-55.
• Hilkewich, T., 2009, presentation on “Blast movement at Ruby Hill Mine”
Barrick Gold Corporation.
• Johnson, T., 2000, Metal and mineral zoning at the Greater Midas Au Cu Ag
skarn deposit (Battle Mountain Mining District), Lander County, Nevada:
Geological Society of Nevada, Geology and Ore Deposits of the Great Basin
Symposium, Sparks, Nevada, April 1-5, 2000.
• Knipe, S., 1999, Mineralogical analysis of Phoenix project ore samples,
unpublished report by Amtel, May 5, 1999, pp. 1-42.
• Kruse, F. A. et al., 2010, HSI Mineral Mapping From Airborne Outcrop, and
Drill-Core Perspectives, Proceedings of the SPIE Symposium on Defense and
Security, April 2010, Volume 7687, Orlando, FL.
• Little, T.N. and Van Rooyen, F., 1988, The current state of the art of grade control
blasting in the Eastern Goldfields, The Aus. IMM Explosives in Mining
Workshop, Melbourne, Victoria, November, pp. 87-95.

122
• Myers, G.L., 1990, Alteration zonation of the Fortitude gold skarn deposit,
Lander County, Nevada: Mining Engineering, pp.360-368.
• Myers, G.L., 1994, Geology of the Copper Canyon-Fortitude skarn system, Battle
Mountain, Nevada: unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Washington State University,
pp.356.
• Roberts, R.J., 1964, Stratigraphy and structure of the Antler Peak Quadrangle,
Humboldt and Lander Counties, Nevada, U.S.G.S. professional paper 459a.
• Scott, A. (Ed) Cocker, A. Djordjevic, N. Higgins, M. La Rosa, D. Sarma, K.S.
Wedmair, R., 1996, “Open Pit Blast, Design-Analysis and Optimization”, Julius
Kruttschnitt Mineral Research Center, University of Queensland, Australia.
• Taylor, S. L., 1995, Blast induced movement and its effects on grade dilution at
the Coeur Rochester mine, M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Mining Engineering,
Mackay School of Mines, Reno, Nevada, August.
• Taylor, D. and Firth, I. 2003, Utilization of blast movement measurements in
grade control. Proceedings of the Application of Computers and Operations
Research in the Mineral Industry. SAIMM, pp 243-247
• Theodore, T.G., et al., 1973, Geochemistry and potassium-argon ages of plutonic
rocks in the Battle Mountain mining district, Lander County, Nevada: U.S. Geol.
Survey Professional paper 798-A, pp. A1-A24.
• Theodore, T.G. and Blake, D.W., 1975, Geology and geochemistry of the Copper
Canyon porphyry copper deposit and surroundings area, Lander County, Nevada:
U.S. Geol. Survey Professional paper 798-B, pp. 86.

123
• Thornton, D., Sprott, D. & Brunton, I., 2005, Measuring blast movement to
reduce ore loss and dilution. Proc. 31st Annual Conference on Explosives &
Blasting Technique, Cleveland, OH, U.S.A., 22 Feb 2005. Cleveland, OH:
International Society of Explosives Engineers.
• Tunstall, A.M. and Bearman, R.A., 1997, Influence of fragmentation on crushing
performance, Mining Engineering, Society of Mining Engineers, Littleton,
Colarado, January, pp. 65-70.
• Yang, R.L. and Kavetsky, A., 1989, A two dimensional kinematic model for
predicting muckpile shape in bench blasting. Int. Journal of Mining and
Geological Engineering, Vol. 7, No 3, October, pp. 209-226.
• Yang, R.L. and Kavetsky, A., 1990, A three dimensional model of muckpile
formation and grade boundary movement in open pit blasting. Int. Journal of
Mining and Geological Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 1, March, pp. 13-34.
• Zhang, S., 1994, Rock movement due to blasting and its impact on ore grade
control in Nevada open pit gold mines, M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Mining
Engineering, Mackay School of Mines, Reno, Nevada, May.
• Zhang, S., Gilbride, L.J., Mousset-Jones, P. and Daemen, J.K., 1994, Blast rock
movement and its impact on ore grade control at Rain Mine, Newmont Gold
Company, Department of Mining Engineering School of Mines, University of
Nevada, Reno, Nev., USA.

124
Appendix A - Blast Details
The blast details and figures showing the bench blast ID, the blast hole
locations, and movement direction and distance for each blast.

125
Appendix - A Index
Bench 6240…………………………………………………………………………..…127
PX013909………………………………………………………………………127
PX013914………………………………………………………………………130
PX013915……..………..…………………………………………………...….133
PX013917………………………………………………………………………135
PX013918………………………………………………………………………138
PX013920………………………………………………………………………141
PX013930………………………………………………………………………144
Bench 6200……………………………………………………………………………..147
PX014103………………………………………………………………………147
Bench 6160………………………………………………..……………………………151
PX014308………………………………………………………………………151
PX014309………………………………………………………………………154
PX014310……..……………………………………………………….……….157
Bench 6120……………………………………………………………………………..160
PX014503………………………………………………………………………161
PX014508………………………………………………………………………162
PX014510…………………………………………………………………..…..165
PX014513…..………………………………………………….……………….168
PX014514………………………………………………………………………170
Bench 6080……………………………………………………………………………..172
126
PX014702…………………………………..…………………………………..172
PX014707…………………………………………………..………….……….175
Bench 6040……………………………………………………………………………..178
PX014906………………………………………………………………………178
PX014907……………………………………………………..…….………….180
PX014908………………………………………………………….………..….182
PX014909………………………………………………………………………184
PX014910…………………………………………………………..…………..187
PX014911…………………………………………………...………………….189
PX014916………………………………………………………………………191
Bench 6000………………………………..……………………………………………193
PX015103………………………………………………………………………193
PX015106………………………………………………………..……………..195
PX015107………………………………………………………………………196
PX015110………………………………………………………………………197
Bench 5960……………………………………………………………………………..199
PX015303………………………………………………………………………199
127
Bench 6240
Figure 68: Top Bench 6240 Figure 69: Bottom bench 6220
PX013909

128
• Initiation – V

129

BMM # Initial DepthInitial Surfa Initial BMMFinal Surfac Final BMM Direction Horiz.Dist. Vert.Dist. 3D Dist. Inclination
3 30 6281.9 6251.9 6302.7 6211.6 178 25.9 -40.3 47.9 -57.3
4 15 6279.9 6264.9 6305.5 6282.3 180 65.5 17.4 67.7 14.9
5 15 6281.4 6266.4 6291.5 6279.9 186 52.2 13.5 53.9 14.5
6 15 6280.8 6265.8 6308.2 6279.4 194 50.4 13.6 52.2 15.1
Table 19: Results of the blast movement

130
PX013914
• Rock type – Harmony (Cha)

131

132
BMM # Initial DepthInitial SurfacInitial BMMFinal Surfac Final BMM Direction Horiz.Dist. Vert.Dist. 3D Dist. Inclination
1 15.3 6280.6 6265.3 6298.9 6256.9 299 53.6 -8.4 54.3 -8.9
2 15.3 6281.2 6265.9 6296.4 6279.6 251 32.9 13.7 35.7 22.6
3 30 6279.8 6249.8 6303.1 6157.9 289 33.8 -91.9 97.9 -69.8

133
PX013915

134
Figure 81: Direction of the movement of the blast

135
PX013917
136
• Initiation – Flat
137
BMM # Initial DepInitial Surf Initial BMMFinal SurfaFinal BMMDirection Horiz.Dist Vert.Dist. 3D Dist. Inclination
3 30 6279.9 6249.9 6302 6253.5 314 21 3.6 21.3 9.6

138
PX013918
139

140
Figure 90: Result of the blast hole movement from BMM assistant
BMM # Initial DepInitial Surf Initial BMM

Final SurfaFinal BMMDirection Horiz.Dist Vert.Dist. 3D Dist. Inclination
1 15 6280.7 6265.7 6294 6276.6 324 25.2 10.9 27.4 23.4

141
PX013920

142

143
BMM # Initial DepInitial Surf Initial BMMFinal SurfaFinal BMMDirection Horiz.Dist Vert.Dist. 3D Dist. Inclination
1 15 6279.7 6264.7 6293.5 6274.5 314 54.8 9.8 55.6 10.1
2 15 6280.4 6265.4 6302.1 6282.7 315 44.1 17.3 47.4 21.5
3 14 6280.1 6266.1 6293.6 6275.7 305 45.2 9.6 46.2 12

144
PX013930
• Rock type – Lower battle\Harmony (Pbl\Cha)

145

146
BMM # Initial DepthInitial SurfacInitial BMMFinal Surfac Final BMM Direction Horiz.Dist. Vert.Dist. 3D Dist. Inclination
1 30 6280.6 6250.6 6284.8 6252.9 285 13.5 2.3 13.7 9.7
2 15 6281.3 6266.3 6287.4 6268.6 284 26.3 2.3 26.4 5.1
3 14 6280 6266 6294.3 6267.5 282 20.5 1.4 20.6 4
4 29 6280.8 6251.8 6276.1 6255.8 292 9.8 4 10.6 22.3

147
Bench 6200
Figure 103: Upper Bench 6200 Figure 104: Lower bench 6180
PX014103

148

149
BMM # Initial DepthInitial Surfa Initial BMMFinal Surfac Final BMM Direction Horiz.Dist. Vert.Dist. 3D Dist. Inclination
1 28 6241.8 6213.8 6262.6 6219.4 298 12.9 5.6 14.1 23.3
2 28 6242.9 6214.9 6267.6 6222.1 310 22.7 7.3 23.9 17.7
3 29 6242.2 6213.2 6264.5 6233.5 317 31.5 20.3 37.5 32.8
4 29 6241.7 6212.7 6244.6 6222.4 327 31.9 9.6 33.4 16.8
5 10 6242.1 6232.1 6263.1 6250.7 304 47 18.6 50.5 21.6
6 10 6242.9 6232.9 6263.6 6251.2 309 42.5 18.4 46.3 23.4
7 10 6242.5 6232.5 6259.3 6238.9 323 39.5 6.4 40 9.2
9 29 6242.7 6213.7 6263.7 6227.1 311 40.4 13.4 42.6 18.4
10 29 6242.2 6213.2 6255.8 6228.4 311 48.4 15.2 50.8 17.4
11 29 6242 6213 6241.7 6230.5 312 47.4 17.6 50.6 20.3
12 10 6241.6 6231.6 6259 6245 313 31.1 13.4 33.8 23.3
13 10 6241.5 6231.5 6251.1 6236.4 325 24.6 4.9 25.1 11.3
15 29 6241 6212 6258 6213.2 318 9.8 1.3 9.9 7.4
16 29 6241.4 6212.4 6253.2 6221.9 317 31.3 9.5 32.7 16.8
17 29 6240.8 6211.8 6249.2 6229.6 311 31.6 17.8 36.3 29.4
18 28 6239.3 6211.3 6243.1 6221.1 327 49.8 9.8 50.8 11.1
19 10 6241.3 6231.3 6257.2 6245.5 324 22 14.2 26.2 32.9
21 10 6240.4 6230.4 6248.7 6234.5 311 24.8 4.1 25.1 9.3
22 25 6241.4 6216.4 6250.6 6226.9 321 17.7 10.5 20.6 30.6
24 23 6241.3 6218.3 6246.1 6227.3 290 14 9 16.7 32.6
25 27 6240 6213 6239.2 6197.3 306 49.2 -15.7 51.6 -17.7

150

151
Bench 6160
Figure 110: Upper bench 6160 Figure 111: Lower bench 6140
PX014308
152

153
Figure 114: Result of the blast movement of the BMM assistant
BMM # Initial DepthInitial Surfa Initial BMMFinal Surfac Final BMM Direction Horiz.DistanVert.Distanc3D DistanceInclination
1 24 6200.2 6200.2 6221.5 6221.5 256 24.8 21.3 32.7 40.6
2 14 6200 6200 6213.6 6213.6 276 26.1 13.6 29.4 27.6
3 25 6200.3 6200.3 6212.3 6212.3 289 34.3 12 36.3 19.3
4 15 6200.2 6200.2 6210.4 6210.4 252 14.3 10.2 17.6 35.6
5 24 6200.8 6200.8 6210.6 6210.6 256 26.8 9.7 28.6 20

154
PX014309

155

156
BMM # Initial DepthInitial SurfacInitial BMMFinal Surfac Final BMM Direction Horiz.DistanVert.Distanc3D DistanceInclination
1 14 6199.1 6185.1 6224.1 6206.6 313 34.1 21.5 40.3 32.3
2 23 6198.9 6175.9 6224.4 6186.5 326 41.5 10.7 42.8 14.4
4 13 6197.9 6184.9 6188.5 6172 307 18.9 -12.9 22.9 -34.3
5 13 6198.8 6185.8 6217.7 6166.3 320 45 -19.5 49 -23.4

157
PX014310

158

159
4 25 6200.7 6175.7 6207 6176.9 311 53.5 1.2 53.5 1.3
5 14 6199.9 6185.9 6208.9 6193.1 352 19.9 7.1 21.1 19.8
6 23 6199.3 6176.3 6214.7 6181.2 323 43.2 4.9 43.5 6.5

160
Bench 6120
161
PX014503
162
PX014508

163

164
1 27 6160.4 6133.4 6176.2 6115 194 12.6 -18.4 22.2 -55.6
3 24 6160.1 6136.1 6181.9 6031.1 126 26.1 -105 108.2 -76
5 24 6161.1 6137.1 6176 6017.8 146 29.3 -119.3 122.8 -76.2
4 23 6160.2 6137.2 6176.8 6150.9 233 42.4 13.6 44.5 17.9

165
PX014510

166

167
1 20 6159 6139 6174.1 6146.4 322 23.9 7.4 25 17.3
2 16.7 6159 6142.3 6171.5 6146.9 317 22.8 4.6 23.2 11.4
3 20.4 6159 6138.6 6171.3 6146.8 309 25.8 8.2 27.1 17.6
4 20.6 6159 6138.4 6175.7 6146.9 290 22.4 8.5 24 20.7
Table 30: Result of the blast movement

168
PX014513
169
1 13 6160 6147 6160 6141.8 311 31.5 -5.2 32 -9.4
2 19 6160 6141 6160 6135 312 33.7 -6 34.2 -10.1
3 22 6160 6138 6160 6127.7 297 38.5 -10.3 39.8 -15
4 20.9 6160 6139.1 6160 6066.4 320 35.3 -72.7 80.8 -64.1
5 19.3 6160 6140.7 6160 6138.9 320 32.4 -1.8 32.5 -3.3

170
Figure 145: Original polygons on the

Figure 144: Original polygons on the
lower bench of the pattern
upper bench of the pattern
PX014514

171

172
Bench 6080
Figure 151: Lower bench 6060

Figure 150: Upper bench 6080
PX014702
173
• Explosive – 458/462

174
2 19 6119 6100 6142.7 6112.3 215 22 12.3 25.2 29.2
3 19 6118.9 6099.9 6138.6 6111.6 224 25.3 11.7 27.9 24.8
4 19 6119.9 6100.9 6134 6112.2 220 21.1 11.3 24 28.2
Figure 155: Original polygons on the Figure 156: Original polygons on the
upper bench of the pattern lower bench of the pattern

175
PX014707
176

177
1 20 6121 6101 6134.9 6107.5 244 15.6 6.5 16.9 22.5
2 19 6121.4 6102.4 6140.8 6109.1 290 19.8 6.6 20.8 18.5
4 18.5 6119.9 6101.4 6134.8 6110.5 300 19.6 9.1 21.6 25

178
Bench 6040
PX014906

179

180
1 24 6078.8 6054.8 6095.9 5934 159 21.3 -120.7 122.6 -80
2 25 6079.2 6054.2 6097 6060 169 24.7 5.8 25.3 13.1
3 24 6081 6057 6100.8 6069.7 163 41.6 12.8 43.5 17.1
PX014907
• Rock type – Antler

181

182
1 25 6080.8 6055.8 6090.5 6058.9 57 15.4 3.2 15.7 11.7
3 26 6081.1 6055.1 6095.1 6060.8 133 15.1 5.7 16.1 20.7
4 27 6082 6055 6095 6061.2 114 16.4 6.2 17.5 20.7
5 26 6081.2 6055.2 6093.5 6062.3 75 15.2 7.2 16.8 25.3
6 24 6080.2 6056.2 6099.3 6059.2 95 10.3 2.9 10.7 16
PX014908

183

184
1 24 6079.4 6055.4 6101.2 6075.3 121 24.4 19.9 31.4 39.3
2 23 6079.3 6056.3 6107.7 6061.3 104 20.7 5 21.3 13.7
3 27 6081.3 6054.3 6099.3 6070.1 74 20.9 15.8 26.2 37.1
4 21 6079.1 6058.1 6101.5 6067.2 79 27.4 9.2 28.9 18.5
5 25 6079.3 6054.3 6099.8 6064.1 107 23.1 9.8 25.1 23.1
6 25 6079.2 6054.2 6092.7 6061.5 124 27.3 7.4 28.2 15.1
7 22 6080.1 6058.1 6094.9 6068 110 26.3 9.9 28.1 20.6
PX014909
185
• Rock type – Antler
186

187
6 31 6082.9 6051.9 6101.2 6034.4 76 26.7 -17.5 32 -33.2
9 18 6083.5 6065.5 6091.2 6050.5 149 43.7 -15 46.2 -18.9
2 29 6082.1 6053.1 6117 6074.5 123 31.1 21.4 37.7 34.5
1 15 6081.3 6066.3 6105 6098.8 108 34.9 32.6 47.7 43.1
3 11 6082.6 6071.6 6115.7 6108.9 171 51.6 37.3 63.7 35.8
7 15 6082.9 6067.9 6099.1 6080.7 81 44.4 12.8 46.2 16.1
8 15 6083.4 6068.4 6110.1 6092.9 122 52.4 24.5 57.8 25
PX014910

188

189
1 30 6080.1 6050.1 6088.8 6054.1 302 23.2 3.9 23.5 9.7
2 29 6079.9 6050.9 6094.8 6058.2 291 24.8 7.3 25.9 16.4
4 30 6079.5 6049.5 6084.6 6043.5 221 15.7 -6 16.8 -20.9
5 25 6080 6055 6082.5 6055.6 227 18 0.6 18 1.8
PX014911
• Rock type – (Pbl)

190

191
1 25 6081.1 6056.1 6100.1 6061.1 169 13 5 14 20.9
2 25 6081.4 6056.4 6096 6066.9 205 21.5 10.5 23.9 25.9
3 25 6080 6055 6095.5 6059.5 179 14.4 4.5 15.1 17.1
PX014916

192
• Rock type – Virgin fault (Vfz)

193
1 31 6080.9 6049.9 6102.4 6053.4 147 10.5 3.4 11 18.2
2 30 6079.6 6049.6 6092.2 6053.2 199 12.4 3.7 13 16.4
3 28 6080.1 6052.1 6092.3 6054.4 185 12.9 2.3 13.1 10.3
Bench 6000
PX015103

194

195
PX015106
196
PX015107

197
PX015110
198

199
Bench 5960
PX015303

200

201
1 19 5999.6 5980.6 6017.5 5993.6 280 38.7 13 40.9 18.6
2 19 5999.4 5980.4 6028.2 5994.6 247 46 14.2 48.1 17.2
3 19 5999.6 5980.6 6022.3 6000.3 205 55.2 19.7 58.6 19.6
4 18 6000.6 5982.6 6008.9 6008 180 49.5 25.4 55.7 27.2

202
Appendix B - Moving the digging polygons using Surpac

203
Moving the digging polygons using Surpac
1. Open Surpac software
• Surpac software saves files to one folder, known as the "work directory" by
default. File can be saved in any folder, but it is necessary to specifically select
any other folder than the "work directory".
• In the Navigator, right-click the folder to be set as the work directory.
• From the popup menu, select Set as work directory. Figure A.
Figure A: Set as working directory

204
The name of the work directory is displayed in the title bar of the Surpac window.
2. Load the blast holes to Surpac.
• The easting, northing and elevation of the drill holes should be in a .txt file
format. String files are used to store all coordinate data which is processed by
functions which process string data. String files are free format ASCII text files
which use commas "," as delimiters between fields in a record. With the exclusion
of the 2 header records and the end of file record, each record represents a point.
• A sample of a string file is shown in Figure B. Figure C, D and E show the
process of importing the blast hole data into Surpac.
Figure B: Easting, northing and elevation of the blast holes

205
Figure C: Importing Blast holes into Surpac from .txt file
Figure D: Entering the .txt file name and location

206
Figure E: Entering the X, Y, Z field numbers
• After applying the field numbers Surpac will create a string file with name,
pattern_coords.str.
• Similarly, import the bmm_pre, bmm_post and polygon coordinates to Surpac as
explained in step 2.
3. Open the string file
• Open the string file created in the previous step and see Figure F.
• To view the point holes, go to Display menu, click on hide strings and click as
lines. Click ‘Apply’ in the pop window as shown in Figure G which results a
blank screen.
• Now, go to display points and click on markers following Figure H which gives
point holes as shown in Figure I.

207
Figure F: String file of the blast holes
Figure G: Name of the string file

208
Figure H: Points converting to markers
Figure I: Blast holes as markers

209
4. Open string files of the BMM data and polygons repeating steps 1-3.
• In Figure J, the holes in red color are original drill holes, the holes in green are
bmm_pre and the holes in cyan are bmm_post.
Figure J: Showing the pre and post positions of the BMM balls
• Open the polygon string file. (01_5980_00_c163_pts.str).
Usually in Surpac the polygons do not close. Manually close the polygon as
shown in Figure K.
210
Figure K: Polygon to be moved
5. Moving the polygons
• Go to ‘Inquire’, click on ‘bearing and distance between two points’ and select the
two points to know the bearing, dip and slope distance. Repeat this for all the four
points. Take the average distance of the two points close to the polygon.
• Go to Edit and click on ‘move segment constrained by’ and select ‘bearing and
distance’ as shown in Figure L.
• Enter the bearing, dip and slope distance values in the pop up window and click
apply as shown in Figure M.
• Figure N shows the position of the original polygon and moved polygon.
211
• Repeat the steps 4 and 5 to move all the polygons in the pattern. Figure O shows
the pattern with original (blue) and moved polygons (pink).
Figure L: Moving the polygon according to the bearing and distance
Figure M: Bearing, dip and slope distance of the selected point

212
Figure N: Original ore polygon and moved ore polygon
Figure O: Pre-blast original ore polygons and post-blast moved ore polygons
213
Appendix C – Analysis of alternative sampling results for Blast

No. PX015303 and PX0150010204
214
Histograms
Copper: Avg pan1&pan2 top
Copper: Avg pan1&pan2 bottom

215
Copper: Old top half
Copper: Old bottom half

216
Silver: Avg pan1&2 top
Silver: Avg pan1&2 bottom

217
Silver: Old top half
Silver: Old bottom half

218
Gold: Avg pan1&2 top
Gold: Avg pan1&2 Bottom

219
Gold: Old top half
Gold: Old bottom half

220
Semi-variograms
Pan 1 –Silver
Pan2 – Silver
221
Old sample (top) - Silver
Pan 1- Copper
222
Pan 2- Copper
Old sample top half – Copper

223
Pan 1 –Gold
Pan 2- Gold
224
Old sample top half – Gold

225
Appendix D – Spectral Imaging

Results from a test at the Trinity mine, Nevada by Spectir LLC, Reno, Nevada
226
Determination of Mineralogical Singatures in the Trinity Mine Pit Using an
Hyperspectral Imager, 357 5-nm bands in (400 - 2500) nm
Due to the kind permission afforded us by AuEx Explorationists and Richard
Bedell, we were able to conduct an experiment in the detailed scanning of the
sidewalls of the Trinity Mine pit, which produced silver and copper. The instrument
was set up in such a way as to produce an image by sweeping sideways. A
Spectralon panel was placed in the views, so that, once the raw data had been
converted to radiance in the standard way, it was then possible to convert to
reflectance using the Spectralon panel for an empirical-line calibration procedure:
Estimate the spectra of pixels that cover the Spectralon and divide that single
spectrum, pixel by pixel, in the entire image to obtain Spectralon Reflectance, or
reflectance for this writeup.
Detailed information is available on file at AuEx, so the results we obtain can
be checked and vetted very thoroughly, a major advantage to making use of this
particular (now abandoned) mine site. The next three images show panoramic views,
taken with a digital camera, looking north, east, and northeast in and around the pit.
227
By way of comparison, simulated true color images, obtained by the ProSpecTIR
VS2 hyperspectral instrument, are shown next.

228
229
We focused on a particularly interesting area within the pit, which featured a
pod of dark-colored sulphides. These are shown in the next two images.
For each hyperspectral image, note that a white, rectangular panel appears in these
images. These provide the basis for the conversion to reflectance across the entire
spectrum as just described. In the image above, the pixel size on the mine wall varies
from about 5 to 15 cm, while for the lower image a pixel size of about 2 cm was
achieved. The instrument was set up to maximize the signal-to-noise ratio.

230
In looking at the reflectance data, a number of image end members were
found. On the VNIR side, we found jarosite and goethite (no hematite) as shown in
the following images, compared with spectral standards from the SpecMinTM library.
Jarosite also manifests strongly in the SWIR as does the dominant mineral here, Illite.
Note the close similarity of the end member pixels shown with the library spectra
(dashed lines.)
231
Three of the end members found are similar, including Illite, the dominant one
found on some 63% of the image pixels. One is probably Smectite, and the other is
consistent with Montmorillonite, but such an ID must be subject to independent
analysis by XRD or some other standard to be sure of this. Those classified as
Montmorillonite (2.6% of the pixels) and Smectite (0.8% of the pixels) are shown
next.
In these images, spectral averages are computed for pixels that resemble the
end member spectra from somewhat similar (green - yellow) to very similar (red -
cyan). In each case the green spectrum is for the increment of pixels that are most
dissimilar to the endmember, so that all of the classified pixels of these minerals
belong reliably to each endmember. Because they are similar, the exercise provides a
good test of the resolving power of the imager.

232
Here the minewall pixels classified as illite, 63.5% of them all, show the strong,
symmetric minimum at 2200 nm, and smaller but diagnostic features near 2120 and
near 2360 nm. As above, green - yellow - red - blue are pixels that more and more
closely resemble the dashed curve, the end member, which practically overlays
several of the standard library spectra from a number of sources.
Finally is shown an image in which all the end members are presented: illite,
montmorillonite, smectite, jarosite, goethite, and kaolinite. This image is spectacular
in showing detailed mineralogical zonation.

233
The small number of kaolinite pixels on the image show spectral averages and an
endmember suggestive of poorly-crystalline kaolinite.
View publication stats

Blast Movement Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Blast Movement Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Measurement of blast-induced rock movement in surface mines by application

Geraint Harris Pierre mousset-jones

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

University of Nevada, Reno

BLAST INDUCED ROCK MOVEMENT MEASUREMENT

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Master of Science in

ANANTA LAKSHMI YENNAMANI

Dr. Pierre Mousset-Jones/Thesis Advisor

University of Nevada, Reno

from a measurement program at Newmont’s Phoenix mine in Nevada.

the project from Drs. Jaak Daemen and Robert Watters.

My greatest thanks to my parents for giving me the strength and unconditional

Hari Kishore Nune, for his encouragement and support.

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. vii

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... viii

1.1 Blast design considerations and optimization .................................................................. 1

1.2 Research objectives .......................................................................................................... 6

2 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 8

3 THE PHOENIX MINE .......................................................................................................... 24

3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 24

3.2 Geology and mineralization of the Phoenix Mine ......................................................... 26

3.3 Blasting practices ........................................................................................................... 32

3.4 Ore control practices ...................................................................................................... 34

4 BLAST MOVEMENT MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY ............................................... 37

4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 37

4.2 Instrumentation .............................................................................................................. 38

4.3 Research Procedure ........................................................................................................ 48

4.3.1 Drill and Blast considerations ................................................................................ 51

5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS .......................................................................................... 57

5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 57

5.2 Results of the blast movement measurements ............................................................... 60

5.2.1 Blast PX014306 ..................................................................................................... 60

5.3.1 Depth v’s BMM ball movement ............................................................................ 75

5.4.1 Moving the ore polygons using Surpac.................................................................. 86

5.6 Batch test and results ..................................................................................................... 96

5.7 Sample test using pie pans ........................................................................................... 101

6 Cost analysis of the BMM balls ........................................................................................... 108

7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 111

7.1 Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 115

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 120

Appendix A - Blast Details .......................................................................................................... 124

Appendix B - Moving the digging polygons using Surpac .......................................................... 202

Appendix D – Spectral Imaging .................................................................................................. 225

Table 3: Lost revenue at Porcupine Mine ...................................................................................... 22

Table 4: Results of the rock movement at Barrick Goldstrike ....................................................... 22

Table 5: Delay times ...................................................................................................................... 40

Table 6: Final Summary of the Blast Movement Measurement software ..................................... 51

Table 7: Summary of the PX013909 pattern ................................................................................. 65

Table 8: Summary of the PX013911 blast ..................................................................................... 71

Table 10: Summary of the blast movement (PX015303)............................................................... 84

Table 12: Summary of blast movement of PX014510 ................................................................... 96

Table 18: Cost analysis of BMM balls......................................................................................... 109

Figure 3: Post-blast polygons adjustment ...................................................................................... 10

Figure 4: Three dimensional polygonal ore block movement ....................................................... 11

Figure 5: Two dimensional average movement profile of the rock ............................................... 13

Figure 6: Magnetic gradiometer targets evaluated during field testing ......................................... 15

Figure 7: Finished type targets (Harris, 1997) ............................................................................... 17

Figure 9: Dilution and reconciliation issues at the Porcupine Mine .............................................. 21

Figure 10: Pre and post-blast ore polygons .................................................................................... 21

Figure 11: Movement of the digging polygons .............................................................................. 23