CHAPTER FOUR

DATA COLLECTION

4.1 Data collection

Several blasting operations were observed and monitored in the study area with a view to
studying blasting parameters such as burden, spacing, depth of hole and diameter of blast
hole, as well as physical geological condition of the mine, types and quantity of explosives
and blast design used. Visual examination, personal observations and field measurements
were also used in estimating the size of fragmented rocks. Both primary and secondary data
were collected in this study. Field data from the observed blasts, measurements and other raw
data formed the sources of primary data.
Mining operations of a gold mine was considered for four weeks and the major parameters
influencing the blasting operations were carefully garnered for this research study. Drilling is
done using Sandvik Panterra 1500i Drill Rigs. Production holes are marked out in staggered
pattern to a specified depth with specific hole diameter drilled with button bits. The drill holes
are mostly drilled with a 102 mm and 127mm diameter bit at an angle of 90° for production
blasting. A 250 g pentolite booster, an emulsion blend explosive of composition – 70% pure
Emulsion and 30% Ammonium Nitrate Porous Prills (ANPP) are used for blasting in the
mine. Ammonium Nitrate Fuel Oil (ANFO) explosives is only used in dry hole conditions. As
an effort for improving the quality of blast fragmentation, the mine periodically conducts
studies and evaluates the Velocity of Detonation (VOD) of the explosives and other key
drilling and blasting parameters.

4.1.1 Observations

Some geological factors where carefully observed and this is what was recorded.
1. Rock hardness
The rocks in gold tree pit zone I is relatively hard in such a way that most machines such as
drill rig machines pose more challenges during drilling of holes. The hardness of rock affects
also the penetration rate, drilling parameters (such as spacing, burdens and depth of the hole)
as the result they cause wear of machines and poor drilling parameters resulting to poor
fragmentation.
2. A dike
In geology, a dike refers to a sheet of rock that is formed in a fracture of pre-existing rock
body. Therefore, it is essential a tabular body of rock that cuts through the surrounding rock
formations. As observed in gold tree pit zone I, a dyke has been seen passing through the
production area and it seems that it is a youngest rock and fresh rock compared to parent rock
which it has been formed after the parent rock. A dike cuts across the layers of rock or
through a contiguous mass of rock at a different angle than the rest of the structure. Dikes are
usually visible because they have different color and texture than the rock surrounding them,
whereby it is dark in color.

4.1.2 Details on drilling and blasting parameters

I. Drilling parameters

Geometric data set were obtained from the blast plans and reports of the mine. The blast
design parameters for the four blasts are presented in Table 4.1. The table shows a summary
of the collected data on the blasts used for this study. All the data were collected from blasting
the same type of fresh rock (Basalts and Quartz) with density ranging from 2.5 g/cm3 to 2.7
g/cm3. The staggered drilling pattern was used in all blasts.
Table 4.1: Geometric drilling parameters at gold tree zone I
BLAST 1
Design Surveyed Actual depth Design Actual Desig
Hole Hole Depth Depth after backfill / Burden Burden Spacin
Number Hole Type Diameter (m) (m) redrill (m) (m) (m) (m)
1. Production 102mm 5.5 6.1 6 2.8 2.9 3.2
2. Production 102mm 5.5 5.8 5.6 2.8 2.8 3.2
3. Production 102mm 5.5 6.1 5.5 2.8 2.8 3.2
4. Production 102mm 5.5 6.0 5.5 2.8 2.6 3.2
5. Production 102mm 5.5 5.9 5.9 2.8 2.8 3.2
6. Production 102mm 5.5 6.0 6 2.8 2.7 3.2
7. Production 102mm 5.5 6.0 6 2.8 2.7 3.2
8. Production 102mm 5.5 6.1 6.1 2.8 2.7 3.2
9. Production 102mm 5.5 6.2 6.2 2.8 2.8 3.2
10. Production 102mm 5.5 6.0 5 2.8 2.8 3.2
11. Production 102mm 5.5 6.0 6 2.8 2.8 3.2
12. Production 102mm 5.5 6.0 6 2.8 2.6 3.2
13. Production 102mm 5.5 5.9 5.9 2.8 2.9 3.2
14. Production 102mm 5.5 5.8 5.8 2.8 2.8 3.2
 15. Production 102mm 5.5 5.8 5.8 2.8 2.8 3.2
16. Production 102mm 5.5 6.1 6.1 2.8 2.7 3.2
17. Production 102mm 5.5 6.1 6.1 2.8 2.9 3.2
18. Production 102mm 5.5 6.0 6 2.8 2.8 3.2
19. Production 102mm 5.5 5.8 5.8 2.8 2.8 3.2
20. Production 102mm 5.5 5.7 5.7 2.8 2.7 3.2

BLAST 2

Design Actual depth Design Actual Design

Hole Hole Hole Depth Surveyed after backfill / Burden Burden Spacing
Number Type Diameter (m) Depth (m) redrill (m) (m) (m) (m)
1. PD 102mm 5.4 6.2 6.3 2.8 2.8 3.2
2. PD 102mm 5.4 6.2 6.2 2.8 2.7 3.2
3. PD 102mm 5.4 6.2 6.2 2.8 2.9 3.2
4. PD 102mm 5.4 6.2 6 2.8 2.9 3.2
5. PD 102mm 5.4 5.8 5.8 2.8 2.8 3.2
6. PD 102mm 5.4 5.7 5.7 2.8 2.9 3.2
7. PD 102mm 5.4 5.7 5.7 2.8 2.8 3.2
8. PD 102mm 5.4 5.8 5.4 2.8 2.7 3.2
9. PD 102mm 5.4 5.7 5.1 2.8 2.7 3.2
10. PD 102mm 5.4 5.6 5.6 2.8 2.8 3.2
11. PD 102mm 5.4 5.8 5.8 2.8 2.9 3.2
12. PD 102mm 5.4 5.8 5.8 2.8 2.8 3.2
13. PD 102mm 5.4 5.9 5.9 2.8 2.9 3.2
14. PD 102mm 5.4 6.4 5.4 2.8 2.8 3.2
15. PD 102mm 5.4 6.3 6.3 2.8 2.8 3.2
16. PD 102mm 5.4 6.3 6.3 2.8 2.8 3.2
17. PD 102mm 5.4 6.2 6.1 2.8 2.7 3.2
18. PD 102mm 5.4 6.0 6 2.8 2.9 3.2
19. PD 102mm 5.4 5.9 5.9 2.8 2.9 3.2
20. PD 102mm 5.4 5.8 5.8 2.8 2.8 3.2

BLAST 3
 Design Surveyed Actual depth Design Actual Design
Hole Hole Hole Depth Depth after backfill / Burden Burden Spacing
Number Type Diameter (m) (m) redrill (m) (m) (m) (m)
1. PD 127mm 5.6 6.4 5.6 3.7 3.7 4.2
2. PD 127mm 5.6 6.4 6.4 3.7 3.5 4.2
3. PD 127mm 5.6 6.5 6.5 3.7 3.6 4.2
4. PD 127mm 5.6 6.5 6.5 3.7 3.7 4.2
5. PD 127mm 5.6 6.4 6.4 3.7 3.7 4.2
6. PD 127mm 5.6 6.4 6.4 3.7 3.7 4.2
7. PD 127mm 5.6 6.4 5.6 3.7 3.7 4.2
8. PD 127mm 5.6 6.3 6.3 3.7 3.6 4.2
9. PD 127mm 5.6 6.3 6.6 3.7 3.6 4.2
 10. PD 127mm 5.6 6.6 5.6 3.7 3.5 4.2
11. PD 127mm 5.6 6.4 6.4 3.7 3.6 4.2
12. PD 127mm 5.6 6.4 6.4 3.7 3.7 4.2
13. PD 127mm 5.6 6.5 6.5 3.7 3.7 4.2
14. PD 127mm 5.6 6.7 6.7 3.7 3.7 4.2
15. PD 127mm 5.6 7.0 6.6 3.7 3.7 4.2
16. PD 127mm 5.6 6.7 5.6 3.7 3.6 4.2
17. PD 127mm 5.6 6.6 6.6 3.7 3.6 4.2
18. PD 127mm 5.6 6.7 6.3 3.7 3.7 4.2
19. PD 127mm 5.6 6.7 6.7 3.7 3.6 4.2
20. PD 127mm 5.6 6.9 6.6 3.7 3.7 4.2

BLAST 4

Design Surveyed Actual depth Design Actual Design

Hole Hole Hole Depth Depth after backfill / Burden Burden Spacing
Number Type Diameter (m) (m) redrill (m) (m) (m) (m)
2. PD 127mm 5.5 5.6 5.6 3.0 2.9 3.5
3. PD 127mm 5.5 5.1 5.1 3.0 2.9 3.5
4. PD 127mm 5.5 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.5
5. PD 127mm 5.5 4.6 4.6 3.0 2.9 3.5
6. PD 127mm 5.5 4.7 4.7 3.0 3.0 3.5
7. PD 127mm 5.5 5.2 5.2 3.0 3.0 3.5
8. PD 127mm 5.5 4.9 4.9 3.0 2.9 3.5
11. PD 127mm 5.5 5.1 5.1 3.0 3.0 3.5
12. PD 127mm 5.5 5.2 5.2 3.0 3.0 3.5
13. PD 127mm 5.5 5.1 5.1 3.0 3.2 3.5
14. PD 127mm 5.5 5.1 5.1 3.0 3.1 3.5
15. PD 127mm 5.5 4.9 4.9 3.0 3.1 3.5
16. PD 127mm 5.5 4.3 4.3 3.0 2.9 3.5
17. PD 127mm 5.5 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.0 3.5
19. PD 127mm 5.5 6.0 5.7 3.0 3.0 3.5
20. PD 127mm 5.5 5.9 5.5 3.0 3.1 3.5
21. PD 127mm 5.5 5.7 5.5 3.0 2.8 3.5
22. PD 127mm 5.5 5.3 5.3 3.0 3.2 3.5
23. PD 127mm 5.5 5.3 5.3 3.0 2.8 3.5
24. PD 127mm 5.5 5.2 5.2 3.0 3.0 3.5

II. Blasting parameters

Geometric data set were obtained from the blast plans and reports of the mine. The blast

design parameters for the four blasts are presented in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2: Geometric blasting parameters at gold tree zone I

BLAST 1
Surveyed Design Design
Hole Hole Powder Stemming
Hole Type Depth Charge Charge
Number Diameter Factor Ht (m)
(m) Kg/m Kg
1. Production 102mm 6.1 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
2. Production 102mm 5.8 0.72 2.6 9.60 31.0
3. Production 102mm 6.1 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
4. Production 102mm 6.0 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
5. Production 102mm 5.9 0.72 2.7 9.60 31.0
6. Production 102mm 6.0 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
7. Production 102mm 6.0 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
8. Production 102mm 6.1 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
9. Production 102mm 6.2 0.72 2.8 9.60 33.0
10. Production 102mm 6.0 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
11. Production 102mm 6.0 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
12. Production 102mm 6.0 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
13. Production 102mm 5.9 0.72 2.7 9.60 31.0
14. Production 102mm 5.8 0.72 2.6 9.60 31.0
15. Production 102mm 5.8 0.72 2.6 9.60 31.0
16. Production 102mm 6.1 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
17. Production 102mm 6.1 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
18. Production 102mm 6.0 0.72 2.7 9.60 32.0
19. Production 102mm 5.8 0.72 2.6 9.60 31.0
20. Production 102mm 5.7 0.72 2.6 9.60 30.0

BLAST 2

Design Design
Hole Hole Hole Surveyed Powder Stemming
Charge Charge
Number Type Diameter Depth (m) Factor Ht (m)
Kg/m Kg
1. PD 102mm 6.2 0.76 2.7 9.60 33.0
2. PD 102mm 6.2 0.76 2.7 9.60 33.0
3. PD 102mm 6.2 0.76 2.7 9.60 33.0
4. PD 102mm 6.2 0.76 2.7 9.60 33.0
5. PD 102mm 5.8 0.76 2.6 9.60 31.0
6. PD 102mm 5.7 0.76 2.5 9.60 31.0
7. PD 102mm 5.7 0.76 2.6 9.60 30.0
8. PD 102mm 5.8 0.76 2.6 9.60 31.0
9. PD 102mm 5.7 0.76 2.6 9.60 30.0
10. PD 102mm 5.6 0.76 2.5 9.60 30.0
11. PD 102mm 5.8 0.76 2.6 9.60 31.0
12. PD 102mm 5.8 0.76 2.6 9.60 31.0
 13. PD 102mm 5.9 0.76 2.6 9.60 32.0
14. PD 102mm 6.4 0.76 2.8 9.60 34.0
15. PD 102mm 6.3 0.76 2.8 9.60 34.0
16. PD 102mm 6.3 0.76 2.8 9.60 34.0
17. PD 102mm 6.2 0.76 2.7 9.60 33.0
18. PD 102mm 6.0 0.76 2.6 9.60 32.0
19. PD 102mm 5.9 0.76 2.6 9.60 32.0
20. PD 102mm 5.8 0.76 2.6 9.60 31.0

BLAST 3

Design Design
Hole Hole Hole Surveyed Powder Stemming
Charge Charge
Number Type Diameter Depth (m) Factor Ht (m)
Kg/m Kg
1 PD 127mm 6.4 0.80 3.0 14.90 51.0
2 PD 127mm 6.4 0.80 3.0 14.90 51.0
3 PD 127mm 6.5 0.80 3.0 14.90 52.0
4 PD 127mm 6.5 0.80 3.0 14.90 52.0
5 PD 127mm 6.4 0.80 3.0 14.90 51.0
6 PD 127mm 6.4 0.80 3.0 14.90 51.0
7 PD 127mm 6.4 0.80 3.0 14.90 51.0
8 PD 127mm 6.3 0.80 3.0 14.90 49.0
9 PD 127mm 6.3 0.80 3.0 14.90 49.0
10 PD 127mm 6.6 0.80 3.0 14.90 54.0
11 PD 127mm 6.4 0.80 3.0 14.90 51.0
12 PD 127mm 6.4 0.80 3.0 14.90 51.0
13 PD 127mm 6.5 0.80 3.0 14.90 52.0
14 PD 127mm 6.7 0.80 3.0 14.90 55.0
15 PD 127mm 7.0 0.80 3.0 14.90 60.0
16 PD 127mm 6.7 0.80 3.0 14.90 55.0
17 PD 127mm 6.6 0.80 3.0 14.90 54.0
18 PD 127mm 6.7 0.80 3.0 14.90 55.0
19 PD 127mm 6.7 0.80 3.0 14.90 55.0
20 PD 127mm 6.9 0.80 3.0 14.90 58.0

BLAST 4

Surveyed Design Design

Hole Hole Powder Stemming
Hole Type Depth Charge Charge
Number Diameter Factor Ht (m)
(m) Kg/m Kg
2. Production 127mm 5.6 0.84 2.5 14.90 47.0
3. Production 127mm 5.1 0.84 2.2 14.90 43.0
4. Production 127mm 5.0 0.84 2.2 14.90 42.0
5. Production 127mm 4.6 0.84 2.0 14.90 38.0
6. Production 127mm 4.7 0.84 2.1 14.90 39.0
7. Production 127mm 5.2 0.84 2.3 14.90 43.0
8. Production 127mm 4.9 0.84 2.2 14.90 41.0
11. Production 127mm 5.1 0.84 2.3 14.90 42.0
12. Production 127mm 5.2 0.84 2.3 14.90 43.0
13. Production 127mm 5.1 0.84 2.3 14.90 42.0
14. Production 127mm 5.1 0.84 2.3 14.90 42.0
15. Production 127mm 4.9 0.84 2.2 14.90 40.0
16. Production 127mm 4.3 0.84 1.9 14.90 35.0
17. Production 127mm 3.7 0.84 1.7 14.90 30.0
19. Production 127mm 6.0 0.84 2.7 14.90 49.0
20. Production 127mm 5.9 0.84 2.6 14.90 49.0
21. Production 127mm 5.7 0.84 2.5 14.90 48.0
22. Production 127mm 5.3 0.84 2.3 14.90 44.0
23. Production 127mm 5.3 0.84 2.3 14.90 44.0
24. Production 127mm 5.2 0.84 2.3 14.90 43.0
 CHAPTER FIVE

DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

Statistical analysis of data collected in this project work was done using Microsoft Excel.
Therefore, the analysed data appear in form of tables and charts. Both drilling and blasting
operations as well their designs have been analysed.
5.1 Analysis on design depth and actual depth
At Singida gold surface mine there was an ineffective drilling practice which leads to poor
rock fragmentation as per expectations. This is shown by variation between actual drilling
data and the designed ones as shown on the graphs below.
GRAPH I

A GRAPH SHOWING DESIGN DEPTH AGAINST

ACTUAL DEPTH
8
6
METERS

4
2
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
NO. OF DESIGN HOLES

Design Depth Actual depth after backfill / redrill

Figure 5.1: A graph showing design depth and actual depth of blast 1.
GRAPH II

A GRAPH SHOWING DESIGN DEPTH AGAINST

ACTUAL DEPTH
7
6
5
4
METERS

3
2
1
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
NO. OF DESIGN HOLES

Design Depth Actual depth after backfill / redrill

Figure 5.2: A graph showing design depth and actual depth of blast 2
 GRAPH III

A GRAPH SHOWING DESIGN DEPTH AGAINST

ACTUAL DEPTH
6.8
6.6
6.4
6.2
6
METERS

5.8
5.6
5.4
5.2
5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
NO. OF DESIGN HOLES

Design Depth Actual depth after backfill / redrill

Figure 5.3: A graph showing design depth and actual depth of blast 3

GRAPH IV

A GRAPH SHOWING DESIGN DEPTH AGAINST

ACTUAL DEPTH

6
5
4
METERS

3
2
1
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
NO. OF DESIGN HOLES

Design Depth Actual depth after backfill / redrill

Figure 5.4: A graph showing design depth and actual depth of blast 4
From the figures 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4 above it is observed that the drilled holes depths were
deviating from design drill depth and thus resulted to poor fragmentation of rock. In figure
5.4, the holes are drilled shorter than the designed depth in extent that it resulted to shorter
stemming length which in turns may cause decreased fragmentations of the materials and
displacement of rocks which can result in reduced productivity and secondary blasting due to
boulders that are to be formed. In figure 5.3, the actual depth tends to deviate more further
from designed one which results to longer stemming lengths which reduces the energy in the
top of the hole leading to coarser fragmentation.

5.2 Analysis on burden

Burden is the distance between the hole and the nearest free face. Ineffective drilling is shown
by variation between actual burden data and the designed ones together as shown on the
graphs below.

GRAPH I

A GRAPH SHOWING DESIGN BURDEN AGAINST

ACTUAL BURDEN
2.95
HOLE DEPTH

2.85

2.75

2.65

2.55

2.45
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

NO. OF HOLES

Design Burden (m) Actual Burden (m)

Figure 5.5: A graph showing design burden and actual burden of blast 1.
 GRAPH II

A GRAPH SHOWING DESIGN BURDEN AGAINST

ACTUAL BURDEN
2.95
2.9
HOLE DEPTH

2.85
2.8
2.75
2.7
2.65
2.6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

NO. OF HOLES

Design Burden (m) Actual Burden (m)

Figure 5.6: A graph showing design burden and actual burden of blast 2.

GRAPH III

A GRAPH SHOWING DESIGN BURDEN AGAINST

ACTUAL BURDEN
3.75
3.7
HOLE DEPTH

3.65
3.6
3.55
3.5
3.45
3.4
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

NO. OF HOLES

Design Burden (m) Actual Burden (m)

Figure 5.7: A graph showing design burden and actual burden of blast 3.
 GRAPH IV

A GRAPH SHOWING DESIGN BURDEN AGAINST

ACTUAL BURDEN
3.3
3.2
HOLE DEPTH
3.1
3
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

No.OF HOLES

Design Burden (m) Actual Burden (m)

Figure 5.8: A graph showing design burden and actual burden of blast 4.

From the figures 5.5, 5.6, 5.7 and 5.8 above it is observed that the actual burden was deviating

from design burden. In figure 5.7, the actual burden seems to be too small than the designed

ones whereby the explosive energy is not efficiently transmitted to the rock mass, this can

lead to poor fragmentation of rock. From the graph 5.8, holes number 10, 11, 12,16 and 17 are

too large whereby reducing the energy density and resulting in poor fragmentation. The larger

the burden the poor the rock fragmentation in the side of the blasthole i.e., the courser

particles in the side of the blasthole. The smaller the burden results to overbreak hence fly

rocks generated.

5.3 Analysis on Spacing

Spacing is the distance between holes in the same row. Ineffective drilling is shown by
variation between actual spacing data and the designed ones together as shown on the graphs
below.
 GRAPH I

A GARPH SHOWING DESIGN SPACING AGAINST

ACTUAL SPACING
3.35

3.25
HPLE DEPTH

3.15

3.05

2.95

2.85
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

NO. OF HOLES

Design Spacing (m) Series2 Actual Spacing (m)

Figure 5.9: A graph showing design spacing and actual spacing of blast 1.

BLAST II

A GRAPH SHOWING DESIGN SPACING AGAINST

ACTUAL SPACING
3.5
3
HOLE DEPTH

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

NO. OF HOLES

Design Series2 Actual Spacing (m)

Figure 5.10: A graph showing design spacing and actual spacing of blast 2.
 BLAST III

A GRAPH SHOWING DESIGN SPACING AGAINST

ACTUAL SPACING
4.35
HOLE DEPTH

4.25

4.15

4.05

3.95

3.85
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

NO. OF HOLES

Design Spacing (m) Actual Spacing (m)

Figure 5.11: A graph showing design spacing and actual spacing of blast 3.

BLAST IV

A GRAPH SHOWING DESIGN SPACING AGAINST

ACTUAL SPACING

4
3.5
HOLE DEPTH

3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

No. OF HOLES

Design Spacing (m) Actual Spacing (m)

Figure 5.12: A graph showing design spacing and actual spacing of blast 4.

From the figures 5.9, 5.10, 5.11 and 5.12 above it is observed that the actual spacing was
deviating from design spacing. When the spacing is appreciably less than the burden,
premature splitting between the blastholes and early loosening of the stemming material tend
to occur. When the spacing to burden ratio is too high, adjacent charges cannot interact well
to break the intact rock between them and will result in boulder formation.

5.3 PROPOSED OPTIMAL DRILLING AND BLAST DESIGN PARAMETERS

Optimization of drilling and blasting parameters of the site are done with the aid of the rule of
thumb. The pattern layout proposed is Staggered patterns because this pattern provides the
best explosive energy distribution (equilateral triangle) through which it can help to reduce
boulders production.

Burden
Burden = 26 x charge diameter
BLAST I & II
Burden = 26 x 0.102 = 2.652 ~ 2.7m
BLAST III & IV
Burden = 26 x 0.127 = 3.302 ~ 3.3m
Spacing
Spacing = 1.23 x burden
BLAST I & II
Spacing = 1.23 x 2.7 = 3.321 ~ 3.3m

BLAST III &IV

Spacing = 1.23 x 3.3 = 4.059 ~ 4.1m
Stemming Length
Stemming height = 25 x blast hole diameter
BLAST I & II
Stemming height = 25 x 0.102 = 2.55 ~ 2.6m
BLAST III &IV
Stemming height = 25 x 0.127 = 3.175 ~ 3.2m
Sub-drill length
Sub-drill = 0.3 x burden
BLAST I & II
Sub-drill = 0.3 x 2.7 = 0.8m
BLAST III &IV
Sub-drill = 0.3 x 3.3 = 0.99m
The data in the table below shows the proposed parameters to which better fragmentation
(more than 93% mean fragment size) can be produced.
Table 5.1: Proposed parameters for drilling and blasting
PARAMETERS DESIGNED VALUE PROPOSED VALUE
BLAST I&II BLAST III& BLAST BLAST
IV I&II III&IV
Burden (m) 2.8 3.7 and 30 2.7 3.3
Spacing (m) 3.2 4.2 and 35 3.3 4.1
Hole diameter (m) 102 127 102 127
Stemming length (m) 2.5 2.5 2.6 3.2
Sub-drill depth (m) 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.9