Blasting Technology For Underground Hard Rock Mining

Vivek Kumar Himanshu
A. K. Mishra
M. P. Roy
P. K. Singh
Blasting
Technology
for Underground
Hard Rock
Mining
Blasting Technology for Underground Hard Rock
Mining
Vivek Kumar Himanshu · A. K. Mishra ·
M. P. Roy · P. K. Singh
Blasting Technology
for Underground Hard Rock
Mining
Vivek Kumar Himanshu A. K. Mishra
CSIR-Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Department of Mining Engineering
Research Indian Institute of Technology (Indian
Dhanbad, Jharkhand, India School of Mines)
Dhanbad, Jharkhand, India
M. P. Roy
CSIR-Central Institute of Mining and Fuel
Research
Research
P. K. Singh
Research
ISBN 978-981-99-2644-2 ISBN 978-981-99-2645-9 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2645-9
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse
of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Preface
The mineral industries have shown a significant shift from openpit to underground
method of mining due to extinction of shallow depth ore deposits. The openpit mining
is preferred for the faster rate of production. So, maintaining the production pace from
underground mining to meet the rising raw material demands is the main challenge
for the mining practitioners. The large-scale blasting is the only alternative to meet
the target production with faster pace. Accordingly, the scientists, practitioners and
planners have devised various methods of underground blasting. These methods
have been devised to deal with the practical challenges of the mining. The methods
are based on the scientific predictions using advanced numerical simulation and
statistical analysis. The devised methods were further implemented at the site, and
the desired outcomes were achieved. This book consists of the discussions on these
blasting methodology, scientific analysis for underground blast, instrumentations
during blasting operation, etc. The book encompasses the detailed discussion on the
recent advancements in the underground blasting for hard rock mining under Indian
geomining conditions.
This book consists of nine chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the readers regarding
the need for underground blasting. The importance of drilling and blasting has been
briefed in this chapter with the help of statistical data. The progressive advance-
ments in underground blasting have also been described in this chapter. Chapter 2
encompasses a brief discussion about underground metalliferous mining methods.
The methods used in Indian mineral industries have been described in detail in this
chapter. The discussion regarding the role of rock–explosive interaction on blast-
induced damages has been made in Chap. 3. This chapter gives a brief outlook to
the readers regarding the mechanism of rock blasting and parameters affecting the
blasting outcomes. The underground blasting for hard rock mining progresses in
three major steps as drivage development, stope opening and production blasting.
The discussions regarding the science and applicability of these three steps have
been made in Chaps. 4, 5 and 6. The blasting operation has associated hazards in
terms of ground vibration, air overpressure, flyrocks, etc. The ground vibration is the
major hazard which affect structural safety. The discussion regarding the prediction
and control of induced ground vibration from underground blasting has been done
v
vi Preface
in Chap. 7. Some of the special blasting techniques used in the Indian mines to over-
come the safety and productivity-related challenges have been discussed in Chap. 8.
Chapter 9 provides a summary of this book. The future challenges with underground
blasting and way forward to deal with the future challenges have also been discussed
in this chapter.
We hope that this book would be a knowledgebase to the mining professionals.
The methodology used in the book may be replicated in new mines with similar
site conditions. The analytical part of the book will give the research professionals
an outlook to deal similar problems with scientific approach. The academicians and
students of the related discipline will also be benefitted with the diversified content
of this book.
Dhanbad, India A. K. Mishra

Acknowledgements
It would not have been possible to write this book without the help and support of
the kind people around us, to only some of whom it is possible to give a particular
mention here.
Authors would like to express their sincere thanks and gratitude to Dr. C. Sawm-
liana, Chief Scientist and Head of Section of Rock Excavation Engineering Research
Group of CSIR-CIMFR, Dhanbad, for providing necessary technical inputs as and
when required during experimentation at different study sites. We are also thankful
to the other members of this research group for their help and cooperation during
the experimentation at the study sites. We express our special thanks to Mr. Ashish
Kumar Vishwakarma, Technical Officer, CSIR-CIMFR, Dhanbad, for his help in
editing the figures for this book. Our heartfelt thanks goes to Dr. P. Pal Roy, Former
Outstanding Scientist, Dr. M. M. Singh, Former Chief Scientist and Dr. B. M. P.
Pingua, Former Chief Scientist of CSIR-CIMFR, Dhanbad, Prof. U. K. Dey, Former
Director of BIT Sindri and others for their support and encouragements.
Authors are also thankful to the mine management of M/s Hindustan Zinc Limited
(Vedanta) and M/s Hindustan Copper Limited for their support and cooperation
during field studies. We would also like to thank Mr. Praveen Sharma, Chief Operating
Officer of M/s HZL, Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, CMD of M/s Hindustan Copper
Limited and Mr. Prabhat Kumar, Director General, DGMS, Dhanbad.
Last but not the least, we express special thanks to our family members. We
received their continuous support, constant care, prayers and countless love which
always prompted us to work dynamically. We thank God for showering divine bless-
ings, though abstract in nature but potent enough to be felt of its efficacy, without
which nothing can perhaps be accomplished in this world.
Vivek Kumar Himanshu
vii
Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Preamble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Underground Blasting for Metalliferous Mining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Advancements in Underground Production Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2 Overview of Underground Metalliferous Mining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2 Stages in Underground Metalliferous Mining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3 Stoping Methods Practised in India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3.1 Sublevel Stoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3.2 Longhole Stoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.3.3 Room and Pillar Stoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.3.4 Cut and Fill Stoping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3 Rock–Explosive Interaction During Underground Blasting . . . . . . . . . 25
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.2 Rock Breakage Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.3 Rock Mass Damages Under Dynamic Loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.3.1 Constitutive Models Used for Numerical Simulation
of Rock Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.4 Rock Parameters and Their Role on Damage Characteristics . . . . . . 30
3.4.1 Nearfield Vibration and Rock Breakage Characteristic . . . . . 33
3.5 Influence of Explosive Parameters on Rock Mass Damage . . . . . . . . 34
3.5.1 Commercial Explosive and Its Principle of Explosion . . . . . 34
3.5.2 Explosive Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.5.3 Equation of State for Explosive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.6 Impacts of Blast Design Parameters on Rock Mass Damage . . . . . . 40
3.6.1 Blasthole Diameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
ix
x Contents
3.6.2 Burden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.6.3 Spacing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.6.4 Stemming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.6.5 Subgrade Drilling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.6.6 Charging Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.6.7 Delay Timings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.7 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
4 Drivage Excavation Using Drilling and Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4.2 Elements of Burn-Cut Blast Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.3 Measurement of Outputs from Underground Drivage Blasting . . . . . 52
4.4 Optimization of Drivage Blasting Pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.4.1 Numerical Simulation and Prediction of Damages
from Drivage Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.4.2 Designing of Delay Pattern for Drivage Blasting
Using Nearfield Ground Vibration Monitoring Results . . . . . 58
4.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
5 Box-Cut Excavation and Stope Opening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
5.2 Principle of Underground Slot Raise Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
5.3 Drilling Pattern for Slot Raise Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
5.4 Charging and Initiation of Blastholes in Slot Raise Blasting . . . . . . . 68
5.5 Delay Sequence of Blastholes for Slot Blasting Pattern . . . . . . . . . . . 69
5.6 Special Slot Raise Blasting Pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
5.7 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
6 Underground Ring Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
6.2 Drilling Pattern for Underground Ring Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
6.3 Charging of Ring Blastholes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
6.3.1 Suitability of Explosive for Different Rock Strata . . . . . . . . . 80
6.3.2 Charge Factor and Dimensional Parameters for Ring
Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
6.4 Connection and Firing Sequence of Charged Ring Blastholes . . . . . 84
6.4.1 Optimization of Delay Sequence and Delay Timing
for Production Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
6.4.2 Delay Timing for Multi-Ring Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
6.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Contents xi
7 Blast-Induced Hazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
7.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
7.2 Standards on Ground Vibration Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
7.3 Sensitive Structures Prone to Ground Vibration Hazards . . . . . . . . . 96
7.4 Optimisation of Ring Blasting Parameters for Structural Safety . . . 98
7.4.1 Parameters Affecting Blast-Induced Ground Vibration . . . . . 98
7.4.2 Case Studies on Designing Controlled Blasting
Pattern for Underground Ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
7.5 Safety Precautions While Blasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
7.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
8 Innovative Blasting Practices for Underground Hard Rock
Mining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
8.2 Technique for Simultaneous Excavation of Slot Raise
and Rings in a Single Blasting Round . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
8.3 Drilling and Blasting Methodology for Extraction of Narrow
Vein Ore Deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
8.4 Multi-Ring Blasting Pattern for Rock Excavation
in Ore-Waste Combination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
8.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
9 Challenges and Way Forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
9.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
9.2 Future Challenges of Underground Blasting and Way Forward . . . . 120
9.3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
About the Authors
Dr. Vivek Kumar Himanshu is Senior Scientist at CSIR-Central Institute of Mining

and Fuel Research, Dhanbad. He did his Ph.D. in Mining Engineering from Indian
Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad. He graduated in Mining
Engineering from B.I.T Sindri and M.Tech. in Mine Safety Engineering from
Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research, CSIR-CIMFR, Dhanbad. He joined
Hindustan Copper Limited as Graduate Engineer Trainee (Mining) and served for one
year in various capacity of underground mine supervision, mine planning, EIA/EMP
study, etc. He served as Trainee Scientist at CSIR-CIMFR, Dhanbad, during his
period of post-graduation and worked for various research projects of metallif-
erous mining and its simulation design. He joined National Institute of Technology
Rourkela after his M.Tech. and worked there as Assistant Professor for 8 months. He
gathered teaching, research, and academic experience during this period. Currently,
he is working at Rock Excavation Engineering Research Group of CSIR-CIMFR,
Dhanbad. He has received Young Engineers Award 2022 from The Institution of
Engineers (India) for his contributions in mining engineering. His area of research
includes rock excavation by blasting, controlled blasting, blast vibration prediction,
blast simulation, etc. He has published more than 30 papers in different journals and
proceedings of seminar.
Prof. A. K. Mishra is Mining Engineer with M.Tech. and Ph.D. in Mining Engi-
neering from Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad,
having teaching, industrial, and administrative experience of 31 years. Presently,
He is Director of CSIR-Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research, Dhanbad.
He is also Professor en-lien in the Department of Mining Engineering, IIT(ISM),
Dhanbad. After graduation, he joined Coal India Limited as Mining Engineer and
served for three years. He then joined the IIT(ISM), Dhanbad, as Faculty Member in
1992. He has also served as Technical Services Manager in Orica Mining Services,
Australia, and headed the technical services function of Indian Business during 2005
to 2009. He worked as Chair Professor (Uranium) sponsored by Department of
Atomic Energy, GoI. His areas of specialization include opencast and underground
mining technology, drilling and blasting technology, rock excavation engineering,
xiii
xiv About the Authors
tunnelling, geomechanics, ground control, and strata management. Prof Mishra has
to his credit, 193 research publications in peer-reviewed reputed journals, interna-
tional/national conferences, and symposia. He is actively involved in solving real-life
problems of mining and allied industry by undertaking R&D and industry sponsored
projects in mining and allied areas and has completed more than 139 such projects. He
has guided 10 Ph.D. dissertations, while another 15 are ongoing. He has completed
29 Management and Executive Development Programs for various mining, IT, and
other allied industries. He has been awarded with the prestigious National Geoscience
Award from the Ministry of Mines, GoI by Honorable President of India in 2016.
He is also Recipient of the Abheraj Baldota Memorial Gold Medal Award—2012
(Young Mining Engineer of the year 2012) from Mining Engineer’s Association of
India.
Dr. M. P. Roy is Senior Principal Scientist at CSIR-Central Institute of Mining and

Fuel Research, Dhanbad. He has made notable contributions in blasting science and
technology to solve practical problems in the mining industry encompassing the fields
of blast vibration and associated correlation with structural damage, wall control, rock
fragmentation, blast design in mines and tunnels, cast blast designs in coal mining
operations, and controlled blasting in civil construction projects. He has worked
as Project Leader in two Mega S&T Project titled “Characterization of rock and
explosive parameters for optimal explosive energy utilization in opencast blasting”
and “Blast Design and Fragmentation Control-Key to Productivity” and significantly
contributed in another five (5) R&D Projects of Ministry of Coal, Government of
India, in different area of rock blasting. He has published more than 90 scientific
papers in international and national journals and conferences. He has received CSIR
Technology Awards 2019.
Dr. P. K. Singh is Former Director of CSIR-Central Institute of Mining and Fuel

Research, Dhanbad. He is a Doctorate in Engineering from Institute of Mining Engi-
neering, Technical University, Clausthal, Germany. His areas of research interest
include rock mechanics, mining methods, rock excavation engineering, coal charac-
terization, and clean coal technologies. He has published more than 200 papers in
scientific journals and proceedings of seminars. He has also authored and edited 13
books. He has been Project Leader and Advisor in about 20 S&T projects sponsored
by Government of India. Dr. Singh received different prestigious awards including
National Mineral Award, Raman Research Fellowship, German Academic (DAAD)
Fellowship, CSIR Technology award, etc. He is Fellow of the Indian Academy
of Sciences (FASc), Bengaluru, and National Academy of Sciences (FNASc),
Allahabad.
Chapter 1
Introduction
Abstract Industrial revolution has increased the mineral/metal consumption during

previous decades. Accordingly, there was fast depletion of shallow depth mineral
deposits. The excavation of deep seated deposits is possible only using underground
mining, as openpit mining for such deposit will not be economical. Maintenance of
production pace from underground mining as par with openpit mining is a challenging
task. However, with the technological advancements, it has been possible to do large-
scale excavation from underground as well. Such technological innovations have
addressed the associated operational and safety related issues of underground mining.
In this chapter, the introductory details of the need of the mineral, advancements in
underground mining and advancements in technologies to address the challenges of
underground mining have been discussed.
1.1 Preamble
The mineral and energy consumption is one of the major precursors of the socio-
economic growth of a country. Esen and Bayrak (2017) found in a study that energy
consumption has significant contribution in the economic growth of a country.
Mudakkar et al. (2013) conducted the study to correlate Gross Domestic Products
(GDP), Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and other financial development indicators
with energy consumption for South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
(SAARC) countries. The study concluded energy consumption as a major contrib-
utor in GDP and promoting FDI. The study on the global status of mineral consump-
tion further reveals that per capita mineral consumption for developed countries
are higher than the developing nations (US Department of Interiors, accessed on
04.10.2021). India has targeted to be a USD 5 trillion economy by 2024–25 (The
Economic Times, accessed on 04.10.2021). The mineral and energy consumptions
will eventually rise to fulfil this target. Such consumption demand can be addressed
by enhancing the mineral and energy production or accelerating the imports. Mining
plays the significant role in bridging the gap between demand and supply of the
minerals and energy. In Indian context, mining and quarrying sector accounts for
2.5% of country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The contributions of mining
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 1
V. K. Himanshu et al., Blasting Technology for Underground Hard Rock Mining,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2645-9_1
2 1 Introduction
sector in GDP of the developed countries are more than 10% (National Mining
Association, accessed on 04.10.2021).
Drilling and blasting is a dominant method for excavation of coal and minerals
throughout the globe to date. The rock mass is fractured using the explosive energy
in this method. The dominancy of this method can be gauged from the data of
global explosive consumption. The total cost of global consumption of industrial
explosives was $1.7 billion in 2019, which is projected to be $10.9 billion by 2027
(Alliedmarketsearch, accessed on 15.07.2021). The coal mining sector is the largest
consumer of the industrial explosives. It consumes around 40% of the total industrial
explosives. The second largest consumer is metalliferous mining sector with 33%
consumption of the explosives. The consumption of explosives in stone quarries and
limestone mining are around 16% (Ihsmarkit, accessed on 15.07.2021). In India,
drilling and blasting contributes to more than 95% excavation of coal and 100%
excavation of hard rock metalliferous deposits. As per DGMS (2015a, b), altogether
571 coal mines, 19 lignite mines and 1183 metalliferous mines use drilling and
blasting based techniques for mining in India. The coal cutting machines are used in
nine Indian coal mines. The total consumption of industrial explosives during 2015
for coal and non-coal mining in India were 591,099 tonnes and 105,428 tonnes,
respectively (DGMS 2015a, b). Moreover, the excavation of hard rocks in various
civil construction works, viz. tunnel construction, roadway construction, foundations
for industrial establishments, etc., is also carried out by drilling and blasting.
Despite the significant advancements in blasting science and technology, effec-
tive utilization of explosive energy is still a challenge, as only a small fraction of the
energy (20–30%) is helpful for rock breakage, and the rest is considered waste energy
(Monjezi et al. 2011). This is well known that waste energy contributes to undesirable
phenomena such as ground vibration, flyrocks, air blast, noise, over breaks, undesir-
able throw, etc. (Parida and Mishra 2015; Rebello et al. 2016). Various controllable
and uncontrollable parameters impact the blasting performance and consequently the
utilization of explosive energy. The controllable parameters include the blast design
parameters like—the amount of explosive charge, detonation velocity of explosive,
density of explosive, delay timing between different blastholes, the accuracy of delay
detonators, etc. The uncontrollable parameters consist of rock mass conditions at the
blasting site, isotropy and homogeneity of the rock mass, blast vibration propagation
media, etc. The prior assessment of uncontrollable parameters and thereby designing
a blast can lead to achieve optimum utilization of explosive energy. This may be
accomplished by the assessment of the rock–explosive interactions under a defined
geomining condition. Saharan et al. (2006) suggested that the engineering system
of rock–explosive interaction consists of rock properties, explosive properties, and
boundary conditions. The suggested system is shown in Fig. 1.1. The rock proper-
ties in this system included geological and geotechnical parameters. The explosive
properties included energy parameters of explosive and stress wave propagation
characteristics. The boundary condition mainly included the status of the free face
condition. The boundary conditions will vary depending on the mining methods. The
rock and explosive properties also show a great extent of variability. The considera-
tion of suitable boundary condition becomes more vital, when the excavation has to
1.3 Advancements in Underground Production Blasting 3
be carried out by underground. The challenges with the underground blasting are also
different from the bench blasting or foundation blasting for civil construction works.
To overcome these challenges, the significant advancements in the prediction method,
engineering and operational technique of underground blasting have occurred during
last decades. This book presents the discussion regarding these advancements.
1.2 Underground Blasting for Metalliferous Mining
Underground mining is preferred for the exploitation of minerals/coal situated at

greater depth. The method is advantageous in different other aspects also such as
enhancement of land use, reduction in environmental pollution, etc. The large-scale
underground mining of coal is mainly done by mechanized excavations. Contin-
uous miners and shearers are the foremost excavators for the underground mining of
coal. However, the drilling and blasting-based method is used for the underground
mining of hard rock deposits. The hard rock excavations include the exploitation of
metalliferous ore deposits. Underground mining is practised in India for the exploita-
tion of minerals such as Copper, Lead–Zinc, Chromite, Manganese, Uranium, etc.
These deposits are excavated by different stoping methods such as cut and fill, room
and pillar, post-pillar, sublevel stoping and its variants. The ore deposits of steeper
inclination are exploited using cut and fill, room and pillar or post-pillar stoping
methods. The rate of excavation in these stoping methods is relatively slow. The
method includes small diameter drilling and blasting. The nearly vertical dipping ore
deposits are exploited using the sublevel stoping method and its variants. The variants
of this method include—longitudinal longhole stoping, transverse longhole stoping,
vertical retreat mining, etc. The advanced mining using the longhole stoping method
uses large diameter drilling with higher consumption of explosives for blasting. The
method has resulted in achieving a faster production pace in underground mining.
This stoping method is used for the mining of Lead–Zinc ore and Copper deposits
in India. The steps in underground excavation using longhole stoping include exca-
vation of drivages, slot raises and rings. The major challenges with underground
blasting include—pull enhancement from drivage (face) blasting, overbreak control
in face blasting, damage optimization in slot raise excavation and fragmentation
control in ring blasting. The blast design parameters are optimized to overcome
these challenges.
1.3 Advancements in Underground Production Blasting
The significant advancements have occurred in underground production blasting

during last decades. The advancements were a need to increase the production pace
in order to meet the rising demand of the raw materials. The advancements have
also occurred to deal with the operational and safety challenges of the mine. The
4
Fig. 1.1 Engineering system of rock–explosive interaction (Saharan et al. 2006)

1 Introduction
1.3 Advancements in Underground Production Blasting 5
state-of-the-art prediction methodologies and instrumentations were used to reach

the operational advancement. The underground ring blasting under Indian condition
was started with the excavation of only four holes of a ring. The number of holes was
restricted as the surface residential structures were in the close proximity (within
300 m) from the blasting face. However, the rising demand of production could not
be made by blasting smaller number of holes in a round. With the advent of more
accurate delay detonators, it was found that the larger number of holes separated
with long delay timing can be blasted, even by restricting the ground vibration near
structures within safe limit. Further, it was felt that the development of deeper level
interval is possible, when the orebody is nearly vertical. In such case, the level interval
of more than 50 m was developed for some of the mines, in order to reduce the
development cost. Now, the complete extraction of the deeper ring blastholes was a
challenging task. It was expected that maximum explosive charge per delay (MCPD)
would increase while taking complete length of a ring blasthole in a single round, and
thereby ground vibration would increase near the structures. The statistical analysis
of the recorded vibration data was carried out to compute the optimum MCPD. It was
thought to go for decking to reduce MCPD. The optimum deck length was decided
by studying the breakage characteristic of rock. The deck length was chosen, so that
it should not lead to the formation of boulders. The suitable delay timing, plugging
system, etc. were also decided to maximize the utility of explosive energy. Based
on the outcomes of the analysis, the multi-decking ring blasting methodology was
devised to control the ground vibration along with taking complete level of a stope
in one go.
Further, the multi-ring blasting was also used to increase the productivity. It was
found that the firing of larger quantity of explosive in a blasting round lead to superpo-
sition of blast vibration wave from different delay, specifically at far-field distances.
The intensity of ground vibration in such case increased near the far-field under-
ground structures, viz. shaft, decline, underground workshop, etc. This challenge
was undertaken by selecting the optimal delay time between two rings. The selection
was made such that the initiation of second ring had started only after the complete
dampening of vibration from first ring.
Working in shear zone was another challenge at one of the mines. The manpower
deployment after different round of blasting was a risky task for the faces with shear
zone. Accordingly, a special method was devised so that there would be a need of
manpower deployment in only three rounds of blasting. The first round of blasting
in this method had to be carried out from lower level to upper level using uphole
charging pattern. The human resources would be safe under a specially designed
canopy in uphole charging pattern. In second round, the complete extraction of slot
raise, slot raise expansion and ring holes of hangingwall direction was taking place.
Almost 60–70% of the stope was excavated in the second round. In final round, only
the rings of footwall side were blasted. Since, the hangingwall zone was already
blasted in second round, the risk to the working manpower in third round would be
minimal. This method has also resulted into further enhancement in productivity by
conducting larger blast in one go. This would have happened due the advent of special
type of high viscosity explosive for uphole charging. Such explosive is compatible
6 1 Introduction
Table 1.1 Technological advancements in underground blasting for metalliferous mining

Issues addressed Methodology Technological output
Production enhancement Numerical simulation, Ring blasting with larger
experimental trials on number of holes
simulation results
Safety of surface structures Experimental trials with Multi-deck ring blasting
various MCPD, statistical
analysis, experimental trial
with reduced MCPD
Safety of underground Experimental trials, waveform Delay design for multi-ring
structures analysis and subsequently blasting
dampening of the effect of total
explosive charge on blast
vibration
Working in shear zone Prospects to extract complete Simultaneous extraction of slot,
ring in a single go was slot expansion and ring in one
examined. Experimental trials go
and analysis
Making space for Prospects for uphole charging Uphole charging and blasting
accumulation of blasted and blasting was examined and pattern
muckpile of complete stope analysed
to stick to the blastholes and thereby works as a resistance to fall under gravity. The
advancements in the blasting methodologies for underground metalliferous mining
are summarized in Table 1.1. The detailed discussion on these advancements along
with their principle and practices has been discussed in different chapters of this
book.
1.4 Summary
The enhancement of production from underground is the need of the hour. Accord-
ingly, the larger underground blast is the prime need of the mining industry. The
operation of large-scale underground blasting comes with different safety and site
specific operational challenges. The scientific design, advanced data analysis and
utilization of advanced operational techniques are the solution of these challenges.
Indian mining industry has seen progressive technological advancements in rock
blasting from last decade. These advancements have enabled the mine management
to conduct underground blast with total explosive consumption of 22 tonnes in a
blasting round. The advancements in prediction methodologies and designing tech-
niques have also enabled the management to achieve longer pull, reduced overbreak,
improved fragmentation and optimized muckpile distribution.
References 7
References
Alliedmarketsearch. https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/industrial-explosives-market.
Accessed on 15 July 2021
DGMS (2015a) Statistics of mines in India Volume-I (Coal). http://dgms.gov.in/writereaddata/Upl
oadFile/Coal_2015a.pdf
DGMS (2015b) Statistics of mines in India Volume-II (non-Coal). http://dgms.gov.in/writereaddata/
UploadFile/VOLUME_II_NON_COAL_2015b.pdf
Esen Ö, Bayrak M (2017) Does more energy consumption support economic growth in net energy-
importing countries? J Econ Fin Admin Sci 22(42):75–98. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEFAS-01-
2017-0015
Ihsmarkit. https://ihsmarkit.com/products/explosives-and-blasting-chemical-economics-han
dbook.html. Accessed on 15 July 2021
Monjezi M, Ghafurikalajahi M, Bahrami A (2011) Prediction of blast-induced ground vibration
using artificial neural networks. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 26(1):46–50. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.tust.2010.05.002
Mudakkar SR, Zaman K, Shakir H, Arif M, Naseem I, Naz L (2013) Determinants of energy
consumption function in SAARC countries: balancing the odds. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
28:566–574
National Mining Association. https://nma.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Economic-Contribut
ions-of-Mining-in-2015-Update-final.pdf. Accessed on 4 Oct 2021
Parida A, Mishra MK (2015) Blast vibration analysis by different predictor approaches-a compar-
ison. Procedia Earth Planet Sci 11:337–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeps.2015.06.070
Rebello NE, Shivashankar R, Sastry VR (2016) Response of strata and buildings to blast induced
vibrations in the presence and absence of a tunnel. Geotech Geol Eng 34(4):1013–1028. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10706-016-0021-y
Saharan MR, Mitri HS, Jethwa JL (2006) Rock fracturing by explosive energy: review of state-of-
the-art. Fragblast 10(1–2):61–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/13855140600858792
The Economic Times. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/policy/govt-sticks-
to-usd-5-trillion-economy-target-emphasis-on-infra-aimed-at-achieving-goal-dea-secretary/art
icleshow/80686511.cms?from=mdr. Accessed on 4 Oct 2021
US Department of Interiors. https://www.doi.gov/ocl/global-mineral-consumption. Accessed on 4
Oct 2021
Chapter 2
Overview of Underground Metalliferous
Mining
Abstract Various stoping methods are practised across the globe for the final extrac-
tion of mineral deposits. The selection of a feasible mining method for a mine is
dependent on the technical suitability and economical profitability. The technical
suitability of a method for a site is assessed by evaluation of the thickness, strength
and inclination of the ore deposit as well as the strength of the wall rocks. The
economic profitability assessment includes the evaluation of capital investment, pace
of production and additional cost in account of safety and environmental concern.
In Indian condition, room and pillar stoping, cut and fill stoping, sublevel stoping
and their variants are used for exploitation of Copper, Lead–Zinc, Mica, Chromite
and other minerals. The brief discussions on these methods have been done in this
chapter.
2.1 Introduction
The mineral industries have seen significant shift towards the underground mining
due to extinction of shallow depth ore deposits (Carvalho 2017). The exploitation
of mineral deposits by underground is advantageous in many other aspects as well.
It is comparatively safer for the nearby resident in respect of the hazards associated
with flyrock ejections during blasting (Raina et al. 2014). It is also environmentally
viable due to absence of dust emission and propagation under the circumstances of
openpit blasting. It also provides the opportunity for simultaneous land utilisation
while mining (Chugh 2018; Mborah et al. 2015; Whittle et al. 2018). In Indian mining
scenario, underground mining is practised for exploitation of Copper, Lead–Zinc–
Silver, Gold, Uranium, Chromite and Mica deposits (TERI 2019; Tewari et al. 2020;
Verma and Chaudhari 2017). During the recent years, the complete transition from
openpit to underground mining has been seen for Copper and Lead–Zinc deposits in
India (Singh et al. 2015). The major minerals which are excavated by openpit mining
includes Iron ore and manganese. The openpit mining for these deposits are feasible
till date due to their higher cut off grades. However, with the faster excavation to fulfil
the rising raw material needs, there is prospect for transition of mining methods for the
excavation of these mineral deposits as well. There is existence of underground iron
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2645-9_2
10 2 Overview of Underground Metalliferous Mining
ore mines viz. Kiruna underground mine in global scenario (Dineva and Boskovic
2017; Newman et al. 2006).
To cope with the faster excavation targets from underground is one of the major
challenges for mineral industries. Selection of suitable mining method plays an
important role over here. The conventional way for selecting suitable mining method
is based on the physicomechanical properties of host rock and orebody (Deshmukh
2009; Hartman 2002). The need today however is to optimize the suitability of
mining method based on the physicomechanical properties and production demand.
The details regarding the selection of suitable mining method have been discussed
in this chapter. The discussion has also been made regarding the basic overview
of underground metalliferous mines, associated terminologies and different mining
methods practised in India.
2.2 Stages in Underground Metalliferous Mining
The underground mining for mineral exploitation comprises of mainly three stages
viz. making access to the orebody, initial/box-cut excavation and final excava-
tion of ore. The primary access to the underground mine is in the form of shaft,
incline, decline or adit. These accesses are made from the surface. The mine is
further connected to different secondary access viz. drive/drivage, cross-cuts through
primary access. The secondary access works as approach to the orebody. The location
for primary access to the mine is optimised so that to minimise the developments of
secondary access during the advancement of mining operations. A mine should have
minimum two primary access. Sometimes, tertiary access is also made as chute, ore
pass or manway. The overview of different access to an underground mine is shown
in Fig. 2.1. Once the access to the mine is made, the excavation of the orebody
is carried out. The ore extraction takes place using different stoping methods. The
dominant stoping methods practised under Indian geomining conditions have been
discussed in different subsections of this chapter. The major terminologies used in
underground metalliferous mining are defined below:
Dip: Angle of inclination of a deposit measured from the horizontal.

Strike: Horizontal bearing of a tabular deposit at its surface intersection.
Country Rock/Host Rock: Rocks lying in adjacent to the mineral deposit. If such
rock is lying under the deposit, it is termed as footwall. If the rock is lying above
the ore deposit, it is termed as hangingwall.
Incline: Inclined opening driven to connect surface from underground.
Shaft: Vertical opening connecting the surface with underground openings.
Decline: Primary access to the mine driven in nearly helical fashion.
Adit: Primary access to the mine, which is horizontal opening to the underground
deposit.
Level: System of horizontal openings connected to a shaft.
2.2 Stages in Underground Metalliferous Mining 11
Fig. 2.1 Outlook of terminologies for an underground mine (Himanshu et al. 2021a)
Drift/Drive/Drivage: Access made parallel to the orebody. The access exposing

footwall side of the ore body is termed as footwall drive/drivage. The access
exposing hangingwall side of the orebody is termed as hangingwall drive. Hang-
ingwall and footwall drivages together work to expose the ore body. They are
connected with crosscut.
Crosscut: Access connecting drivages from shaft/decline or access connecting
two drivages.
Haulageway: Horizontal opening used primarily for materials handling. Gener-
ally, footwall drivages are used as haulageway.
Manway: Compartment of a raise or a vertical or near vertical opening intended
for personnel travel between two levels.
Ore pass: Vertical or near vertical opening through which rock material flows by
gravity.
Chute: Opening from a draw point, utilizing gravity flow to direct excavated rock
from ore pass to load a conveyance.
Draw point: Loading point beneath a stope, utilizing gravity to move rock material
downward and into a conveyance.
Ramp: Openings driven to connect levels usually in a downward direction and
used for haulage.
Raise: Vertical or near vertical opening driven upward from one level to another.
Winze: Vertical or near vertical opening driven downward from one level to
another.
Stoping: Final excavation of mineral.
Stope: Area comprising the exposed minerals for final exploitation.
Stope Back: Roof, top or overlying surface of excavated stope.

Cap Rock: Overlying material or burden above an underground stope.
Pillar: Unexcavated portion of an ore deposit which is left to ensure stability of
host rock and overlying burden during excavation.
Crown Pillar: Pillar which is left above the excavated stope to ensure stability of
drivages.
Rib Pillar: The pillar left between two stopes. This pillar is used to ensure the
stability of wall rock after excavation.
Sill Pillar: Pillar which is left below the excavated stope to ensure stability of
drivages.
Slot: Initial/box-cut opening in the ore body to make free face for the subsequent
round of stope excavation.
2.3 Stoping Methods Practised in India
Variety of mineral and coal deposits are present across different parts of India. These
deposits are excavated dominantly by drilling-blasting method (DBM). However,
mechanical excavators using shearer, continuous miner, surface miner and high-wall
mining equipment are used at few places for the excavation of coal deposits. Most of
the precious metals like Copper, Lead–Zinc–Silver, Gold, etc. are excavated domi-
nantly by underground mining method. However, openpit mining is still dominant
for the excavation of Iron ore deposits. Chromite and Mica deposits are excavated
by both openpit as well as underground excavation methodology. An overview of
excavation methodology for different coal and metalliferous deposits is shown in
Fig. 2.2.
The charge factor suggested by many researchers is mostly for the excavation using
open pit mining method. The charge factor requirement for underground excavation
will be different specially in the case of hard rock excavations, as the mining method
in such cases is devised to extract orebodies only. Different excavation methods are
used for exploitation of mineral deposits using underground access. The selection
of excavation methodology is based on the nature of orebody and country rock as
well as the expected production demand. The suitability of excavation methodology
for different combinations of nature of orebodies and wall rock has been outlined in
Table 2.1.
Different stoping methods have various advantages and disadvantages. Open
stoping methods are cost economic, as they do not require additional expenditure on
support system. However, minerals are locked in such methods to provide support
to the wall rocks and levels. Stoping methods with artificial supports viz. backfill
material, timber support, rock bolting are practised to increase the mineral recovery.
Timber-based supports are very costly; hence, the applicability of square set stoping
is limited. Backfilling using the wastes from mill tailings is in trend nowadays. The
applicability of caving-based methods is also difficult. These methods are only appli-
cable when the strength of the wall rock is weak. However, induced caving is also
2.3 Stoping Methods Practised in India 13
Fig. 2.2 Overview of excavation methodologies for coal and metalliferous deposits in India
practised sometimes, when the strength of the wall rock is sufficiently high. Accord-
ingly, these stoping methods are practised for the exploitation of mineral deposits with
an aim to optimise between the technical applicability and economic profitability. A
summary of these stoping methods being practised at different underground mines
in global scenario is given in Table 2.2.
The dominant excavation methodology used under Indian conditions is—cut and
fill stoping, room and pillar mining and sublevel/longhole/vertical crater retreat
(VCR) stoping. Some variants of room and pillar and cut and fill stoping are also
employed at different mines in India. The excavation method for these dominant
methods with the ways to estimate the charge factor has been discussed in various
subsections.
2.3.1 Sublevel Stoping
In this method of stoping, sublevels are driven between two main levels. These
sublevels work as drivages. The number of such drivages at a particular sublevel
may be more than one, depending upon the width of the orebody. These sublevels
are connected by driving raises. These raises may work as manway, ore pass or
Table 2.1 Summary of mining method suitability for underground excavations in hard rock
(Deshmukh 2009; Hartman 2002; Hustrulid and Lu 2003)
Stoping methods Applicability criteria
Thickness of the Strength of ore Dip of orebody Strength of wall
orebody rocks
Open stoping with Thin or thick Weak or strong Flat Strong
casual pillars
Room and pillar Thin or thick Strong Flat Strong
stoping
Room and pillar Thin or thick Weak or strong Flat Strong
longwall
Cut and fill stoping Thin Weak or strong Flat Weak or strong
Post-pillar stoping Thick Weak or strong Flat Weak or strong
Sublevel open Thin or thick Weak or strong Steep Strong
stoping
Sublevel stoping Thin or thick Weak or strong Steep Weak or strong
and their variants
with backfilling
Shrinkage stoping Thin or thick Strong Steep Strong
Square set stoping Thin or thick Weak Flat Strong
Top slicing Massive Weak or strong Flat Weak
Sublevel caving Massive Weak or strong Steep Weak
Block caving Massive Weak or strong Flat or Steep Weak
ventilation network. The blocks for the extraction of orebody are also divided by
different raises. One of the raises which work as ore pass has chute in the bottom.
This chute works for the ore transfer by gravity. Chute is opened to dislodge the
excavated ore directly on the dumpers/tubs. Chute arrangement is made on the main
level connected with the primary access to the mine (shaft/incline/decline). One
“slusher drift level” is also developed above main level and below the sublevels. This
slusher drift level is connected by funnel shaped “finger raises”. The excavated ore
at sublevels is put inside these finger raises, and they get transferred to the slusher
drift level. Ore is further transferred from this drift level to main level using chute.
Once the development work for sublevel stoping is over, the final excavation of
the ore starts. Initially, a slot is opened either in the middle of the orebody or on
one side of the orebody. The excavation starts from this slot and retreats towards
the drivages. The ore excavation may be done at different sublevels simultaneously
to achieve the productivity. However, the designing of proper support system is
important. Sometimes, ore may be left as pillars to provide stability to the overlying
strata. The sequence of stoping operations for sublevel stoping method is shown in
Fig. 2.3.
Table 2.2 Summary of stoping methods practised at different underground mines of world
S. No. Stoping method Name of Mine References
01 Room and pillar • Mineral Hill Mine, Jardine, • Kahraman (2002)
stoping Montana, USA • Hustrulid et al. (2001)
• Immel mine, East Tennessee,
USA
02 Cut and fill mining • Nellore Mica belt, India • Tewari et al. (2020)
• Balaghat underground • Manekar et al. (2017)
manganese mine, India
03 Post pillar stoping • Mosaboni mine, India • Singh et al. (1995)
04 Sublevel open • Salaman Gold Deposit, Spain • e Faria et al. (2022)
stoping
05 Sublevel stoping • Rampura Agucha Mine, India • Himanshu et al. (2021a)
• Zawar Group of Mine, India • Barton and Pandey
(2011)
06 Shrinkage stoping • Gold Road Mine, Arizona, • Silver (1997)
USA • Kral (1997)
• Nixen Fork Mine, Alaska,
USA
07 Square set stoping • Homestake Gold Mine, South • Hartman and Mutmansky
Dakota, USA (1987)
• Bunker Hill Silver Mine, • Songstad (1982)
Idaho, USA
08 Top slicing • Negaunee Mine, Michigan, • Russell, (2007)
USA • Sasaoka et al. (2015)
• Rožná Uranium mine, Czech
Republic
09 Sublevel caving • The Ridgeway SLC Gold • Brunton et al. (2010)
operation—Australia • Zhang and Wimmer
• Malmberget mine—Sweden (2018)
• Chengchao Iron Mine—Hubei • Cao et al. (2016)
Province, China
10 Block caving • El Teniente Mine—Chile • Palma and Agarwal
• Tongkuangyu mine—China (1973)
• Xia et al. (2021)
2.3.2 Longhole Stoping
Longhole stoping is a high production and low-cost mining method for metalliferous
mine. It is a very popular method chosen when open pit mining activities are no longer
economical and mines move to underground operations. This method is a variant of
sublevel stoping in which longer blastholes with larger diameters (100–165 mm) are
used. Depth of hole may reach up to 100 m. In this method, a vertical slot is created
at one end of the stope and then works in the sublevels to drill a radial pattern of drill
holes. This radial pattern of drill holes is known as ring/fan drilling (Kushwaha et al.
2014).
(a) Sectional view of Development for a sublevel stoping method
(b) Development in sublevel stoping method to extend opening

raise from hangingwall to footwall
Fig. 2.3 Sequence of operations for sublevel stoping method
After a set of these holes are loaded, blocks of ore body are blasted into open
stope. There are two main variations of this method as longitudinal longhole stoping
and transverse longhole stoping. The advancement of stoping operation takes place
along the strike of the orebody in longitudinal longhole stoping method. Accord-
ingly, the stope progress takes place between two drivages. In transverse longhole
stoping method, the stoping operation advances along dip of the orebody. The oper-
ation advances from hangingwall to footwall side along the crosscut driven between
(c) Progress of stoping operation from opening raise to Manway
Fig. 2.3 (continued)
hangingwall and footwall drivages. The diagrammatic comparison of these two vari-
ants of longhole stoping method is shown in Fig. 2.4. The selection of longitudinal or
transverse longhole stoping method is significantly based on the width of the orebody.
The transverse longhole stoping is approached for the wider orebody, whereas the
longitudinal longhole stoping method is used for narrow orebodies. In addition to
this, the strength properties of the rock are also a deciding factor for the selection of
different variants of longhole stoping method. The optimum thickness of the orebody
to employ transverse longhole stoping is based on the strength properties of the host
rock (Himanshu et al. 2021b).
In longhole stoping method, the main access to the orebody is made through a
shaft or decline. The main access is connected to footwall drive through cross-cuts
on each stoping level. The orebody under excavation is exposed by driving drivages
as footwall drive and extraction drive (Himanshu et al. 2021b).
The longhole stoping method is practised extensively at different Lead–Zinc
underground mines, Gold mine and Copper mines in India. At Rampura Agucha
underground Lead–Zinc mine, for longhole stoping, the cross-cuts are made at the
interval of 30 m each. The first 15 m spans between two cross-cuts are excavated as
primary stope, and the next 15 m are left as a pillar. The left pillars are excavated
as secondary stope after the completion of extraction and subsequent backfilling of
the primary stope. Excavated stopes are backfilled using cemented rock fill (CRF)
or paste fill. The excavation between the cross-cuts is made by opening slot raises
(Himanshu et al. 2021a). The plan and sectional view of the mining method used at
this mine is shown in Fig. 2.5.
Fig. 2.4 Diagram showing difference between longitudinal and transverse longhole stoping method
(Kushwaha et al. 2014)
Fig. 2.5 Plan and sectional view showing the sequence of stope excavation at Rampura Agucha
underground Lead–Zinc mine (Himanshu et al. 2021b; Roy et al. 2022)
Fig. 2.6 Schematic layout for stope excavation at Rampura Agucha underground mine (Himanshu
et al. 2021a)
The stoping operation for extraction of minerals at this mine is executed by

drilling-blasting technology. The complete operation of stope extraction includes
the opening of slot raise, slot raise expansion and ring blasting. The initial excava-
tion in a stope is made by opening a slot raise. The slot raises are opened through
the cross-cuts. Since the slot raise is an initial opening in the stope, it lacks sufficient
space for the movement of the blasted rock mass. Accordingly, the free face in the
slot raise blast design is provided using relief/reamer holes. Once the excavation for
slot raise is completed, the blastholes of slot raise expansion and ring are blasted
along the respective free face. Sometimes, the initial excavation from the lower level
to the upper level of a mine is performed to make the space for the accumulation of
blasted rock in the subsequent stages of excavation. The operation is termed sliping.
The excavation of sliping holes is done by uphole drilling and charging (Himanshu
et al. 2021a). The schematic layout of stope excavation operation at Rampura Agucha
underground mine is shown in Fig. 2.6. The major variations in drilling and blasting
pattern are possible in this stoping method. Different methods adopted under Indian
geomining conditions have been dealt in subsequent chapters.
For longhole stoping at Malanjhkhand underground copper mine, slot is opened
at the hangingwall and footwall end. Slot is excavated using drop raise method.
Once the slot is excavated, the slot expansion holes are blasted. The blasting of slot
expansion holes takes place along the excavated slot raise. The firing of ring holes
takes place along the excavated slot. Accordingly, the movement of the blasted rock
takes place along both the directions, i.e. along hangingwall as well as footwall side.
A schematic of excavation pattern practised at Malanjhkhand underground mine is
shown in Fig. 2.7.
At Malanjhkand underground copper mine, a level interval of about 50 m is made.
About 16 m from lower level to upper level is excavated as trough. Rest 35 m is drilled
as main ring from upper level to lower level. Trough holes are of small diameter of
34 mm. Small diameter cartridges or compressed ANFO explosive is used for the
firing of trough holes. Once the trough holes are blasted, mouth of the main ring holes
get opened. The holes of main rings have hole diameter of 115 mm. These holes are
charged with cartridge explosives of 83 mm diameter or ANFO. Sometimes, a ring
is also blasted in two parts, in order to reduce maximum charge per delay (MCPD).
Section of drilling pattern used at this mine is shown in Fig. 2.8.
Fig. 2.7 Schematic drill design for stope excavation at an Indian copper mine
2.3.3 Room and Pillar Stoping
This method of stoping is very common for ore bodies with lesser width and having
mild gradient. In this method of stoping, raises are driven between two levels. Raises
work for different purposes including transport of materials, ventilation and layout
of water pumps. Sill pillar is left up to certain extent from lower level, and stope is
widened along both sides from the raises. Sufficient crown pillar is left to support
upper level. Rib pillar is left between two stopes. Dimensions of sill pillar, crown
pillar and rib pillar depend on characteristic of orebody and surrounding rock strata.
Excavated stope is supported with the help of roof bolts or rock bolts. Diagrammatic
layout of room and pillar stoping method is shown in Fig. 2.9. This method of mining
is used for exploitation of narrow width ore deposits of Copper and Uranium in India.
The method is extensively used in Singhbhum zone in Jharkhand, India.
The drilling-blasting process in this method of mining consists of drifting and
production drilling. The initial drifts are driven to open the stope using horizontal
drilling. The stoping operation progresses with horizontal or inclined/uphole drilling
of the blastholes. The holes are drilled in rectangular/scattered pattern. The hori-
zontal/vertical openings work as the free face for the blastholes. In Singhbhum zone
of mines, the drilling operation is carried out using jack hammer drills. The charge
factor for the blastholes is decided based on the hardness and massiveness of the
rock strata. Charge factor in the range of 0.55–0.8 kg/m3 is used for the exploitation
of rock mass at Singhbhum group of mines. The dimensional parameters for drifting
operation are similar to that of the tunnelling, whereas for the production blasts,
the dimensional parameters viz burden and spacing are taken in the line of openpit
excavations.
Fig. 2.8 Section of drill pattern used at Malanjhkhand underground copper mine
Fig. 2.9 Plan and sectional views of room and pillar stoping method
2.3.4 Cut and Fill Stoping
In this method of stoping, raises are driven between two levels. Sufficient sill pillar
is left above lower level to support lower level. A sill drive is opened in the region
above sill pillar; to open the stope, heightening of sill drive is further done as a part
of extraction of material up to designed height. Excavated part is backfilled with
sand filling material to work as platform for further excavation. This cut and fill
operation propagates towards upper level. Crown pillar is left below upper level to
support it. Ore passes are made which may be equipped with chute at the bottom
to transfer material at loading level by gravity. Design of sill pillar and crown pillar
depends on rock mass strength parameters of rock and accordingly stress analysis
due to excavation. Raises serve the purpose for ventilation, and sometimes, it may
also be equipped to serve as manways. Sometimes, pillars are left in this method
when ore body is wider comparatively. This variation of cut and fill stoping is called
post-pillar stoping. Design of pillar dimension is also done on the basis of stress
analysis. Diagrammatic layout of cut and fill stoping method is shown in Fig. 2.10.
This method of stoping is used for excavation of steeply inclined ore deposits of
Copper, Uranium, Manganese, Mica, etc. in India.
The drilling-blasting process in this method of mining also consists of drifting
and production drilling. The drifting is carried out using the horizontal drilling. The
stoping operation progresses with horizontal or inclined/uphole drilling of the blast
holes. The holes are drilled in rectangular/scattered pattern similar to that of room
and pillar stoping method.
Fig. 2.10 Diagrammatic layout of cut and fill stoping method

References 23
2.4 Summary
An overview of the underground metalliferous mining has been presented in this

chapter. The summary of the discussions made in this chapter is as follows:
• Room and pillar stoping, cut and fill stoping, sublevel stoping and sublevel caving
methods are used for the exploitation of mineral deposits in India.
• The variants of sublevel stoping are used for the faster pace of mineral exploitation.
This method has advantage of large diameter and deep hole drilling and blasting.
• The selection of a stoping method is done on the basis of technical suitability and
cost economics.
References
Barton N, Pandey SK (2011) Numerical modelling of two stoping methods in two Indian mines
using degradation of c and mobilization of ϕ based on Q-parameters. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
48(7):1095–1112
Brunton ID, Fraser SJ, Hodgkinson JH, Stewart PC (2010) Parameters influencing full scale sublevel
caving material recovery at the Ridgeway gold mine. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 47(4):647–656
Cao S, Song W, Deng D, Lei Y, Lan J (2016) Numerical simulation of land subsidence and
verification of its character for an iron mine using sublevel caving. Int J Min Sci Technol
26(2):327–332
Carvalho FP (2017) Mining industry and sustainable development: time for change. Food Energy
Secur 6(2):61–77. https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.109
Chugh YP (2018) Concurrent mining and reclamation for underground coal mining subsidence
impacts in China. Int J Coal Sci Technol 5(1):18–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40789-018-0189-2
Deshmukh DJ (2009) Elements of mining technology, vol. 2. Denett & Company
Dineva S, Boskovic M (2017) Evolution of seismicity at Kiruna Mine, 125–139. https://doi.org/10.
36487/ACG_rep/1704_07_Dineva
e Faria MF, Dimitrakopoulos R, Pinto CLL (2022) Integrated stochastic optimization of stope design
and long-term underground mine production scheduling. Resources Policy 78:102918
Hartman HL (2002) Introductory mining engineering. Wiley
Hartman HL, Mutmansky JM (1987) Introductory mining engineering. John Wiley & Sons, New
Jersey
Himanshu VK, Mishra AK, Roy MP, Vishwakarma AK, Singh PK (2021a) Numerical simulation
based approach for assessment of blast induced deformation pattern in slot raise excavation. Int
J Rock Mech Min Sci 144:104816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2021.104816
Himanshu VK, Roy MP, Shankar R, Mishra AK, Singh PK (2021b) Empirical approach based
estimation of charge factor and dimensional parameters in underground blasting. Min Metall
Explor 38(2):1059–1069. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-020-00374-8
Hustrulid W, Lu W (2003) The Lu-Hustrulid approach for calculating the peak particle velocity
caused by blasting. In: Explosives and blasting technique. Taylor & Francis, pp 291–300. https://
doi.org/10.1201/9781439833476.ch36
Hustrulid WA, Hustrulid WA, Bullock RL (eds) (2001) Underground mining methods: Engineering
fundamentals and international case studies. SME, 83–87
Kahraman SAİR (2002) Estimating the direct P-wave velocity value of intact rock from indirect
laboratory measurements. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 39(1):101–104
Kral S (1997) Mining industry beginning to rediscover Alaska. In: Mining engineering, 49
Kushwaha A, Himanshu VK, Sinha A (2014) Design of stoping parameters and support system
for long-hole stoping method by numerical modelling. In: Proceedings of 5th Asian mining
congress and exhibition, Kolkata
Manekar GG, Shome D, Chaudhari MP (2017) Prediction of subsidence parameters & 3-D analysis
at Balaghat underground manganese mine of MOIL limited, India. Procedia Eng 191:1075–1086
Mborah C, Bansah KJ, Boateng MK (2015) Evaluating alternate post-mining land-uses: a review.
Environ Poll 5(1):14. https://doi.org/10.5539/ep.v5n1p14
Newman AM, Martinez M, Kuchta M (2006) A review of long- and short-term production
scheduling at Lkab’s Kiruna Mine. In: Herrmann JW (eds) Handbook of production scheduling.
International series in operations research & management science, vol 89. Springer, Boston,
MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-33117-4_11
Palma R, Agarwal R (1973) A study of the cavability of primary ore at the El Teniente Mine.
Technical Report from Colombia University, New York, (niepublikowane)
Raina AK, Murthy VMSR, Soni AK (2014) Flyrock in bench blasting: a comprehensive review.
Bull Eng Geol Env 73(4):1199–1209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-014-0588-6
Roy MP, Himanshu VK, Kaushik AP, Singh PK (2022) Influence of ring blasting pattern on the
safety of nearby underground structures. Sādhanā 47(4):192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-
022-01968-2
Russell L (2007) Negaunee Mine, top slicing operation
Sasaoka T, Hamanaka A, Wahyudi S, Shimada H, Kebo V (2015) Numerical study on effect of rock
mass stability on deep deposit slicing at uranium mine in Czech Republic. Electron J Geotech
Eng 20(12):4379–4386
Silver DB (1997) Gold road mine: anatomy of a turnaround. Min Eng 49(8):28–32
Singh UK, Jain PN, Prasad M (1995) Post-pillar behaviour at deep levels in a copper mine. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstracts 32(6):585–593
Singh PK, Roy MP, Paswan RK, Dubey RK, Drebenstedt C (2015) Blast vibration effects in an
underground mine caused by open-pit mining. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 80:79–88. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2015.09.009
Songstad J (1982) Square-set timber in load-haul-dump stopes at the Bunker Hill Mine, Kellogg,
Idaho. In: Underground mining methods handbook, pp 744–748
TERI (2019) Exploration and mining in India: time for a deeper look. The Energy and Resources
Institute, August, 1–40
Tewari S, Himanshu VK, Porathur JL, Bhattacharjee R, Das AJ, Mandal PK (2020) Exploitation
of mica deposits at Nellore mica belt, Andhra Pradesh, India. Curr Sci 118(4). https://doi.org/
10.18520/cs/v118/i4/593-602
Verma S, Chaudhari S (2017) Safety of workers in Indian mines: study, analysis, and prediction.
Saf Health Work 8(3):267–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2017.01.001
Whittle D, Brazil M, Grossman PA, Rubinstein JH, Thomas DA (2018) Combined optimisation
of an open-pit mine outline and the transition depth to underground mining. Eur J Oper Res
268(2):624–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.02.005
Xia ZY, Tan ZY, Zhang L (2021) Instability mechanism of extraction structure in whole life cycle
in block caving mine. Geofluids
Zhang ZX, Wimmer M (2018) A case study of dividing a single blast into two parts in sublevel
caving. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 104:84–93
Chapter 3
Rock–Explosive Interaction During
Underground Blasting
Abstract The rock–explosive interaction behaviour influences the blasting outputs

in terms of breakage, fragmentation and induced hazards. The blast designers can
optimize the design parameters by assessment of rock–explosive interaction to
achieve the desired output. The expected outcomes from underground blasting would
be different under varying geomining conditions. The optimum breakage of rock
mass with enhanced pull and reduced overbreak is expected while underground
drivages blasting. The blasting under box-cut excavation scenario comes with the
expectation to achieve the optimum pull and maximized movement. The expectations
from the production blasting are to optimize the rock fragmentation. The geological
conditions viz. presence of joints, shear zone, etc. also influence the blasting outputs.
In these cases, the design parameters need to be optimized using the assessment of
rock–explosive interaction behaviour. This chapter presents a theoretical overview
of rock–explosive interactions.
3.1 Introduction
The quality of a blast is measured in three significant aspects as—extent of rock mass
damage, rock fragmentation and blasting hazards (Silva et al. 2019). The blast design
parameters are optimized to improve the quality of a blast in these aspects. The review
of the literatures on rock–explosive interactions suggests that the rock parameters,
explosive parameters and mining conditions influence the blasting outputs (Singh
et al. 2016). Different empirical and numerical approaches have been used to identify
the impacts of these parameters on blasting quality over the years (Zhang et al.
2020; Gorai et al. 2021). Most of these approaches are for openpit excavations.
The concerns relating to the quality of a blast for underground excavation would
be different. Despite different concerns under varying geomining conditions, the
science behind rock breakage under dynamic/blast loading would be the same. So,
the discussions have been made in this chapter on the rock breakage mechanism. The
various theories concerning the rock breakage mechanism have also been discussed.
Under the impact of explosive energy, the rock mass experiences a high impact
of more than 4000 m/s (Gómez et al. 2020; Leng et al. 2021; Chiquito et al. 2019).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2645-9_3
26 3 Rock–Explosive Interaction During Underground Blasting
The deformation behaviour of rock mass under such impact loading would be plastic
or hydrodynamic. The physical behaviour of any engineering material under a set of
loading conditions is described by constitutive models. Different constitutive models
have been used by the researchers over the years to evaluate the rock–explosive inter-
action behaviour under different practical situations (Baranowski and Małachowski,
2018; Yang et al. 1996). Some of these constitutive models have also been used in
numerical simulation in successive chapters. The damages in rock mass are anal-
ysed using these constitutive models. It is analysed with various descriptors viz.
induced strain, factor of safety, damage index, etc. (Coggan et al. 2012; Gui et al.
2017; Hu et al. 2015; Ma and An 2008; Zhang et al. 2020; Shukla and Mishra, 2020;
Liu et al. 2016; Tan et al. 2020; Maji and Adugna 2016). Researchers like Arora
and Dey (2010), Gómez et al. (2020), Hustrulid and Lu (2003), Yilmaz and Unlu
(2014), etc. have correlated damage with nearfield peak particle velocity (PPV).
Rock parameters, explosive parameters and blast design parameters have the fore-
most impact on nearfield PPV. This chapter includes the discussions regarding the
rock breakage mechanism, assessing the influences of rock and explosive parame-
ters on rock breakage, and the constitutive models for rock breakage under dynamic
loading. The explosive interaction behaviour during underground blasting has been
summarized in the end of this chapter.
3.2 Rock Breakage Mechanism
Blast-induced rock mass breakage consists of three major steps as—shock/stress

wave-induced cracking, crack propagation and rock movement by gas pressurization.
Damage/cracking induced by shock/stress wave in the immediate adjacent to the
borehole results from crushing of borehole wall due to extremely high detonation
pressure (ISEE Blasters’ Handbook 2011). It is found that the development of cracks
and damage has a significant time lag behind the shock wave. Shockey et al. (1974)
stated that the crack propagation speed is three times slower than the shock wave
velocity.
The pressure exerted on the borehole wall induces compressive shock waves in
the rock mass. The wave gets reflected after reaching free face/discontinuity. This
reflected wave is termed as secondary wave. The secondary wave may be compressive
or tensile in nature, depending on the difference in characteristic acoustic impedance
of the interface. There is an interface between rock and air when the stress wave gets
reflected from the free face. The nature of the secondary wave in such a case will
be tensile. The fracturing in rock mass occurs when the superimposed values of the
incident compressive stress and reflected tensile stress exceed the tensile strength of
the rock mass. However, the strength of the rock mass also changes with variations
in the strain rate (Prasad et al. 2000). So, considering the strain rate dependency, the
rock fracturing will occur when the superimposed values of the incident compressive
stress and reflected tensile stress would exceed the characteristic strength of the rock,
which is the result of strain rate-dependent response at that point under the existing
3.3 Rock Mass Damages Under Dynamic Loading 27
Fig. 3.1 View of blast-induced stress wave propagation through rock media (Pal 2015)
state of stress. A schematic diagram of rock breakage mechanism under the influence
of stress wave is shown in Fig. 3.1. Bhandari (1997) classified the zones of influence
in the rock mass under the action of the stress wave. The zones were crush zone,
fracture zone and seismic zone. The crush zone is expected up to 4 times the radius
of the blasthole. The fracture zone is up to 50 times the radius of the blasthole. The
zone beyond the fracture zone is considered the seismic zone.
Apart from shock/stress waves, explosive detonation also produces high-pressure
gaseous products at very high temperatures. These high-pressure products also play
a key role in the fracturing of the rock mass. Researchers such as Ash (1963), Kutter
and Fairhurst (1971), Langefors and Kihlstrom (1963), Persson et al. (1970), Porter
and Fiarhurst (1970), Sengani (2020), etc. discussed the role of gaseous pressure in
rock breakage mechanism. As per literature, the high-pressure gaseous detonation
products flows through the pre-existing cracks and widens them, thereby enhancing
the fragmentation. Dally et al. (1975) observed through the experimental trials that
the gas pressure helps in extending cracks in the vicinity of the blasthole. The findings
suggested that the containment of gaseous products increases the amplitude of the
tensile wave and results in more fractures and fracture length. Bhandari and Vutukuri
(1974) found in the experimental trials that the fractures near the blast holes are
formed by quasi-static gas pressure, and the fractures near the free face are formed
by stress wave reflection.
3.3 Rock Mass Damages Under Dynamic Loading
The physical response of the material under varying loading conditions is described
by constitutive models. The rock mass behaviour under static and dynamic loading
has also been represented by different constitutive models. Selection of a proper
constitutive model to study the breakage mechanism of rock mass under dynamic
Table 3.1 Deformation behaviour of materials under different loading (Jaiswal 2018)
Impact velocity (m/s) Strain rate (/s) Deformation behaviour
< 10–5 Static/creep
< 50 10–5 to 10–1 Elastic
50–1000 10–1 to 101 Elasto-plastic
1000–3000 101 to 106 Primarily plastic (pressure level ≥ material strength)
3000–12,000 106 to 108 Hydrodynamic
> 12,000 > 108 Vaporization of colliding solids
loading is very difficult, as the rock mass shows variations in mechanical behaviour
under such loading. A brief about the deformation behaviour of materials under
different impact loading is shown in Table 3.1 (Jaiswal 2018). The table shows that
using detonation velocity and strain rate of the explosive, the material behaviour of
rock mass under blast loading can be taken as primarily plastic or hydrodynamic.
However, minimal literature is available on the constitutive models to assess the phys-
ical behaviours of rock mass under dynamic loading. But, significant developments
have been made in the constitutive models for concrete and other similar materials.
Cui et al. (2017) discussed about the different constitutive theories of concrete and
emphasized that it shows theories of—elasticity, plasticity, damage, visco-plasticity
and fracture mechanics under the dynamic loading.
A stress–strain plot is a fundamental way to study the physical behaviour of rock
under a defined loading condition. The rock shows proportional relation between
stress and strain up to the attainment of yield strength under uniaxial compres-
sion loading conditions. The rock behaviour is ductile up to the yield strength. Its
behaviour changes to brittle from ductile after the attainment of the strength of the
rock. There is a decrement in stress with the increasing strain after attaining the
uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) of the rock. The rock shows inelastic or plastic
behaviour when it is loaded further after the yield point. The state of rock when the
stress–strain curve continues to rise after the yield stress, but with a shallower slope
is known as the plastic behaviour with strain hardening. Such rock material shows
unloading behaviour along the curve parallel to the original stress–strain curve. The
rock that shows no increment in stress with increasing strain after attaining yield
strength is elastic-perfectly plastic. The stress–strain behaviour under the unloading
condition in this rock will be parallel to the elastic stress–strain behaviour. A mate-
rial is considered as rigid-perfectly plastic if it shows no increment in strain with
loading conditions. However, the stress will change with the cumulative loading.
The unloading behaviour will be parallel to the stress axis for this type of material.
The rock behaviour under high strain rate loadings would be different from that
due to static loading. Researchers viz. Beser and Aydiner (2019), Gong et al. (2019a,
b), Pan et al. (2021), Renjie et al. (2020), Wen et al. (2020), etc. have studied the rock
behaviour under high strain rate loadings. The stress–strain plot from the findings
of Gong et al. (2019a, b) is shown in Fig. 3.2. The plot shows the rock behaviour
under uniaxial compressional loading conditions with different strain rates. It can be
3.3 Rock Mass Damages Under Dynamic Loading 29
Fig. 3.2 Stress–strain behaviour of rock in uniaxial compression and with different strain rate
loadings (Gong et al. 2019a, b)
drawn from this plot that UCS of rock at the strain rate of 135/s is about 2.5 times
of UCS at the strain rate of 45/s.
Apart from the uniaxial compression, the rock mass may be subjected to biaxial or
tri-axial loading conditions. The behaviour of rock and associated stress–strain plot
would be different under confined loading conditions. The confined strength of the
rock would be higher than UCS. The amplification in strength would be dependent
on the magnitude of confinement.
The stress–strain relation is obtained from the response of a material under
different mechanical and/or thermal loading conditions. This stress–strain relation,
together with the conservation laws and kinematic relations, constitutes the consti-
tutive models. These constitutive models can be divided into equation of states
(EOSs), strength models and failure models. The EOSs comprise the relation between
the pressure to volume and internal energy or temperature. The strength models
relate the deviatoric stress to the deviatoric strain. Additionally, a failure criterion
is required to identify the onset and describe the evolution of material failure (Wu
et al. 2017). Babu et al. (2010) classified the constitutive models for the concrete
material as linear elastic models, nonlinear elastic models and plasticity-based
models. Plasticity-based models follow the yield criterion, flow rules or hardening
rules. The yield criteria are pressure-dependent and pressure-independent. The stan-
dard pressure-independent yield criterion-based plasticity constitutive models are—
Tresca or maximum shear stress criterion, von Mises or maximum distortion energy
criterion, Rankine or maximum tensile stress criterion, Mohr–Coulomb criterion,
etc. The pressure-dependent plasticity yield criteria are—Drucker–Prager criterion,
Mises-Schleicher criterion, etc. (Babu et al. 2005).
3.3.1 Constitutive Models Used for Numerical Simulation

of Rock Blasting
Researchers have used different constitutive models for predictions of blasting

outputs under practical conditions. A summary of some of such research works
is given in Table 3.2. These research works included simulation for predictions of
vibration and rock fragmentation.
3.4 Rock Parameters and Their Role on Damage

Characteristics
The discussions on constitutive models show that the rock parameters affect the rock
mass damage characteristic under dynamic loading. The impacts of rock parameters
have also been assessed in various research works using experimental field data. Most
of these research works have presented rock mass damage as a function of nearfield
PPV. In this context, the critical vibration limit to initiate the rock mass damages has
been proposed by researchers under varying conditions. Bauer and Calder (1970)
have defined the peak particle velocity (PPV) limits of the rock mass for initial
fracturing, tensile slabbing, radial cracking and complete breakup. The PPV limits
for different nature of fracturing in the rock mass are shown in Table 3.3 (Silva et al.
2019; Bauer and Calder 1970). The suggested limits by Bauer and Calder (1970) are
based on the nature of fracturing due to blast vibration. However, the inconsistency in
the fracturing in different rock types has not been discussed under this classification.
The literature suggests the P-wave velocity of the rock mass as one of the suitable
parameters to define the rock mass damage under the influence of detonation wave.
Forsyth (1993) suggested a relationship of critical PPV with P-wave velocity (Silva
et al. 2019; Forsyth 1993). The suggested relationship is based on the general law
of elasticity, under which the PPV and P-wave velocity of the rock mass has been
considered as the change in velocity and original velocity to compute the strain.
The damage has been considered against the tensile strength of the rock mass. The
relationship correlating the rock properties with critical PPV is shown in Eq. 3.1.
σt
PPVcritical = Vp (3.1)
Y
where
PPVcritical = Critical peak particle velocity limit to initiate damage in the rock
mass
σ t = Tensile strength of the rock
Y = Youngs modulus of elasticity of the rock
V p = P-wave velocity of the rock.
3.4 Rock Parameters and Their Role on Damage Characteristics 31
Table 3.2 Summary of the constitutive model used by researchers in numerical simulation of rock
blasting
Research Title Constitutive model Simulation code
work
Li et al. Numerical simulation of blast Plastic kinematic Dynamic FEM
(2017) vibration and crack forming strengthened constitutive
effect of rock-anchored beam model
excavation in deep
underground caverns
Wang et al. Johnson–Holmquist-II(JH-2) Johnson–Holmquist-II(JH-2) FEM
(2018) constitutive model for rock constitutive model
materials: parameter
determination and application
in tunnel smooth blasting
Shahrin Numerical simulation of rock Elastic DEM
et al. (2019) fragmentation by blasting
using discrete element
method and particle blast
method
Baranowski Experimental testing and Johnson–Holmquist-II(JH-2) FEM and SPH
et al. (2020) numerical simulations of constitutive model
blast-induced fracture of
dolomite rock
Yang et al. Numerical simulation of Elastic DFN
(2020) blasting in confined fractured
rocks using an
immersed-body fluid–solid
interaction model
He and Experimental and numerical Johnson–Holmquist FEM
Yang (2019) investigations of dynamic constitutive model
failure process in rock under
blast loading
Gao et al. Effect of initiation location User-defined damage model FEM
(2019) on distribution and utilization
of explosion energy during
rock blasting
Trivino and Assessment of crack initiation Visco-elastic Kelvin model FEM-DEM
Mohanty and propagation in rock from
(2015) explosion-induced stress
waves and gas expansion by
cross-hole seismometry and
FEM–DEM method
Hu et al. Numerical simulation of the Tensile-compressive damage SPH-DAM-FEM
(2015) complete rock blasting model
response by SPH-DAM-FEM
approach
(continued)
Table 3.2 (continued)

Research Title Constitutive model Simulation code
work
Pramanik Implementation of smoothed Graddy and Kipp damage SPH
and Deb particle hydrodynamics for model
(2015) detonation of explosive with
application to rock
fragmentation
Himanshu Numerical simulation-based Elastic FEM Explicit
et al. (2021) approach for assessment of Dynamics
blast-induced deformation
pattern in slot raise
excavation
Himanshu Explicit dynamics-based Elastic FEM Explicit
et al. (2022) numerical simulation Dynamics
approach for assessment of
impact of relief hole on
blast-induced deformation
pattern in an underground
face blast
FEM Finite element method; DEM Discrete element method; DFN Discrete fracture network; SPH
Smooth particle hydrodynamics
Table 3.3 Vibration limit for

PPV (mm/s) Effect
different nature of fracture in
the rock mass (Bauer and < 250 No fracture of intact rock
Calder 1970) 250–635 Minor tensile slabbing will occur
635–2540 Strong tensile and some radial cracking
> 2540 Complete breakup of rock mass
Although there are merits of this P-wave velocity-based damage assessment

method, Fleetwood et al. (2009) have highlighted some of the major constraints
of this method. The main constraint is the concept that considers the variations in the
strength of the rock by changing the loading rate. This consideration has not been
taken into account under this criterion. Despite these limitations, it is clear from this
criterion that the rock mass damage is a function of tensile strength, P-wave velocity
and elastic modulus.
Researchers have also correlated other rock properties, viz. elastic modulus,
Poisson’s ratio, density, RQD, RMR, GSI, etc., with PPV. The statistical algorithms
were used in these research works to identify the influence of these parameters. The
summary of research work that identifies the influence of rock parameters on PPV
is given in Table 3.4.
3.4 Rock Parameters and Their Role on Damage Characteristics 33
Table 3.4 Summary of research work correlating rock parameters with PPV
Study Input rock parameters Technique R2
Hajihassani et al. (2015a) P-wave velocity, Young’s ICA-ANN 0.97
modulus of elasticity
Hajihassani et al. (2015b) Rock quality designation PSO-based ANN 0.85
(RQD)
Khandelwal and Singh (2009) P-wave velocity, Young’s ANN 0.98
modulus of elasticity, Poisson’s
ratio
Rezaeineshat et al. (2020) RQD ICA-ANN 0.90
Amin Shokravi et al. (2018) Rock mass rating (RMR) PSO-Linear 0.95
Kumar et al. (2016) Uniaxial compressive strength Statistical Analysis 0.78
(UCS), RQD, geological
strength index (GSI)
Kumar et al. (2014) Poisson’s ratio Statistical Analysis 0.907
ICA Imperialist competitive algorithm; ANN Artificial neural network; PSO Particle swarm
optimization
3.4.1 Nearfield Vibration and Rock Breakage Characteristic
Based on the assumption of rock breakage under critical vibration limit, nearfield
vibration can be taken as the important parameter to assess breakage characteristics.
The review of vibration propagation characteristics shows that the amplification and
attenuation of blast vibration depend on the propagating media. The propagating
media can be considered to be homogeneous in the nearfield. So, the assessment
of nearfield blast vibration can give the extent of damage under the blast loading.
Holmberg and Persson predictor is one of the globally accepted nearfield vibration
predictors. The predictor is a nonlinear relationship between distance and explosive
charge. The relationship under this predictor is shown in Eq. 3.2. The schematic
diagram of the parameters used in this predictor is shown in Fig. 3.3 (Onederra and
Esen 2004).
⎡ x
⎤α
s +Δx
dx
PPV = K ⎣l 2 β/2α ⎦ (3.2)
xs
r0 + (x − x0 )2
where
l is the linear charge concentration (kg/m).
dx is the element of charge contributing to the PPV at point P.
This relation can be simplified by assuming β = 2α. The simplified relation is
shown in Eq. 3.3.
Fig. 3.3 Schematic diagram

of Holmberg and Persson
parameters to model near
field PPV (Onederra and
Esen 2004)
α
l Δx + xs − x0 x0 − xs
PPV = k arctan + arctan (3.3)
r0 r0 r0
K and α in these relations are site constants. The site constants are dependent on
the nature of rock strata and discontinuity in the strata.
This nearfield predictor makes the following presumptions:
• The blast wave obeys the charge weight scaling law.
• PPV due to each small element of charge within the blasthole is additive.
• The velocity of detonation (VOD) of the explosive charge has been neglected.
• The impact of the free face boundary has been neglected.
• PPV is proportional to the dynamic strain experienced by the rock mass.
3.5 Influence of Explosive Parameters on Rock Mass

Damage
The rock breakage pattern is also influenced by explosive parameters viz. explosive
density, detonation velocity, detonation pressure, etc. (Jimeno et al. 1987). The choice
of suitable explosive as per the strata demand is necessary to get the optimum output
from the blast.
3.5.1 Commercial Explosive and Its Principle of Explosion
The explosive is a reactive substance that instantaneously releases a huge amount of

energy. The energy is released in the form of shock or stress waves and gases. When
3.5 Influence of Explosive Parameters on Rock Mass Damage 35
the explosive is initiated by shock, the molecules of the explosive mass convert into a
gaseous substance. These gaseous molecules propagate through the adjacent media.
The speed of the first gasified molecule is so high that it does not lose heat through
the conductivity to the unreacted zone. Instead, the unreacted zone is initiated by the
transmission of shock from the reacted zone. So, once the explosive is initiated, the
shock/stress wave is generated, propagating through its own mass. At the same time,
the reacting explosive mass releases a large quantity of high-temperature gases. The
pressure due to this high-temperature gas is known as secondary pressure. If this
secondary pressure acts upon the undetonated explosive part, its effect is added to
the primary pressure. The combined effect is capable of transforming the process
of deflagration to detonation. If the secondary pressure acts against the primary
pressure in the undetonated portion, it slows down the explosive reaction. It may
stop the further energization of the rest of the explosive mass, and the explosive may
remain undetonated. The variation of pressure concerning the time at different points
in an explosive column is shown in Fig. 3.4 (Zhang 2016).
In the frame of the leading shock of the detonation wave, gases enter at supersonic
velocity and are compressed through the shock. This sudden change in pressure initi-
ates the release of chemical energy. This released energy again accelerates the flow
back at sonic speed. The phenomenon leads to the development of a pressure gradient
at a plane. This plane is known as Chapman–Jouguet (C–J) plane. A schematic of
C–J plane in the detonation of the explosive is shown in Fig. 3.5. The C–J plane
moves at a very high speed. The velocity of the C–J plane is known as velocity of
detonation (VOD). The speed of movement of explosion products is one-fourth of
the VOD (Jimeno et al. 1987). So, the detonation pressure exerted by the explosive
is taken as per Eqs. 3.4 and 3.5.
Pd = ρe (VOD)Ue (3.4)
where
Pd = Detonation pressure
ρ e = Density of explosive
VOD = Velocity of detonation of explosive
U e = Velocity of explosion products.
1
Pd = ρe (VOD)2 (3.5)
4
3.5.2 Explosive Parameters
Based on the principle of explosive detonation, its composition and output behaviour,
different parameters of the explosive have been identified. The influence of these
parameters on the rock breakage characteristic has been discussed in this section.
Fig. 3.4 Pressure profile at different locations in a blasthole (Zhang 2016)
Researchers have also studied the interdependency among these explosive parameters
(Mishra et al. 2018; Yunoshev et al. 2012).
3.5.2.1 Density
The density of an explosive is defined as the mass of explosive per unit volume. It
contributes to the borehole pressure on the wall of the blasthole. It is recommended
to use higher density explosives for a denser rock formation. The recommendation
is based on the impedance match theory. The higher is the ratio of the characteristic
impedance of explosive to that of rock, and the rock breakage will be more. The
characteristic impedance for explosive is defined as the product of the explosive
density and its velocity of detonation (VOD). The characteristic impedance for the
rock is defined as the product of the rock density and its P-wave velocity. The density
Fig. 3.5 Schematic diagram showing C–J plane in the detonation of explosive (Jimeno et al. 1987)
of explosives generally lies in the range of 0.5–1.7 g/cc (Jimeno et al. 1987; Mishra
et al. 2019).
3.5.2.2 Velocity of Detonation (VOD)
It is defined as the speed with which the detonation wave moves through the explosive
column. The different factors which affect the detonation velocity are explosive
type, explosive diameter, confinement of explosive, etc. The impedance ratio gets
affected dominantly by the velocity of detonation of explosives during rock fracture
process. The velocity of detonation generally lies in the range of 1500–6700 m/s.
The explosives such as emulsion and slurry, having higher VOD, produce more
shock waves upon detonation than explosives with lesser VOD (He and Yang 2019;
Brinkmann 1990).
3.5.2.3 Detonation Pressure
It is defined as the pressure associated with the reaction zone of a detonating explo-
sive. Silva et al. (2019) and Torbica and Lapcevic (2014) highlighted the role of
detonation pressure in the process of rock damage by blasting.
3.5.2.4 Energy
The explosive energy is the amount of actual expansion work carried out by the
explosive. This is an important parameter along with the other explosive parameters.
It is expected that the high energy explosive will give better performance in rock
breaking. The computation of explosive energy is difficult. The most common method
of computing explosive energy is an underwater test. Although the values from this
test may not give real value while blasting in rock, the heat of explosion is also
sometimes considered for computation of explosive energy. However, it is a poor
descriptor of the strength of the explosive as the mechanical work performed by the
explosive on rock is a better descriptor of the strength (Sanchidrián and López 2006).
3.5.2.5 Sensitivity
It is the property of explosive which defines the ease of explosive to get detonated
by fire, impact, shock, heat or any other source. It is related to the requirement of
input energy for the detonation of explosives. To enhance the ease of detonation,
explosives are categorized as cap sensitive and non-cap sensitive. A standard deto-
nator is required to detonate cap sensitive explosives, whereas a detonator cannot
initiate non-cap sensitive explosives, as they require primer or booster with the deto-
nator. The sensitivity of explosives gets affected by different factors such as water,
temperature and charge diameter.
3.5.2.6 Flammability
It is the property of explosive which define the ease of explosive to get detonated
by spark, fire, heat or flame. In other words, it is the measure of the amount of heat
required to cause the burning of explosives instead of detonation. For any explosive,
the required minimum level of heat must be achieved to get detonated instead of
burning. It is an important property in terms of safety during the storage and trans-
portation of explosives. Nowadays, maximum explosive compounds are inflammable
due to alteration in its component, but they must be taken into account for safety
concerns (Jimeno et al. 1987).
3.5.2.7 Water Resistance
It is the ability of an explosive to withstand exposure to water without suffering

any detrimental effects in its performance. Explosive generally has internal resis-
tance among its composition, which shows hydrophilic or hydrophobic nature while
coming in contact with water. The explosives which are hydrophobic in nature can
directly be poured into the borehole without any detrimental effect in nature. The
explosives, which are hydrophilic in nature, when come in contact with water, start
dissolving some of their ingredients and hence decreases their strength. When a blast
is to be taken in the watery blastholes, a good and fair water-resistant explosive must
be selected. When blast for sleeping holes needs to be carried out, then also the
explosive having good water resistance should be used (Jimeno et al. 1987).
3.5.2.8 Fume
The fume is the measure of the amount and type of toxic gases produced after
the detonation of the explosive. They are generated due to oxygen dis-balance in
the explosive. Fume production is a significant concern in underground mines due
to insufficient ventilation. Toxic fumes are produced due to inadequate priming,
poor water resistance of explosives, lesser confinement, critical charge diameter, etc.
(Jimeno et al. 1987).
3.5.3 Equation of State for Explosive
The equation of state is a thermodynamic relation that describes the state of a matter
under a set of physical conditions. The basic relation for the EOS is shown in Eq. 3.6.
The relation states that pressure (P), volume (V ) and temperature (T ) parameters in
a reaction are related to each other. Ideal gas law is the basic equation of state. The
other EOSs are modifications of this relation under a set of physical scenarios.
f (P, V , T ) = 0 (3.6)
The physical properties of the detonation products such as explosives follow the
Jones–Wilkins–Lee (JWL) equation of state (EOS) (Artero-Guerrero et al. 2017;
Castedo et al. 2018; Hu et al. 2015; Pramanik and Deb 2015 José A. Sanchidrián and
López 2006). The EOS is a relationship among pressure, volume and energy. The
expression for the JWL equation of state is shown in Eq. 3.7.
ω ω ωE
P = A 1− e−R1 V + B 1 − e−R2 V + (3.7)
R1 V R2 V V
where
A, B, R1 , R2 and ω are constants
P = Pressure
V = Specific volume
E = Energy per unit volume.
Cylindrical tests are conducted to estimate the parameters of JWL EOS (Baker
et al. 2012). Sanchidrián et al. (2015) estimated JWL EOS parameters of the explo-
sives of different densities and diameters and validated the result with the numerical
simulation. Castedo et al. (2018) estimated JWL EOS parameters for emulsion explo-
sives of different diameters using cylindrical tests. Davis and Hill (2001) estimated
the JWL parameters for Ammonium Nitrate–Fuel Oil (ANFO) explosives using
cylindrical tests.
3.6 Impacts of Blast Design Parameters on Rock Mass

Damage
The different blast design parameters such as drilling accuracy and free face condition
have the foremost impact on the rock breakage. The free face boundary works to
reflect the stress wave. The reflected tensile wave works to initiate dislodging of
the broken rock mass. The discussions on some of these parameters influencing
rock breakage have been made in this section. An outline of different blast design
parameters in a bench blasting is shown in Fig. 3.6. For the underground metalliferous
mining, the excavated slot works as the free face. The blasting in such cases takes
place in ring/fan pattern against the excavated slot. An outline of the different blast
design pattern for underground ring blasting is shown in Fig. 3.7.
3.6.1 Blasthole Diameter
The charge concentration at a point is controlled by this parameter. Jimeno et al.

(1987) have suggested the optimum blasthole diameter as 0.00016 times the depth of
the blasthole. The suggestion has been made to optimize the fragmentation, powder
factor and cost. Such rules of thumb also consider that the larger blastholes tend to
increase deviation. However, the development of the recent drilling equipment has
made it possible to drill larger blastholes of small diameter with greater accuracy.
Accordingly, the longer blastholes of small diameter are also in practice nowadays.
On the other hand, sometimes, the large diameter blastholes are drilled even in the
smaller bench height when the rock strata are very hard. This is done to cope up with
the inability of the drilling equipment to drill holes of smaller diameter in the harder
Fig. 3.6 Outline of different

blast design parameters used
in bench blasting
3.6 Impacts of Blast Design Parameters on Rock Mass Damage 41
Fig. 3.7 Outline of different Holes of 2nd Ring

blast design parameters for Upper level
underground ring blasting
Holes of 1st Ring
Burden
Burden
Free Face or Slot
Stope
Toe Spacing
Lower level
rock formation. So, the selection of blasthole diameter nowadays is mainly based on
the strata condition, economy and safety.
The chances of deviation of blasthole are more in the case of underground blasting,
as the deeper holes with inclination are drilled in such case. The control on drill
deviation is achieved by the use of accurate drilling machine. At the same time,
the measurement of drill deviation before explosive charging is also important. The
charging parameters can be modified to achieve the desired outputs from the blasts,
if the deviation in blastholes is known to the blast designers.
3.6.2 Burden
Burden is defined as the shortest distance to relief at the time of detonation of holes.
Burden also signifies inter-row distance. It is the most critical parameter in any
blasting operation. When the burden is very small, problems such as high air blast
level, production of excessive fines and the throw of rock to large distances arise.
If the burden is too much, it produces severe back break and shattering of back
wall (Pal Roy 2007). The optimum burden for a bench blast is determined based on
the assessment of rock parameters, explosive parameters and operational parameters.
Researchers have proposed some empirical relations to compute the optimum burden
for bench blasting. The relation proposed by Konya and Walter (1990) is given in
Eq. 3.8.
SGe
B= 2 + 1.5 .φe (3.8)
SGr
where
B = Burden in ft
SGe = Specific gravity of explosive
SGr = Specific gravity of rock
φ e = Diameter of explosive in inch.
The empirical relation for burden proposed by Pal Roy (2005) is given in Eq. 3.9.
√
φe 5.93 Le
B=H . + (0.37) (3.9)
φ RQD K
where
B = Burden (m)
H = Bench height (m)
φ e = Diameter of explosive (mm)
φ = Diameter of blasthole (mm)
RQD = Rock quality designation
L e = Loading density of explosive (kg/m)
K = Charge factor (Kg/m3 ).
In case of ring blasting, toe burden/burden is the distance of the ring blastholes
from the excavated slot portion. It is also the distance between two rings. Very limited
literature is available regarding the selection of optimum burden for ring blasting.
Rustan (1992) proposed a relationship between the blasthole diameter and burden.
The relationship is shown in Eq. 3.10.
B(in m) = 11.8 × φ 0.63 (3.10)
where
φ = Blasthole diameter (in m).
3.6.3 Spacing
Spacing is defined as the distance between two adjacent holes, measured perpen-
dicularly to the burden and parallel to the free face. Spacing and burden form grid
patterns if their values are equal, which is applicable for massive rock breaking.
Twisting and tearing of rock is more, and splitting and back break are lesser if the
burden is small and spacing is large. If the spacing is smaller than the burden, splitting
3.6 Impacts of Blast Design Parameters on Rock Mass Damage 43
occurs between blastholes and back break is observed. As a general guideline used
by Pal Roy (2007), spacing should be 1.2–1.5 times the burden in bench blasting.
The term “toe spacing” is used in the case of underground ring blasting. It can
be defined as the distance between two blastholes of a ring at the toe point. Rustan
(1992) suggested to keep toe spacing as 1.5–2.0 times of the burden for ring blasting.
3.6.4 Stemming
Stemming is the inert material (mud, clay, sand or drill cutting) used to cover the
hole after the drill hole is packed with explosives. It works to give confinement to
the propagating shock wave while blasting. Stemming increases blasting efficiency
by enhancing fragmentation. It also reduces air shock waves and high-pressure gases
venting into the atmosphere. The preferable stemming material to reduce flyrock
ejection is 3–4-mm rock chips.
3.6.5 Subgrade Drilling
Drilling of the blastholes beyond the planned grade lines is termed subgrade drilling.
The subgrade drilling causes a larger zone of maximum tension, which must be
sheared for a good rock breakage (Pal Roy 2007).
3.6.6 Charging Parameters
Quantity of explosive charge has a dominant impact on rock breakage patterns.

The charging parameters are expressed in different terms as explosive charge per
hole, explosive weight per delay and total explosive charge in a firing round. The
variations of these parameters affect the quantitative blast output in terms of frag-
mentation, backbreak and throw, and blasting hazards in terms of ground vibration,
air overpressure, etc.
3.6.7 Delay Timings
The rock breakage profile in blasting is mainly dependent on delay timings. The
delay timings work to separate the firing of blastholes, thereby increasing the utility
of the explosive energy. The delay interval between the blastholes should be such
that the burden from the previously fired holes has enough time to move out and
provide adequate relief to the subsequent holes.
3.7 Summary
The overview of role of rock mass properties, explosive parameters and blast design
parameters on blasting outputs has been discussed in this chapter. The summary of
discussions made in this chapter is as follows:
I. The rock breakage during blasting takes place under the influence of shock
wave and gaseous pressure. The selection of proper explosive based on the
strata demand is necessary to maximize the explosive energy utilization.
II. The blasting outputs have foremost influence of rock properties. The proper
assessment of rock parameters and geological discontinuities is important to
decide optimal explosive and design suitable blasting pattern.
III. The explosive parameters viz. detonation velocity, detonation pressure and
density also influence the blasting results. The blast design parameters are
optimized based on the assessment of rock–explosive interactions.
References
Arora S, Dey K (2010) Estimation of near-field peak particle velocity: a mathematical model. J
Geol Min Res 2(4):68–73. http://www.academicjournals.org/jgmr
Artero-Guerrero J, Pernas-Sánchez J, Teixeira-Dias F (2017) Blast wave dynamics: the influence
of the shape of the explosive. J Hazard Mater 331:189–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.
2017.02.035
AminShokravi A, Eskandar H, Derakhsh AM, Rad HN, Ghanadi A (2018) The potential application
of particle swarm optimization algorithm for forecasting the air-overpressure induced by mine
blasting. Eng Comput. 34(2): 277–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-017-0539-5
Ash RL (1963) The mechanics of rock breakage, standards for blasting design. Pit Quarry 56(3):118–
122
Babu RR, Benipal G, Singh AK (2005) Constitutive modeling of concrete: an overview. Asian J
Civ Eng 6(4):211–246
Babu RR, Benipal GS, Singh AK (2010) Constitutive model for bimodular elastic damage of
concrete. Latin Am J Solids Struct 7(2):143–166. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1679-782520100
00200003
Baker EL, Murphy D, Stiel LI, Wrobel E (2012) Theory and calibration of JWL and JWLB
thermodynamic equations of state. 60, 41–52.https://doi.org/10.2495/978-1-84564-750-6/05
Baranowski P, Małachowski J (2018) Possibilities of rock constitutive modelling and simulations,
130005. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5019135
Baranowski P, Mazurkiewicz Ł, Małachowski J, Pytlik M (2020) Experimental testing and numerical
simulations of blast-induced fracture of dolomite rock. Meccanica 55(12):2337–2352. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11012-020-01223-0
Bauer A, Calder PN (1970) The influence and evaluation of blasting on stability in open pit mining.
Society of Mining Engineers of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum
Engineers
Beser MH, Aydiner K (2019) Effect of stress level on the compressive strength of the rock samples
subjected to cyclic loading. IOP Conf Ser: Earth Environ Sci 221:012023. https://doi.org/10.
1088/1755-1315/221/1/012023
Bhandari S (1997) Engineering rock blasting operations
References 45
Bhandari S, Vutukuri VS (1974) Rock fragmentation with longitudinal charges. In: 3rd International
congress on rock mechanics, Denever, United States, pp 1337–1342
Brinkmann JR (1990) An experimental study of the effects of shock and gas penetration in blasting.
In: 3rd International symposium on rock fragmentation by blasting, pp 55–66
Castedo R, Natale M, López LM, Sanchidrián JA, Santos AP, Navarro J, Segarra P (2018) Estimation
of Jones-Wilkins-Lee parameters of emulsion explosives using cylinder tests and their numerical
validation. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 112:290–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.10.027
Chiquito M, Castedo R, López LM, Santos AP, Mancilla JM, Yenes JI (2019) Blast wave charac-
teristics and tnt equivalent of improvised explosive device at small-scaled distances. Defence
Sci J 69(4):328–335. https://doi.org/10.14429/dsj.69.12637
Coggan J, Gao F, Stead D, Elmo D (2012) Numerical modelling of the effects of weak immediate
roof lithology on coal mine roadway stability. Int J Coal Geol 90–91:100–109. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.coal.2011.11.003
Cui J, Hao H, Shi Y (2017) Discussion on the suitability of concrete constitutive models for high-
rate response predictions of RC structures. Int J Impact Eng 106:202–216. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.ijimpeng.2017.04.003
Dally JW, Fourney WL, Holloway DC (1975) Application of dynamic photoelasticity to excavation
technology. Recent Adv Eng Sci 7:19–28
Fleetwood KG, Villaescusa E, Li J (2009) Limitations of suing PPV damage models to predict rock
mass damage. International Society of Explosive Engineers
Forsyth WW (1993) A discussion on the blast induced overbreak around underground excava-
tions.Proceedings of 4th Int. Symp on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting 161–166
Gao Q, Lu W, Yan P, Hu H, Yang Z, Chen M (2019) Effect of initiation location on distribution
and utilization of explosion energy during rock blasting. Bull Eng Geol Env 78(5):3433–3447.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-018-1296-4
Gómez S, Sanchidrián JA, Segarra P (2020) Near-field vibration from blasting and rock damage
prediction with a full-field solution. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 134:104357. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.ijrmms.2020.104357
Gong F-Q, Si X-F, Li X-B, Wang S-Y (2019a) Dynamic triaxial compression tests on sandstone
at high strain rates and low confining pressures with split Hopkinson pressure bar. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 113:211–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.12.005
Gorai AK, Himanshu VK, Santi C (2021) Development of ANN-based universal predictor for
prediction of blast-induced vibration indicators and its performance comparison with existing
empirical models. Mining Metallurgy Explorat. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-021-00449-0
Gong F, Zhao G, Zhang Q, Wu W (2019b) Dynamic failure characteristics and behavior of rock
materials. Adv Civ Eng 2019:1–2. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6972053
Gui YL, Zhao ZY, Zhou HY, Goh ATC, Jayasinghe LB (2017) Numerical simulation of rock blasting
induced free field vibration. Procedia Eng 191:451–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.
05.203
Hajihassani M, Jahed Armaghani D, Marto A, Tonnizam Mohamad E. (2015a) Vibrations au sol
prédiction dans quarry dynamitage à travers un réseau neural artificiel optimisé par une concur-
rence impérialiste algorithme. Bull Eng Geo Environ 74(3):873–886. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10064-014-0657-x
Hajihassani M, Jahed Armaghani D, Monjezi M, Mohamad ET, Marto A (2015b) Blast-induced air
and ground vibration prediction: a particle swarm optimization-based artificial neural network
approach. Environ Earth Sci 74(4):2799–2817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4274-1
He C, Yang J (2019) Experimental and numerical investigations of dynamic failure process in rock
under blast loading. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 83(3):552–564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.
2018.08.047
Himanshu VK, Mishra AK, Roy MP, Vishwakarma AK, Singh PK (2021) Numerical simulation
J Rock Mech Min Sci 144: 104816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2021.104816
Himanshu VK, Mishra AK, Vishwakarma AK, Roy MP, Singh PK (2022) Explicit dynamics based
numerical simulation approach for assessment of impact of relief hole on blast induced defor-
mation pattern in an underground face blast. Geomech Geophy for Geo-Energy and Geo-Resour
8:19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40948-021-00327-5
Hu Y, Lu W, Chen M, Yan P, Zhang Y (2015) Numerical simulation of the complete rock blasting
response by SPH-DAM-FEM approach. Simul Model Pract Theory 56:55–68. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.simpat.2015.04.001
Hustrulid W, Lu W (2003) The Lu-Hustrulid approach for calculating the peak particle velocity
caused by blasting. In: Explosives and blasting technique. Taylor and Francis, pp 291–300.
https://doi.org/10.1201/9781439833476.ch36
International Society of Explosives Engineers (2011) ISEE blasters’ handbook. International Society
of Explosives Engineers, Cleveland, Ohio
Jaiswal A (2018) Ansys training material. https://www.scribd.com/document/388146000/ANSYS-
Explicit-Dynamics-Ashish-Jaiswal-pdf
Jimeno Carlos L, Jimeno Emilio L, Ayala Carcedo Francisco J, Yvonne Visser de R (1987) Drilling
and blasting of rocks, 1st ed. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315141435
Konya CJ, Walter EJ (1990) Surface blast design. Prentice Hall
Khandelwal M, Singh TN (2009) Prediction of blast-induced ground vibration using artificial neural
network. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 46(7): 1214–1222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2009.
03.004
Kutter HK, Fairhurst C (1971) On the fracture process in blasting. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech
Abstracts 8(3):181–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(71)90018-0
Kumar R, Choudhury D, Bhargava K (2014) Prediction of Blast-Induced Vibration Parameters for
Soil Sites. Int J Geomech. 14(3):04014007. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gm.1943-5622.000
0355
Kumar R, Choudhury D, Bhargava K (2016) Determination of blast-induced ground vibration
equations for rocks using mechanical and geological properties. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng
8(3):341–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2015.10.009
Langefors U, Kihlstrom B (1963) The modern technique of rock blasting. Wiley
Leng Z, Sun J, Lu W, Xie X, Jia Y, Zhou G, Chen M (2021) Mechanism of the in-hole detonation wave
interactions in dual initiation with electronic detonators in bench blasting operation. Comput
Geotech 129:103873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2020.103873
Li XP, Huang JH, Luo Y, Dong Q, Li YH, Wan Y, Liu TT (2017) Numerical simulation of blast
vibration and crack forming effect of rock-anchored beam excavation in deep underground
caverns. Shock Vib. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/1812080
Liu Y, Wei J, Ren T (2016) Analysis of the stress wave effect during rock breakage by pulsating
jets. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49(2):503–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-015-0753-7
Ma GW, An XM (2008) Numerical simulation of blasting-induced rock fractures. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 45(6):966–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2007.12.002
Maji V, Adugna A (2016) Numerical modeling of tunneling induced ground deformation and its
control. Int J Min Geo-Eng 50(2):183–188. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijmge.2016.59827
Mishra AK, Rout M, Singh DR, Jana SP (2018) Influence of Gassing Agent and Density on Deto-
nation Velocity of Bulk Emulsion Explosives. Geotech Geol Eng 36(1):89–94. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10706-017-0308-7
Onederra I, Esen S (2004) An alternative approach to determine the Holmberg-Persson constants
for modelling near field peak particle velocity attenuation. Fragblast 8(2):61–84. https://doi.org/
10.1080/13855140412331336151
Pal A (2015) https://www.slideshare.net/abhijitpal00/research-on-mean-partical-size-after-drilling-
blasting-by-abhijit-pal
Pal Roy P (2005) Rock blasting effects and operations. Oxford and IBH Publishing Company Pvt.
Ltd.
Pal Roy P (2007) Technical guidelines for controlled blasting
References 47
Pan B, Wang X, Xu Z, Guo L, Wang X (2021) Experimental and numerical study of fracture behavior
of rock-like material specimens with single pre-set joint under dynamic loading. Materials
14(10):2690. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14102690
Persson PA, Lundborg N, Johansson SH (1970) The basic mechanism of blasting. 2nd Cong ISRM,
Belgrade 3(5):19–33
Porter DD, Fairhurst C (1970) A study of crack propagation produced by the sustained borehole
pressure in Blastin. In: Dynamic rock mechanics, AIME, New York
Pramanik R, Deb D (2015) Implementation of smoothed particle hydrodynamics for detonation
of explosive with application to rock fragmentation. Rock Mech Rock Eng 48(4):1683–1698.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-014-0657-y
Prasad U, Mohanty B, Nemes JA (2000) Dynamic fragmentation of selected rocks under impact
loading. In: North American rock mechanics symposium, Seattle, Washington, pp 577–581
Renjie W, Haibo L, Xiaofeng L, Xiang X, Liwang L (2020) Experimental study and numerical simu-
lation of the dynamic behavior of transversely isotropic phyllite. Int J Geomech 20(8):4020105.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001737
Rezaeineshat A, Monjezi M, Mehrdanesh A, Khandelwal M (2020) Optimization of blasting design
in open pit limestone mines with the aim of reducing ground vibration using robust techniques.
Geomech Geophy for Geo-Energy and Geo-Resour 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40948-020-
00164-y
Rustan RA (1992) Burden, spacing and borehole diameter at rock blasting. Int J Surf Min Reclam
Environ 6(3):141–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/09208119208944329
Sanchidrián JA, López LM (2006) Calculation of the energy of explosives with a partial reaction
model. Comparison with cylinder test data. Prop Explos Pyrotech 31(1):25–32. https://doi.org/
10.1002/prep.200600003
Sanchidrián JA, Castedo R, López LM, Segarra P, Santos AP (2015) Determination of the JWL
constants for ANFO and emulsion explosives from cylinder test data. Central Eur J Energ Mater
12(2):177–194
Sengani F (2020) Fundamental principles of rock fracturing at the vicinity of preconditioned blast
hole. Arch Min Sci 65:769–786. https://doi.org/10.24425/ams.2020.134146
Shahrin MI, Abdullah RA, Jeon S, Jeon B, Sa’Ari R (2019) Numerical simulation of rock frag-
mentation by blasting using discrete element method and particle blast method. IOP Conf Ser:
Mater Sci Eng 527(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/527/1/012032
Shockey DA, Curran DR, Seaman L, Rosenberg JT, Petersen CF (1974) Fragmentation of rock
under dynamic loads. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstracts 11(8):303–317. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0148-9062(74)91760-4
Shukla N, Mishra MK (2020) Experimental evaluation of failure characteristics of coal using 2D
digital image correlation approach. Arab J Geosci 13(20). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-020-
06044-9
Singh PK, Roy MP, Paswan RK, Sarim M, Kumar S, Jha RR (2016) Rock fragmentation control
in opencast blasting. J Rock Mech Geotec Eng 8(2):225–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.
2015.10.005
Silva J, Worsey T, Lusk B (2019) Practical assessment of rock damage due to blasting. Int J Min
Sci Technol 29(3):379–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2018.11.003
Tan L, Ren T, Yang X, He X (2020) Numerical study on the fracture characteristics and failure
mode of hard coal under coupled static and dynamic loads. E3S Web Conf 192. https://doi.org/
10.1051/e3sconf/202019204002
Torbica S, Lapcevic V (2014) Model for estimating blasted rock fragmentation. Int Multidiscip Sci
GeoConf Surv Geol Min Ecol Manag, SGEM 3(1):379–386. https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2014/
b13/s3.050
Trivino LF, Mohanty B (2015) Assessment of crack initiation and propagation in rock from
explosion-induced stress waves and gas expansion by cross-hole seismometry and FEM–DEM
method. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 77:287–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2015.03.036
Wang J, Yin Y, Luo C (2018) Johnson-Holmquist-II(JH-2) constitutive model for rock materials:
parameter determination and application in tunnel smooth blasting. Appl Sci (Switzerland) 8(9).
https://doi.org/10.3390/app8091675
Wen S, Zhang C, Chang Y, Hu P (2020) Dynamic compression characteristics of layered rock mass
of significant strength changes in adjacent layers. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 12(2):353–365.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2019.09.003
Wu S, Zhang S, Guo C, Xiong L (2017) A generalized nonlinear failure criterion for frictional
materials. Acta Geotech 12(6):1353–1371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-017-0532-6
Yang R, Bawden WF, Katsabanis PD (1996) A new constitutive model for blast damage. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstracts 33(3):245–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(95)000
64-X
Yunoshev AS, Plastinin AV, Sil’vestrov VV (2012) Effect of the density of an emulsion explosive
on the reaction zone width. Combust Explos Shock Waves 48(3):319–327
Yang P, Lei Q, Xiang J, Latham JP, Pain C (2020) Numerical simulation of blasting in confined
fractured rocks using an immersed-body fluid-solid interaction model. Tunnell Undergr Space
Technol 98(July 2019):103352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2020.103352
Yilmaz O, Unlu T (2014) An application of the modified Holmberg-Persson approach for tunnel
blasting design. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 43:113–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2014.
04.009
Zhang ZX (2016) Rock fracture and blasting. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2014-0-01408-6
Zhang Z, Gao W, Li K, Li B (2020) Numerical simulation of rock mass blasting using particle flow
code and particle expansion loading algorithm. Simul Model Pract Theory 104:102119. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2020.102119
Chapter 4
Drivage Excavation Using Drilling
and Blasting
Abstract The drivage excavation in underground mine is done to make the access
to the orebody. The excavation is dominantly performed using drilling and blasting.
The burn-cut blasting pattern is used in all the Indian metalliferous mines to make
drivages. The pattern consists of a set of holes to be blasted against the free face
provided by relief/reamer holes. The design parameters in burn-cut face blasting
include drilling pattern (burden, spacing, blasthole diameter, relief hole diameter,
number of blastholes, number of relief holes, number of dummy holes, etc.), charging
pattern and firing pattern. These design parameters need to be designed based on
the assessment of rock mass properties at the site. The numerical simulation and
nearfield ground vibration waveform analysis may be advantageous in the designing
of blasting pattern of drivage blasting to obtain optimum breakage. The delay pattern
and maximum charge weight pre-delay for cut and perimeter of the blasting face
can be optimized using these tools. With the technological advancements, the bulk
emulsion explosives with varying densities have evolved in the recent days. Such
explosives provide flexibility to the blast designers to optimize the charging pattern
to get optimum damage.
4.1 Introduction
The major challenge with the blasting for the excavation of tunnels or drivages of
an underground metal mine is to achieve the optimum pull with the reduction in
over break. The blasting for a drivage excavation also comes with the operational
challenges due to the presence of limited free face in single direction only. The
principle and methodology for the drivage excavation and tunnel excavation are
similar. The tunnel excavation is carried out using the wedge-cut or burn-cut pattern.
In wedge-cut pattern, the horizontal holes are drilled at an angle of about 60°, such
that they came closer at one end to form a wedge (Mei et al. 2021; Ramulu 2012; Rana
et al. 2022; Venkatesh et al. 2018). All the drivages/face blasting operation in Indian
underground metalliferous mines are carried out using burn-cut pattern. This pattern
has a set of cut holes containing empty (relief/reamer) and blastholes. The relief
holes work to provide additional free face to ensure tensile breakage in this pattern.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2645-9_4
50 4 Drivage Excavation Using Drilling and Blasting
This is required to maximize the explosive energy utilization and thereby obtaining
the optimum pull from the face blast (Adhikari 1994; Gupta et al. 1991; Murthy and
Dey 2002; Verma et al. 2018). The diameter of relief holes is generally kept more
than that of the blastholes. Allen (2014) emphasized in the research findings that
the lengthen relief holes will result into the improvement of pull-in burn-cut pattern.
Singh (1995) further suggested that the dimension of reamer holes, including their
diameter, number, depth and relief area, plays a significant role in achieving the
optimum damage due to blasting. Further, the optimum dimensions of relief hole
diameter would be different under varying physico-mechanical properties of rock
(Liu and Qiu 2020; Salum and Murthy 2019; Murthy and Dey 2002). Sharma (2005)
studied the impact of multiple reamer holes on the results of a face blast. It was
concluded in this study that the multiple number of relief holes will be more effective
than the single large diameter hole to prevent freezing in the spongy rock mass.
The rock mass properties, viz. uniaxial dynamic compressive strength, uniaxial
dynamic tensile strength, elastic modulus, Poisson’s ratio, etc., have foremost impact
on the induced damage profile from a face blast. The prior assessment of these
parameters helps the blast designers in estimating the optimum blast design pattern.
The P-wave and S-wave velocities of the rock strata are another important param-
eter. The optimum detonation velocity of the explosive for blasting in a rock is
decided by the prior assessment of the ultrasonic velocities (Verma et al. 2018).
The results of drivage blasting for underground metalliferous mining are also influ-
enced by the insitu stresses. Researchers found in their study that the pre-stressed
strata shows higher overbreak under the similar conditions of the explosive loading
(Abdel-Meguid et al. 2003; Mandal and Singh, 2009; Xiao et al. 2019). Mandal and
Singh (2009) suggested to do excavations in small sections and phase-wise to reduce
the overbreak under such conditions. Verma et al. (2016) highlighted the role of the
discontinuities in the rock strata in the blasting results from a tunnel blast. Authors
correlated the parameters such as Q system, rock mass rating (RMR), rock quality
designation (RQD) and core recovery (CR) with the resulting overbreak from the
blast.
The optimum explosive parameters are selected for a face blast based on the results
of the assessment of the rock mass. The suitable explosive quantity and quality are
selected for maximizing the pull and minimizing the overbreak. Researchers have
outlined the role of charging parameters and initiation sequence on the blast-induced
damage pattern. Mandal et al. (2005) found that the magnitude of overbreak enhances
with the decrement in the delay interval. Bullock (2013) highlighted the role of the
velocity of detonation (VOD) of the explosive on induced damage pattern from
blasting. Authors suggested to use the low VOD explosives for the blast in the
spongy (plastic) nature of rock compared to the brittle nature of the rock. The excess
scattering in the delay detonators significantly influences the profile of breakage in
the face blast. The scattering leads to the improper detonation of the charged blast
holes and thereby influences the creation of the required cut for the progressive
initiation round. Vishwakarma et al. (2020) found that the scattering in the delay
detonators impacts the resulting pull as well as enhances the overbreak. The profile
of excavation in the face blast is affected by several other parameters such as the
4.2 Elements of Burn-Cut Blast Design 51
magnitude of deviation in the drill holes and hole spacing (Cardu and Seccatore 2016;
Singh 2018). The detailed discussion regarding the burn-cut face blasting pattern,
measurement of face blasting outputs and optimization of face blasting pattern has
been made in different sections of this chapter.
4.2 Elements of Burn-Cut Blast Design
The burn-cut face blasting design consists of a set of blastholes and reamer holes.
The reamer holes are mostly of larger diameter than that of the blastholes and
are kept uncharged during the process of blasting. The blastholes of the burn-cut
pattern are classified as—cut holes, easers, lifters and perimeter holes. The blast-
holes surrounding the reamer holes are termed as cut holes. These cut holes are fired
against the free face provided by reamer holes. The judicious drill design and firing
pattern for cut holes are important to achieve the maximum pull from the face blast.
Once the firing of cut holes is completed, the easers are fired along the free face
created by the cut portion. The lifters are placed in the bottom of the face. They are
fired either in the last or before the firing of the perimeter holes. The perimeter holes
play important role in the reduction of overbreak during face blasting. Accordingly,
the longer delay interval is provided in the perimeter holes. The longer delay interval
works to provide sufficient relief to the blastholes and thereby ensure tensile breakage
of the rock mass. Sometimes line drilling is also done along the perimeter holes to
reduce the overbreak. These line drilling holes are kept uncharged, and work for
reducing the superposition of stress waves from different blastholes. A sample face
blasting design with the positions of reamer, cut, easer, perimeter and line drilling
holes is shown in Fig. 4.1. The position of reamer and cut holes in a drivage blasting
face of an underground mine are shown in Fig. 4.2.
The arrangement of blastholes is changed as per the site requirement. The rules
of thumb for burn-cut face blasting pattern have been developed over the years by
blasting practitioners. These rule of thumbs states that the burden/spacing for easer
holes should be in the range of 16–22 times of the blasthole diameter. It should be
in the range of 13–17 times the blasthole diameter for perimeter holes. The reamer
holes should be chosen such that it provides void of about 15% of the overall drivage
face (Dyno Nobel Underground Manual 2004). However, the blasting practitioners
judiciously change these parameters to achieve the optimum output from the face
blast.
Fig. 4.1 View of arrangements of blastholes and reamer holes in burn-cut face blasting pattern
Fig. 4.2 View of arrangement of cut holes and reamer holes in an underground drivage
4.3 Measurement of Outputs from Underground Drivage

Blasting
The outputs from a drivages blasting are measured in terms of fragmentation, pull
achieved and overbreak. The measured output is analysed, and parametric variations
in blast design are done to improve the output. The fragmentation analysis from the
4.3 Measurement of Outputs from Underground Drivage Blasting 53
face blast is carried out using image analysis. The images of blasted muckpile are
taken for this purpose. The size distribution of the fragmented rock is analysed. A
view of fragmentation output from an underground drivage face blast is shown in
Fig. 4.3. The optimum fragmentation output helps the mine management in reducing
the cost of downstream processes, viz. loading and breaking. The fragmentation is not
an issue in most of the cases of face blasting. This is because the charge concentration
in a small area of face blasting is very high.
The pull and overbreak measurements from the face blasting are done using
survey equipment. The conventional way to assess the pull and overbreak is by using
total station-based survey. During recent times, the scanning systems have evolved,
which are capable of measuring these parameters more accurately and efficiently.
The comparison of drivage profile before and after blasting can be done using these
scanners. A view of drivage profiling after blast using cavity monitoring system
(CMS) scanner for an underground mine is shown in Fig. 4.4.
The reduced pull from the blast also pose safety threats. Sometimes, when the
pull from a blast face is below 50%, then there is formation of socket in the post-blast
faces. There may be a possibility of the presence of unburnt explosive cartridge or
detonator inside such sockets. These unburnt cartridges may detonate while hole
cleaning operation performed by a miner. So, the adequate inspection of sockets
Fig. 4.3 Rock fragmentation output from a drivage face blast
(a) Development face blast (b) Haulage Drive
Fig. 4.4 View of drivage profiling using cavity monitoring system

Fig. 4.5 View of assessment

of socket in a blasted face
after the blasts is required. The sockets should be inspected physically. A view of
the inspection of socket in a blasted drivage face is shown in Fig. 4.5.
4.4 Optimization of Drivage Blasting Pattern
The optimum output from a face blasting pattern can be achieved by assessing the
rock–explosive interaction behaviour and thereby designing the blasting pattern.
The rock mass damage in this operation is optimized to enhance pull and reduce
overbreak.
For the purpose of pull enhancement, the requirement of detonation pres-
sure/borehole pressure in cut portion of the face blast is more. To enhance the borehole
pressure in this region, the explosive charge with high density, high velocity of deto-
nation (VOD) and better coupling are used. Sometimes two or more blastholes are
detonated simultaneously to increase the resultant tensile breakage in the cut portion.
However, the care is required while deciding the number of blastholes firing simul-
taneously in the cut portion. As the firing of larger number of holes simultaneously
may lead to over-damage in the cut portion, and thereby the explosives of the easer
holes would be unutilized, which may result into the reduction of pull and enhance-
ment in overbreak. The number and diameter of reamer holes also affect the resultant
pull from the cut portion of the drivage blasting. Himanshu et al. (2022) found in the
study that the extent of damage in the cut portion of the face blasting increases with
the increment in number and diameter of reamer holes. Authors suggested that the
blast face shows more controlled deformation while using multiple number of relief
holes of optimum diameter as compared to a single large diameter relief hole. The
comparison of extent of deformation due to cut hole blasting under relief provided
by varying diameter and numbers of reamer holes is shown in Fig. 4.6. Jimeno et al.
(1987) also emphasized that the single large diameter relief hole provides more relief
4.4 Optimization of Drivage Blasting Pattern 55
Fig. 4.6 Comparison of 25
Extent of damage in perephery (m2)

extent of deformation in rock
mass for burn-cut
20
development face blast under
different variations of relief
holes (Himanshu et al. 2022) 15
10
1 relief hole
2 relief holes
5 3 relief holes
4 relief holes
0
0 50 100 150 200
Diameter of relief holes (mm)
than the multiple numbers of relief holes. Authors proposed a relationship for equiv-
alent diameter of a single relief hole compared to the multiple number of relief holes.
The relationship is shown in Eq. 4.1
eq √
φR = n × φR , (4.1)
where
eq
φR = equivalent diameter of relief hole
n = number of relief holes
φR = diameter of relief holes.
The overbreak control in drivage face blasting pattern is mainly dependent on the
damage induced by perimeter holes. Therefore, designing of charging pattern and
delay sequence of perimeter holes are important to reduce overbreak from the face
blasting. The insufficient breakage of rock mass in cut or easer portion of the burn-cut
pattern may also result into the overbreak. This is mainly because of unavailability
of sufficient free face for the perimeter holes. To reduce the overbreak, the decoupled
explosive charge is used in the perimeter holes of the burn-cut pattern. The firing
sequence is also designed to reduce the maximum charge weight per delay, and
thereby resulting vibration in the periphery of the face. The vibration is required to
be reduced below the critical vibration limit to control damage in order to reduce
overbreak. The low-density explosives are also used in perimeter holes to reduce the
resultant damage beyond the line of breakage.
With the advancements in explosive products, the bulk emulsion explosives are
being charged in drivage blasting faces of different underground mine. Such bulk
emulsion explosives come with different density and velocity. The density and VOD
of bulk emulsion explosive used at Indian Underground Lead–Zinc mine are given
in Table 4.1 (Saw and Dasgupta 2022).
Table 4.1 Properties of bulk emulsion explosive used at Indian Lead–Zinc underground mine (Saw
and Dasgupta 2022)
Properties
Density (gm/cc) 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2
Critical diameter (mm) 38 38 38 38 42
Velocity of detonation (m/s) 4500 4900 5300 5700 6200
Relative weight strength (RWS) 72 78 85 92 98
Relative bulk strength (RBS) 72 89 106 127 147
Sleep time 7 days
The variability in the density and VOD gives the flexibility to the blast designers
to better plan the blast. The detonation pressure exerted by the explosive is a function
of density and VOD. The relationship among the detonation pressure, density and
VOD of explosive is given in Eq. 4.2.

ρe × VOD2 × 106
Pd = , (4.2)
4
where
Pd = Detonation pressure (MPa)
ρe = Density of explosive (kg/m3 )
VOD = Velocity of detonation (m/s).
The detonation pressure gets transferred as borehole pressure on the blasthole
wall during the process of blasting. The transfer amount is dependent on the rock
type, explosive coupling and confinement. The explosive charge with high detonation
pressure is charged in the cut portion, and with low detonation pressure is charged
in the perimeter holes of the burn-cut pattern. This ensures the generation of low
borehole pressure in the periphery region and thereby reduces the overbreak.
4.4.1 Numerical Simulation and Prediction of Damages

from Drivage Blasting
The blast design pattern for optimum damage from a drivage blasting would be
different under varying physico-mechanical properties of rock strata. Numerical
simulation may be a comprehensive tool to optimize the blast design pattern. In the
simulation study, the numerical model with input rock mass parameters and explo-
sive parameters is prepared. The blast design pattern is varied in different models,
and output damages are evaluated. The design pattern is optimized to get enhanced
pull and reduced overbreak under the prevailing rock mass condition.
Himanshu et al. (2022) optimized the cut hole blasting pattern for drivage blasting
in an Indian Lead–Zinc underground mine using numerical simulation. The drivages
at this mine are usually of 4.0 m × 5.0 m dimension. The blastholes are drilled in the
burn-cut pattern to make the drivages. The burn-cut pattern at the mine incorporates
drilling of the blastholes of diameter 40 mm and drilling length of 4.0 m. The existing
burn-cut blasting pattern at the site consists of 56 charged blastholes of 40 mm
diameter with 04 relief holes of 89 mm diameter. The existing drilling and blasting
pattern practised at this mine site are shown in Fig. 4.7.
To optimize the blast design pattern of this site, the numerical simulation with
varying diameter and numbers of relief holes was carried out. The extent of damage
was assessed under different parametric variations. A view of the extent of damage
due to blasting of cut holes with four relief holes of different diameter is shown in
Fig. 4.8 (Himanshu et al. 2022).
There were issues of socket formation as well as overbreak from the face blast
at the site using the existing blast design pattern. The identification of sockets was
made to investigate the cause of its formation. Most of the sockets were in the holes
near the cut portion, which reveals that there was overbreak while blasting the cut
portion. This overbreak might have caused to restrict the detonation of the nearby
charged blastholes, which have resulted in the socket formation. The overbreak may
be due to the unavailability of proper void for relief. This might have led to excessive
Fig. 4.7 Existing drilling and blasting patterns practised at the experimental development faces of
the study site (Himanshu et al. 2022)
Fig. 4.8 Damage due to firing of cut holes against four relief holes of different diameter (Himanshu
et al. 2022)
damage around the cut portion resulted into improper blast. The extent of damage
output from the numerical model has been compared to estimate the optimum cut
blasting pattern to reduce the damage due to the blast of cut holes. The extent is due
to the simultaneous detonation of thirteen blastholes. The numerical simulation with
the practical delay timing is not possible with the Ansys-Explicit Dynamics module.
Hence, simultaneous detonation was provided in the model to all the cut blastholes.
Based on the dependency of rock breakage on critical peak particle velocity (Holm-
berg and Persson 1978), the blast-induced damage can be considered proportional
to the maximum charge per delay (MCPD). Accordingly, the damage while firing of
two blastholes of cut simultaneously will be 1/6.5th of that of the simulation results.
The extent of damage using this computation for the firing of two cut holes simul-
taneously against four relief holes of 115 mm diameter will be 2.4 square metres.
Accordingly, the deformation will be 0.1 m more than the cut boundary extent using
this pattern. Hence, this pattern can be considered optimum for the blasting face of
the study site. Based on this result, the cut hole pattern of the blast design for the site
was revised. The revised pattern consisted of four relief holes of 115 mm diameter.
The number of cut holes firing simultaneously was also reduced to two in the revised
pattern (Himanshu et al. 2022). The revised blast design pattern for the study site is
given in Fig. 4.9.
4.4.2 Designing of Delay Pattern for Drivage Blasting Using

Nearfield Ground Vibration Monitoring Results
The nearfield ground vibration waveform is also helpful in the designing of optimum
blasting pattern for face blasting. The ground vibration for such case needs to be
monitored as near from the blasting face as possible. The ground vibration waveform
at distant locations is due to the superposition of the waves from different delays.
There is possibility of superposition due to reflection and refraction of waves due to
change in media at far-field distances as well. So, the attempt needs to be made to
record the vibration upto the distance where heterogeneity is not at a larger scale.
To compare the nearfield ground vibration waveform, the geophones must be
placed in the similar fashion in each case. The optimization of delay pattern for the
Fig. 4.9 Revised blast design based on the results of the numerical simulation and waveform
analysis (Himanshu et al. 2022)
blast design shown in Fig. 4.7 was carried out by monitoring the nearfield ground
vibration. For this purpose, the geophones were placed on the same level of the mine
at which blast was conducted. It was placed using Plaster of Paris (PoP). A view of
vibration monitoring at different locations in the underground is shown in Fig. 4.10.
The waveform analysis of recorded nearfield vibration data was carried out to
explore the possibility of design modifications for the reduction of overbreak. The
recorded waveform for an experimental development face blast is shown in Fig. 4.11.
The analysis of the recorded waveform shows two sharp peaks of vibration. One peak
is due to the blast of cut holes, and another is due to the blast of perimeter holes.
The vibration peaks have been compared with the face blasting pattern shown in
Fig. 4.7. The peak due to the blast of cut holes is because of the firing of four cut
holes simultaneously against the insufficient free face generated by relief holes of
89 mm diameter. The peak due to the firing of perimeter holes can be considered
the main reason behind the overbreak due to the blast. The review of the existing
blast design reveals that the number of holes blasted at delay no. 21 and 22 is 16
and 15, respectively, which increased the charge weight per delay, thereby increasing
vibration in the nearby line of extraction in the development face. The increased level
of vibration will result in enhanced over break. So, the design needed to be modified
to distribute the delay sequence such that the charge weight per delay along periphery
holes should be reduced. Accordingly, the maximum of 8 blastholes was suggested
to be fired in the blast design, thereby reducing the MCPD by half in the revised blast
design pattern shown in Fig. 4.9. This waveform was recorded at a distance of 30 m
from the blast face (Himanshu et al. 2022).
Fig. 4.10 A view of nearfield blast vibration monitoring at different underground locations
Fig. 4.11 Recorded nearfield vibration waveform from a drivage blasting face using the blast design
pattern shown in Fig. 4.7 (Himanshu et al. 2022)
4.5 Summary 61
Fig. 4.12 Recorded waveform for the drivages blasting using blast design pattern shown in Fig. 4.9
(Himanshu et al. 2022)
The waveform at a distance of 30 m from the blast face was also recorded after
the blast using the revised blast design pattern shown in Fig. 4.9. The resulting
waveform is shown in Fig. 4.12. The waveform analysis shows that the vibration
magnitude has come down to 10 mm/s compared to the 40 mm/s vibrations shown
in Fig. 4.11. The waveform analysis also reveals that the variation in magnitude
of vibration while blasting of different cuts is relatively uniform. This leads to the
controlled deformation of the rock mass. Hence, the redesigned blasting pattern is
optimal for the study site (Himanshu et al. 2022).
4.5 Summary
The techniques of underground drivage blasting along with their blast design opti-
mization have been discussed in this chapter. Following are the summary of the
discussions made in this chapter:
I. Drivage excavation in Indian condition is done using burn-cut drilling and
blasting pattern.
II. The cut hole pattern in burn-cut influences the induced pull significantly. Hence,
the optimization of cut portion including the dimensions of relief and blastholes
is necessary. Such optimization may be carried out using numerical simulation
and waveform analysis of nearfield ground vibrations.
III. The optimization of delay pattern for periphery holes is necessary to reduce
blast-induced overbreak. The waveform analysis of nearfield ground vibration
may be helpful in optimizing delay patterns for the periphery holes.
References
Abdel-Meguid M, Rowe RK, Lo KY (2003) Three-dimensional analysis of unlined tunnels in rock

subjected to high horizontal stress. Can Geotech J 40(6):1208–1224. https://doi.org/10.1139/
t03-057
Adhikari GR (1994) Controlled blasting in tunnel—some issues. Tras Inst Engineers (I), MN 75:56
Allen MR (2014) An analysis of burn cut pull optimization through varying relief hole depths.
Thesis submitted to Missouri University of Science and Technology
Bullock RL (2013) Tunneling and underground construction
Cardu M, Seccatore J (2016) Quantifying the difficulty of tunnelling by drilling and blasting. Tunn
Undergr Space Technol 60:178–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2016.08.010
Dyno Nobel Underground Manual (2004)
Gupta RN, Singh RB, Adhikari GR (1991) Controlled blasting for underground excavations. Int
J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstracts 28(2–3):A101. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-906
2(91)92477-g
numerical simulation approach for assessment of impact of relief hole on blast induced deforma-
tion pattern in an underground face blast. Geomech Geophys Geo-Energy Geo-Resour 8(1):19.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40948-021-00327-5
Holmberg R, Persson P 1978. The Swedish approach to contour blasting. In: Proceedings of 4th
annual conference on explosives and blasting research. International Society of Explosives
Engineers, pp 113–127
Jimeno Carlos L, Jimeno Emilio L, Ayala Carcedo Francisco J, Yvonne Visser de R (1987) Drilling
and blasting of rocks, 1st ed. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315141435
Liu K, Qiu J (2020) Investigation of burn cut parameters and model for one-step raise excavation
based on damage evolution mechanisms. Geofluids 2020:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/
8879477
Mandal SK, Singh MM (2009) Evaluating extent and causes of overbreak in tunnels. Tunnell
Undergro Space Technol 24(1):22–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2008.01.007
Mandal SK, Singh MM, Bhagat NK (2005) Causes of overbreak and influence of blast parameters
for smooth undamaged wall. In: International symposium on advances in mining technology
and management, IIT, Kharagpur, pp 49–58
Mei J, Zhang W, Xu B, Zhu Y, Wang B (2021) Experimental study of blasting excavation for large
cross-section tunnel in horizontal layered rock mass. Preprint: Research Square. https://doi.org/
10.21203/rs.3.rs-180296/v1
Murthy VMSR, Dey K (2002) Development of predictive models for blast-induced rock damage
assessment (BIRD) in tunnels. MHRD Project No: MHRD (27)/99-00/111/ME:12–43
Ramulu M (2012) Blast optimisation with In Situ rock mass characterization by seismic profiling
at an opencast coal mine in India. February, pp 387–396
Rana A, Bhagat NK, Singh A, Singh PK (2022) Predicting blast-induced pull using regression tree.
Arab J Geosci 15(2):173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-022-09452-1
Salum AH, Murthy VMSR (2019) Optimising blast pulls and controlling blast-induced excavation
damage zone in tunnelling through varied rock classes. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 85:307–
318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2018.11.029
Saw PK, Dasgupta S (2022) Selection of explosives in fully mechanised underground metaliferous
mines. Indian Min Eng J 61(02):34–37
Sharma PD (2005) Tunnel blasting—emulsion explosives and proper blast design are the
prerequisite for better efficiency. Indian J Mines Met Fuel 10
Singh SP (1995) Mechanism of cut blasting. Trans Inst Min Metall 104(A1):134–138
Singh S (2018) Overbreak control in underground mines. Rock Mech Open Access J 1(1):11–17
Venkatesh HS, Balachander R, Gopinath G (2018) Drilling and blasting of tunnels in Himalayan
geology. Tunnel Asso India (TAI) J 7(01):21–28
References 63
Verma HK, Samadhiya NK, Singh M, Prasad VVR, Goel RK (2016) Investigations of rock mass
damage induced by blasting. J Rock Mech Tunnell Technol (JRMTT) 22(1):2016–2065. www.
isrmtt.com
Verma HK, Samadhiya NK, Singh M, Goel RK, Singh PK (2018) Blast induced rock mass damage
around tunnels. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 71:149–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2017.
08.019
Vishwakarma AK, Himanshu VK, Kumar S, Roy MP (2020) Overbreak control in development
face blasting of underground metal mine—a case study. In: Proceedings of national conference
on advances in mining (AIM-2020), pp 473–482
Xiao S-Y, Su L-J, Jiang Y-J, Liu Z-X (2019) Numerical analysis of hard rock blasting unloading
effects in high in situ stress fields. Bull Eng Geol Env 78(2):867–875. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10064-017-1067-7
Chapter 5
Box-Cut Excavation and Stope Opening
Abstract The initial excavation of orebody in longhole stoping is done by driving

slot raise. Blasting for excavation of slot raise is different from the bench/ring blasting
due to the absence of sufficient free face for the movement of the blasted rock mass.
To address this issue, slot raises are excavated step-wise using drop raise method.
However, the drop raise method is time intensive and hence not feasible in order to
enhance the pace of production. So, there is utmost need for a technique to excavate
complete slot raise in a single shot. The excavation of such slot raises comes with
the challenges of face jamming, boulder generation and restricted face movements.
The additional free face using uncharged reamer holes is provided to address these
issues during the slot raise excavation. The blast design encompassing the drilling
pattern, delay design, etc., for slot raise excavation is done based on the assessments
of the rock–explosive interactions. Numerical simulation is a comprehensive tool for
such assessments. Various techniques of slot raise excavation along with the methods
for designing a slot raise blasting pattern have been discussed in this chapter. The
advanced guided slot raise drilling and blasting technique has also been explained
and compared with the conventional techniques.
5.1 Introduction
The initial excavation in the ore body is done to open the stope. Since such excavation
is to be carried out without free face, the excavation may be termed as box-cut. In cut
and fill method of stoping, the box-cut excavation is done by driving sill drivages.
These sill drivages are further extended in the operation of stoping. In longhole
stoping method, the box-cut excavation is done by driving raises. These raises work
as the free face for the accumulation of rock in the subsequent excavation stages.
There are other purposes for driving the raises such as creation of ventilation raise,
formation of raises for material/ore transfer and cable layout. The raises used as
the box-cut opening for the subsequent round of blasting are termed as slot raises
(Tatiya 2005). Such slot raises are located either on the side or in the centre of a stope
(Villaescusa 2014).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2645-9_5
66 5 Box-Cut Excavation and Stope Opening
The raise development is done using the mechanized method or by drilling

and blasting. The mechanized raise development is carried out using Raise Borer
Machines (Vishwakarma et al. 2022). Since slot raise development needs to be done
regularly for stope opening and that too at different places of the mine, so mechanized
slot raise development is a difficult task. The mechanized slot raise development will
require the frequent shifting of the machinery, which is a time- and cost-consuming
task. The mechanized slot raise development method is also not feasible to cope up
with the faster production demands. Hence, the drilling and blasting is the best-suited
alternative for the slot raise development. The drilling- and blasting-based slot raise
development methods have added advantage of lower capital cost investments.
The blasting for slot raise excavation is different from the bench/ring blasting due
to the unavailability of a free face. The free face during the slot raise excavation is
available only along the excavated drivage. To address this limitation of the limited
free face, the slot raises are excavated in multiple steps. The technique to excavate
slot raise in multiple steps is termed as drop raising or inverse drop raising (Baase
et al. 1982; Ferreira 2003; Liu and Tran 2000; Liu et al. 2019). However, this tech-
nique gives limited progress. So, there is an utmost need for the complete slot raise
excavation in single shot. This is required to enhance the production pace. The chal-
lenges for the deep slot excavation are more severe. The availability of the limited
free faces while deep slot hole excavation restricts the movements of the blasted rock
and thereby leads to the issues of face jamming, freezing and production of oversize
boulders.
Generally, the additional free faces under such blasting conditions are provided by
drilling relief/reamer holes (Singh 1995; Sharma 2005; Allen 2014). These reamer
holes work as the free face for the cut holes of the slot raise. After the excavation of
cut holes of the raise, subsequent rows are allowed to be blasted against the cavity
made by cut holes. This cavity works as the swelling space for the blasted rocks.
There is very limited literature available on the slot raise blasting pattern. The
slot raise blasting concepts have been explained in some of the research papers, viz.
Chandrakar et al. (2023), Dobran (1996), Gertsch and Bullock (1998), Mann (1998),
Pakalnis and Hughes (2011), etc. These research papers signify the similarity in the
concept of the slot raise blasting pattern with the burn-cut face blasting pattern. The
only difference between the burn-cut face blast and slot raise blast is the direction
of material movement (Liu et al. 2018). Accordingly, the idea of burn-cut face blast
can be used to overcome the challenges of jamming, freezing or boulder generation
from the slot raise blasting. The scientific blast design can be proposed to address
these issues. Such scientific blast design will include the variations in the number and
position of the reamers and blastholes, their firing sequence and the delay timings. The
formulation of the scientific design will include the assessments of rock–explosive
interactions and thereby designing of the drilling, charging and delay patterns. The
details regarding the slot raise blasting techniques and the methodology for the slot
raise blast design have been discussed in different sections of this chapter.
5.3 Drilling Pattern for Slot Raise Blasting 67
5.2 Principle of Underground Slot Raise Blasting
The slot raise excavation is carried out against the limited space provided by drivages.
The free face direction is also available only along the drivages. The additional free
face for this purpose is made using relief/reamer holes. The diameter of relief holes is
generally kept larger than that of the blastholes. The reamer holes are kept uncharged
during the process of blasting. While firing of blastholes, the relief holes works to
provide tension to the stress wave induced by blasting. Accordingly, the tensile
breakage of rock mass takes place against the relief holes.
The slot raises may be driven in a single go or in multiple rounds. In multi-round
excavation process, the bottom part of the slot raise is blasted initially. The subsequent
round of blasting takes place after plugging the hole from through part. If the slot
raises have to be blasted in one go, then it is mandatory to ensure that the proper space
is available for the excavation of muckpile generated from slot blasting. In most of
the cases, the space for muckpile accumulation is provided by excavated drivages.
If the slot raises of greater depth have to be excavated, then the additional space for
muckpile accumulation is created. At Indian Lead–Zinc underground mine sites, the
additional space is made by uphole drilling and blasting.
The blastholes for slot raise excavation are drilled vertically. The holes are through
from one level to the another level. The plugging of the blastholes is needed before
explosive charging in such cases. The plugging works to hold the explosives and
thereby prevent the possible dislodging of the explosive materials inside the open
drivages. The plugging is done using woods, plastic bottles or stem plugs. The view
of wooden plugging arrangement for slot raise excavation at an Indian underground
mine is shown in Fig. 5.1.
5.3 Drilling Pattern for Slot Raise Blasting
The drilling pattern for slot raise excavation varies with the dimension of slot to be
excavated. The diameter of blastholes is 75–115 mm. The larger diameter blastholes
provide ease in deeper hole drilling. It also reduces the drill deviation. However,
the larger diameter blastholes increase the charge concentration in smaller volume
of the excavation area, which may result into improper breakage. Accordingly, the
selection of optimum diameter suitable to the respective rock type is important. The
spacing between holes is generally kept 0.4–0.8 m. The diameter of relief/reamer
holes is in the range of 115–165 mm. The number of blastholes and reamer holes for
slot raise excavation needs to be optimized based on the strata condition. Himanshu
et al. (2021) carried out study to investigate the deformation pattern in underground
slot raise blasting. Authors suggested that the ratio of relief holes to blastholes in cut
portion of the slot raise blasting pattern should be more than 1, to get the optimum
breakage. This ratio gives more space to the cut holes for tensile breakage. The
perimeter blastholes in slot raise blasting pattern are kept in square or scattered
Fig. 5.1 View of plugging arrangement using wooden plugs at an Indian underground mine
pattern. However, the scattered pattern of perimeter blastholes gives more controlled
deformation than the square pattern. A sample slot raise blast design pattern is given
in Fig. 5.2.
5.4 Charging and Initiation of Blastholes in Slot Raise

Blasting
Charging of blastholes for slot raise excavation may be done using slurry/emulsion
explosive cartridges or site mixed emulsion (SME) explosives. The density of explo-
sive for cut holes and perimeter holes may be varied while explosive charging using
SME. The cut holes are charged with the high-density SME, whereas low-density
explosives are used in perimeter holes to control damages.
The initiation of blastholes is done either using long delay non-electric (NONEL)
delay detonators or using electronic delay detonators. Electronic delay detonators
are preferred for slot raise blasting, as it gives flexibility to the blast designers to give
timings to the blastholes. The position of initiation in slot raise blasting is also impor-
tant. If the delay detonators are put in the extreme bottom of the blasthole, then the
confinement to the explosive energy would be less. In this case, the explosive energy
utilization will reduce. So, the judicious placement of initiation point is necessary to
5.5 Delay Sequence of Blastholes for Slot Blasting Pattern 69
Fig. 5.2 Sample slot raise blast design pattern (Himanshu et al. 2021)
have optimum utilization of explosive energy. Himanshu et al. (2021) conducted the
study using numerical simulation to optimize the position of initiation system during
slot raise excavation. A comparison of the model output from this study, showing the
deformation pattern while taking initiation point in the middle of the blasthole and at
one-fourth distance from the plug in the blasthole is given in Fig. 5.3. The analysis
of deformation pattern reveals that the deformation is more uniform when the deto-
nation point has been placed at one-fourth distance of blasthole from the plug. This
is due to the tensile nature of breakage of the rock strata under blast loading. The
time taken by blast wave to reach near free face (plug portion) is much higher when
the initiation was put in the middle of the blasthole. Hence, the magnitude of tensile
breakage is lower in such case. Accordingly, it may be concluded that the detonation
point at a distance of about 20–30% of the blasthole length from plug will give the
maximum breakage under blast loading.
5.5 Delay Sequence of Blastholes for Slot Blasting Pattern
Long delay timings between the blastholes are kept in slot blasting pattern. This is
to ensure the creation of free face while blasting of subsequent blastholes. The delay
timings are optimized based on the strata demand and the depth of the blasthole. In
Fig. 5.3 Deformation contour for the blast of cut holes while placement of initiation point at
different positions (Himanshu et al. 2021)
Indian condition, the delay between holes for the cut holes of slot raise pattern is
kept in the range of 100–500 ms. The maximum charge weight per delay (MCPD) in
cut portion is kept optimum to maximize pull and minimize overbreak. The MCPD
while blasting in perimeter portion is kept minimum to avoid overbreak. The delay
sequence is arranged to ensure sequential excavation of cut holes and perimeter holes.
The sample delay timings for a slot raise blasting pattern are shown in Fig. 5.2.
5.6 Special Slot Raise Blasting Pattern
The best slot blasting practices have been reviewed from the literature. The literature
search suggests that guided slot drilling method is one of the established slot blasting
method. This concept was elaborated by M/s LKAB in Sweden. The method had been
successfully applied at the Malmberget mine of M/s LKAB, where five 200 mm (8 in.)
diameter holes are drilled adjacent to each other and are physically interconnected.
This linear slot, sometimes referred to as Swedish slot, serves as a relief volume for
blasting an inverse drop raise of up to 30 m. A view of drilled slot face using this
method is shown in Fig. 5.4.
The concept of such slot drilling is fairly straightforward. A first production hole
is drilled in a normal fashion, either reamed or directly drilled to a desired diameter.
Next, a specially designed unit with guided hammer is installed on a drill. The guide
pipe or rod is inserted into the first hole before drilling the second. Thus, the guiding
pipe keeps the second hole parallel and connected to the first one. After the second
5.7 Summary 71
Fig. 5.4 A view of drilling in guided slot drilling method
hole has been drilled, it serves as a guide hole for drilling of the third one, and so on
and so forth.
The guided slot drilling method is superior than the other slot excavation method
as in this case, whether or not there is deviation, it will always provide a true linear
slot composed of interconnected holes. To analyse the blasting outcomes under the
existing slot blasting method at Indian mines and guided slot blasting method, the
numerical simulation for two concepts under similar rock properties was carried out.
The deformation pattern for slot blasting using existing pattern is shown in Fig. 5.3.
The deformation pattern for cut hole blasting in guided slot raise blasting method is
shown in Fig. 5.5. The comparison of output deformation for these two models shows
that the guided slot raise blasting pattern gives more uniform deformation than the
existing method. The deformation analysis also suggests that there is a prospect of
further reducing the number of holes using this method. This method of slot blasting
may be applied at the mine to get the optimum breakage. A sample blast design
pattern with guided slot hole drilling is shown in Fig. 5.6.
5.7 Summary
The summary of the slot raise blasting pattern discussed in this chapter is as follows:
i. The study under Indian conditions suggests that the optimum deformation occurs
when the distance of initiation point from the plug is equal to about 20–30% of
the length of the blasthole.
ii. In drilling pattern, the uniformity in deformation has been seen when the ratio
of the number of reamer holes to blastholes is greater than one.
Fig. 5.5 Deformation pattern due to blast of cut holes in guided slot drilling pattern
Fig. 5.6 Slot blasting pattern using guided slot drilling concept
iii. The delay sequence of the blastholes for slot raise blasting should be such that
the sequential excavation is ensured.
iv. The guided slot raise blasting method is one of the advanced methods used for
maximizing damage while slot raise excavation.
References 73
References
Allen RM (2014) An analysis of burn cut pull optimization through varying relief hole depths
Baase RA, Diment WD, Petrina AJ (1982) Sublevel caving at Craigmont Mines Ltd. In:
Underground mining methods handbook, pp 898–915
Chandrakar S, Paul PS, Sawmliana C (2023) Long-hole raise blasting in a single shot: assessment
of void ratio and delay time based on experimental tests. Eng Struct 275:115272. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.115272
Dobran MF (1996) Comparison of techniques used to develop a slot raise. International Society of
Explosives Engineers, Cleveland, OH (United States)
Ferreira PH (2003) Improved technologies in longhole blast drilling, applied to drop raising and
longhole stoping as well as the application of a small twin boom mechanized drillrig. J South
Afr Inst Min Metall 103(04):233–240
Gertsch RE, Bullock RL (1998) Techniques in underground mining. In: Underground mining
methods handbook. SME
Liu Q, Tran H (2000) Techniques of inverse drop raise blasting and slot drilling. CIM Bull
93(1039):45–50
Liu K, Yang J, Li X, Hao H, Li Q, Liu Z, Wang C (2018) Study on the long-hole raising technique
using one blast based on vertical crater retreat multiple deck shots. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
109:52–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.06.020
Liu K, Li X, Hao H, Li X, Sha Y, Wang W, Liu X (2019) Study on the raising technique using one
blast based on the combination of long-hole presplitting and vertical crater retreat multiple-deck
shots. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 113:41–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.11.012
Mann CD (1998) Sublevel stoping techniques in underground mining. In: Underground mining
methods handbook, pp 223–227
Pakalnis RT, Hughes PB (2011) Sublevel stoping. In: SME mining engineering handbook, pp
1355–1363
Sharma PD (2005) Tunnel blasting—emulsion explosives and proper blast design are the
prerequisite for better efficiency. Indian J Mines, Metals Fuel 10
Singh SP (1995) Mechanism of cut blasting. Trans Inst Min Metall 104(A1):134–138
Tatiya RR (2005) Surface and underground excavations: methods, techniques and equipment. CRC
Press
Villaescusa E (2014) Geotechnical design for sublevel open stoping. CRC Press
Vishwakarma AK, Murthy VMSR, Himanshu VK, Roy MP (2022) Optimisation of operational
parameters of a raise borer machine for rock excavation in an underground metaliferous mine.
In: 9th Asian mining congress, pp 295–300
Chapter 6
Underground Ring Blasting
Abstract Ring blasting method is practised for the final excavation of rock mass
in longhole stoping. The method is advantageous in achieving the faster production
pace due to the use of large diameter drilling and blasting. However, this method has
many associated operational challenges. These challenges have been overcome using
the technological innovations. It has been possible to undertake ring blasting up to
the depths of 50 m with the help of multi-deck firing. The advent of electronic delay
detonators has given additional ease to the blast designers in planning and imple-
menting of multi-ring blasting. The selection of optimal blast geometry, charging
pattern and delay sequence is also important to obtain the desired output from a ring
blast. Various empirical, numerical and statistical models have been developed by
the researchers for the computation of these parameters. In this chapter, the process
of ring blasting and designing of blasting parameters for a ring blasting has been
discussed in detail. Some of the experimental data from the case studies at Indian
underground mines have also been discussed in this chapter.
6.1 Introduction
The ring blasting method is used for the final extraction of the orebody in long-
hole stoping. In this method, deep hole drilling and blasting are done to achieve a
faster production pace. The blasting in this method is conducted against the free face
provided by the excavated slot raises. The sufficient free faces in two or more direc-
tions are present for the accumulation of the blasted muck. Accordingly, this method
can be treated similar to the bench blasting of openpit excavation. So, the challenges
of ring blasting would also be similar to bench blasting. The major challenges are to
improve rock fragmentation, muckpile movement and to reduce ground vibration.
The flyrock ejection is not a concern in ring blasting, as the blasting area in under-
ground would be devoid of any manpower during blasting. Despite the similarities in
the challenges, the drilling of inclined holes is one of the major differences between
the ring and bench blasting patterns. Accordingly, there is a need to devise a different
method to optimize blasting parameters for the underground ring blasting.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2645-9_6
76 6 Underground Ring Blasting
The main challenge of rock fragmentation improvement can be solved by opti-

mizing charge factor and dimensional parameters. The optimum charge factor results
in the proper breakage of rock strata with minimum nuisance and maximum produc-
tivity. The decision on the optimal charge factor and dimensional parameter in
underground excavation focuses on reducing the boulder generation, accessibility
of the excavators, maintaining the sequence of excavation and ensuring safety to
the man and machinery. Researchers and underground mining practitioners have
used different methodologies to optimize the blasting pattern including the charging
parameters, dimensional parameters and delay design. The very basic empirical
formulae for assessing the optimal burden was proposed by Rustan (1992). This
relation correlates the burden for ring blasting with the hole diameter. This relation-
ship has the limitation of not using rock and explosive parameters for the estimation
of optimum burden. Also, the suitability of hole diameter for underground blasting
is decided from the productivity and safety perspective. The major factor from the
productivity perspective consists of the planned hole depth to be blasted in a round.
The larger diameter of the blasthole is more suitable for the blast of deep holes, as
the deeper hole tends to show comparatively more deviation. The expected deviation
will be lesser while using the larger diameter of blastholes. However, the smaller
diameter blasthole may be preferred to control the vibration for the safety of nearby
structures (Himanshu et al. 2018a).
Other different methods have been used by the researchers to address the limi-
tations of Rustan (1992) model. The most of the models are objective based and
suitable for a particular site. Wang et al. (2018) developed an algorithm to optimize
the charging scheme of a blast with an objective to protect brow. This algorithm
was based on Harries mathematical model and the superposition model. Duranović
et al. (2018) developed generalized empirical model for the estimation of optimum
burden for ring blasting. The model consisted of rock and explosive parameters.
Onederra (2004) developed a design evaluation model called “FRAGMENTO” for
ring blasting. Onederra and Chitombo (2007) developed a systematic approach to
assess the impacts of blast design in ring blasting on the expected fragmentation and
potential damage to the surrounding rock mass. Some of the special techniques were
also used by the blast designers to improve the blasting outputs in terms of rock
mass damage, fragmentation and reduction of ground vibration (Dorssen et al. 2002;
Sun et al. 2021; Zhang 2014; Zhang and Naarttijärvi 2005). Zhang and Wimmer
(2018) used “dividing a single blast (DSB)” method for reduction of dilution while
extraction of narrow ore deposits.
6.2 Drilling Pattern for Underground Ring Blasting
The inclined blastholes are drilled along the extent of the orebody for underground
ring blasting. However, sometimes the drilling is also required to be done in waste
to completely exploit the ore body. The caution should be taken in such cases while
charging of explosives. The inclined holes in the ring blasting are drilled from a
6.2 Drilling Pattern for Underground Ring Blasting 77
drivage opening. So, the blastholes seem to be converging at the drivages in this
pattern. Accordingly, the pattern results into the varying spacing between the holes
from toe to collar. So, the term “Toe Burden” and “Toe Spacing” are better used for
ring drilling pattern instead of “Burden” and “Spacing” of bench blasting. Toe burden
for a ring blasting pattern is defined as the distance between the ring blastholes and
excavated slot, as well as the distance between the blastholes of two rings.
The drilling geometry for ring blasting pattern consists of depth of blastholes,
blasthole diameter, toe burden and toe spacing. The complete depth between two
levels/sublevels of a longhole stope is blasted in a single go. Accordingly, the depth
of the blastholes is taken as the level difference of the stope. The optimum level
difference is selected on the basis of different criteria. The dip of the orebody is the
main criteria among them. The optimum level difference is made to reduce the cost
of crosscut development and transportation of the blasted ore upto the shaft/decline.
The optimum hole diameter for ring blasting has dependency on the depth of the
blastholes. It is difficult to drill deeper blastholes using small diameter drill holes.
As the smaller drill holes will have more tendency towards deviation, than the larger
diameter drill holes. The rock mass properties also affect the selection of optimum
diameter of drill holes. It is difficult to drill in the harder rock formations using
small diameter drill holes. From the perspective of improving the performance of a
blast, the drilling of small diameter blastholes would be more helpful. The smaller
geometry of the blast with small diameter blastholes would result into better rock
fragmentation. It will also help in reducing the maximum explosive charge weight
per delay for a blast and thereby reducing the induced ground vibration from the
blast.
The selection of optimum toe burden and toe spacing is another important param-
eter while designing the drill geometry. In bench blasting, the practitioners have
correlated the burden and spacing with the blasthole diameter. The most popular
computation method for optimum burden–spacing for ring blasting is also based on
their relationship with the blasthole diameter. This relationship has been suggested
by Rustan (1992). The empirical relation between blasthole diameter and burden
as suggested by Rustan (1992) is shown in Eq. 6.1. Rustan has also suggested the
maximum and minimum limits of the burden for this formulae. The maximum burden
should be kept 50% more than the computed burden, and the minimum burden can
be 35% less than the computed burden. Author has suggested taking toe spacing in
the range of 1.5–2.0 times of the toe burden.
Burden(in m) = 11.8 × φ 0.63 (6.1)
where
φ = Blasthole diameter (in m)
This suggested relationship however is very general in nature. So, there was a
need for optimizing the burden–spacing by investigating the rock mass properties of
the site and correlating it with the expected fragmentation from the blast. Himanshu
et al. (2021) developed an algorithm for the purpose of optimizing dimensional
parameters for ring blasting. The algorithm is based on the empirical Kuz-Ram
model. This empirical model consists of three different equations as Kuznetsov’s
equation, Uniformity index equation and Rosin–Rammler equation. Kuznetsov’s
equation correlates the mean fragment size from the blasting with rock factor and
explosive parameters. The rock factor in this equation may be computed using Lilly’s
blastability index. The uniformity index equation correlates the dimensional param-
eters of blast with an index. This index further correlates the mean fragment size
from the blasting with desired percentage of fragment to be retained on the screen of
a defined size. Authors in the developed algorithm suggested to compute rock factor
for the site of blasting using blastability index. Then to assume the expected mean
fragment size and 90% passing fragment size (Assuming that only 10% oversize
boulder is allowed from blasting). The optimum charge factor is back-calculated
using Kuznetsov’s equation with assumed mean fragment size value. Further, the
uniformity index is computed using Rosin–Rammler equation with the assumed
mean fragment size and 90% passing fragment size. The computed index is used
in uniformity index equation for back-calculating the optimum burden and spacing.
However, many assumptions are made for computing burden–spacing using this
approach. But, the approach gives an initial idea about the drilling geometry for ring
blasting under different rock mass condition.
6.3 Charging of Ring Blastholes
The charging of ring blastholes is performed either using cartridge emulsion/slurry

explosives or using site mixed emulsion (SME)/site mixed slurry (SMS) explosives
or using Ammonium Nitrate–Fuel Oil (ANFO) explosives. The explosive charging
using ANFO or SME/SMS is preferred, as it is faster as compared to the manual
charging of blastholes using cartridge explosives. The charging is performed either
from upper level to lower level (downhole charging) or from lower level to upper level
(uphole charging). Sometimes the combination of downhole and uphole charging is
used for the excavation of stopes. The compressed ANFO explosives are used for
charging in the uphole blastholes. The compression provides the adhesiveness to
the explosives, and thereby it remains intact to the blastholes. A view of explosive
charging arrangement using ANFO for an Indian underground mine is shown in
Fig. 6.1. The SME/SMS explosives with high viscosity are used for uphole charging.
The explosives come with high temperature for this purpose. The higher viscosity
of the explosives helps it to attach to the wall of blastholes and thereby works as the
resistance against free fall under gravity. A view of uphole charging using SME/SMS
at an Indian underground mine is shown in Fig. 6.2.
Since the spacing between the holes of a ring varies between toe to collar of the
blasthole, hence the spacing between the holes near the collar is very less. The uniform
charging all along the blastholes in this case will lead to over-charge concentration
at some of the zone. So, the differential charging or alternate hole charging is done
6.3 Charging of Ring Blastholes 79
Fig. 6.1 Explosive charging arrangement using ANFO for uphole charging in an Indian under-
ground mine
Fig. 6.2 Uphole explosive

charging using SME/SMS at
an underground mine
Fig. 6.3 Differential

charging pattern for ring
blasting (Himanshu et al.
2021)
in the zone with reduced spacing. A schematic of differential charging pattern for
ring blastholes is shown in Fig. 6.3.
6.3.1 Suitability of Explosive for Different Rock Strata
The breakage mechanism of rock under explosive loading includes the tensile
cracking under the impact of detonation pressure and final breakage under the impact
of gaseous energy. The optimum requirement of detonation pressure and gaseous
energy is different for the different types of rock. The elastic nature of rock requires
more detonation pressure for its state change to plasticity. The plastic (spongy) rock
type needs gaseous energy-based breakage in order to get optimum blasting output
with minimal hazards. The optimum detonation pressure for the respective rock
type is computed by evaluation of the characteristic impedance of explosive and
rock media. Characteristic impedance of explosive and rock mass represents opti-
mization of seismic amplitude. The maximum seismic amplitude can be obtained
with unit impedance coupling. This impedance coupling is the ratio of character-
istic impedance of explosive and characteristic impedance of media. This can be
determined by Eqs. 6.2 and 6.3.
Characteristic impedance of explosive

Impedance =
Characteristic impedance of media
(6.2)
(Loading density of explosive charge) × (Detonation Velocity of explosive charge)
Impednace =
(Density of rock) × (P − wave velocity of rock)
(6.3)
The evaluation of suitability of explosive for the respective rock types of an Indian
underground mine was done. For this purpose, the core samples of Ore, Garnet-
Biotite-Sillimanite-Gneiss (GBSG), Quartzite-Biotite-Gneiss (QBG) and Paste were
collected from the mine management for the assessments of rock mass properties.
Sometimes the development drivages at this underground mine are also made in paste
backfilled area. So, the suitability of explosive for blasting in paste-filled zone was
also evaluated. Density, uniaxial compressive strength (UCS), Young’s modulus,
Poisson’s ratio, P-wave velocity and S-wave velocity of the core samples were
tested at Rock Mechanics Laboratory of CSIR-CIMFR, Dhanbad, for this purpose.
Summary of the tested rock mass properties for the core samples is shown in Table
6.1.
The suitable detonation velocity for the tested rock types has been computed
considering the impedance theory. The suitable correction factor for insitu p-wave
velocity has been added during the computation. The computed detonation velocity
for each rock type is shown in Table 6.2. The computed results show that there is
requirement of very low VOD for excavations in paste. The practical availability of
such low VOD is not possible. But, for the purpose of optimization, comparatively
low VOD and low-density explosive should be preferred for blasting in paste. The
other means of reducing damages by design alteration may be explored for the
improvements in blasting outputs, while blasting in paste zone.
Table 6.1 Tested rock mass properties for different rock and paste samples
Rock type Density Uniaxial Young’s Poisson’s P-wave S-wave
(dry) compressive modulus ratio velocity velocity
(kg/m3 ) strength (MPa) (GPa) (m/s) (m/s)
Ore 3077 59 12.54 0.25 4563 2004
GBSG 2828 35 5.87 0.25 4308 1769
QBG 2660 89 14.41 0.29 3327 1658
Paste 1391 0.74 0.28 0.35 1126 826
Table 6.2 Suitable detonation velocity of explosive for different rock and paste strata
Rock type Density (dry) (kg/m3 ) P-wave velocity (m/s) Suitable detonation velocity of
explosive (m/s)
Ore 3077 4563 4500–5500
GBSG 2828 4308 4000–4500
QBG 2660 3327 3500–4000
Paste 1391 1126 < 2000
(ANFO explosive should be
preferred)
6.3.2 Charge Factor and Dimensional Parameters for Ring

Blasting
The optimum amount of explosive charge for ring blasting is to enhance rock frag-
mentation, improve muckpile distribution and reduce induced ground vibration. The
induced ground vibration may also be reduced by distributing the explosive charge
and thereby reducing the maximum explosive charge weight per delay (MCPD). The
detailed discussion on this has been made in Chap. 7. From the fragmentation and
distribution of muckpile perspective, the charge factor and dimensional parameters
play important role.
The charge factor can be defined as amount of explosive required for the breakage
of one cubic meter volume of the rock mass. The optimum charge factor results in the
proper breakage of rock strata with minimum nuisance and maximum productivity.
Researchers and blasting practitioners have used different methods for optimizing
the charge factor. The charge factor for four different classes of rock, viz. hard,
medium, soft and very soft, has been defined by Dyno Nobel (2010) blasting reference
manual (Table 6.3). Jimeno et al. (1995) have suggested the charge factor based on
the rock mass properties of the blast face. The charge factor classification under this
literature has been done for different distances between natural fractures of the rock
mass, different uniaxial compressive strength values and rock density values. The
suggested charge factor as per Jimeno et al. (1995) is shown in Table 6.4. Broadbent
(1974) correlated the insitu P-wave velocity with the charge factor for an openpit
copper mine. The correlation is shown in Eq. 6.4. Further, the approach was used by
Muftuoglu et al. (1991) for overburden strata in lignite/coal mines. Adhikari (1994)
reviewed some noteworthy approaches such as transfer of energy approach, based on
drilling data and assessment of rock quality index, blastability index approaches for
the assessment of charge factor. Himanshu et al. (2021) computed the optimum charge
factor for a Lead–Zinc underground mine. The computation was made using an
algorithm based on empirical Kuz-Ram model. The comparison of optimum charge
factor for an Indian Lead–Zinc underground mine using different approaches is given
in Table 6.5. The rock mass at this mine had severe jointing with joint dipping inside
the face and having joint spacing of less than 0.1 m. The average elastic modulus
of rock was 15 GPa, and average UCS was 90 MPa. The rock density was 2.84
tonne/cu-m. The P-wave velocity of the rock was 4500 m/s.
K = 0.00017 × V P − 0.13, (6.4)
where
K = Charge factor (in kg/m3 )
Vp = P-wave velocity of rock (in m/s)
Dimensional parameter for a blast is indirectly related to the charge factor. It
includes the blast geometry, viz. burden, spacing, explosive column length, stemming
length, etc. Rules of thumb used by different rock blasting practitioners have related
Table 6.3 Charge factor for different rock types as per Dyno Nobel quick reference guide (Dyno
Nobel quick reference guide 2010)
Rock type Charge factor (kg/m3 )
Hard 0.7–0.8
Medium 0.4–0.5
Soft 0.25–0.35
Very soft 0.15–0.25
Table 6.4 Charge factor classification based on the geotechnical properties of the rock strata
(Jimeno et al. 1995)
Charge factor Mean distance Uniaxial Rock density
Class limit Average value between natural compressive rock (t/m3 )
(kg/m3 ) (kg/m3 ) fractures in rock strength (MPa)
mass (m)
0.12–0.18 0.150 < 0.10 10–30 1.40–1.80
0.18–0.27 0.225 0.10–0.25 20–45 1.75–2.35
0.27–0.38 0.320 0.20–0.50 30–65 2.25–2.55
0.38–0.52 0.450 0.45–0.75 50–90 2.50–2.80
0.52–0.68 0.600 0.70–1.00 70–120 2.75–2.90
0.68–0.88 0.780 0.95–1.25 110–160 2.85–3.00
0.88–1.10 0.990 1.20–1.50 145–205 2.95–3.20
1.10–1.37 1.235 1.45–1.70 195–250 3.15–3.40
1.37–1.68 1.525 1.65–1.90 235–300 3.35–3.60
1.68–2.03 1.855 > 1.85 > 285 > 3.55
Table 6.5 Optimum charge factor for a Lead–Zinc underground mine using different approaches
Charge factor (in kg/m3 )
Dyno Nobel quick reference guide, 2010 0.5–0.6
Jimeno et al. (1995) 0.45
Broadbent (1974) 0.635
Himanshu et al. (2021), Emulsion explosive 0.61
Himanshu et al. (2021), ANFO explosive 0.73
the dimensional parameters with hole diameter. Hole diameter is, however, decided
based on the bench height/stope height. The assessment seems good from the produc-
tion planning perspective. However, the blasting practices with the most sophisti-
cated modern drilling equipment have surpassed the rule of thumb. The dimensional
parameters in such cases must be decided on the basis of assessment of rock mass and
geo-mining conditions. The dimensional parameters such as burden and spacing for
underground ring blasting have been related with hole diameter by Rustan (1992).
Table 6.6 Optimum dimensional parameter for ring blasting at an Indian Lead–Zinc mine using
different approaches
Hole diameter Toe burden (m) Toe spacing (m)
(mm) Using Rustan Using Himanshu Using Rustan Using Himanshu
(1992) et al. (2021) (1992) et al. (2021)
70 2.2 1.8 3.3 1.9
76 2.3 2.0 3.5 2.1
89 2.6 2.3 3.9 2.4
115 3.0 3.0 4.5 3.1
This relationship however is generalized in nature and doesn’t correlate the dimen-
sional parameters with rock parameters, explosive parameters and expected frag-
ment size. Himanshu et al. (2021) computed the optimum dimensional parameter
using an algorithm based on empirical Kuz-Ram model. The algorithm computes
the parameters to achieve a desired rock fragmentation size from the blasting. The
comparison of optimum dimensional parameters for a Lead–Zinc underground mine
having different blasthole diameter is shown in Table 6.6.
6.4 Connection and Firing Sequence of Charged Ring

Blastholes
The charged ring blastholes are connected using non-electric (NONEL) delay deto-
nators or electronic detonators. The long delay interval is used in the ring blasting.
The initiation system is connected in the blastholes using cap-sensitive explosives.
Cast/emulsion boosters are used as cap-sensitive explosives for the blasting faces with
ANFO and SME explosives. The timing of NONEL detonators is preset. However, the
timing of electronic delay detonators is programmed judiciously as per the require-
ment at the blast face. The shock tubes of detonators are connected on a common
harness wire or detonating fuse or another cable of electronic detonator. Such wire
or fuse is further connected through an electric detonator, which is fired from a safe
distance from the blasting face. When the connection is made on the wire of elec-
tronic detonator, then the firing is done using logger of electronic system from a
safe distance from the blasting face. A view of connection of charged uphole ring
blastholes using electronic detonator is shown in Fig. 6.4.
6.4 Connection and Firing Sequence of Charged Ring Blastholes 85
Fig. 6.4 View of connection

of charged blastholes of a
ring blasting face using
electronic detonator
6.4.1 Optimization of Delay Sequence and Delay Timing

for Production Blasting
The sequence of delay for stope blasting is decided to maximize the fragmentation
and reduce the damages in the waste rock. In a ring blasting, the length of explosive
charging in the blastholes varies depending on their position and inclination. The
holes are drilled to cover all the portions of the orebody. Sometimes, the drilling
has to be made in waste as well. The length of the drilled holes in the waste portion
is not charged. The hole with maximum length of the explosive charge is taken as
the initiation hole in the blast. This is done to create maximum relief area for the
subsequent round of blasting. In the next round, the blastholes are fired along the free
face created by the first hole. The blastholes of hangingwall and footwall side are
fired in alternate. A sample blast design with firing sequence of blastholes for a ring
blasting is shown in Fig. 6.5. The delay timings of the blastholes for the sample blast
design shown in Fig. 6.5 are given in Table 6.7. The minimum delay timing between
the ring holes was given 40 ms in this design. The delay timings for the firing of first
holes were kept on higher side, as the free face direction is only along the excavated
slot. After that, the timings between the holes from two directions were kept 40 ms.
The higher delay intervals were used for the blasts of periphery blastholes. The delay
interval has also been increased, if the movement of the holes has to be kept in single
direction. However, for multi-hole blasting the delay timing for two holes along two
extremities may be kept same, as the firing holes will not increase the intensity of
vibration in the contact of wall rock in such case. The simultaneously firing holes
in such cases may also result into the improvement of fragmentation due to the
interaction between the blasted rocks.
The optimum delay timing for the ring blasting serves two important purposes:
(i) Reduction of induced ground vibration near the structures.
(ii) Reduction of induced vibration and thereby damage in the wall rock.
Fig. 6.5 Sample design of a ring blasting (Himanshu et al. 2018b)
Table 6.7 Delay timings of

Hole No. Explosive Stemming Delay timing
the blastholes for ring blasting
charge length column length (ms)
pattern shown in Fig. 6.5
(m) (m)
H1 4 2 260
H2 8 3 160
H3 12 4 80
H4 15 6 0
H5 14 6 120
H6 13 6.5 200
H7 12 5 300
H8 8 4 400
H9 4 4 500
H10 1 2 600
6.4 Connection and Firing Sequence of Charged Ring Blastholes 87
To achieve the above-mentioned purposes, the delay timings are optimized using
the waveform analysis of the recorded vibration data. The nearfield ground vibration
waveform gives a better idea regarding the optimum delay from the blasting. The
delay sequence for a uphole ring blasting pattern using NONEL delay detonators is
shown in Fig. 6.6. Two rings containing nine holes in each ring were used in this
pattern. Two periphery holes in this pattern were kept uncharged. These uncharged
holes work as line drilling holes and work to restrict the damage in the ore body
only. This design pattern was validated at an underground Lead–Zinc mine. The
nearfield ground vibration was recorded for the validation. The recorded vibration
waveform from one of the blast is shown in Fig. 6.7. The charging pattern was
compared with the vibration waveform. The analysis of this waveform reveals that
the maximum vibration due to blast was 28.32 mm/s at 193 ms and 26.16 mm/s at
125 ms. Comparing the result with charging and initiation pattern of blastholes, it
can be drawn that 28.32 mm/s vibration has resulted due to blast of two simultaneous
holes with total explosive charge of 32 kg. The blast vibration of 26.16 mm/s has
resulted due to blast of one hole with total explosive charge of 24 kg. This means
that vibration level was almost same in both the cases even if the explosive charge in
first case is much higher than second case. This is due to the movement of blastholes
along free face created by blasting of first three holes. Hence, the design pattern is
optimum for the blasting at the study site.
Sometimes the excavation of orebody is done using both uphole and downhole
rings. The drilling in such cases is done from a sublevel. This pattern gives ease to
the management in drilling, explosive charging and connection from a single level.
Fig. 6.6 Delay sequence of blastholes for an uphole ring blasting face
Fig. 6.7 Nearfield vibration waveform for an experimental blast conducted using blast design
pattern shown in Fig. 6.6
The mucking of blasted rock in such cases is also done from a single (bottom most)
level, which is an added advantage. This pattern helps in faster excavation. The delay
sequence in such cases is planned such that all the holes of downhole ring are fired
before the firing of first hole of uphole ring. This is done to ensure that there is no
connection cut due to blasted rock from uphole ring. The firing of downhole ring
initially also provides the additional free face to the uphole ring. A sample design
pattern for the simultaneous excavation of uphole and downhole rings is shown in
Fig. 6.8.
6.4.2 Delay Timing for Multi-Ring Blasting
The multi-ring blasting pattern is used for faster excavation of rock. The optimization
of delay interval between two rings is important in this case. The main issue associated
with the multi-ring blasting is the intensity and substance of vibration near important
underground and surface structures. The detailed discussion on this topic has been
made in Chap. 7. The delay timing between rings for multi-ring blasting is generally
kept such that the impact of the blasting of first ring near structure is completely
dampened before the firing of the subsequent ring. A sample blast design with delay
timings of holes for multi-ring blasting is shown in Fig. 6.9. The delay interval for
second hole after initiation hole was 60 ms. Further, the delay timings between holes
of a ring were kept 40 ms in this pattern. Larger jump in delay interval has been used
in some rings for the periphery holes. However, the periphery holes of two sides were
fired at same delay interval. The delay timing between first to second ring in this
pattern has been kept 500 ms; assuming that the complete dampening of vibration
6.5 Summary 89
Hole No. Delay No.

H1 7
H2 6
H3 5
H4 3
H5 1
H6 2
H7 5
H8 6
H9 7
H10 13
H11 12
H12 11
H13 10
H14 8
H15 9
H16 11
H17 12
H18 13
Fig. 6.8 Sample blast design pattern for simultaneous firing of uphole and downhole rings
wave will occur below 500 ms. The larger delay timing for the last ring has been
given to avoid any possibility of backbreak generation. So, the delay timing between
second and third rings in this pattern has been kept 1000 ms.
6.5 Summary
The ring blasting pattern is practised for rock excavation in longhole stoping. The
detailed discussion on the ring blasting practices has been made in this chapter. The
summary of the discussions is as follows:
I. The inclined blastholes are drilled in ring blasting pattern to cover the complete
extent of the ore body. The toe burden and toe spacing are maintained during
the drilling of the holes to improve fragmentation from blasting.
II. The blastholes of a ring are charged using slurry/emulsion cartridges or
SME/SMS/ANFO. The suitability of the explosive for strata is determined using
impedance matching.
III. The charged blastholes are connected using NONEL or electronic delay detona-
tors. The firing sequence of the blastholes is optimized to utilize the advantage
of tensile cracking against the free face. The delay timings between the holes
Fig. 6.9 Sample delay pattern for multi-ring blasting (Roy et al., 2022)
of a ring are optimized to reduce the breakage in the wall rock and maximize
the ore breakage.
IV. The ring blastholes are drilled in uphole or downhole pattern based on the
requirement at the site. Sometimes uphole and downhole rings are blasted simul-
taneously from a sublevel. Such pattern gives advantage of faster excavation and
reduction in cost of production by the deployment of machineries and excavator
at a single level.
V. Multi-ring blasting is also preferred sometimes to achieve a faster pace of
production. The delay timing between the rings is optimized in such cases
to completely dampen the impact of first ring before the firing of subsequent
ring.
References
Adhikari GR (1994) Controlled blasting in tunnel—some issues. Tras Inst Eng (I) MN 75:56
Broadbent CD (1974) Predictable blasting with in-situ seismic surveys. Mining Eng 26:37–41
Dorssen P, Van Valicek P, Farren M, Harrison G, Joubert W, Pickering RGB, Van Rensburg HJ
(2002) A long hole stoping system for mining narrow platinum reefs. J Southern African Instit
Min Metall 102(3)(September 2001):151–154
Duranović M, Ðokić N, Lapčević V, Torbica S, Petrović M, Savić L (2018) Optimization of ring
blasting in sublevel stoping gold mine. Podzemni Radovi 33:61–68. https://doi.org/10.5937/Pod
Rad1833061D
References 91
Dyno Nobel (2010) Blasting and explosives: quick reference guide. https://www.leg.mn.gov/docs/
2015/other/150681/PFEISref_1/Dyno%20Nobel%202010.pdf
Himanshu VK, Roy MP, Mishra AK, Paswan RK, Panda D, Singh PK (2018a) Multivariate statistical
analysis approach for prediction of blast-induced ground vibration. Arab J Geosci 11(16):460.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-018-3796-8
Himanshu VK, Roy MP, Sarim Md, Singh PK, Mishra AK, (2018b) Blast design for underground
long hole stope to safeguard surface industrial structures from blast induced vibration. In: 12th
International symposium on rock fragmentation by blasting, Lulea, Sweden, pp 257–267
Himanshu VK, Roy MP, Shankar R, Mishra AK, Singh PK (2021) Empirical approach based
estimation of charge factor and dimensional parameters in underground blasting. Mining Metall
Explorat 38(2):1059–1069. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-020-00374-8
Jimeno CL, Jimeno EL, Carcedo FJA (1995) A review of drilling and blasting of rocks. Int J Surf
Mining Reclamat Environ 10,1:V–VI. https://doi.org/10.1080/09208119608964786
Muftuoglu YV, Amehmetoglu AG, Karpuz C (1991) Correlation of powder factor with physical
rock properties and rotary drill performance in Turkish surface coal mines. Int Soc Rock Mech
Rock Eng 1–3
Onederra I (2004) A fragmentation modelling framework for underground ring blasting applications.
Fragblast 8(3):177–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/13855140412331333262
Onederra I, Chitombo G (2007) Design methodology for underground ring blasting. Min Technol
116(4):180–195. https://doi.org/10.1179/174328607X282244
safety of nearby underground structures. Sadhana 47:192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-022-
01968-2
Rustan RA (1992) Burden, spacing and borehole diameter at rock blasting. Int J Surf Min Reclam
Environ 6(3):141–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/09208119208944329
Sun M, Ren F, Ding H (2021) Optimization of stope structure parameters based on the mined
orebody at the Meishan iron mine. Adv Civil Eng 2021:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/805
2827
Wang M, Shi X, Zhou J (2018) Charge design scheme optimization for ring blasting based on the
developed Scaled Heelan model. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 110:199–209. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.ijrmms.2018.08.004
Zhang ZX (2014) Effect of double-primer placement on rock fracture and ore recovery. Int J Rock
Zhang ZX, Naarttijärvi T (2005) Reducing ground vibrations caused by underground blasts in
LKAB Malmberget mine. Fragblast 9(2):61–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/13855140500140275
Zhang Z-X, Wimmer M (2018) A case study of dividing a single blast into two parts in sublevel
caving. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 104:84–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.02.002
Chapter 7
Blast-Induced Hazards
Abstract Large-scale drilling and blasting are the need of the hour to maintain
the production pace from the underground mining. Such large-scale blasting may
be a threat to the structures. Accordingly, there is a need to devise the controlled
blasting pattern to safeguard such structures. The structures to be protected from
blast-induced hazards include the surface residential structures, industrial buildings
and underground structures. The threshold ground vibration limits for different nature
of structures would be different. So, the designing of controlled blasting pattern
includes the assessment of threshold vibration limit near the structure and thereby
designing the charging and delay pattern to restrict the ground vibration within the
threshold limit. Over the years, different techniques have been evolved to enhance
the productivity while maintaining the ground vibration within safe limits. Such
techniques include the multi-deck excavation, multi-ring blasting and ring slicing.
The advanced statistical analysis is used to optimize the charging pattern in order to
achieve the challenge of restricting vibration within the limits. In this chapter, the
detailed discussion has been made on the ground vibration propagation characteristics
for underground ring blasting, blast vibration threshold for different structures and
the techniques for large-scale underground blasting.
7.1 Introduction
Quality of a blast is measured in terms of productivity and magnitude of associated

blasting hazards. The rock blasting phenomena consists of hazards in the form of
blast-induced ground vibration, air-overpressure/noise, flyrock ejections, dust and
other environmental concerns. Blast design parameters are optimized to improve the
productivity of the mine while minimizing the associated hazards. Some of these
hazards are due to the release of huge amount of instant explosive energy; however,
others are directly associated with the insitu rock mass. The hazards in the form of
explosive energy release can be reduced by efficient utilization of explosive energy
for the breakage of insitu rock mass. The findings from different literatures suggest
that only a small fraction of the explosive energy (20–30%) is useful for rock breakage
and the rest is considered as waste energy (Monjezi et al. 2011). The waste explosive
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2645-9_7
94 7 Blast-Induced Hazards
energy contributes to the undesirable phenomena such as ground vibration, flyrocks,

air blast and noise. The degree of impact of different undesirable phenomena of the
blast will vary based on the nature of blasting work. All the types of excavation
work focus to reduce the blast vibration near the houses/structures, as high levels of
structural vibration caused by ground vibration from blasting can result in damage
to, or failure of, structures (Singh et al. 2008). The blasting hazards in the form
of flyrocks, air blast and noise are other major concerns for openpit excavation.
The control over these hazards can be achieved by proper planning of blasts with
optimum stemming, proper inspection of blast face before blasting, use of proper (low
noise) initiation system, etc. However, the reduction of ground vibration hazards
needs consideration of different controllable and uncontrollable parameters. The
identification of these parameters and thereby investigations of the techniques to
reduce ground vibration is the prime need for the mining industries.
7.2 Standards on Ground Vibration Limits
Different standards on ground vibration limits have been fixed by researchers, orga-
nizations and government agencies. Much of this work originated in the mining
industry, where vibration from blasting is a critical issue. Dowding (1985) found in
the probabilistic study that no damage or cosmetic cracking in the structures takes
place, when PPV is below 12 mm/s. The PPV data considered in this study was of
very low frequencies (below 4 Hz). The low frequencies of the ground vibration
may resonate with the frequencies of the structures. The frequency of the residential
structures is generally in the range of 3–8 Hz. As per Siskind et al. (1980), no visible
blast-induced cracks are generated, if the peak particle velocity is below 19 mm/s.
Singh et al. (2008) and Singh and Roy (2010) conducted extensive studies to
document the levels of vibrations causing cosmetic, minor and major damage to the
different types of structures. The findings from their study are summarized in Table
7.1.
Although the detailed investigations by Singh et al. (2008) and Singh and Roy
(2010) have provided the PPV threshold for different nature of cracking in different
structures, the statutory standards mostly provide the PPV threshold for different
structures under different variations of associated frequency. The frequency in such
cases is considered for the ground motion. It is expected that the low-frequency
vibration will have greater influence on the structural damage particularly in case of
multi-storied buildings.
In Indian condition, the threshold vibration limits for the safety of structures have
been fixed by Directorate General of Mines Safety under DGMS_ (Tech) (S&T)
Circular No. 7 dated 29th August 1997. The limits (Table 7.2) under this circular are
depending on the type of structures and dominant excitation frequency.
The review of different standards framed for different countries revealed that
PPV below 2.0 mm/s does not possess damage potential for any sensitive structures
irrespective of any frequency. As the frequency of vibration increases, the threshold
7.2 Standards on Ground Vibration Limits 95
Table 7.1 Level of vibrations causing cosmetic, minor and major damages to different types of
structures (Singh et al. 2008; Singh and Roy 2010)
Type of structure Floor Nature of cracking PPV Level (mm/s)
Mudhouse Ground floor Minor damage 55.0–56.1
Major damage 87.1–104.0
Brick mudhouse Ground floor Cosmetic crack 51.6–56.3
Minor damage 81.0–89.7
Major damage 99.6–113.0
RCC Structure Ground floor Cosmetic crack 68.6–71.3
Minor damage 104.0
Major damage 122.0
First floor Cosmetic crack 71.2–72.2
Minor damage 98.3–118.0
Major damage 128.9–161
Table 7.2 Permissible peak particle velocity (PPV) in mm/sec at the foundation level of structures
as per DGMS circular 7 of 1997 (DGMS Circular No. 07, 1997)
Type of Structures Dominant excitation frequency, Hz
< 8 Hz 8–25 Hz > 25 Hz
(A) Buildings/structures not belong to the owner
Domestic houses/structures (Kuchha brick and cement) 5 10 15
Industrial buildings (RCC and framed structures) 10 20 25
Objects of historical importance and sensitive structures 2 5 10
(B) Building belonging to owner with limited span of life
Domestic houses/structures (Kuchha brick and cement) 10 15 25
Industrial buildings (RCC and framed structures) 15 25 50
value for damage also increases. Indian standard as mentioned in Table 7.2 also
recommends 2.0 mm/s of PPV for objects of historical importance and sensitive
structures in a frequency range below 8 Hz. As the frequency increases above 8 Hz,
the limiting PPV value is 5 and 10 mm/s for frequency above 25 Hz.
If the structures are made up of insitu rock of underground mine, then the threshold
vibration limits would be different from that suggested under DGMS circular 7 of
1997. Such structures may include underground haulage drivages, shaft, decline,
workshop, electrical substations, repair shops, etc. The threshold vibration limits for
such structures have been framed by Directorate General of Mines Safety (DGMS)
Tech circular No. 06 of 2007. This circular describes the vibration limits around
different structures based on rock mass rating (RMR), which is a good indicator of
insitu rock condition. Although the PPV limits under this circular have been given on
the basis of a scientific study conducted to study the influence of opencast blasting on
Table 7.3 Threshold values of vibration for the safety of roof in the below-ground workings for
different RMR (DGMS Circular No. 06, 2007)
RMR of roof rock Threshold value of vibration in terms of peak particle velocity [mm/s]
20–30 50
30–40 50–70
40–50 70–100
50–60 100–120
60–80 120
Table 7.4 Threshold values of vibration for the safety of sidewall in the below-ground workings
for different RMR (DGMS Circular No. 06, 2007)
RMR of roof rock Threshold value of vibration in terms of peak particle velocity [mm/s]
20–30 20
30–40 20–30
40–50 30–40
50–60 40–50
60–80 50
the stability of the underground structures for a coal mine, the RMR-based threshold
presents its generalized nature, and it may also be used to ensure the stability of the
structures of the underground metalliferous mine (Roy et al. 2022). RMR incorporates
the strength of the intact rock, structural discontinuities, groundwater conditions,
etc. (Bieniawski 1968). The study suggests that the magnitude of PPV at roof, floor
and sidewall of the underground workings from the same blast would be different.
Accordingly, this circular provides the threshold for the safety of roof and sidewall
as shown in Tables 7.3 and 7.4, respectively. While measurement of ground vibration
in an underground metalliferous mine working, the drill level in case of downhole
ring may be considered as roof. In case of uphole ring, the roof will be at the level
where the ring holes would be through. This consideration has been made on the
basis that the maximum propagation of vibration would take place in continuity. The
voids in draw level will tend to reduce the magnitude of PPV.
7.3 Sensitive Structures Prone to Ground Vibration

Hazards
Various structures, viz. surface residential structures, surface Industrial structures and
underground structures, are prerequisite to be protected from blast-induced ground
vibration. The threshold limits for the surface domestic structures not belonging to
owner are taken as per DGMS circular 7 of 1997. The circular suggests the vibration
7.3 Sensitive Structures Prone to Ground Vibration Hazards 97
limit as 5 mm/s, 10 mm/s and 15 mm/s for the associated blast frequency of < 8 Hz,
8–25 Hz and > 25 Hz, respectively. Some of the mining industries have associated
industrial buildings at the surface. These industrial buildings mainly include crusher
house, mill, tailing pond, offices, etc. Since most of these industrial buildings consist
of vibration generating machineries, the expected threshold to sustain vibration in
these structures would be more. To understand the proneness of damage of these
structures from induced ground vibration, Himanshu et al. (2018b) measured the
natural frequency of such structures of an underground mine. The natural frequency
is the number of times per second that the structure will vibrate back and forth when
excited, and the damping of the structures is proportional to the rate at which the
vibration decays with time. The measured natural frequency for some of the industrial
structures of an underground mine is shown in Table 7.5. The table shows that the
natural frequency of these structures is in the range of 6–13 Hz. Accordingly, the
frequency of blast vibration more than 25 Hz will ensure no resonance to the surface
structures.
The threshold vibration limits for industrial buildings are taken from DGMS
circular 7 of 1997. The circular suggests the threshold limits as 10 mm/s, 20 mm/s
and 25 mm/s for the associated frequency of < 8 Hz, 8–25 Hz and > 25 Hz.
The dynamic loading due to large-scale blasting in the stoping operation also influ-
ences damages in the nearby long-term underground structures, viz. shafts, declines,
haulage drivages, underground workshop, electrical substations, repair shop, under-
ground crusher house, etc. These structures are also required to be safeguard from
induced ground vibration. The threshold vibration limits to protect such structures
are assessed based on various damage criteria under dynamic loading or statutory
norms.
The scientific theories state that the damages in the underground structures occur
due to the redistribution of insitu stresses. Such redistribution takes place because of
the mining activity. The blast loading conditions also contribute in the redistribution
of the stresses. The redistributed stresses reduce the sustenance of rock strata against
failure (Yang et al. 2017). The threshold sustenance of vibration by rock strata is
dependent on the strength of the rock mass to resist failure against incoming vibration
Table 7.5 Natural frequency of different surface structures of an underground mine (Himanshu
et al. 2018b)
Structures Approximate height of the Natural frequency (in Hz)
structures (in m)
1. Power Station Roof 12–13 m 6.25
Second floor 8–9 m 6.13
First floor 4–5 m 6.25
2. Mine Office Roof 11–12 m 6.13
First Floor 4–5 m 12.5
3. Canteen Roof 4–5 m 12.6
4. S K Mill office Roof 10–11 m 7.13
waves (Xie et al. 2016). The ratio of the calculated strength and stress on the structures
to be protected (i.e. pillars, roof, drivages, etc.), gives safety factor for the stability of
the particular structure. Based on this concept, the designing of controlled blasting
pattern with an aim to protect the nearby underground structures is done to keep the
combined effect of stress redistribution and blast loading below the strength of the
rock mass. Various empirical formulae are used for the assessment of the strengths of
the underground pillars and other structures. However, the estimation of the strengths
of different underground structures with the acceptable accuracy is a difficult task.
So, the existing statutory norms (DGMS circular 7 of 2007) are a better option for the
determination of threshold vibration limits around different underground structures.
7.4 Optimisation of Ring Blasting Parameters

for Structural Safety
The ring blasting parameters are optimized to restrict the vibration near the structures
within the threshold limits. For this purpose, the factors affecting the magnification
and attenuation of ground vibration wave are identified.
7.4.1 Parameters Affecting Blast-Induced Ground Vibration
There are three types of parameters responsible for amplification and attenuation
of blast vibration, viz. rock mass properties, propagation media for blast vibration
waves and blast design parameters including explosive parameters (Gorai et al. 2021;
Gui et al. 2017; Hao et al. 2001; Himanshu et al. 2018a; Kumar et al. 2016; Resende
et al. 2014; Singh et al. 2015; Wu et al. 1998). The rock mass properties and nature of
propagation media are uncontrollable parameters. However, the blast design param-
eters are controllable parameter. The suitable designing of controllable parameters
based on the assessment of uncontrollable parameters can reduce the induced blasting
hazards near the structures. Researchers have considered maximum explosive charge
weight per delay (MCPD) and distance of the blast face from the structures (D) as the
most dominant parameter influencing blast-induced ground vibration (Ambraseys
and Hendron 1968; Duvall and Fogelson 1962; Pal Roy 1991). Researchers have
established the empirical relations correlating PPV with MCPD and D. Such empir-
ical relations have been made considering that the most of the other parameters for
mine would be constant. However, with the advancement in technology, the mining
industries are now using variability in blasting parameters based on the availability
of drilling equipment, strata condition and other associated parameters for same
mine. Accordingly, the researchers have incorporated other design parameters, viz.
burden, spacing, hole diameter, hole depth, etc., also in the predictor. Such predic-
tors have been established with the help of multivariate statistical analysis and soft
7.4 Optimisation of Ring Blasting Parameters for Structural Safety 99
computing tools such as artificial neural network, random forest and K-nearest neigh-
bour (Bahrami et al. 2011; Hasanipanah et al. 2015; Tian et al. 2019; Verma and Singh
2011; Wen et al. 2020; Zhou et al. 2021). These statistical algorithms predict PPV
on the basis of analysis of data for the trial blasts conducted at the site.
7.4.2 Case Studies on Designing Controlled Blasting Pattern

for Underground Ring
The experimentation and modifications in blast design for controlling the induced
ground vibration near structures within safe limits have been discussed in this section.
7.4.2.1 Case Study-1: Designing of Controlled Blasting Pattern

for Reducing Vibration Near Surface Residential Structures
Roy et al. (2016) designed the controlled blasting pattern for the safety of surface
residential structures due to blasting at Kayad underground mine. Authors used the
technique to reduce the MCPD by multi-deck blasting technology. The electronic
delay detonators were used at the mine for this purpose. The blasthole with maximum
length was used as initiation hole. The delay sequence was given to fire the bottom
deck of the blastholes initially. The fired bottom portion worked as the free face
for the subsequent round of blasting. The optimum delay timing of 20–80 ms was
used between the decks in this study. This delay interval worked successfully in
optimizing the explosive energy utilization after deck. In this study, the comparison
was made for two conditions of multiple decked ring blasting. The first condition
encompasses the complete firing of all the holes at once and thereafter the firing
of the decks of subsequent ring holes. In the second condition, the ring holes were
divided as bottom slice and top slice. The bottom slice was fired in the first round
and thereafter the firing of top slice was accomplished. The blasting sequence for
these two conditions is shown in Fig. 7.1. The blasting output revealed that the
fragmentation under second condition was better as compared to the first condition.
Accordingly, the bottom slice–top slice technique is helpful for reducing the ground
vibration near surface structures for ring blasting along with maintaining the desired
fragmentation output.

for Reducing Vibration Near Surface Industrial Structures
Himanshu et al. (2018b) designed the blasting parameters for blasting faces located
near surface industrial structures of Sindesar Khurd underground mine. The struc-
tures in this study included crusher plant, water tank, tailing thickener, mill process
Fig. 7.1 Detonation of the ring blastholes by detonating holes one by one and by taking bottom
slice first and top slice afterwards (Roy et al. 2016)
plant, control room, electrical substation, mine office, etc. The experimentation with
variation in blast design was performed for this purpose. The experimental and simu-
lation approach was used to optimize blast design parameters. The blast vibration
predictors were developed based on the gathered data. The multi-deck blasting tech-
nique was used in this study to distribute the explosive charge. A view of multi-deck
blasting pattern used in this study is shown in Fig. 7.2.
In this study, the influence of total explosive charge on induced ground vibration
was also investigated. It is presumed that the induced ground vibration from different
delays may superimpose at far-field distances. Accordingly, the multivariate regres-
sion analysis was carried out correlating PPV with different blast design parame-
ters. The predictor from the multivariate regression analysis was power in nature. It
included the total explosive charge in a blasting round, number of blastholes, hole
diameter and distance of blast face from monitoring point. The developed multi-
variate predictor under this study is given in Eq. 7.1. This equation is site specific.
The total explosive charge and number of blastholes were restricted based on this
equation. The technique developed under this study resulted in reducing the ground
vibration near industrial structures within the limits stipulated by DGMS.
ϕ 0.26 Qt 0.45
PPV = 367 (7.1)
N 0.45 D 1.26
7.4 Optimisation of Ring Blasting Parameters for Structural Safety 101
Fig. 7.2 Multi-deck blasting pattern for underground ring
Multiple coefficient of correlation = 81.78%,
where
ϕ = Hole diameter (mm)
Qt = Total explosive charge in a blasting round (kg)
N = Number of blastholes fired in a blasting round
D = Distance of vibration monitoring station from blast face (m)
PPV = Peak particle velocity of vibration (mm/s)

for Reducing Vibration Near Underground Structures
The nearby underground structures, viz. shaft, decline, haulage drivages, under-
ground workshops, etc., are also affected by induced ground vibrations. Under Indian
conditions, the vibration near these underground structures is to be controlled within
the limits shown in Table 7.3. Sometimes some of these underground structures are
within 30 m distance from the blast face. The advanced statistical techniques are
used in such cases to investigate the influence of different blast design parameters.
One such study was carried out by Roy et al. (2022) at an Indian underground mine.
In this study, the experimentations were done by variation of blast design parameters.
The PPV data was recorded along with the design parameters. The statistical anal-
ysis of recorded charging parameters for the blast was performed. The recorded data
consisted of various charging parameters for the blast, distance of vibration moni-
toring station from the blast face (D) and recorded PPV. The charging parameters
included—MCPD, total explosive charge in a ring (TCR) and total explosive charge
in a blasting round (TC). The importance of different independent parameters, viz.
MCPD, TCR, TC and distance (D) on dependent parameter (PPV), was estimated
using artificial neural network approach. Under this study, different neural network
models were developed to analyse the importance of various charging parameters
and distance on the induced ground vibration from the ring blasting. The prepared
ANN model was trained and tested with 70% and 30% of the data, respectively. The
model performance was evaluated as coefficient of determination (R). The value of R
was taken more than 0.8 in all the prediction models. Initially, the analysis has been
carried out to predict the output PPV from the input parameters D, MCPD, TCR and
TC. The analysis was carried out for all the recorded data. It was found that PPV
shows maximum dependency on D. The order of dependency of PPV on different
parameters is as—D > MCPD > TCR > TC. The result shows that the total explosive
charge in a ring also has significant influence (normalized importance—47.2%) on
PPV. This is due to the superposition of blast waves of two holes of a ring. To further
identify the superposition characteristics of the blast wave, ANN model was prepared
for PPV at different distances from the blast face. Seven different models with PPV
recorded at distances of > 100 m, < 100 m, < 90 m, < 80 m, < 70 m, < 60 m and
< 50 m were analysed. The analysis shows that distance is the dominant parameter
influencing PPV, when recording has been done at a distance of > 60 m. But, when
the distance of recording ground vibration is less than 60 m, then D and MCPD have
equal influence on PPV. The role of other charging parameters also starts dominating
in such case, which defines the larger impact of charging parameters than distance on
PPV at nearfield locations. MCPD is the dominant charging parameter influencing
PPV. However, it was observed that the normalized importance of TCR and MCPD
are almost equal when recording of the ground vibration was made at a distance of
> 90 m. This analysis suggests that the superposition of the blast waves of two holes
of a ring has started at a distance of more than 90 m from the blast face. Since the
data was measured only at nearfield distances, the superposition of the blast waves
of two rings could not be found in the analysis. However, it may be interpreted from
the increasing trend of importance of TC with distance that there will be impact
of TC at far-field distances. The delay intervals between the rings were kept more
than 500 ms during the experimentation. Accordingly, the multi-ring blast design as
shown in Fig. 6.9 was adopted for productive exploitation of mineral at the study site
along with controlling the ground vibration near underground structures within safe
limits.
With the help of the multi-ring blast design suggested using this study, the mine
management has been able to conduct blast with total explosive charge of 4920 kg.
The explosive charge was distributed in six different rings. The blast face was at a
distance of 40 m from nearest footwall drivage. The blast was conducted successfully
with the magnitude of vibration recorded near footwall drivage as 50.51 mm/s at peak
7.6 Summary 103
dominant frequency of 79.88 Hz. The recorded vibration data was well within the
statutory limit as per DGMS standard.
7.5 Safety Precautions While Blasting
To achieve the safe blasting at the faces in the nearby of the surface and under-
ground structures, the following safety precautions need to be undertaken by the
mine management:
• Maximum charge weight per delay and total explosive charge in a blasting
round should be followed considering the minimization of blast vibration within
stipulated standards for safety of nearfield underground structures, far-field
underground structures as well as surface residential/industrial structures.
• Hole deviation measurement should be done to ensure proper toe burden as well
as collapsing of two holes. As the collapsing of holes may lead to increased charge
weight per delay.
• Special precautions at permanent underground structures, viz. drivages, shaft
pillars, crown pillar, etc., should be taken to ensure proper support after blasting.
The insitu stresses are redistributed after blasting, which may lead to requirement
of additional supports at these places to regain rock strength.
• Loose rocks should be dressed properly before drilling/charging behind blasted
face.
• Stope should be scanned after blasting to get actual view of void generated after
blasting. Precautions should be taken while charging where additional cavity in
toe of downhole face has been observed in scan.
7.6 Summary
The ground vibration induced by large-scale production blasting for underground

mining works as safety and environmental threat to the surface and underground
structures. The detailed discussion regarding the measurement and prediction of
ground vibration has been made in this chapter. The discussions of this chapter are
summarized below:
I. In Indian condition, the safe limits for the ground vibration have been framed
under Directorate General of Mines Safety (DGMS) regulations. The DGMS
circular 7 of 1997 defined the limits of ground vibration for the safety of surface
structures.
II. The safe vibration limits for underground structures, viz. underground haulage
drivages, shaft, decline, workshop, electrical substations, repair shops, etc., may
be taken as per Directorate General of Mines Safety (DGMS) Tech circular
No. 06 of 2007. This circular describes the vibration limits around different
structures based on rock mass rating (RMR), which is a good indicator of insitu
rock condition.
III. Different controlled blasting pattern has been developed for underground ring
blasting in order to meet the production demand along with maintaining the
ground vibration within safe limits. Roy et al. (2016) use a pattern with slicing
of ring into two parts. The bottom slice of the ring was given initial delay and
thereafter the top slicing portion was taken. The method has resulted into the
successful reduction of ground vibration near domestic structures.
IV. Himashu et al. (2018b) used multi-deck blasting pattern for the reduction
of ground vibration near surface industrial structures. The influence of total
explosive charge on induced ground vibration was also investigated under this
study.
V. The multi-ring blasting technology with the use of long delay between rings was
used for productive blasting with the safety of nearby underground structures.
The blast design for this purpose was optimized by investigating the parameters
influencing PPV.
References
Ambraseys NR, Hendron AJ (1968) Dynamic behaviour of rock masses. In: Rock mechanics in
engineering practices. Wiley
Bahrami A, Monjezi M, Goshtasbi K, Ghazvinian A (2011) Prediction of rock fragmentation due
to blasting using artificial neural network. Eng Comput 27(2):177–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00366-010-0187-5
Bieniawski ZT (1968) Fracture dynamics of rock. Int J Fract Mech 4(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF00186807
DGMS Circular No. 06 (2007)
DGMS circular No. 07 (1997)
Dowding CH (1985) Blast vibration monitoring and control. Prentice-Hall Inc., New Jersey
Duvall WI, Fogelson DE (1962) Review of criteria for estimating damage to residences from blasting
vibrations. Report of Investigations/United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines
5968, p 19, //catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/005981586%5Cn. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.
39015078529347
Gorai AK, Himanshu VK, Santi C (2021) Development of ANN-based universal predictor for
prediction of blast-induced vibration indicators and its performance comparison with existing
empirical models. Mining, Metall Explorat. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-021-00449-0
Gui YL, Zhao ZY, Zhou HY, Goh ATC, Jayasinghe LB (2017) Numerical simulation of rock blasting
induced free field vibration. Procedia Eng 191:451–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.
05.203
Hao H, Wu Y, Ma G, Zhou Y (2001) Characteristics of surface ground motions induced by blasts
in jointed rock mass. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 21(2):85–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0267-726
1(00)00104-4
Hasanipanah M, Monjezi M, Shahnazar A, Jahed Armaghani D, Farazmand A (2015) Feasibility
of indirect determination of blast induced ground vibration based on support vector machine.
Measurement 75:289–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2015.07.019
References 105
Himanshu VK, Roy MP, Mishra AK, Paswan RK, Panda D, Singh PK (2018a) Multivariate statistical
analysis approach for prediction of blast-induced ground vibration. Arab J Geosci 11(16):460.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-018-3796-8
Himanshu VK, Roy MP, Sarim Md, Singh PK, Mishra AK (2018b) Blast design for underground
long hole stope to safeguard surface industrial structures from blast induced vibration. In: 12th
international symposium on rock fragmentation by blasting, Lulea, Sweden, pp 257–267
Kumar R, Choudhury D, Bhargava K (2016) Determination of blast-induced ground vibration
equations for rocks using mechanical and geological properties. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng
8(3):341–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2015.10.009
Monjezi M, Ghafurikalajahi M, Bahrami A (2011) Prediction of blast-induced ground vibration
using artificial neural networks. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 26(1):46–50. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.tust.2010.05.002
Pal Roy P (1991) Vibration control in an opencast mine based on improved blast vibration predictors.
Mining Sci Technol 12(2):157–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-9031(91)91642-U
Resende R, Lamas L, Lemos J, Calçada R (2014) Stress wave propagation test and numerical
modelling of an underground complex. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 72:26–36. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.ijrmms.2014.08.010
Roy MP, Singh PK, Sarim M, Shekhawat LS (2016) Blast design and vibration control at an
underground metal mine for the safety of surface structures. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 83:107–
115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2016.01.003
safety of nearby underground structures. Sādhanā 47(4):192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-
022-01968-2
Singh PK, Roy MP (2010) Damage to surface structures due to blast vibration. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 47(6):949–961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2010.06.010
Singh PK, Roy MP, Sinha A (2008) Damage of structures due to blast induced vibrations in mining
areas. 2nd Asian Mining Congress, Kolkata India, pp 385–397
Singh PK, Roy MP, Paswan RK, Dubey RK, Drebenstedt C (2015) Blast vibration effects in an
underground mine caused by open-pit mining. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 80:79–88. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2015.09.009
Siskind DE, Stachura VJ, Stagg MS, Koop JW (1980) Structure response and damage produced by
air-blast from surface mining. United States Bureau of Mines
Tian E, Zhang J, Soltani Tehrani M, Surendar A, Ibatova AZ (2019) Development of GA-based
models for simulating the ground vibration in mine blasting. Eng Comput 35(3):849–855. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00366-018-0635-1
Verma AK, Singh TN (2011) Intelligent systems for ground vibration measurement: a comparative
study. Eng Comput 27(3):225–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-010-0193-7
Wen S, Zhang C, Chang Y, Hu P (2020) Dynamic compression characteristics of layered rock mass
of significant strength changes in adjacent layers. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 12(2):353–365.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2019.09.003
Wu YK, Hao H, Zhou YX, Chong K (1998) Propagation characteristics of blast-induced shock
waves in a jointed rock mass. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 17(6):407–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0267-7261(98)00030-X
Xie LX, Lu WB, Zhang QB, Jiang QH, Wang GH, Zhao J (2016) Damage evolution mechanisms of
rock in deep tunnels induced by cut blasting. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 58:257–270. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2016.06.004
Yang JH, Yao C, Jiang QH, Lu WB, Jiang SH (2017) 2D numerical analysis of rock damage induced
by dynamic in-situ stress redistribution and blast loading in underground blasting excavation.
Tunn Undergr Space Technol 70:221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2017.08.007
Zhou J, Li C, Koopialipoor M, Jahed Armaghani D, Thai Pham B (2021) Development of a new
methodology for estimating the amount of PPV in surface mines based on prediction and proba-
bilistic models (GEP-MC). Int J Min Reclam Environ 35(1):48–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/174
80930.2020.1734151
Chapter 8
Innovative Blasting Practices
for Underground Hard Rock Mining
Abstract The state-of-the-art blasting methodologies have been developed over the
years to overcome the challenges of underground mining. The major challenges
associated with Indian underground mines include ore dilution and narrow vein
mining. The productivity enhancement from underground is another challenge, as
most of the shallow depth ore deposits are in the stage of extinction. To achieve the
production pace from underground, the mining with blasting of larger number of
holes in a same blasting round was the need. One special technique has been evolved
for this purpose. This technique is capable of extracting 60–70% of the stope in
a single blasting round. The detailed discussion regarding this technique has been
made in this chapter. Additionally, the blasting methods for narrow vein mining and
excavation in ore-waste combination have also been discussed in this chapter.
8.1 Introduction
Production enhancement and improving grade of the excavated mineral are two main
goals of a mining engineer. Optimization of blasting pattern has significant contri-
bution in achieving these goals. The production from underground blasting can be
enhanced using the blasting of larger diameter and deeper blastholes. Increment in
number of blastholes and multi-ring blasting also adds to the production enhance-
ment. The technological advancements, viz. fast charging technology using site
mixed explosives, high viscosity explosives for uphole charging and electronic delay
detonators for judicious decision on delay timings supports the miners to achieve
faster production targets. Various advanced techniques of ring blasting are used at
different underground mines like Malmberget Iron Ore mine, Kiruna Iron Ore mine,
Fankou Lead–Zinc mine and Meishan Iron Ore mine (Sun et al. 2021; Wang et al.
2018; Zhang and Wimmer 2018; Zhang 2014; Zhang and Naarttijärvi 2005; Wimmer
et al. 2012). Some of these techniques may be implemented with the site-specific
changes at other similar mines in the global context.
Another important challenge while ring blasting is to control ore dilution.
Different innovative techniques are used to reduce ore dilution during blasting. The
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2645-9_8
108 8 Innovative Blasting Practices for Underground Hard Rock Mining
research articles suggest that the optimum stope blasting pattern leads to minimiza-
tion of the ore dilution. Such pattern incorporates investigation of rock–explosive
interaction to contain the blast-induced damages within the orebody. Various control-
lable and uncontrollable parameters have influence on the blast-induced rock mass
damages. The investigations of uncontrollable parameters, viz. characteristics of ore
body, rock mass properties, insitu stresses, etc., can give an insight to optimize the
blast design parameters to contain the damages. Researchers have used different
techniques for the prediction of ore dilution due to blasting. The factors respon-
sible for dilution have also been identified in these studies. Clark (1998) has used
the concept of Equivalent Linear Overbreak Slough (ELOS) for the assessment of
unplanned dilution. Using this ELOS parameter, the irregular overcut orebody under
exploitation is converted into average overcut depth. Henning and Mitri (2008) have
discussed different methods for assessment and control of ore dilution. Stewart et al.
(2007) discussed the methods for stoping in narrow veins to reduce dilution. Authors
have identified three different patterns for drilling, viz. inline, dice 5 and staggered.
The concept of overbreak estimation for slot raise and drivage excavation used by
the researchers can also be implemented to reduce the ore dilution. Researchers have
used various soft computing and numerical modelling-based tools for the assessment
of rock mass damage due to blasting. Zhao and Niu (2020) have predicted unplanned
ore dilution using artificial neural network. Jang et al. (2015) used neurofuzzy system
for prediction of ore dilution.
Some of the innovative techniques used at Indian underground mines to improve
the production pace and reduce the ore dilution have been discussed in this chapter.
8.2 Technique for Simultaneous Excavation of Slot Raise

and Rings in a Single Blasting Round
The excavation of deeper blastholes in a single blasting round has been adopted in
many mines to enhance the pace of production. The depth of the blastholes is kept
as equal to the level interval in such cases. However, the level interval is decided
on the basis of the dip of the ore body, to minimize the cost of the production.
So, the depth of the blastholes in such cases would be limited. Accordingly, the
enhancement in production pace in such a case may be achieved by increasing the
number of blastholes to be fired in a blasting round. A special technique has been
devised to excavate the slot raise and rings of the hangingwall side simultaneously
for this case. This technique was first implemented at Rampura Agucha underground
Lead–Zinc mine.
The available drill hole diameter at the mine for stope excavation was 89 and
152 mm. The ore body was having a dip of 55º and width of 18–20 m. The level
difference of the stope was 25 m centre to centre. The major geological constraints at
the stope were plasticity of the rock strata. The plastic nature of the rock strata leads
to the restricted movements of the blasted muck while excavation of slot raise. The
8.2 Technique for Simultaneous Excavation of Slot Raise and Rings … 109
Fig. 8.1 Schematic layout

showing the excavation
sequence of an underground
stope
proper excavation of slot raise is necessary to ensure the successful excavation of

subsequent ring holes. The major environmental concern at the site was to safeguard
the nearby sensitive underground structures, viz. footwall drive, decline, electrical
panel, etc. The operational constraint of the stope included the lack of space for accu-
mulation of blasted rock from the slot raise and stope excavation. Initial positioning
of the holes was planned on the basis of excavation sequence for the whole stope.
The vertical slot holes were planned between two levels of the stoping block. The
rest part of the orebody was planned to be excavated by drilling ring holes along
hangingwall as well as footwall direction. The required space for accumulation of
blasted muckpile of the stope was computed considering the bulking factor of the
rock. Accordingly, there was need for excavation of 6 m height of the stope. The
excavation of this 6 m height of the stope was planned using uphole drilling and
charging. The excavation was termed as sliping. The slot raise and rings along the
hangingwall direction were planned to be excavated in a single round. The rings
along the footwall direction were planned to be excavated in another blasting round.
The schematic layout of the excavation sequence of stope is shown in Fig. 8.1.
The drilling parameters for the experimental stope were decided on the basis of
analysis of deformation pattern using numerical simulation (Himanshu et al. 2021).
The core samples of the rock strata of the stope were collected, and the assessment of
rock mass properties was carried out. The assessed rock mass properties were used
as the input in the numerical model. The explosive properties were also simulated in
the model based on the properties of explosives available at the mine. The complete
extraction of slot in a round was simulated in the initial stage. The deformation
pattern was not satisfactory as the extent of slot along strike direction was very
large. Accordingly, the slot was divided as slot and slot expansion. The different
combinations of reamer and blastholes were simulated in the numerical model. The
optimum drill design for the slot was finalized to maximize the deformation. The
slot raise expansion holes were planned to move along the excavated slot raise.
The numerical model with excavated slot raise and drilled slot expansion holes was
prepared. The deformation pattern for different combinations of burden–-spacing for
slot expansion holes was analysed. The optimum burden–spacing for slot expansion
holes was decided based on the model output. The excavation of rings was planned
against the excavated slot raise. The burden–spacing for excavation of rings was
optimized on the basis of deformation contour analysis in the numerical model. The
schematic excavation sequence for slot raise and rings is shown in Fig. 8.2.
The charging quantification for blastholes of slot raise and rings was done
using statistical analysis. The United State Bureau of Mines (USBM) blast vibra-
tion predictor was developed to predict the magnitude of vibration under varying
Maximum Charge Weight per Delay (MCPD). The suitable MCPD was decided on
Fig. 8.2 Schematic layout showing the face movement direction while simultaneous excavation of
slot raise and rings
8.3 Drilling and Blasting Methodology for Extraction of Narrow Vein Ore … 111
the basis of the distance of nearby sensitive structure. The safe limits of vibration
near underground structure were taken on the basis of Directorate General of Mines
Safety (DGMS) circular no. 6 of 2007. Multi-variate statistical regression analysis
was carried out to study the impact of total explosive charge in slot raise/single
ring/blasting round. It was observed that the complete dampening of blast vibration
occurs when the slot raise and different rings are separated from each other by long
delay of more than 500 ms.
The delay sequence of slot raise holes was decided by analysis of deformation
contour from numerical model. The slot raise holes were distributed as cut holes, first
box holes and periphery holes based on the model output. The holes of first box and
periphery positions were scattered to maximize the deformation. The delay timings
of slot raise holes and ring holes were decided on the basis of waveform analysis
and signature hole analysis. The selection of optimum delay time for slot holes was
done to ensure tensile breakage of the rock mass. The cumulative face movement and
void generation in different rounds of blasting were taken into consideration while
selection of delay timings. The delay timing for slot raise holes from a stope blasting
is shown in Fig. 8.3. The delay timings for ring holes were decided to dampen
the impact of total explosive charge from multiple rings on blast vibration. The
interaction between the blasted rock was also taken into consideration to maximize
rock fragmentation. The delay timings for slot raise expansion and ring holes for the
excavation of same stope are shown in Fig. 8.4. The rings along footwall direction are
further excavated in the next blasting round. Accordingly, the complete extraction
of stope using this method is accomplished in three blasting rounds. During the
simultaneous excavation of slot raise and rings of hangingwall direction, about 60–
70% of the stope is excavated in a single blasting round.
The major advantages of this blasting methodology are as follows:
(i) It accelerates the pace of mineral exploitation, as about 60% of the stope is
excavated in a single blast round.
(ii) It reduces the cost of mineral production, as this method reduces the cycles of
the unit operation in stope excavation and thereby saves the cost of excavator
shifting, explosive and accessories transport, manpower cost, etc.
(iii) It reduces the safety risk to the miners by abolishing their multiple time
exposure to the blasted face.
8.3 Drilling and Blasting Methodology for Extraction

of Narrow Vein Ore Deposits
The excavation of narrow vein ore deposits by drilling and blasting is a challenging
task. The extent of damage while blasting in such deposit leads beyond the ore
deposits. Accordingly, the wall rock gets damaged and induces dilution. Different
methods have been used worldwide to excavate the narrow vein ore deposits. Stewart
et al. (2007) suggested three different methods for excavation of narrow vein ore
Fig. 8.3 Delay timings of the blastholes for excavation of slot in a stope
deposits using longhole stoping method. The suggested methods are—staggered/zig-

zag, dice 5 and inline method. In the staggered method, the blastholes are placed
alternatively closer to the hangingwall and footwall. In dice 5 pattern, two holes are
placed closer to the hangingwall and two holes are placed closer to the footwall, the
remaining one hole is placed in the middle of the ore body. The pattern is repeated
afterwards. In inline pattern, the blastholes are placed in the middle of the orebody.
The schematic of these patterns is shown in Fig. 8.5.
The blasting methodology for excavation of narrow vein ore deposits of Zawar
group of mines was devised using the concept of Inline pattern. The devised method-
ology consisted of drilling of blastholes of diameter 64–76 mm keeping toe burden
of 1.5–2.5 m. The optimum toe burden for different faces was decided on the basis
of the rock mass properties of ore body and host rock. The blastholes were drilled in
a single line along the strike of the ore deposit in this method. In most of the cases,
the blastholes were kept in the middle of the orebody, between the hangingwall and
footwall. The hangingwall is more prone to damage during the blasting. Accord-
ingly, the blastholes were shifted towards footwall, when the width of the orebody
was larger than 3 times of the toe burden. A view of the positioning of blastholes for
this method is shown in Fig. 8.6.
8.3 Drilling and Blasting Methodology for Extraction of Narrow Vein Ore … 113
Fig. 8.4 Delay timings of blastholes for excavation of slot expansion and rings of hangingwall
direction of a stope
Fig. 8.5 Schematic of drilling patterns for excavation of narrow vein ore deposits (Stewart et al.
2007)
The maximum explosive charge weight per delay was computed to reduce the
vibration in the wall rock within the critical limit to initiate damage. The explosive
charge was distributed in different decks to reduce MCPD. The suitable plugging
arrangement for individual decks was done. Differential charging of the blastholes
was used to utilize the combined impact of explosive energy on rock breakage.
The blastholes were charged preferably by low-density ANFO or SME explosive to
reduce the effective damage by shock wave.
Fig. 8.6 Positioning of blastholes for excavation of narrow vein deposits
The sequence of blastholes was planned such that first hole was blasted along
the slot raise, and the consecutive movement of blastholes has taken place along the
strike of the orebody. In a particular blasthole, the bottom deck of the hole was taken
first and top deck at the last in the sequence. The initiation of bottom deck of the
second hole started after completion of blast of middle deck and before blast of top
deck of first hole. The sequence of firing of blastholes in this methodology is shown
in Fig. 8.7. The initiation of the blastholes was carried out using Electronic/NONEL
detonators with suitable delay timing. The explosive decks were separated by delay
interval of 20–80 ms.
8.4 Multi-Ring Blasting Pattern for Rock Excavation

in Ore-Waste Combination
The rock blasting in ore-waste combination need to be dealt judiciously. The major
challenge in this case includes the proper breakage of the rock strata along with the
reduction of the ore dilution. The conventional ring blasting practices in such case
leads to improper breakage. Accordingly, a method was devised which included
the differentiation of explosive charging pattern even in the rings. The differential
charging pattern between different holes of a ring (as shown in Fig. 6.1) is popular for
such cases. But, sometimes during the multi-ring blasting, the charge concentration
at a particular zone also gets enhanced while using uniform differentiation between
8.4 Multi-Ring Blasting Pattern for Rock Excavation in Ore-Waste … 115
Fig. 8.7 Differential charging pattern and sequence of firing of blastholes in narrow vein excavation
the holes of different rings. So, the differential charging in multi-ring blasting pattern
was used at one of the underground mine. In this pattern, the first blasthole of the first
ring was charged upto two-third length, and rest portion was stemmed. The adjacent
blastholes of the first hole were charged upto one-third length and stemmed upto
two-third length of the blasthole. The pattern was repeated for all the holes of the
first ring. First and second blastholes of the first ring were taken together as initiation
holes in this pattern to enhance the breakage of the ore body. The blasthole of the
second ring behind the first hole of the first ring was charged upto one-third length
and stemmed upto two-third length. Afterwards, the pattern was repeated for the
second ring similar to that of the first ring. Again the charging pattern for third ring
was a copy of the charging pattern of the first ring. Since the third ring would be
closer to the wall rock, the initiation of single hole at a time was used for this ring. The
firing sequence and differential charging pattern used in this blasting methodology
are shown in Fig. 8.8. The delay timings between the holes and between rings were
optimized on the basis of waveform analysis to reduce ore dilution. The delay timing
between second and third ring was kept more as compared to that between first and
second ring in order to provide additional relief to the ring before blasting. The rock
excavation with the reduced dilution and enhanced throw was achieved using this
blasting methodology.
Fig. 8.8 Charging pattern and firing sequence for multi-ring differential blasting pattern
8.5 Summary
Three innovative blasting practices have been discussed in this chapter. These blasting
techniques have been devised to address different problems of the mining industry.
The summarized details of these methods are as follows:
I. The technique for simultaneous excavation of slot raise and rings is useful
in enhancing the pace of production from underground. In this technique, the
blasting of slot raise, slot raise expansion and rings along hangingwall contact is
conducted in a single round using electronic delay detonators. The technique has
advantage of saving cost of production by minimizing the machinery movement
and manpower deployment.
II. Various blasting methodologies are used for excavation of narrow vein ore
deposits while minimizing the ore dilution. The inline drilling pattern along
with differential charging of blastholes is a useful method for reducing ore
dilution.
III. The multi-ring differential blasting pattern may be used to minimize dilution and
maximize ore breakage while blasting in ore-waste combination. The pattern
consisted of the differential charging of ring blastholes of different rings.
References 117
References
Clark LM (1998) Minimizing dilution in open stope mining with a focus on stope design and narrow
vein longhole blasting. University of British Columbia
Henning JG, Mitri HS (2008) Assessment and control of ore dilution in long hole mining: case
studies. Geotech Geol Eng 26(4):349–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-008-9172-9
Jang H, Topal E, Kawamura Y (2015) Decision support system of unplanned dilution and ore-loss
in underground stoping operations using a neuro-fuzzy system. Appl Soft Comput 32:1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2015.03.043
Stewart P, Trueman R, Lyman G (2007) Development of benchmark stoping widths for long-
hole narrow-vein stoping. Min Technol 116(4):167–175. https://doi.org/10.1179/174328608
X318270
Sun M, Ren F, Ding H (2021) Optimization of stope structure parameters based on the mined
orebody at the Meishan iron mine. Adv Civil Eng 2021:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/805
2827
Wang M, Shi X, Zhou J (2018) Charge design scheme optimization for ring blasting based on the
developed Scaled Heelan model. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 110:199–209. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.ijrmms.2018.08.004
Wimmer M, Nordqvist A, Ouchterlony F, Nyberg U, Furtney JK (2012) Burden movement
in confined drift wall blasting tests studied at the LKAB Kiruna SLC mine. In: The 10th
international symposium on rock fragmentation by blasting, pp 373–383
Zhang ZX (2014) Effect of double-primer placement on rock fracture and ore recovery. Int J Rock
Zhang ZX, Naarttijärvi T (2005) Reducing ground vibrations caused by underground blasts in
LKAB Malmberget mine. Fragblast 9(2):61–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/13855140500140275
Zhang Z-X, Wimmer M (2018) A case study of dividing a single blast into two parts in sublevel
caving. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 104:84–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.02.002
Zhao X, Niu J (2020) Method of predicting ore dilution based on a neural network and its application.
Sustainability 12(4):1550. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041550
Chapter 9
Challenges and Way Forward
Abstract Underground blasting for hard rock mining consists of three main stages
as drivage development, slot raise excavation and production ring excavation. The
nature of challenges in these stages is different. These challenges are dealt with
the technological advancements in operations, mechanization and instrumentation.
The advent of advanced prediction techniques has also provided ease to the blast
designers. However, the underground mining at greater depth of cover will come
with the additional opportunities for the technological advancements and scientific
solutions. The developments of low VOD explosives, plasma blasting techniques or
chemical-based rock breakage technology are some of the solutions for the future
challenges. The advanced assessments of rock mass properties and thereby accurate
prediction of blasting outcomes is also necessary to achieve safe and productive
underground excavation. This chapter presents some of the future challenges and
opportunities in underground blasting.
9.1 Overview
Underground mining for exploitation of mineral deposits are becoming dominant

with the extinction of shallow depth ore deposits. Maintaining the production pace
from underground is a major challenge to the mining practitioners. The longhole
stoping with large-scale drilling and blasting can be a suitable alternative to overcome
these challenges. The planning and implementation of mass blasting for longhole
stoping require thorough scientific investigations of the expected outcomes. Such
investigations need to be supported by the state of the art instrumentation, advanced
predictive models and adequate case histories. This book presented the technological
advancements in underground blasting in India over the years.
The mining operation using longhole stoping method comprises of three main
steps as—drivage development, slot raise excavation and ring blasting. The chal-
lenges in these steps are different. The enhancement of pull and reduction of over-
break is the main aim of a blast designer in drivage blasting (Himanshu et al. 2022).
The optimum blast design to achieve these objectives is specific to the rock mass
condition of the site. Accordingly, the assessment of rock mass condition is done
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2645-9_9
120 9 Challenges and Way Forward
to devise the blasting pattern for drivage blasting. The cut portion of the burn-cut
face blasting design, is mainly responsible for the pull from the drivage blasting.
The optimum number and diameter of blastholes, relief holes are selected to maxi-
mize the pull (Murthy and Dey 2002; Verma et al. 2018). Additionally, the delay
timings between the holes are also chosen judiciously to optimize the damage in the
cut blasting round. The objective of overbreak reduction is achieved by optimizing
the resultant detonation pressure along the periphery holes. This is done using the
waveform analysis of the nearfield vibration (Mandal and Singh 2009; Vishwakarma
et al. 2020; Himanshu et al. 2022).
The slot raise blasting pattern is somehow similar to the burn-cut face blasting
pattern, as the breakage in both the cases takes place along the tensile relief provided
by reamer holes (Himanshu et al. 2021a). However, the slot raise pattern shows
dissimilarity in the direction of movement of blasted rock. Accordingly, the suitable
placement of initiation system is important in such case. The slot raise blasting comes
with the challenges of muckpile movement, face jamming, improper breakage, etc.
The ratio of reamer hole to the blastholes is optimized to get optimum breakage in
this case. Additionally, the delay timing and sequence of firing of blastholes are also
optimized based on the waveform analysis (Himanshu et al. 2021a).
The production blasting in longhole stoping method includes the drilling of holes
in ring pattern. The ring blasting takes place against the free face created by the
excavated slot raise. The optimum burden and spacing are selected for the ring
blasting to get the proper fragmentation. Uphole and downhole charging are used in
the ring blasting based on the need. The ring blasting operation has the challenges to
optimize the rock fragmentation and reduce the induced ground vibration near surface
and underground structures (Himanshu et al. 2021b; Roy et al. 2022). The drilling
parameter, charging pattern and delay timings are suitably chosen to enhance the rock
breakage with reduced ground vibration. The specialized pattern in ring blasting has
been devised to enhance the pace of production. Such pattern includes the complete
extraction of slot raise and rings of hangingwall direction in a single blasting round.
The ring blasting pattern for narrow vein mining and controlling ore dilution has also
been devised over the years.
9.2 Future Challenges of Underground Blasting and Way

Forward
The discussions made in this book are based on the technological advancements
adopted in Indian underground mine for exploitation of minerals. The scientific
approaches used for devising the blasting methods have been discussed in different
chapters. However, with the increasing challenges of mining specifically with the
increment in the depth of mining and extinction of easily mineable ores, there would
be requirement of more sophisticated techniques for prediction of blasting outcomes
and implementation of advanced blasting technology in future. Such predictions
9.2 Future Challenges of Underground Blasting and Way Forward 121
would be required to be backed up by advanced instrumentations, sophisticated

prediction models and practical rock testing data. Some of the specific challenges in
these areas have been discussed in this section.
Rock mass properties are the basis of prediction and designing of the blasting
parameters for a site. The accurate assessment of the rock mass properties is a
prominent need for blast design. Under most of the situations, the rock mass prop-
erties are assessed to carry out static numerical simulation. The additional prop-
erties, viz. strain rate dependency, pressure dependency, etc., need to be assessed
for the dynamic numerical simulation, and thereby for the prediction of blasting
outputs. Split Hopkinson Pressure (SHPB) can serve this purpose. The compressive
and tensile behaviour of rock mass can be tested under different strain rate loading
conditions using SHPB (Gong et al. 2019). In most of the research work carried
out for prediction of blasting outcomes using numerical simulation, RHT concrete
and Johnson–Holmquist constitutive models were used (Borrvall and Riedel 2011;
Wang et al. 2018; Baranowski et al. 2020). These models have been devised for
predicting damages in homogeneous concrete media under dynamic loading. The
rock, however, has different nature of heterogeneity due to the presence of joints,
shear zone, faults, folds, etc. Different failure models for static loading conditions,
viz. Hoek & Brown rock failure criterion, Sheorey rock failure criterion, etc., are
available (Jaeger et al. 2014). But, the constitutive model for the prediction of rock
failure under dynamic loading is not known till date. Accordingly, there is a need to
develop the constitutive model comprising of insitu rock properties, viz. rock mass
rating (RMR), rock quality designation (RQD) or Q system along with the dynamic
rock mass properties. The rock mass to be excavated from the greater depth of cover
would also be under the influence of insitu stresses. There is a need to design the
blasting parameters considering the insitu stresses in such cases.
Apart from the numerical model-based damage prediction, the empirical models
also have important role in predicting the blasting outputs and thereby designing
the blast for a practical problem. The production blasting specifically is designed to
get optimum fragmentation. The charge factor and dimensional parameters for the
production blasting are computed based on the available rock fragmentation predic-
tors, viz. Kuz-Ram model, Swebrec function, etc. (Cunningham 1983; Kuznetsov
1973; Rosin and Rammler 1933; Kansake et al. 2016; Adebola et al. 2016). These
prediction models, however, are for the openpit bench blasting. The underground
ring blasting has different set of circumstances due to inclination of the hole. The
rock fragmentation prediction model in such case would be different from the bench
blasting. Accordingly, there is a need to develop a separate rock fragmentation model
for underground blasting.
In blasting operation, the challenges are there in controlling ore dilution,
conducting blast in very close proximity to the structures and excavating very soft
rocks using drilling and blasting. In future, the availability of high-grade mineral
deposits would be limited. While extraction of lean-grade ores, the dilution of even
smaller amount will lead to the economic loss to the mining industries (Jang et al.
2015; Zhou and Niu 2020). In such condition, the detailed guidelines on the blasting
122 9 Challenges and Way Forward
methodology for controlling ore dilution would be beneficial to the mining commu-
nity. The rising demands of the raw material, will lead to a challenge to recover
the ores lying in very close proximity to the structures. The development of non-
explosive-based rock breaking methodologies would be helpful in such cases. The
available technologies such as Plasma Blasting, Autostem and rock breaking chemi-
cals (Zhou et al. 2018) would be required to meet such challenges. The development
of explosive with low detonation velocity would also be helpful in such cases.
The advancements in the monitoring of blasting outputs will also be required in
future. The existing methods of ground vibration monitoring are based on placement
of seismograph at a particular point. However, with the increment in sensitivity, the
need for monitoring at continuous points would be required. The accessibility of
such monitoring results from surface will also be required. The Internet of Things
(IoT) enabled monitors or fibre optic-based sensors would be helpful in such cases.
The continuous fragmentation analysis based on images from the respective rounds
of muckpile removal will also be required. The advanced fragmentation analysis
system needs to be developed for this purpose.
The analysis of the recorded monitoring data and identification of trend of
their variation using machine learning algorithms is also important. The latest soft
computing tools need to be adopted for the identification of the importance of
controllable and uncontrollable parameters influencing blasting outputs.
9.3 Summary
The challenges in underground blasting for mineral exploitation would increase with
the extinction of easily mineable ore deposits. These challenges need to be over-
come by adopting the technological advancements in instrumentation, numerical
modelling, statistical analysis, etc. The operational developments also need to be
made to cope up with the demands of the industry.
References
Adebola JM, Ajayi OD, Elijah OP (2016) Rock fragmentation prediction using Kuz-Ram model. J
Environ Earth Sci 06(05):110–115
Baranowski P, Mazurkiewicz Ł, Małachowski J, Pytlik M (2020) Experimental testing and numerical
simulations of blast-induced fracture of dolomite rock. Meccanica 55(12):2337–2352. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11012-020-01223-0
Borrvall T, Riedel W (2011) The RHT cconcrete model in LS-DYNA. In: 8th European LS-DYNA
users conference
Cunningham CVB (1983) The Kuz–Ram model for prediction of fragmentation from blasting. In:
1st international symposium on rock fragmentation by blasting, pp 439–453
Gong F-Q, Si X-F, Li X-B, Wang S-Y (2019) Dynamic triaxial compression tests on sandstone at
high strain rates and low confining pressures with split Hopkinson pressure bar. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 113:211–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.12.005
References 123
Himanshu VK, Mishra AK, Roy MP, Vishwakarma AK, Singh PK (2021a) Numerical simulation
Himanshu VK, Roy MP, Shankar R, Mishra AK, Singh PK (2021b) Empirical approach based
estimation of charge factor and dimensional parameters in underground blasting. Mining, Metall
Explorat 38(2):1059–1069. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-020-00374-8
numerical simulation approach for assessment of impact of relief hole on blast induced defor-
mation pattern in an underground face blast. Geomech Geophys Geo-Energy and Geo-Resour
8(1):19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40948-021-00327-5
Jaeger JC, Cook NGW, Zimmerman RW (2014) Fundamentals of rock mechanics (4th Edition).
Wiley Blackwell
Jang H, Topal E, Kawamura Y (2015) Decision support system of unplanned dilution and ore-loss
in underground stoping operations using a neuro-fuzzy system. Appl Soft Comput 32:1–12
Kansake BA, Temeng VA, Afum BO (2016) Comparative analysis of rock fragmentation models—a
case study. In: 4th UMT biennial international mining and mineral conference, pp 1–11
Kuznetsov VM (1973) The mean diameter of the fragments formed by blasting rock. Sov Min Sci
9(2):144–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506177
Mandal SK, Singh MM (2009) Evaluating extent and causes of overbreak in tunnels. Tunn Undergr
Space Technol 24(1):22–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2008.01.007
Murthy VMSR, Dey K (2002) Development of predictive models for blast-induced rock damage
assessment (BIRD) in tunnels. MHRD Project No: MHRD (27)/99-00/111/ME, pp 12–43
Rosin R, Rammler E (1933) Laws governing the fineness of powdered coal. J Instit Fuel 7:29–36
safety of nearby underground structures. Sadhana 47:192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12046-022-
01968-2
Verma HK, Samadhiya NK, Singh M, Goel RK, Singh PK (2018) Blast induced rock mass damage
around tunnels. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 71:149–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2017.
08.019
Vishwakarma AK, Himanshu VK, Kumar S, Roy MP (2020) Overbreak control in development
face blasting of underground metal mine—a case study. In: Proceedings of national conference
on advances in mining (AIM-2020), pp 473–482
Wang J, Yin Y, Luo C (2018) Johnson-Holmquist-II(JH-2) constitutive model for rock materials:
Parameter determination and application in tunnel smooth blasting. Appl Sci (Switzerland) 8(9).
https://doi.org/10.3390/app8091675
Zhou X, Niu J (2020) Method of predicting ore dilution based on a neural network and its application.
Sustainability 12:1550
Zhou H, Xie X, Feng Y (2018) Rock breaking method to replace blasting. IOP Conf Series: Mater
Sci Eng 322, 022014

Blasting Technology For Underground Hard Rock Mining

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Blasting Technology For Underground Hard Rock Mining

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vivek Kumar Himanshu

ISBN 978-981-99-2644-2 ISBN 978-981-99-2645-9 (eBook)

Dhanbad, India A. K. Mishra

Vivek Kumar Himanshu

Dr. Vivek Kumar Himanshu is Senior Scientist at CSIR-Central Institute of Mining

Dr. M. P. Roy is Senior Principal Scientist at CSIR-Central Institute of Mining and

Dr. P. K. Singh is Former Director of CSIR-Central Institute of Mining and Fuel

Abstract Industrial revolution has increased the mineral/metal consumption during

1.2 Underground Blasting for Metalliferous Mining

Underground mining is preferred for the exploitation of minerals/coal situated at

1.3 Advancements in Underground Production Blasting

The significant advancements have occurred in underground production blasting

Fig. 1.1 Engineering system of rock–explosive interaction (Saharan et al. 2006)

state-of-the-art prediction methodologies and instrumentations were used to reach

Table 1.1 Technological advancements in underground blasting for metalliferous mining

2.2 Stages in Underground Metalliferous Mining

Dip: Angle of inclination of a deposit measured from the horizontal.

Drift/Drive/Drivage: Access made parallel to the orebody. The access exposing

Stope Back: Roof, top or overlying surface of excavated stope.

2.3 Stoping Methods Practised in India

2.3.1 Sublevel Stoping

2.3.2 Longhole Stoping

(a) Sectional view of Development for a sublevel stoping method

(b) Development in sublevel stoping method to extend opening

Fig. 2.3 Sequence of operations for sublevel stoping method

(c) Progress of stoping operation from opening raise to Manway

Fig. 2.3 (continued)

The stoping operation for extraction of minerals at this mine is executed by

2.3.3 Room and Pillar Stoping

2.3.4 Cut and Fill Stoping

Fig. 2.10 Diagrammatic layout of cut and fill stoping method

An overview of the underground metalliferous mining has been presented in this

Abstract The rock–explosive interaction behaviour influences the blasting outputs

3.2 Rock Breakage Mechanism

Blast-induced rock mass breakage consists of three major steps as—shock/stress

3.3 Rock Mass Damages Under Dynamic Loading

3.3.1 Constitutive Models Used for Numerical Simulation

Researchers have used different constitutive models for predictions of blasting

3.4 Rock Parameters and Their Role on Damage

Table 3.2 (continued)

Table 3.3 Vibration limit for

Although there are merits of this P-wave velocity-based damage assessment

3.4.1 Nearfield Vibration and Rock Breakage Characteristic

Fig. 3.3 Schematic diagram

3.5 Influence of Explosive Parameters on Rock Mass

3.5.1 Commercial Explosive and Its Principle of Explosion

The explosive is a reactive substance that instantaneously releases a huge amount of

3.5.2 Explosive Parameters

Fig. 3.4 Pressure profile at different locations in a blasthole (Zhang 2016)

3.5.2.2 Velocity of Detonation (VOD)

3.5.2.3 Detonation Pressure

3.5.2.7 Water Resistance

It is the ability of an explosive to withstand exposure to water without suffering

3.5.3 Equation of State for Explosive

3.6 Impacts of Blast Design Parameters on Rock Mass

3.6.1 Blasthole Diameter

The charge concentration at a point is controlled by this parameter. Jimeno et al.

Fig. 3.6 Outline of different

Fig. 3.7 Outline of different Holes of 2nd Ring

Free Face or Slot

B(in m) = 11.8 × φ 0.63 (3.10)

3.6.5 Subgrade Drilling

3.6.6 Charging Parameters