Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr. Vol. 29, No. 2, pp.

143-156, 1992

Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved

0148-9062/92 $5.00 + 0.00 Cop~r:ght © 1992 Pergamon Press Ltd











CONTENTS Introduction ........................................................................................................................... Scope ..................................................................................................................................... Character of Blast Excitation ................................................................................................. Measurement Techniques and Instruments .............................................................................. Evaluation of Measurements ................................................................................................... References .............................................................................................................................. Appendix: Permanent Degradation and Displacement o f Adjacent Rock ............................. 144 145 145 149 152 156 156

Coordinator C. H. Dowding (U.S.A.)


K. Table 1. Mueller (Hungary).S. Siskind (U. O.144 ISRM: BLAST VIBRATION MONITORING SUGGF:-TED METHOD INTRODUCTION The President of the Commission on Testing Methods appointe?. Hudson. Lab6ratorio Nacional de Engenharia Civil. E. rock noise and vibrations (9) Uniaxial.). the Coordinator to organize a Working G r o u p to draft a Suggested Method for blast vibration monitoring on I December 1988. attrition.A. Item 8 of Table 1. Schwenzfeier (France). Dowding (U. Any person interested in these recommendations and wishing to suggest additions or modifications should address his remarks to the Secretary General. Portugal. Calder (Canada). Sassa (Japan). anchor loads. This guideline fail~ under Category II: Engineering Design Tests. openness. geometry. A.). The purpose of this method is to specify procedures. spacing. Ouchterlony (Sweden).R. J. Lisboa 5. absorption (2) Strength and deformability in uniaxial compression: point load strength (3) Anisotropy indices (4) Hardness. the working group has reviewed three successivel? narrowed guidelines dated Spring 1989. Test categories--priority order for standardization~ Category I: Classification and Characterization Rock material (laboratory tests): (I) Density. A. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS C. Brinkman (South Africa).K. Xu (P. Commission President and Journal Editor. Copies of the drafts have been sent to D. P. 2nd and 3rd drafts.) coordinated the working group and prepared the 1st. D. International Society for Rock Mechanics. Beitzer (Fed. Germany). filling and alteration (10) Core recovery. Extensive written comments were received from B. driUability (5) Permeability (6) Swelling and slake-durability (7) Sound velocity (8) Micro-petrographic descriptions Rock mass (field obserrations ): (9) Joint systems: orientation. Avenida do Brasil. V. Rosai and M.S. Fernandez (Spain). biaxial and triaxial compressive strength (I0) Rock anchor testing aThis Table will be superseded as the Commission updated the priorities--J. Summer 1990 and Spring 1991. and to achieve some degree of standardization without inhibiting the development or improvement of techniques. Rep. . rock quality designation and fracture spacing (I 1) Seismic tests for mapping and as a rock quality index (12) Geophysical logging of boreholes Category II: Engineering Design Tests Laboratoo': (1) Determination of strength envelope and elastic properties (triaxial and uniaxial compression: tensile tests) (2) Direct shear tests (3) Time-dependent and plastic properties In situ: (4) Deformability tests (5) Direct shear tests (6) Field permeability. China). roughness. porosity. abrasiveness. T. support pressures. F. Esteves (Portugal). Written comments were received from J. New (U. Since that appointment. ground-water pressure and flow monitoring: water sampling (7) Rock stress determination (8) Monitoring of rock movements. L e r n (Mexico). water content. Ghose (India). H. within the In S i t u Group.A. Li and T. and A.

presents definitions of structural response. Explanation is given for the need of studies with immediate pre. GROUND MOTION 3. effects of blast-induced permanent displacements are included in the Appendix for completeness as they are associated with significant transient effects at relatively small distances. and vertical motions seem to control the vertical response of floors. Evaluation of Measurements. Measurement Techniques and Instrumentation. This true maximum vector sum is not the pseudo-maximum vector sum calculated with the maxima for each component (dots in Fig. many recent cracking studies have correlated visual observations of cracking with excitation particle velocity measured in the ground. Differing cultures have differing thresholds of the toleration of vibration. The L and T directions are oriented in the horizontal plane with L directed along the line between the blast and recording transducer. which usually occurs at the largest peak of the three components. (c) This document implicitly separates measurement of vibration to control cosmetic cracking from that to reduce human response by presenting only studies of blast-induced cosmetic cracking. Because of the importance of excitation frequency in determining this structural response. the full waveform or time history of the motions should be recorded. (a) Variation of peak motions in each component (L. Thus the only effects are those associated with the vibratory response of facilitities. Others have a great deal more than the regularly allowed 5 cm/sec maximum particle velocity at high excitation frequencies. axes can be labelled HI. V and T in Fig. Whenever vibration response is a legitimate concern. excitation particle velocity (that shown in Fig. describes generic attributes of instruments necessary to measure time histories of the blast-induced disturbances.) or on the structure's foundation (Europe). In an absolute sense. 1. This guideline is separated into three main sections. Guidance is given for the choice and deployment of instruments.ISRM: BLAST VIBRATION MONITORING SUGGESTED METHOD 145 Suggested Method for Blast Vibration Monitoring Scope 1.e. The pseudo-maximum vector sum . Special emphasis is placed on computerized systems.and post-blast inspection to separate weather. both the ground and airborne disturbances (upper-four time histories) produce structure response (lower-four time histories). 1) has led to difficulty in determination of the most important. Since it is unlikely that the physics of cracking changes at national borders. transient or vibratory displacement. When a study focuses upon structural response. H2 and V. l) can be measured outside the structure of concern (U. (a) While the subject of this guideline is the measurement of blast-induced. Importance of dominant frequencies of excitation and structural response is introduced here and is emphasized throughout the document. these national variations are certainly influenced by several factors in addition to the crack susceptibility of structures. defines the terminology necessary to describe blasting vibrations and the associated air over pressure. however. 1. Character of Blast Excitation. Character of Blast Excitation 2. 1. these permanent displacements can be more important than the vibrations. Some have so little that urban blasting is prohibited altogether. As shown in Fig. blast response is best described by measurement of the strain at that location. the peak ground motion and thus ground strain is the maximum vector sum of the three components. with H 1 and H2 oriented parallel to the structure's principal axes.and blast-induced response. Guidance is also given for monitoring response of rock masses and buried structures.S. Additional factors such as human response as well as administrative and political expediency must be recognized as separable from cracking in the measurement and evaluation of ground motions. it is assumed that no permanent displacements are produced in or on the rock or soil mass surrounding the blast. (b) Transient effects result from the vibratory nature of the ground and airborne disturbances that propagate outward from a blast. Ground motion can be described by three mutually perpendicular components labelled L (longitudinal). When a critical location in a structure is known. Horizontal motions seem to control the horizontal response of walls and superstructures. The first section. T (transverse) and V (vertical) in Fig. 1) no matter their time of occurrence. Alternatively. In this discussion. The third section. both at the beginning and continuation of a project. Transient means that the peak displacement is only temporary (i. The second section. the dashed line in Fig. lasts less than one-tenth of a second) and the structure or rock mass returns to its original position.

.~vvu 3. I. which form the basis of blasting controls in North America.14 2.. -'vv'Tv "" v ' v " v . .146 ISRM: BLAST VIBRATION M O N I T O R I N G S U G G E S T E D M E T H O D maximum ground motion I • maximum superstructure resp. 2. Body waves travel through earth materials.. = MID WALL SUPER STRUCTURE (15-25 Hz) relponl4 velc¢~ (6-7 Hz) 011a) d..17 ~ w t~-~^^... 1. have been correlated with the maximum single component regardless of direction.. r . and distortional or shear waves.--yv-vv I I vV [ I IV V ~ v "-" 9.26 9. -'-v.18 7. "" ^ v'. which is normally 5-10% greater than the maximum.. At this intersection. .hA. Thus they are not continuous (last many cycles) or steady-state (have constant frequency and amplitude).. 1.. Typical blast vibrations. Comparisonof blast excitation by ground and air-borne disturbancesand residential structure response of walls and superstructure. no matter the wave type. Displacement of the cork from its at-rest position is similar to the displacement u of a particle in the ground from its at-rest position.(L) ~.. The wave shape that excites the cork can be described by its wavelength 2.. ~ .. harmonic motions with those of transient.. '--''v vV v.. the wave Time ( t ) ~j Distonce ( x ) Fig. the distance between wave crests.69 excRatlon Ops) A ''u" 9 . Great care should be taken not to confuse the effects of steady-state.r velocity . whereas surface waves travel close to surfaces and interfaces of earth materials. A A / ~ ..... Therefore. SINUSOIDAL APPROXIMATION 5. ~ yv" v" 109 dB 8. Explosions produce predominantly body waves at small distances which propagate outward in a spherical manner until they intersect a boundary such as another rock layer. single-frequency. Similarly...vv ^ ItlWln/!VVV"v'V v v V 1.. denoted R on the vertical trace in Fig.. As can be seen in Fig..~v p .. body (P/S) surface (R) and are illustrated by the ground motion in Fig._v .. Body waves can be further subdivided into compressive (compression/ tension) or sound-like waves. Measurementswere made some 2000ft (600m) from a typicalsurface coal miningblast (after Dowding[10]). and (b) sinusoidal displacement at one instant (t = constant) [1].. 1.. shear and surface waves are produced.^~5.. . .a. 1 measured some 600 m from a typical surface coal mining blast. . ^ ~ ~ -- v --v. can be approximated as sinusoidally varying in either time or distance as shown by the time variations in Fig. experimental observations of threshold or cosmetic cracking. soil or the ground surface.. use of the pseudo-maximum vector sum for control provides a large. . . Rayleigh surface waves become important at larger transmission distances as illustrated in the vertical trace by the relatively larger " R " amplitude compared to the "P/S" amplitude... unaccounted for. Trans. Vv v~ - Long. . factor of safety._^A^A^^ ^AA.. the maxima of blast-induced motions last only one or two cycles at a relatively constant amplitude and frequency. . hence the term particle velocity. (c) Two principal wave types are produced by blasting.¢' B r~ ^. ~ " V V "" ~ . . 2a and b. . may be as much as 40% greater than the true maximum vector sum. ~. This approximation is similar to the motion of a cork caused by a passing water wave. . (b) In general. as it bobs up and down ti is analogous to that of a particle in the ground. TRANSIENT NATURE OF BLAST MOTIONS 4. "'v VerL Air dl(L) dl(T) p^..24 1/fa Time Fig..~... The most important surface wave is the Rayleigh wave. ^ _ A ~ ^ ^ vV .. denoted as P/S on the vertical trace in Fig. ^ a .. the cork's velocity. irregular blast motions. single-component peak.-. Sinusoidal approximations: (a) sinusoidal displacement at a fixed point (x = constant)..20 mm/s 4. I ^ M^A. .

the initial portion produces the highest wall response while the second produces the greatest superstructure response.0 03 r-I I I (max displacement). and the frequency f. but the typically small distances between a structure and a blast as well as rock-to-rock transmission paths tend to produce the highest dominant frequencies [3]. acceleration is measured in units of gravitational acceleration. or the number of times the cork bobs up and down in 1 sec. Frequency f is equal to l I T or the reciprocal of the period or time it takes the cork to complete one cycle of motion. Dominant frequency histograms at nearest structures categorized by industry. where g = 9814 mm/sec-'. the relatively large explosions produced by surface coal mining.= tZ 0. 1. Adoption of frequency-based vibration criteria has made the estimation and calculation of the dominant or principal frequency an important concern. an acceleration of 2000 mm/sec' is: 2000 9814 = 0. (a) The general form for the sinusoidal approximation is best understood by beginning with the equation for sinusoidai displacement u. f is frequency and t is t i m e a n d Ureax ---. Hz. Therefore.g. when monitored at typically distant structures. velocity and acceleration for complex waveforms are exactly related through integration or differentiation of any of the waveforms.2 where U is maximum displacement. 1. an acceleration time history can be integrated once for a velocity time history. as the procedure is sensitive to small changes in the slope of the velocity time history. ESTIMATION OF DOMINANT FREQUENCY 6. 3. it is not recommended. (c) The best computational approach to determining the dominant frequency involves the response spectrum.ISRM: BLAST VIBRATION MONITORING SUGGESTED METHOD 147 speed or propagation velocity c at which the wave travels past the cork. The more complex frequency analyses need to be employed only when peak particle velocities approach control limits. Dominant frequency can be estimated through: (1) visual inspection of the time history or calculated with (2) response spectra or (3) Fourier frequency spectra. (d) Since many time histories do not contain as broad a range of dominant frequenices as that in Fig. A compromise approach is to calculate the dominant frequency associated with each major peak by the zero crossing approach described above. (a) The accuracy or difficulty of visually estimating the dominant frequency depends upon the complexity of the time history. Such high-frequency motions associated with con- . 3. frequencies are the initial 15-20 Hz portion (peak A) and the later 5-10 Hz portion (peak B). (max acceleration). or two-tenths that of gravity. (max particle velocity). For the best frequency correlation of both types of response. The type of time history record with the most easily estimated dominant frequency is one with a single dominant pulse like that shown in the inset in Fig. The dominant frequency of a single pulse is the inverse of twice the time interval of the two zero crossings on either side of the peak. As can be seen in the figure.2g. The two dominant o. o3 o2 o~ L : 1. (2) f~m~= U 2 n f = 2nfUm. Construction blasts involve smaller explosions. (e) As shown in Fig. both frequencies should be calculated. 3. which in turn can be integrated for a displacement time history. when there is a single dominant frequency: u = U sin(2nft) (1) o. tend to produce vibrations with lower dominant frequencies than those of construction blasts. [2]). Even though a particle velocity record can be differentiated to find acceleration. Frequency is measured in cycles per second or Hertz. Further discussion of the inaccuracies of differentiation and integration can be found in Dowding [1] and in texts devoted to interpretation of time histories (e.z Usually. most approaches require only the calculation of the frequency associated with the maximum particle velocity for blasts that produce low particle velocities. For instance. Dominant frequency is defined in the inset (after Siskind et aL [15]). (b) Kinematic relations between particle displacement. (b) The most difficult type of record to interpret is that which contains nearly equal peaks at two dominant frequencies such as that in Fig.~ Surface co(~l mine bla~n(~ f = principal frequency t 1 oo ~ 03 o Quarry blasting o . Construction blastin9 t2m~= U4n2f' = 27rfZim~ o. The response spectrum is preferred over the Fourier frequency spectrum because it can be related to structural displacement and thus strains [1].U ~ o1 0.o 20 40 Principal 60 frequency ao (Hz) loo 12o Fig.

(a) Just as with ground motions. or plotting peak particle velocity as a function of the distance R. which incorporates energy considerations [4]. While the lower frequency portion is less audible. Peak pressures are reported in terms of decibels. (3) 1. First. while the less audible portion by itself or in combination with ground motion can produce structural motions that in turn produce noise.500 sn E E c > O. The air-blast excitation of the walls can be seen by comparing air-blast excitation and wall response in the rightmost portion of the time histories in Fig. The audible portion of the over-pressure produces direct noise. which are defined as: d B = 20 logt0 . 1. Effects of constructive and destructive interference and geology are included within the scatter of data about the mean trend of the decay in amplitude with distance. is more traditional than the cube-root scaling.1 Hz) labels denote the lower-frequency bounds of the recording capabilities of these so-called "linear" systems. Typical examples of this decay are shown in Fig. Although technically airborne disturbances are not directly related to ground motion. 1 where there is no ground motion. R/W "~( m/kg w2) 10 t00 100 (c) Dominant frequencies also tend to decline with increasing distance and with increasing importance of surface waves. as shown in Fig. respectively) is the source of many complaints.010 O. BLAST-INDUCED AIR OVER-PRESSURES 8. !.000 0.)]. At larger distances typical for mining. PROPAGATION EFFECTS 7.050 0. This does not mean the peak is reduced by changing instruments. They are banded to reflect scatter. Both square or cube-root scaling can be employed to compare field data and to predict the attenuation or decay of peak particle velocity. Attenuation relations showing scatter from geological and blast where P is the measured peak sound pressure and P0 is a reference pressure of 2. Unlike ground motions. air over-pressure can be described completely with only one transducer. (b) Several square-root attenuation relations employed in the U. which is typical of blasting operations. the effect of the weighting scales is dramatically evident. "C" weighting greatly reduces the recorded peak pressure at any scaled distance. higher frequency body wa~es begin to have relatively lower peak amplitudes than the lower frequency surface waves. since at any one point air pressure is equal in all three orthogonal directions. Ground motions decrease in amplitude with increasing distance. divided by the square root of the charge weight R / W ~/2.148 ISRM: BLAST VIBRATION MONITORING SUGGESTED METHOD struction blasts have less potential for cracking adjacent structures than do lower frequency mining blasts [1]. these air over-pressures generated by blasting intensify human response and thus need to be documented. Curve P should be used for presplitting. cratering and beginning new bench levels. 4. square-root scaling is more popular. where n is determined empirically by curve fitting [3]. These low-frequency pressure peaks excite structures and occupants whether or not they are sensed by the measurement instruments. OSM scaled-distance limits decline with increasing absolute distance. (b) Propagation of blast-induced air over-pressures has been studied by numerous investigators and is generally reported with cube-root rather than squareroot scaled distances. Fig.2 [20 x 10 -~ (P. While this scatter is large.S are shown in Fig. however. The higher frequency portion of the pressure wave is audible sound. 4 where maximum particle velocity is plotted as a function of square-root scaled distance from the blast. [15]).tOO 0. which in turn causes a secondary and audible rattle within the structure and is the source of many complaints. Over-pressure may crack windows. 4. Previous researchers have found that response noise within a structure (from blasting and sonic booms. (a) Square-root scaling. 1. the associated decay with distance is observed in all blast-vibration studies. such as presplitting (after Siskind et al. Since lower frequencies can elicit greater structural response [5] as shown in Fig. it excites structures.9 x 10 -9 lb/in. (c) Figure 5 summarizes the effect of two important instrumentation and shot variables.OOS t0 100 1000 Square roo't scaled distance R/W~/Z(ft/Ib ~'~) design effectsas well as high expected velocitiesfrom confined shots. however. . Site specific scaling is sometimes employed where scaled distance takes the form of R / W " . The other (5 and 0. it would have to be unusually high for such cracking. blast-induced air over-pressure waves can be described with time histories as shown in Fig. Office of Surface Mining (OSM) regulations for conservative shot design when monitoring instruments are not employed. It is also the basis for the U.S. but rather that the "C" weighting system does not respond to the low-frequency pressure pulses.

.e. Recorder (tope. Idealized. 6. They should be measured directly from relative displacements on structures or within rock masses when critical locations are known (i. The most complete single reference for detailed instrumentation information that is updated periodically is the Shock and Vibration Handbook [7]. There is an almost endless variety of configurations of these five basic components. (c) Ground motion and air over-pressure time histories can be employed to calculate the relative displacement of structural components with a knowledge of the responding structure's dynamic response characteristics [l]. through cables (2) to an amplifying system (3). pipelines and unusual opening geometry) and can be obtained with a variety of strain and relative displacement gauges [9. Specific information on blast vibration monitors is contained in recent publications by the U. x\ ' 131 X \ \ '. . field-portable blast monitoring system operating on a 12 V battery is illustrated in Fig.rm. field-portable. attenuated or low air over-pressures at those distances. The unconfined relation should be used for demolition of structures after modification for effects of weather and ground reflection.~ 10"" C.e. 6. which is transmitted R/WV3(rn/kc~ *s ) 10"I 10 1 100 ~ 1. J \ \ . (e) An air temperature inversion causes the sound pressure wave to be refracted back to the ground and at times to be amplified in isolated locations about 16-acres in decrease in temperature with altitude is reversed because of the presence of a warmer upper layer. displacement) and air blast (air over-pressure). structural strains control cracking. Since there are many excellent sources for information on instruments. hard-copy reproduction by a pen recorder light-beam galvanometric recorder or dot matrix printer (5). These relative displacements can in turn be employed to calculate strains. Unfortunately. inversions produce zones of intensification of up to three times the average. (b) While particle velocity is the traditional measurement of choice. Consequently. 1. Attenuation relations for air over-pressures produced by confined (highwall) and partially-confined (parting) surface coal mining blasts as well as unconfined blasts [29].S.s l o w ~ I I -- 101 ® ® q 2 3 4 5 Velocity (3 orthogonal) ond sound pressure transducers Cobles Amplifier \ C.. velocity. Bureau of Mines and the OSM (i.~O. . Measurement Techniques and Instruments 9. -~ . At distances less than 3 km. paper or computer digital recorder (4) that preserves the relative time variation of the original signal for eventual permanent. Therefore some means of estimation is necessary.slow \ 9'1 HighwoII PaRing Unconfined 10"~ I I t ttllll i I I I tlttl i i i I lit ® 81 10 100 Cube roo1~ scolecl ¢listonce. 5 from the higher average pressures produced by the parting shots at any scaled distance. and a magnetic tape. the principal characteristics of available systems will be summarized rather than exhaustively reviewed. [6] have shown that for propagation distances of 3--60 kin.000 I t51 \ \ 10"z 141 - s. It consists of transducers (1) that convert physical motion or pressure to an electrical current. This section describes characteristics of instruments that measure the ground motions (acceleration.l. Such an inversion occurs when the no . 5. there is less hole height available for stemming. disk or memory) Light beam oscilloSCope or dot maitrlx printer Fig. (a) An idealized. However.000 R/W'/~(ft. 10]./Ib I/3) Fig. with an average increase of 1. [8]). and these shots many times eject the stemming and thereby produce abnormally high air over-pressures. where high air over-pressures are likely to occur. Schomer et al.~_ . blast monitoring system that shows the schematic relation of the five principal components [1]. storage and reproduction. the effect of gas venting caused by inadequate stemming in shot holes can be observed in Fig. Parting shots are detonated in thin rock layers between coal strata in surface mines.8 times (5.1 dB). The accuracy of these estimates is limited by the degree to which the structure behaves as a single-degree-of-freedom system and the accuracy of the estimate of the dynamic response characteristics.'41 r.000 10. his measurements show no inversion effects.ISRM: BLAST VIBRATION MONITORING SUGGESTED METHOD 149 (d) Second. the best involve microprocessors (computers) for data acquisition. these critical locations may be either unknown or too many in number to economically measure.

it should be measured directly to avoid differenI I IBI I I I I I II I I I tiation of the particle velocity time history. 7) to determine the frequencies monitoring is the mounting of the transducers in the where this difference occurs. Many manufacturers of field. particle velocity is the > most preferable. Machines that record only peak motions (Type and (2) are associated with the peak velocity that II below) can be employed with those that record time produces the greatest response displacement (i.8 ducted only after possible phase shifts have been taken Frequency (Hz) into account. Generally. Peak motions cracking in low-rise structures is typically accomplished and dominant frequency can be employed to describe by measurement of ground. special transa constant mechanical motion.r observation of blast-induced cracking. Thereof the restraint provided by the ground. motions. For instance. 11. of interest [30].the true phenomena when only one transducer type is tation frequency.dominant).e.smaller. and close-in accelerations have been measured above 1000 Hz. if it is desired to describe the excitation measurement of the "true" phenomena. Typical structure fundamental frequencies quency content does not vary widely and where particle are 5-10Hz for two. (b) Time histories of the three components of motion fore it is necessary to compromise the goal of defining should be measured because of the importance of exci. One of the most critical aspects of vibration those shown in Fig. and efficient motions. it is better to request a transducer's response spectrum (such as 12. The importance of mounting is a function of the 20 . (a) Proper frequency response for blast vibration times it is impossible to place transducers on adjacent transducers is dependent upon two considerations: property owned by a party not involved in the project.ducers should be employed that are linear in the range mally expressed in terms of decibels (dB). Frequency response is the frequency range over If it becomes necessary to monitor situations with unwhich the transducer's electrical output is constant with usually low or high dominant frequencies. may have fundamental frequencies near 100 Hz. but they are usually attached to and excited by the lower frequency walls and floors. then they should be scribe true blast phenomena is too large for any one measured on the most responsive structural members. or particle.6 ~ 2 ~. Recording only the magnitudes of employed. then those motions should be measured outside measurement of important characteristics. With 70% o f critical damping this system is × 3dB ( × 30%) down 1 Hz [I]. In Europe.and one-storey structures and 10--30 Hz for walls and floors. 7. Some mechanical systems velocity is low. Furthermore. 3. 4 0. the excitation motion is blast monitors are electronically amplifying transducer measured on the structure's foundation. velocity or acceleration) could be em= ~0 ployed to describe ground motion. The difference output at low-frequency excitation to allow use of stems from historical precedent and location of trans.. While any of the three kinematic descriptors (displacement. linear within 3 dB between 2 and 200 Hz means that the transducer produces a voltage output that is constant TRANSDUCER ATTACHMENT within 3 0 0 between 2 and 200 Hz. and the optimum choice is dependent upon peak motions will not yield information about the the important motion characteristics. Blast-induced delayed gas pressure pulses which are not the basement or foundation walls because occur at frequencies of less than 1 Hz. Unfortuof and not on the structure. In North America.150 ISRM: BLAST VIBRATION M O N I T O R I N G S L G G E S T E D METHOD APPROPRIATE MEASUREMENT OF PARTICLE VELOCITY 4O 30 10. If it is desired to measure nately the entire range of frequencies necessary to destructural response motions. Therefore machines em. If acceleration is 2 desired. the excitation or ground motion is measured on the ground adjacent to the structure of interest. transducer. Furthermore. This range ensures proper ployed to monitor critical motions (Type I below) should recording of amplitudes at excitation frequencies which: be capable of recording time histories of selected critical (1) encompass fundamental frequencies of structures. This constancy is nor. Instruments with ducers during scientific observation of cracking rather such electronic amplification should be physically calithan difference in philosophy. Integration 02 0 . In North America. which forms the basis of vibration control.frequency range of 2-200 Hz. Example response spectra of a velocity transducer with differ(a) The location for measurement varies throughout ing pereenta~s o f damping. non-critical motions. many brated as described below. the world. 4 6 e 10 20 ao after vectoral addition of components should be cono 3 0. are histories to provide redundant measurement where fre. velocity over a low-level. it can be 0 3 integrated to calculate displacement. high-frequency transducers. Fig. (b) Monitoring ground motion to control cosmetic dominant frequency and time history details that control structural response and rock mass strains. It has the best correlation with scientific ~ 6 4 #:o. Typical dominant excitation TRANSDUCER RESPONSE FREQUENCY frequencies range from 5 to 100 Hz as shown in Fig.

as it is futile to record data if they cannot be exploited because of a lack of reference. pointed downward (to prevent rain damage) and covered with a wind screen to reduce wind excitation-induced false events. Details of the digitization process are discussed elsewhere [1]. and the transducer may be placed upon a horizontal measurement surface without a device to supply a holding force. Care should be exercised to determine the exact details of the system before purchasing.0g. but the best employ digital recording techniques. Type I instrument should record time histories of the three axes of particle velocity as well as air over-pressure. then two and four are the smallest and optimum number of instruments. The best axis is the vertical. this reset time should be determined. since no horizontal direction decision is required and surface waves usually involve a significant vertical component regardless of the direction of the maximum horizontal component. Sending permanent records through the mail for interpretation. Recalibration or checking requires special platforms where frequency and displacement are controlled. It is very accurate. Manufacturers supply calibration curves with their instruments that are similar to the response spectra for transducers shown in Fig.v. When the maximum particle accelerations fall between 0. respectively.or multichannel units. (d) Frequency analysis of records requires a time history and thus some form of permanent record. The type of mounting on a horizontal surface is the least critical when the vertical maximum particle accelerations are less than 0. Mounting of transducers on spikes in soil is discouraged because the free response of the mounting system may effect the recorded motion. those that automatically print after a vibration event may not be recording another event while printing. RMMS 29/2--E . Instruments recording only peak particle velocities will not allow a frequency analysis. and in the field. A third and fifth should be available but not deployed to insure continuous coverage in case of instrument failure. This single. NUMBER OF INSTRUMENTS 15. It is obvious that the entire vibration measurement system should be calibrated. results in a delay of 5 days. Microprocessor (computer) or digital recording systems now dominate new sales of technical recording devices because of the ease of data acquisition and computer linkage. The newest generation recorders employ dot matrix printers and/or floppy discs with microcomputers. and sometimes up to 1 month. floppy disc. the possibilities of rocking the transducer or the transducer package are small. (a) Air over-pressure transducers should be placed at least 1 m above ground. They must at least continuously record the peak particle velocity in one axis and may or may not measure air over-pressure. The signal is sampled at a certain rate. If only one instrument is employed. When blasting will occur at more than one general location (i. it must trigger (begin recording) automatically. If multiple shots are likely. TAPE AND HARD-COPY RECORDERS 151 printer behaviour in cold weather is variable and should also be investigated.0g. (b) A permanent record or "hard copy" of the vibration time history is usually made on photographic film. and each sample is converted to a single magnitude. Furthermore. While the smallest number of instruments or triaxial transducer locations for recording blast excitation motions is one. and records can be directly accessed by a computer. Many of the tape systems involve separate record and reproduction modules to reduce the complexity of recording. only cement or bolts are sufficient to hold the transducer to a hard surface. and be capable of monitoring even while printing or communicating results.ISRM: BLASTVIBRATION MONITORING SUGGESTED METHOD particle acceleration of the wave train being monitored. Unfortunately. 7. 1000 times/sec. (c) Most recorders can be bought as either single. If the above methods are unsatisfactory or accelerations exceed 1. DIGITAL. as tape recorder performance varies at low temperature.2 and 1. A four-channel unit is necessary in blast monitoring to record simultaneously the three components of the ground motion (L. battery-powered memory chips or paper. two triaxial positions would provide a more thorough documentation of the spatial distribution of effects. most employ compact FM cassettes. Since it must monitor continuously. CALIBRATION 14. epoxy or quick-setting cement (hydrocal or other gypsum based cements set within 15-30 min). light-sensitive paper in combination with light-beam galvanometers to record highfrequency motions. as variation in tape speed has no effect if cassette tapes are employed as the storage medium. These 13. a calibrating circuit to pulse the magnetic core of the geophone [12]. u.e. (a) Of those blast-monitoring systems with tape recorders. Systems with light-sensitive paper or dot matrix printers allow immediate interpretation of frequency without additional costly equipment. V and T) and the air blast. Digital recording has several advantages. asphalt or concrete the transducers should be fastened to the measurement surface with either double-sided tape. (a) The second and fourth instruments in the situations described above may provide a lower level of information and will be termed Type II.2g. then it should be located at the nearest or most critical receiver. say. involve different nearest structures separated by hundreds of metres). the transducer or transducer package should be buried completely when the measurement surface consists of soil [11]. The present trend in vibration equipment is to include a signal-conditioning amplifier in the recorder to allow flexible amplification of the signals. Almost all present film-based recorders employ field-developable. When the measurement surface consists of rock. All transducers mounted on vertical surfaces should be bolted in place. In this range.

In order to investigate the effects of certain data sets on the overall conclusions. intended vibration levels at the structure may be exceeded because of poor choice in the location of holes and/or their relative time of initiation. (b) The third or spare instrument can be either Type I or II. is the most effective control from a regulatory viewpoint because effects are so dependent upon details of the shot geometry and initiation sequence. Applicable regulations and mining or construction schedules may require a larger number. the linear orientation should be along a path with constant thickness of soil and not cross any large geologic discontinuities such as faults. Additionally. Unmeasurables in observation or crack documentation can be taken into account indirectly by considering the appearance of cosmetic cracks as a probabilistic event. hairline cracks in masonry. large cracks or shifting of foundations or bearing walls.displaced cracks--includes surfacial cracking which does not affect the strength of the structures (e. Furthermore. For instance. but not necessarily with each blast. single-hole test blast and a number of instruments to record the attenuation and frequency change around the site [13]. multiple hole blasts at the differing instrument sites. both length and frequency content. (c) The above approach describes the least number of instruments. the probability computations of threshold or cosmetic cracking at given .g. 4 but wi~. When blasting projects begin.152 ISRM: BLAST VIBRATION MONITORING SUGGESTED METHOD instruments should be located at a greater distance than the nearest structure to monitor a large area.h a larger intercept on the velocity axis. the spare should be Type I. Such public relations monitoring of vibrations at locations associated with complaints is essential in North America where lawsuits arise even when all blast effects comply with regulatory guidelines. Direct regulation or specification of effects. Where air over-pressures will be problematic or frequencies critical.::nuation relation parallel to that in Fig. Excessive structural response has been separated into three categories arranged below in the order of declining severity and increasing distance of occurrence [14. THRESHOLD--cosmetic cracking--occurs at the lowest velocities and only opens old cracks or produces hairline cracks in plaster walls or may dislodge loose objects (e. MAJOR--permanent distortion---occurs only at very high particle velocities and results in serious weakening of the structure (e. parameters and initiation sequences are constant. Such dependency renders control impossible by simple regulatory specification of two or three design parameters. a blast with a larger burden will produce :~. Even with such detailed specification. test blasts should be conducted to minimize the number of instruments necessary to monitor production blasts. (a) The attenuation relation is not solely a site property. Therefore. DEFINITIONS OF STRUCTURAL RESPONSE 18. when geological conditions change radically or when new initiation systems are introduced. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF DATA WITH PREAND POST-BLAST INSPECTION 19.g. rather than specification of blast design. a minimum of four instruments should be deployed to measure peak particle velocity along a single azimuthal direction at widely differing scaled distances for the same blast. These single-time histories are then synthesized to reproduce the additive time history effects of multiple delay. 15]. Such relations vary from project to project because of changes in geology and blasting practices. broken windows. direction and/or geology. Measurement of structural response (in addition to excitation) may require more instruments.t of time. and the resulting attenuation relation shows only the effect of distance. Such synthesis of time histories to guide blast design has met with variable success but does not replace monitoring of blast effects at critical structures during production blasting. If geology changes radically. INSTRUMENT DEPLOYMENT DURING TEST BLASTS 16. the test blasts allow the determination of the frequency content of motions at different scaled and absolute distances.:: . Ideally. (b) During tes: blasts. consider control by specification of the maximum charge weight detonated per instant at given distances from the nearest structure. differing initiation timing will produce changes in the time history. Seismographs and/or transducers should be placed along a single line with constant geology to determine best the attenuation relation. (c) A number of approaches to blast design for vibration control are now available that employ a singledelay. loose bricks in chimneys). Instrument locations should be chosen to produce project-specific attenuation relations for both air over-pressure and ground motion. control limits are based upon excitation and not response motions. For instance.'. M I N O R . This spare instrument can also be employed to monitor sites where complaints develop. it is also heavily dependent upon the blast geometry and timing. wi:h the s:lme weight of explosive detonated at any ins:..g. Description of these responses collectively as "damage" blurs the distinction between cosmetic cracking and structural distress. or at all critical structures to determine the effects of direction and variable geology. major settlement resulting in distortion and non-vertical walls). Evaluation of Measurements 17. loosened or fallen plaster).r. however. for any one blast design. Although it is dependent upon geology. then two such attenuation lines are necessary.

some of the other studies.79 in. cosmetic cracks similar to those caused by natural. many of which were old. p. iool 1ooo II velocity (mm/sec) too I o 95 90 8O 7O := J~ o oj° O O 8o 60 50 • ~ J~ 0 . 0. (a) Data from various sets of systematic crack observations were analyzed with the assumption that every cracking observation excludes the possibility of noncracking at a higher particle velocity (Siskind et al. Threshold damage is the occurrence of hair-sized.o o 60 " 40 g o 30 E o •g so & G) O) r~ 2o ~ 3o o 2O 10 lO o 5 1 I I ~ II ltl I i i i i till 1 1 0. are also plagued by the unavailability of time histories. (a) Differences in structural response such as that shown in Fig. High-frequency data ( > 40 Hz) show that a 5% probability of displaced cracking does not occur until particle velocities reach 75 mm/sec [15]. Bureau of Mines [16]. 8. (b) According to Fig.and post-blast inspection of walls in residential structures in both Europe and North America.5 1 Particle velocity 10 (in. 1.S. FREQUENCY CONTROL OF STRUCTURAL RESPONSE 20. only the new U. Particle lO 99 i llll i i i i (c) Admissibility of Dvorak's data has been questioned by the researchers reexamining the old data in the late 1970s because of the absence of time histories. Bureau of Mines observations have been included in a recomputation of probabilities in Fig. velocity [in.5 I I Porticle I 2 I 5 I 10 I 20 50 Fig.~L ~ :/f. 16].ISRM: BLAST VIBRATION MONITORING SUGGESTED METHOD 153 particle velocity levels have been made several times [15. To resolve this difficulty.2 I 0. 1 can be calculated from the ground motions if the natural frequency and damping of structural components arc known or estimated. distorted and whose walls were covered with plaster.2 0. This observation includes data with unusually low frequencies that were collected by Dvorak [17]. Structures respond most to ground motions when the excitation frequency matches the structure's fundamental frequency.z~'-~~. environmentally-induced expansion and contraction.S. All of the observations studied by Siskind involve both immediate pre. If the probability of cracking is calculated as the percentage of observations at lower levels of velocity. [15]. As shown in Fig.j:/. This approach seems conservative as low particle velocity observations do not count non-cracking at higher levels.lsec] Fig. 9. the result is the log-normal scaled plot of the probability of cracking particle velocity in Fig. 55). walls and floors respond more to the higher frequency (15-20 Hz) waves in the early portion of that time history. . 9. His data are those that tend to populate the lower region of Fig. this lower bound case was observed in response to a surface coal mine blast./sec (20mm/sec).e • Major damage ~. there appears to be a lower limit of particle velocity of 12 mm/sec below which no cosmetic or threshold cracking (extension of hairline cracks) has been observed from blasting anywhere in the world. Such immediate inspection is mandatory to separate structural distortion caused by natural weather changes from that caused by blast vibration. while the superstructure or overall skeleton of the structure responds more to the last or lower frequency (5-10 Hz) portion. Langan [19] Particle lO 99 velocity loo i i i i~ (mm/sec] i 95 90 • Threshold damage Minor domo. Probability analysis of blast-induced threshold cracks observed by U. 8. 8. The observations include low-frequency motions associated with surface mining. Probability analysis of worldwide blast cracking data [15]. 8. such as that by Langefors et al./sec) 1 0. Again there is a particle velocity. [18]. Furthermore. below which no blast-induced cosmetic cracking was observed.

01 in IOamping ! 5%) lOO I > =. 10.~. While both of these standards allow greater particle velocities for high-frequency excitation. 11. 10 has led to the adoption of frequencybased standards in Germany and the U. 0.3 mm/s I E o O. which compares various control limits. The much smaller construction blast involved detonation of 9 kg of gelatin with a maximum charge per delay of 2.1 in.~ Q.0 sec.0 in.~ 0.~ I B I I "~ o ¢D 0. Limits are based upon particle velocity measurement in the ground (OSM) and on the foundation (DIN). (b) Figure I0 compares time histories and response spectra from the longitudinal components of a small. the response spectra differ radically. . O.3 kg at a distance of only 15m. Even though the particle velocities are approximately equal. This improved correlation is largely a result of the consideration of excitation frequency. l O.60 I I 2. Hz particle velocity A Z @ maximum 3. surface coal mine blast. there is considerable disagreement over the allowable particle velocities as shown in Fig. Although the peak particle velocities are similar: 3. $O¢ Fig.01 1 2 4 6 8 10 20 40 60 80100 Frequency. 21]. 0 I I 0.10 0..8 mm/sec for the construction blast A. responses in the 5--20 Hz frequency range differ greatly.600 kg of ANFO (ammonium nitrate fuel oil) with a planned maximum charge per delay of 60 kg some 825m from the recording instrument. 5-20Hz.. Regardless of the difference in limits..05 ¢D c 0.~. 1. (c) This lower response of structures with natural frequencies of 5-20 Hz to high-frequency excitation shown in Fig. Therefore structural motions can be estimated more accurately by assuming that they are proportional to response spectrum values at the particular structure's natural frequency than by assuming that they are proportional to the peak ground motion [1]. urban construction blast and a large.40 I I 0. This difference is greatest in the range of natural frequencies of residential structures and their components.15 and 2.3 mm/sec for the surface mining blast B. [20.00 I T i t ~ .80 I I 1. and 3.~ 0.1 ISRM: BLAST VIBRATION MONITORING SUGGESTED METHOD has shown that measured structural response has a higher correlation coefficient with calculated singledegree-of-freedom (SDOF) response than with peak ground motion. lO • 0.8 mm/s 3. More work is necessary to reconcile these differences in limits.lg 10.00 : j 1.15.20 A 0.20 I 1.. the allowance of higher particle velocities in high-frequency excitation is the same. In this range the surface mining motions produce response velocities that are 10 times greater than the construction blast. The mining blast involved detonation of 12.lO 0. Comparison of time histories and response spectra from construction and surface mining blasts respectively lasting 0.S. 0.

The continuous and highly cyclical curve is that of displacements produced by environmental change. This calculation of strain is itions that included cracked and uncracked wall cover. structure such as pipelines will usually be those of the surrounding ground and can be approximated as those COMPARISON OF BLAST AND produced by plane wave propagation and are: ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 21. especially when ~ is measured at the ing. . ' ' ' ' ' '"'1 I • ~. non-engineered. .1j. and requires the measurement of c= and across the most dynamically responsive wall covering c.-. . are maximum compressive and shear wave particle Displacements were measured at l0 different wall pos.5 weather •~ -1..ISRM: BLASTVIBRATION MONITORING SUGGESTED METHOD 155 o '°°1= I- .0 -1.8 87. i ii selectively incoming ground motions.5 L -2.w I J E E I[ 2. respectively [1].0 0. The small circles are the maximum. @ 25 e~ crack are compared in Fig.0 86. 12. wood-framed house to compressive and shear wave propagation velocities.velocities.5 E t43 ~ I 1.and 7 . Capacity for free response allows above-ground structures such as homes and rock pinnacles to amplify 0. 3 of OSM are unverified. . strains in a restrained buildings (U).5 E 0.0 87. Comparisonof crack displacementsin a wood-framedhouse produced by weather-inducedchanges in humidityand temperature ( ) with those produced by surface coal mine introduced ground motions (0).approximate. dynamic displacements recorded by the same gauge. Weather and blast-induced crack displacements ground surface.~ ~. . This conclusion was reached after measuring the displacement response of a where ~ and 7 are axial and shear strains. Even though the maximum recorded particle velocity was as high as 24 ram/see.. At other gauges. Comers 2 and restrained or free.. Crack width changes from ground motions less E = . i i i t illl ! i i I . Regardless whether response is Fig. Frequencybased blast vibration control limits: ( ) Office of SurfaceMining[21].-:ore .w" o.* --) DeutscheNormen [20].4 Year Fig. the maximum weather-induced displacements were three times that produced by blasting. Hz cannot respond freely... buried or 1 4 10 20 30 100 restrained structures such as pipelines and rock masses Blast Vibration Frequency. weather changes produced displacements that were 10 times greater than those produced by blasting. however.2 87. are poorly-built. . at the site. . 12. zero-to-peak.n ® a. . RESTRAINED STRUCTURES AND ROCK MASSES _o < 22.0 0 0 0 0 0 CD ! ~4).6 0 blast 86. (6s~ . 20F (~) ¢ ~ i n ot. cracks are initiated by strains. .ea \ / "71 > ® .. 11. More work is required to improve this i 02.(4) than 25 mm/sec are less than those caused by the passage C¢ Cs ' of weekly weather fronts [1(3]. (-. c= and c. Upper and lower dotted lines have been Whereas strains in a freely-responding structure are employed safely for close-in construction blasting near engineered proportional to the relative displacement between the structures (E) and in urban areas near older homes and historic ground and the superstructure. and surface coal mining vibrations for some 8 months.0 ~" 1. .

Dynamic stability of rock slopes and high frequency traveling waves. U. and Little M. F o r cases i n v o l v i n g o n e critical l o c a t i o n a l o n g a pipeline. CA (1979). Harris C.)n 30 Oc. Dowding C. PrenticeHall. PrenticeHall. J. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory. and Kihlstr6m B. 25. The probability of flyrock. NTIS. Englewood Cliffs. Stachura V. Vibratory or shaking-induced displacement is normally associated with unstable blocks in rock slopes and can occur wherever static factors or safety are low and ground motions produce permanent displacements that are larger than the first-order asperity wavelength on the sliding joint or plane [22]. U. . IL (1980). S. Westerberg H. Rosenthal M. Dowding C.S. 29.S. and Edwards A. 33. 23. Seismic Design ofErabankments and Caverns (r. F. Stagg M. U. NJ (1977).S. Vol. Howard.. Stagg M. J. T. Crawford R. L. Office of Surface Mining. J. Englewood Cliffs. Small-bole-diameter construction blasting has induced cracking at distances of 1-2 m. Dowding C. 113-127. S. E. Such blast-induced cracking has been observed experimentally to vary with hole diameter and rock type [24. Stachura V. and Fumanti R. PrenticeHall. Int. 3. Syrup. W. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. Blast-produced fractures in Lithonia granite.S. UMIST Manchester. TRRL. Soils that are either slightly cemented or contain more than 5% fines are a great deal less subject to vibratory densification from typical ground motions. E. and Engler A. Earthquake. Bureau of Mines. and poor shot design with large burdens. H.K. The Art and Science of Geotechnical Engineering at the Dawn of the 21st Century. The Engineer 215. H. Careful blast design can reduce dramatically these maximum distances. Water Power Sept. OSM.. Northwood T.. A. NJ (1988). Siskind D.000 at 600m [27]. CA. APPENDiX--Permanent Degradation and Displacement of Adjacent Rock 23. 28. (1963). Sbornik (1962). The Swedish approach to contour blasting. Washington. Crowthorne. U. and Persson P. Report DS 1981:5. Measurement of blast induced ground vibrations and seismograph calibrations. U. Dvorak A. The propensity for such densification is a function of the soil's density. E. Minneapolis. Medearis K. Ivanov P. 40-47. Stagg M.. Schomer P. Washington. Earthquake Notes. and Engler A. F. pp. U. 4.. These clean sands were densified out to distances of 20 m [28] after detonation of single. Engineering of rock blasting on civil projects. CO. (1986). Hendron A. Statistical studies have shown that the probability of these extreme events are quite low under normal circumstances. Bureau of Mines. 24. Synthetic delay versus frequency plots for predicting ground vibration from blasting. Lang*fors U. Vol. Blast and tmpact. Report prepared for the U. S. A.. Dynamic and static design considerations for underground chambers. New B. Fourth Conf. Structural and Geotechnical Mechanics (W. Institution of Civil Engineers. Permanent effects. 21.). Siskind D. J. 10. and Morelock G. mineralogy and grain size distribution. Peck Honorary Volume (3.. Ground vibration caused by civil engineering works. Swedish Detonic Research Foundation. Stevens M. with less than 5% silt-size particles. Coupling small vibration gauges to soil. OH (1978).S. (Eds) Shock Vibration Handbook. P. J. Comparison of environmental and blast induced effects through computerized surveillance. Bureau of Mines. Siskind D. H. No. J. 3. Bureau of Mines by Management Services Association. Proc.S. TA I0193 (1967). Transport and Road Research Laboratory LR53. Ed. Gas pressure related displacement can occur out to 10s of metres. are encountered only near shot holes and can be divided into degradation and displacement. Lundborg N. Johnson C. G.. Ved. The statistics of amplitude and spectrum of blasts propagated in the atmosphere. 15. Prace Geofyrikenina Ustance.S. U. Delayed gas pressures have dislocated blocks as large as 1000m ~ during construction blasting [1]. Ceskoslovenski Akademie. 2. 5 kg charges within the loose sand mass itself. on Explosives and Blasting Techniques. PB81-222358 (1979). Bureau of Mines. Geogysikalni. 1069-1088 (1988). M. D. clean sand. and Fernandez G. Available for inspection. H. Eastern Section. Department of the Interior. CFR. Report of Investigations 8508 (1981). Siskind D. Adequacy of single-degree-of-freedom system modeling of structural response to blasting vibrations. Berkeley. 22. and Ritter A. Thesis. 143-160. pp. Winzer S. S. Englewood Cliffs. Ed. DIN. D. The effect of detonator variability on explosively induced ground vibration. Airblast instrumentation and measurement techniques for surface mining. and larger-hole-diameter mining blasts are capable of producing cracks at distances of 10-15m. DIN 4150 (1983). R. Geotech. Denver. Proc.. Effects of repeated blasting on a wood-frame house.156 ISRM: BLAST VIBRATION MONITORING SUGGESTED METHOD m a t e d t h r o u g h c a l c u l a t i o n o f the relative flexibility o f the rock a n d liner [23]. Bureau of Mines. E.). pp. Siskind D. M. Society of Explosives Engineers.. Since the probability increases with decreasing distance. (1958). Blast Vibration Monitoring and Control. Report of Investigations 7901 (1974). American Society of Civil Engineers. Report of Investigations 8896 (1984). 19. E. Goff R. M. and Crede C. Report to National Crushed Stone Assoc. 46 (1983). 13. U. Water and Power Resources Services. E. Hall. Holmberg R.ober 1991. 8. Department of Civil Engineering. 12. W. 9. a p p r o a c h to e s t i m a t i n g s t r a i n . E. Roth J. and Dowding C. E. and Kopp J. U. Soils that are densifiable are loose sands. J. Open file report of responses to questions raised by RI 8507. Stagg M. Ed. No.S. McGraw-Hill. I 1. 30. Reading and interpreting Strong Motion Accelograms. U. Dept. IX2 (1983). No. NJ (1985). IEEE Computer Society Press (1983). and Dowding C. 5. 20. 70-74. Hudson D. M.. Bureau of Mines. A model for the determination of flyrock range as a function of shot conditions. T. 6.S. Conf. DC (1976). Montville. Structure response and damage produced by ground vibrations from surface blasting. (a) Displacement can be produced by either delayed gas pressures (those that accumulate during detonation) or to a lesser extent by vibration-induced shaking. (b) Fly rock is a special case of permanent displacement of rock by explosive expulsion from the top of the blast hole and has been propelled as far as 100-1000 m [26].000. Accepted for publlcat. Translated from Russian by the National Science Foundation and available from the library of the U. Blasting vibrations and building damage. Deutsche Normen: Erschiitterungen im Bauwesen--Einwirkungen auf bauliche Anlagen. 48. L. S. Blasting Guidance Manual.V. Such movement is unusual but is associated with isolated blocks. New York (1976). 14. B. Special Technical Publication (1983). Northwestern University. J. with the exception of fly rock. pp. The development of a rational damage criteria for low rise structures subjected to blasting vibrations. J..S. Siskind D. 1 in 10. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement. on Computer Aided Seismic Analysis and Discrimination. (c) Another special case of permanent displacement is the vibratory densification of a nearby mass of loose. Seismological Society of America (1962). Langan R. New B. blasting mats are required for any construction blasting in an urban environment to prevent all fly rock.. and Gilbert C. Evanston. critical s t r a i n s c a n be esti- REFERENCES 1. 159. 26. 27. R. of Interior. Technical Report N-13 (1976). Seismic effects of blasting on brick houses. leakage of gas pressures along open joints. Report of Investigations 8506 (1980). Hall. Engng ASCE 114. Degradation is normally described by cracking intensity. 3rd Int. Compaction of noncohesive soils by explosions. the p i p e s t r a i n s s h o u l d be m e a s u r e d directly o n the m e t a l . MN (1981). 16. 18.S. Kopp J. Stockholm (I981).S. Report of Investigations 8507 (1980). Bureau of Mines. U. Hendron A. Structures response and damage produced by airblast from surface mining. Anderson D. Ground vibrations in blasting. 31. Report of Investigations 8485 (1980).). 17. Los Altos. H. London (1991). 7. F o r cases i n v o l v i n g t u n n e l a n d / o r c a v e r n liners. 25].