OPEN PIT MEGA BLASTING WITH IN-HOLE DELAYS AND / OR PRE-SPLITTING

OF PRODUCTION BLAST – MEASURES TO CONTROL ADVERSE IMPACT OF

COMPLEX VIBRATION ARISING DUE TO PRESENCE OF UNDERGROUND
WORKINGS IN THE VICINITY OR IN OTHERWISE SENSITIVE AREAS.

By: Partha Das Sharma

ABSTRACT

One of the most troublesome and controversial issues facing the mining and excavation
industries is that of blast induced ground vibration. With the general trend towards larger
blasting in mines, increased population and spread of urbanization near to the mining sites
ground vibration problems and complaints have risen manifold.

All blasting operation in mines has to be associated with some form of vibration. Even the best
designed and executed blasts generate a certain amount of unwanted energy in the form of
ground vibration waves, which radiate away from the blast site. However, the impact of ground
vibration wave can be minimized by proper blast design.

Another strange aspect in ground vibration, now a days, coming to fore is increased problem
due to complex vibration wave arising out of presence of underground workings or cavity in the
vicinity of open pit coal mines. As more and more larger open pit mines are expanding its
periphery for their enhanced requirement of production, the chances of coming them to the
vicinity of either abandoned or working underground mines becoming more. A new complex
ground vibration problems are encountered when dealing with safety of dwellings and
structures created above such underground cavities. It has become a challenge to the mining
engineers to understand the peculiar pattern of vibration wave generated because of the
presence of underground cavities and also to design blast to cope up such problems.

The types of waves generated, reflection and refraction occurred when these waves
encountered the Solid-Air interfaces in the underground and implication of their change in
behaviour on ground vibration has been discussed. The modification of blast design in order to
keep the allowable Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) within the limit with less frequency generated
due to presence of Solid-Air interfaces in the underground beneath the surface structures/ area
in question has been also been discussed.

Introduction: One of the most troublesome and controversial issues facing the mining and
excavation industries is that of blast induced ground vibration. With the general trend towards
larger blasting in mines, increased population and spread of urbanization near to the mining
sites ground vibration problems and complaints have arisen manifold.

All blasting operation in mines has to be associated with some form of vibration. Even the best
designed and executed blasts generate a certain amount of unwanted energy in the form of
ground vibration waves, which radiate away from the blast site. However, the impact of ground
vibration wave can be minimized by proper blast design.

A strange aspect in ground vibration, now a days, coming to fore is increased problem due to
complex vibration wave arising out of presence of underground workings or cavity in the vicinity
of open pit coal mines. As more and more larger open pit mines are expanding its periphery for
their enhanced requirement of production, the chances of coming them to the vicinity of either

1
abandoned or working underground mines becoming more. A new complex ground vibration
problems are encountered when dealing with safety of dwellings and structures created above
such underground workings/ cavities. It has become a challenge to the mining engineers to
understand the peculiar pattern of vibration wave generated because of the presence of
underground cavities and also to design blast to cope up such problems.

Another aspect of peculiar phenomena of vibration waveform arises in Mega Blast carried out
in Opencast Mines, when Ground Vibration waves interfere with each other and the resultant
waveform is very much complex in nature. Even by the use of NONEL or Electronic Detonators
the occurrence of this complex nature of waveform can not be avoided. Thus, it becomes all
the more difficult task for blasting engineers to restrict such waves to propagate.

Concept of ground vibration: When an explosives charge is detonated in a blast hole, the
rock immediately surrounding the charge is fractured, split apart and is displaced. At a certain
distance from the blast holes, the explosives energy decreases to a level, which causes no
further shattering or displacement and continues to travel through the rock as an elastic ground
vibration. The ground motion is literally a wave motion spreading outwards from the blast, much
as ripples spread outwards from the impact of a stone dropped into a pool of water.

The ground / rock through which the wave travels is considered to be elastic medium,
composed of innumerable individual particles. As a disturbance, of these particles are set into a
random oscillatory motion, a ground motion wave being generated. Each particle transmits
energy successively to the next.

The total energy of ground motion wave generated in the rock around a blast varies directly
with the quantity of explosives detonated. As the ground motion wave propagates outwards
from a blast, the volume of the rock subject to the compression wave increases. Since the
energy in a ground shot is distributed over successively greater volume of rock, the ground
motion must decrease. Thus energy losses occur with each successive transmission, so that
as the ground wave spread outwards, it diminishes in intensity and the particles gradually
return to the rest position.

In a well-designed blast, most of the explosion energy is spent in breaking of ground and throw
of the blasted rock. A small amount of energy is converted into ground vibration. When blast
holes are under or over charged and absence of proper free face a great deal of liberated
energy is wasted and converted into ground vibration, as explosion energy is not utilized in
fragmenting / breaking of rock and throw.

Ground motion wave produced by blasting is generally of two types:

a) Body wave: Body wave travels through earth material. It may be reflected or refracted
to the surface to become surface wave.

b) Surface wave : The surface waves travel along surfaces and interfaces of earth materials.
The most important Surface wave is the Rayleigh wave (as shown in Fig-1), denoted as “R”.
Rayleigh wave cause the ground to shake in an elliptical motion, with no transverse or
perpendicular motion. Another form of surface wave is Love wave, having a horizontal motion
that is transverse (perpendicular) to the direction the wave is traveling; and is of very less
significance.

2
Body waves can be further subdivided into compressive (compression/tension) or sound like
waves (‘P’ wave as shown in Fig-2) and distortional or shear waves (‘S’ wave as shown in Fig-
3). Explosions produce predominantly body waves at small distances. These body waves
propagate outward in a spherical manner until they intersect a boundary such as another rock
layer, soil, cavity or the ground surface. At this intersection, shear and surface waves are
produced. Rayleigh surface waves become important at larger transmission distances.
Rayleigh wave relatively has larger “R” amplitude compared to the “P” or “S” amplitude. Thus,
S and R waves pose problems as vibration pollution. The effect of R waves is particularly big.
When exciting force is applied vertical to the propagation direction, R waves account for 67% of
total energy, S waves for 26% and P waves for 7%.

Fig-1

3
Fig-2

Fig-3

4
The propagation velocity of a vibration differs slightly between R waves and S waves.
Nevertheless, it is fair to think that, when the vibration source and the receiving point are a few
metre to a few hundred metre apart, as in the case of blasting vibration, and a shock wave is
applied to one point on the surface of a vast homogeneous land, a P wave reaches the
receiving point first followed by a mixed wave of R and S waves (as shown in Fig- 4).

Fig – 4

Reflected and Refracted Wave Path: Whenever an elastic wave (Body wave) encounters a
medium with different elasticity and density reflection and refraction of the wave occurs. P –
waves travel through all type of media, i.e., solid, liquid and gas; in contrast, S – waves have its
inability to propagate through a fluid or gas because fluids and gasses cannot transmit shear
stress. In a discontinuous ground, wave amplitude reduced due to mismatch of impedance
(Impedance ‘Z’ is product of density ‘ρ’ and seismic velocity ‘V’; Z= V. ρ) (as in Fig – 5).

5
 Fig - 5

Parameter of ground vibration: Typical blast vibrations, no matter the wave type, can be
approximated as sinusoidal varying in either time or distance along all the three directions.
There are interrelated parameters that may be used in order to define magnitude of ground
vibration at any location. These are

a) Particle Displacement – The distance that a particle moves before returning to its original
position (measured in mm).

b) Particle Velocity – The rate at which the displacement changes (measured in mm/s).

c) Particle Acceleration – The rate at which the particle velocity changes (measured in
mm/s²).

d) Frequency – The number of oscillation per second that a particle undergoes (measured in
Hz).

The most preferred parameter of measurement of ground vibration is Peak Particle Velocity
(PPV). The peak particle velocity is a function of borehole pressure, confinement, charge
weight, distance from the blast site, the manner in which the compressive wave decays through
rock mass and supposition of stress created by firing sequence of adjacent holes. The
measurement of particles by vibration wave is usually measured in three mutually
perpendicular directions, they are:

a) Longitudinal (sometimes termed Radial) – Back and forth particle movement in the same
direction that vibration wave is traveling.

b) Vertical – Up and down movement perpendicular to the direction of vibration wave

is traveling.

6
c) Transverse – Left and Right particle movement perpendicular to the direction of vibration
wave is traveling.

Broadly speaking, the key factor that controls the amount and type of blast vibration produced
is explosives energy confinement and the distance of the structure from the blasting site. On
this basis the concept of Scaled Distance equation has been developed, which is given below:

Distance of Structure from blast site

Scaled Distance =
√ Max. Charge wt. Per (8 ms) delay interval

In some of the country following scaled distance restrictions have been imposed in mines when
seismograph is not used to monitor the blast:

0 – 300 ft away – minimum allowable scaled distance is 50

301 – 5000 ft away - minimum allowable scaled distance is 55
Over 5000 ft away - - minimum allowable scaled distance is 65

Vibration propagation Equation: The most accepted index (USBM’s PREDICTOR EQUATION)
of Ground vibration generated by blasting is the Peak Particle Velocity (PPV). It has been well
established that, PPV depends on maximum charge per delay; distance from blast-site to
measurement point and Ground geology, and the relationship is as follows:

V = K (D/√Q)-B

Where, V is the Peak Particle Velocity (PPV),

D is the Distance of the measuring transducer

Q is the Maximum charge weight per delay.

K and B are Site constants, to be determined by regression analysis.

D/√Q is called as Scaled Distance.

Taking Logarithm of both sides of the Predictor equation, we get

Log V = Log K – B Log (D/√Q)

If, Y = Log V; X = Log (D/√Q) and C = Log K; then the above equation represents a
straight line of the form Y = C - BX (Straight Line plotted on Log V as Y axis and Log (D/√Q)
as X axis below); where B is the negative slope of the straight line and C is the point of
interception on Y axis. Relationship of Scaled Distance with Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) on
Log scale shown in Fig.- 6.

7
 Fig- 6

Criteria for limiting safe vibration level (Regression Analysis): Regression Analysis is the
process of estimating PPV statistically from the independent variables of explosive weight /
delay and the distance to the structure of concern. Now the prime objective is to determine the
maximum charge to be fired per (at least 8 ms) delay interval, in order to keep PPV within the
safe limit. Following are the procedures involved:

a) Measurement of PPV with different scaled distances. PPV tend to decrease with the
increase of Scaled Distance.

b) Plotting these values on a Log – Log scale as described above in Fig-6.

c) The value of site constants K and B are to be determined by extrapolation of straight line
plotted as described above.

d) Using propagation straight line (plotted as per point ‘b’ above) safe scaled distance to be
determined to keep PPV below safe limit (on the basis of threshold limit prescribed by DGMS,
India).

e) From the determined safe scaled distance above, the maximum charge per delay can be
found out for various distances for a particular site.

Normally, in blasting, a 95% confidence line is calculated. To develop a good analysis, a

minimum of 30 – 35 data sets need to be analysed. If done properly and enough seismographs
are used, this can be accomplished and began in the test blast programme. Regression
analysis should be continued throughout the project and blast design should be adjusted
accordingly.

Besides peak particle velocity, the Frequency is one of the most important factors controlling
the response of structures. As stated earlier, frequency is the number of times the particles
move back and forth in one second. This back and forth motion can also be referred to as

8
oscillations per second or cycle per second that a particle makes under influence from the
vibration wave and is measured in Hz (Hertz).

Frequency is dependent on site geology, distance of the blast, delay sequencing and condition
of available free face of the blast. It has been observed that, presence of buffer in front of face
holes develop low frequency waves. The effect of frequency generated during blasting relates
to the condition of structural response and also can allow higher peak particle velocities with
higher frequency. For example, within very short distance of blast the frequency can be very
high; although they attenuate or decay quickly.

It has also been observed that, the ground motion frequencies are relatively high when solid or
tough rock is present; frequency is relatively low when transmission medium is medium-hard /
softer strata and frequency is considerably low when there is presence of void beneath. Thus,
allowable peak particle velocity reduces considerably when there is void or underground
workings beneath the structures in question. The typical range of ground vibration for surface
open pit predominantly from 20 to 30 Hz in case of hard rock quarries; 8 to 20 Hz in case of
open pit site having medium hard to soft strata and less than 8 Hz in case of ground has
cavities/voids in the form of underground workings.

Effect of blast induced ground vibration: Ground vibration can cause physical damages to mine
plant structures and to neighbouring residences. The most type of damage associated with
ground vibration is the aggravation of existing minor cracks in the structure. The damages to
the structure depend on the intensity of the vibration; which mostly depend on the distance of
the structure from the blast site, Explosives charge weight per Delay, Frequency of vibration,
Blast geometry and confinement. Therefore, the following primary variables are responsible for
damages:

• Distance of structure from blast site (Peak particle velocity reduces as the distance
increases)
• Explosive charge weight per delay
• Frequency of vibration (Low frequency wave below 10 Hz cause more damage to
structure)

Effect of ground vibration when encountered underground workings: It has already been
discussed the nature of various types of waves generated and their nature when they get
reflected or refracted in the interface of strata in the ground. A strange and complex
phenomenon perhaps takes place, when waves encounter Solid-Air interfaces in the
underground (similar to a condition when vibration waves passes through underground
voids/cavities created due to underground workings). An amplified form of wave (relatively
higher PPV) with low frequency has been experienced at the vibration monitoring points near
structures located above such underground voids/cavities. The probable justifications of such
anomaly, effects and control could be explained as below:

a) The ordinary reflection/refraction takes place by some of vibration waves in the conventional
interfaces (solid-solid interface) just above the underground cavities and reaches the receiving
monitor in the usual manner.

b) Portion of vibration waves which otherwise had lost without making any impact on receiving
monitor as they would pass to a greater depth, get reflected back from wider Solid-Air
interfaces in underground (created due to underground workings) towards surface with much
lower frequency, larger wave lengths and larger duration (perhaps follow Rayleigh’s principle).

9
The percentage of such reflected wave would be about 60 to 80% (depend on the nature, width
and extent of Solid-Air interfaces) of the waves that would have lost through the zone.

c) Thus, when this complex vibration waveform reaches receiving monitor at the surface, we
get relatively enlarged peak particle velocity accompanied with low frequency waves; which
endanger the stability of surface structures and inhabitants located above such underground
workings. The rate of attenuation of such low frequency wave is much lesser.

d) In practice also, it has been observed that, keeping surface distance same the intensity of
ground vibration is enormously more with low frequency vibration wave when there is presence
of underground workings beneath a structure than there is no underground cavities.

e) Thus, in order to minimize the adverse effects of such enhanced intensity of ground vibration
at low frequency, the allowable PPV reduced drastically and a great deal of monitoring/
recording of ground vibrations are done in order to design a proper blast by keeping every
relevant aspect in mind.

f) To keep PPV within allowable limit (as per threshold limit prescribed by DGMS, India, given
in Annexure-II), one of the most important aspects in designing the blast is reduction of charge
per delay; which we intend to discuss here broadly.

g) One of most dependable practice to limit charge per delay is by using in-hole delays in deck
charges. With amplified situation of complex waveform, it is very difficult to decide the quantity
of explosives to be kept in a deck and the number of decks to be used. This becomes more
complicated when bench height is large (for a mines where Dragline is being worked and
bench height is kept more than 30 metre). Some time as many as four to five decks depending
on the situation may have to use in order to reduce charge per delay. Each deck of explosives
charge has to be given separate delay timing having interval between each delay more than 8
ms.

h) Regular regression analysis is to be carried out in the mines in order to establish the charge
per delay by calculating scaled distance.

Effect of Ground Vibration on surface structures: Ground vibration may cause damage to
structures and annoyance to inhabitants in the vicinity of mines. Damage to structures depends
on the type of structure, its resonant frequency, construction material used, dimension of
structure etc., and the characteristics of vibrations. Attempts have been made to relate
structural damage to more than one parameter, i.e., frequency, amplitude, velocity and
acceleration. The types of damage caused to the structures in order of increasing intensity are
(a) dust falling from old plaster cracks, (b) extension of old plaster cracks, (c) new plaster
cracks formation, (d) plaster flaking, (e) plaster drops from large areas, (f) masonry crack
formation, (g) partition separating from exterior walls, (h) further severe damages and building
collapses.

Potential for new approach of addressing the issue of structural damage due to Ground
Vibration has opened up; which include vibration resistant structural designs, ways to minimize
the Ground Vibration effects on structures by proper blast design by monitoring the vibration
intensity of the blast and keeping proper record of the blast vibration data collected from site.

Use of in-hole delays for limiting charge per delay – (A case study): The blast detail and of
some of the design applied in an open pit coal mines in the dragline bench blasting and record

10
of blast induced ground vibration measured at a place where human habitants/ villages are
located over an abandoned underground coal mines at a distance of about 700 to 800 metres
from the blast site are given in Table - 1. The blast design with quantity of charge per delay,
number of decks, burden & spacing etc., have been decided after no. of trials conducted with
varying patterns. The necessity of using such a large number of decks (some time as many as
four to five decks depending on the situation, Fig-7 and Fig - 8), many a times, has arisen to
reduce weight of explosives per delay drastically to keep the PPV within allowable limit. With
this system of decking the total lapsed time of the entire blast in a round becomes more, but
PPV in most of the blast kept within reasonable limit as frequency obtained is considerably low.
This is mainly due to presence of underground workings/ cavities beneath the area in question.

Fig. - 7

11
 Fig. - 8

(Table – 1)
S.N. PARTICULARS BLAST NO. 1 BLAST NO. 2 BLAST NO. 3

1 Strata condition / geology Medium hard stand Medium hard Medium hard stand
stone with minor stand stone with stone with minor
faults. Mostly watery minor faults. faults. Mostly
strata. Mostly watery watery strata.
strata.
2 No. of holes in the round 72 39 71
3 Dia. Of hole (mm) 260 260 260
4 Av. Bench Height (m) 32 32 32
5 Depth of holes (m) From 28 to 35 From 28 to 35 From 28 to 35
6 Av. Depth of holes (m) 32 32 32
7 Av. Spacing (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5
8 Av. Burden (m) 7.5 7.5 7.5
9 Av. Stemming (m) 5.3 5.3 5.3
10 Sub-grade drilling Nil Nil Nil
11 No. of Decks used for explosives 5 5 5
12 DTH delay sequence from 450ms, 475ms, 450ms, 475ms, 450ms, 475ms,
bottom deck 500ms, 525ms, 500ms, 525ms, 500ms, 525ms,
550ms. 550ms. 550ms.
13 Surface STL delay sequence Hole to hole -42ms Hole to hole -42ms Hole to hole -42ms
and Row to row – and Row to row – and Row to row –
336ms. 336ms. 336ms.
14 Max. charge per delay (KG) 250 250 250
15 Av. Charge per hole (KG) 1100 1100 1100
16 Total explosives used in the 79.780 42.630 81.380
round (MT)
17 Distance of measurement point 750 780 775
from the blast site (m)
18 Frequency (Hz) 5.0 4.0 5.5
19 Resultant PPV obtained 7.73 5.19 5.03
(mm/sec)

12
(The explosives used for above blasts were Bulk emulsion explosives, Solar BE-101 of M/s
Solar Capitals Ltd. and Shock Tube NONEL (DTH & STL) Supremedet of M/s Economic
Explosives Ltd.).

The blasts with In-hole delay system described above can also be effectively done by using
Electronic Detonators. Direct delay timings can be assigned to the various decks. The Surface
Trunk Line Detonators are not needed in case of blasting with Electronic Detonators.

Pre-splitting of Production Blast or Main Blast: Another effective way of restricting Ground
vibration is by Pre-splitting of the production blast. Pre-splitting helps in isolating blasting area
from remaining rock mass by creating an artificial discontinuity along the final designed
excavation line / plane against which subsequent main blast breaks. A row of holes are drilled
at the periphery (three sides) of the main blasting block at a closer spacing, charged preferably
with lesser quantity of explosives than the production blast and blasted prior to the main blast in
an effort to create a fracture line and a reflective plane at the excavation limit or plane. Some of
the shock waves from subsequent main blast are reflected at the pre-split plane which results
in arresting a considerable portion of blast induced ground vibration generated in the main blast
to propagate.

The theory of pre-splitting is that when two charges are shot simultaneously in adjoining holes,
collision of shock waves between the holes places the web in tension and causes cracking that
give a sheared zone between the holes to open a narrow crack / separation along the three
sides of the production or main block before the main blast goes-off (Fig – 9). This results in a
smooth wall with little or no over break. The pre-sheared plane reflect some of the shockwaves
generated from the primary blasts that follow, which prevent them from being transmitted into
the finished wall and minimizes shattering and over break.

Fig - 9
The separation of timing between blasting of pre-splitting holes and production blast are kept
with the help of delays. The delay gap of 200ms to 250ms between pre-split and main blast is
considered to be enough.

13
The quantity of explosives to be used in pre-split holes, burden and spacing are estimated
keeping in view the insitu tensile strength of rock mass. The borehole spacing of pre-split holes
is normally kept at 8 to 12 times the blast hole diameter and the burden may be kept as of the
burden of the Main Blast. Depth may be kept as of last row of main blast. Mostly, light
distributed decoupled charges are used in pre-splitting holes. Air-deck in between deck
charges improve the quality of pre-split fracture and avoid extension of radial cracks around the
holes (Fig – 10). Generally, the quantity of explosives kept in pre-splitting holes is 8 to 12 % of
the explosives charged in one hole in the Main Blast.

Fig - 10

Advantages of Pre-splitting: (1) Field observation reveals that with the introduction of pre-
splitting the back breaks are eliminated, improving the stability of high-wall slopes and to
provide uniform burden to the front row of holes for next blasting round. (2) As back breaks are
eliminated, formations of pre-formed boulders are reduced resulting better fragmentation in the
subsequent blasts. (3) Field observation reveals that, there is substantial reduction of ground
vibration level to the tune of nearly 1/3rd of normal production blast due to pre-splitting. (4) Pre-
splitting is most suitable for controlling ground vibration level in the case of Overburden Side
Cast Blasts. (5) Mega blasts conducted in opencast mines, the interference of ground waves
result. A very complex phenomenon of resultant waveform occurs, which is very difficult to
control only by NONEL or Electronic Detonators. Pre-splitting of production blast is the best
method of controlling or restricting the intensity of the waveform to propagate outside the Mega
blasting zone and thereby, protecting of Surface Structures.

Modern Technology & Equipment used: Some of the modern equipments available which
can be employed for the purpose of control of Ground Vibration are:
a) Seismograph or Ground vibration recorder is essential in documenting the un-wanted
side effects of blasting such as Ground vibration and Air blast.
b) It has been observed by use of sophisticated, precise and perfect timing Electronic
Detonators in Mega blast in opencast mines reduces intensity of Ground Vibration, as the

14
scattering (deviation of actual timing from nominal delay timing) of delay timing is almost
negligible or nil.
c) Modern surveying equipment and its Computer software provided wealth valuable
information on a blast and post-blast scenario. These include overburden – optimum front hole
location, custom loading information for front row hole burden, pre-blast mapping, post-blast
mapping & determination of cast / throw, volumetric calculation for swell factor and cast
percentage for basis of evaluation of economic advantages.
d) High Speed Photography recording is very efficient and extremely useful instrument for
analyzing of blasts and to assess delay sequence used for the blast. Now a days, high speed
photography to the tune of about 1000 frames per second is in vogue, which is very useful for
the purpose.
e) Velocity of Detonation Recorder is another useful instrument which can be used to
determine explosive performance in the hole.
f) Use of Precise Drilling Equipment to prevent any deviation of holes.

Conclusion: As a complex ground vibration phenomena are observed when dealing with
safety of dwellings and structures created above such underground workings/ cavities or in the
sensitive areas, it has become a challenge to the mining engineers to understand the peculiar
pattern of vibration wave generated. Extensive field study is required in order to understand the
wave pattern generated, change of characteristic of various waves when pass through Solid-Air
interfaces in the ground and to establish the Scaled Distance and safe charge per delay for a
area / structures in question. Pre-splitting of production blast is another important way to control
adverse impact of ground vibration, which blasting engineers should adopt.

References

1. Atlas Powder Company, Dallas, Texas, USA - “Explosive and Rock Blasting” 1987.

2. Siskind.,D.E., Stachura., V.J., Nutting, M.J.; (1987): “Low frequency produced by surface mine blasting over
abandoned underground mines”; USBM RJ9078.

3. Sharma., P.D : “Control of adverse effects of Explosives Blasting in mines by using Shock tubes(Non-
electric) Initiation system and its Future challenges”; Advances in drilling and blasting techniques- Procc. of
DRILL BLAST’99 – National Seminar on drilling and blasting, Bhubaneswar, India, January 2000.

4. DGMS (Tech)/S&T Circular No. 7 of 1997; “Damage of structures to blast induced ground vibrations in the
mining area”; Dhanbad, India.

5. Siskind.,D.E. (2000) : “Ground vibration from blasting”; Int. society of Explosives Engineers.

6. Siskind.,D.E. and Stachura., V.J.; “Vibrations from blasting over abandoned underground mines”; USBM
report - IC 9135h (1988).

7. Lucca., F.J.; “Tight construction blasting, Ground vibration basics, monitoring and prediction”; Terra
Dinamica L.L.C (2003).

8. Konya., C.J. & Watler., C. J.; “ Surface blast design”; Prentice Hall (1990).

9. Siskind., D.E., Stagg., M.s., etal ‘Structural response and damage produced by ground vibration from
Surface mine blasting’, USBM RI 8507, (1980).

10. Dowding,.C.H., ‘Blast Vibration Monitoring and Control’, Prentice Hall Inc., 1985.

11. Blasters’ Handbook – E.I.du Pont de Nemours & Co. (Inc.), Wilmington, Delaware 19898.

15
12. Nicholls., H.R., Jhonson., C. F. and Duvall., W.I., ‘Blasting Vibrations and their effects on Structures’,
USBM Bull. 656. (1971).

13. Gupta., R.N., Ghose., A.K., Mozumdar., B.K., Nabibullah., Md. - ‘Design of Blasting rounds with Airdeck
pre splitting for Dragline and Shovel benches near populated Areas – A case study’, Int. Symposium on
Explosives and Blasting techniques, N.Delhi, Nov. – 1990.

14. Sharma., P.D. – ‘Overburden Side casting by Blasting – Operating large opencast Mines in a cost
effective way’ , Proc., of 1st Asian Mining Congress, 16-18 January 2006, Kolkata, India, (Page No. 307 –
315), MGMI Centenary Vol.-1.

15. Watson., John. T. – ‘Developments with Electronic Detonators’, Proc., of Int. Conf. On Expl. & Blasting
Tech, ISEE (2002).

16. Sharma., P.D. - Open pit blasting with in-hole delays and / or pre-splitting of production blast – Measures
to control adverse impact of complex vibration arising due to presence of underground workings in the vicinity
or in otherwise sensitive areas; Mining Engineers’ Journal, August 2006.

Annexure - I

Known methods and techniques to reduce Ground Vibrations:

The following methods and Techniques have been successful in reducing ground vibration and
resulting annoyance complaint:

1. Reduce weight of Explosives per delay.

2. Reduce explosives confinement by :

a. Reducing burden and spacing.
b. Reducing buffers in front of face holes.
c. Reducing sub-drilling.
d. Reducing Hole depth.
e. Using a blast design that produces maximum relief: this means using large delays
between holes or rows of holes. Optimum delay intervals can be determined and
substantiated with the use of high-speed motion picture photography.
f. Allowing maximum number of free face to blast.

3. Whenever possible, the progression of detonating holes or a row of holes through millisecond
delay intervals should progress away from the structure.

4. Use larger delays, where geological conditions in conjunction with initiation system permit.

5. Where possible, keep the total lapsed time of the entire blast below 1-second duration.

6. Use electric millisecond detonators with sequential blasting machines or an initiating system with
an adequate number of delay intervals preferably, with down-the-hole delays causing bottom
charge and deck charge blast separated by delays.

7. Use of accurate delay timing detonators, i.e., Electronic Detonators, wherever possible minimizes
the intensity of ground vibration.

8. It has been observed that, using pre-splitting the production blast and by using air decking the
ground vibration is reduced considerably.

16
 Annexure - II

THRESHOLD VALUE OF GROUND VIBRATION AS PER DGMS (INDIA)

TYPE OF STRUCTURE PPV IN MM/SEC AT A FOUNDATION LEVEL OF

STRUCTURE AT A FREQUENCY.
<8Hz 8-25 Hz >25Hz
Building structure not
belonging to owner
1.Demostic House
structure kucha brick 5 10 15
&cement
2. Industrial building
10 25 25
RCC& Framed Structure
3.Objects of historical
importance and sensitive 2 5 10
structure
Building belonging to
owners with limited
span to life
1.Domastic houses 10 15 25
structure Kucha bricks &
cement
2.Industrial Building
15 25 50
RCC & framed structure

Author’s Bio-data:

Partha Das Sharma is Graduate (B.Tech – Hons.) in Mining Engineering from IIT, Kharagpur (1979) and was
associated with number of mining and explosives organizations, namely MOIL, BALCO, Century Cement, Anil
Chemicals, VBC Industries, Mah. Explosives etc., before joining the present organization, M/s Solar Explosives Ltd.,
few years ago.

Author has presented number of technical papers in many of the seminars and journals on varied topics like
Overburden side casting by blasting, Blast induced Ground Vibration and its control, Tunnel blasting, Drilling &
blasting in metalliferous underground mines, Controlled blasting techniques, Development of Non-primary explosive
detonators (NPED) etc.

Currently, author has following useful blogs on Web:

• http://www.environmentengineering.blogspot.com
• http://saferenvironment.wordpress.com
• www.coalandfuel.blogspot.com
Author can be contacted at E-mail: sharmapd1@gmail.com

***

17