News Article | December 1, 2016
This report studies Explosives in Global market, especially in North America, Europe, China, Japan, Southeast Asia and India, focuses on top manufacturers in global market, with capacity, production, price, revenue and market share for each manufacturer, covering Orica Mining Services ENAEX Maxam Corp Sasol Limited Austin Powder Company AEL Mining Services Chemring Group Incitec Pivot AECI Group Pyro Company Fireworks ePC Group Alliant Techsystems Titanobel SAS Hanwha Corp Solar Industries India LSB Industries Market Segment by Regions, this report splits Global into several key Regions, with production, consumption, revenue, market share and growth rate of Explosives in these regions, from 2011 to 2021 (forecast), like North America Europe China Japan Southeast Asia India Split by product type, with production, revenue, price, market share and growth rate of each type, can be divided into Type I Type II Type III Split by application, this report focuses on consumption, market share and growth rate of Explosives in each application, can be divided into Application 1 Application 2 Application 3 1 Explosives Market Overview 1.1 Product Overview and Scope of Explosives 1.2 Explosives Segment by Type 1.2.1 Global Production Market Share of Explosives by Type in 2015 1.2.2 Type I 1.2.3 Type II 1.2.4 Type III 1.3 Explosives Segment by Application 1.3.1 Explosives Consumption Market Share by Application in 2015 1.3.2 Application 1 1.3.3 Application 2 1.3.4 Application 3 1.4 Explosives Market by Region 1.4.1 North America Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.4.2 Europe Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.4.3 China Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.4.4 Japan Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.4.5 Southeast Asia Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.4.6 India Status and Prospect (2011-2021) 1.5 Global Market Size (Value) of Explosives (2011-2021) 2 Global Explosives Market Competition by Manufacturers 2.1 Global Explosives Capacity, Production and Share by Manufacturers (2015 and 2016) 2.2 Global Explosives Revenue and Share by Manufacturers (2015 and 2016) 2.3 Global Explosives Average Price by Manufacturers (2015 and 2016) 2.4 Manufacturers Explosives Manufacturing Base Distribution, Sales Area and Product Type 2.5 Explosives Market Competitive Situation and Trends 2.5.1 Explosives Market Concentration Rate 2.5.2 Explosives Market Share of Top 3 and Top 5 Manufacturers 2.5.3 Mergers & Acquisitions, Expansion 3 Global Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue (Value) by Region (2011-2016) 3.1 Global Explosives Capacity and Market Share by Region (2011-2016) 3.2 Global Explosives Production and Market Share by Region (2011-2016) 3.3 Global Explosives Revenue (Value) and Market Share by Region (2011-2016) 3.4 Global Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 3.5 North America Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 3.6 Europe Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 3.7 China Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 3.8 Japan Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 3.9 Southeast Asia Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 3.10 India Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2011-2016) 4 Global Explosives Supply (Production), Consumption, Export, Import by Regions (2011-2016) 4.1 Global Explosives Consumption by Regions (2011-2016) 4.2 North America Explosives Production, Consumption, Export, Import by Regions (2011-2016) 4.3 Europe Explosives Production, Consumption, Export, Import by Regions (2011-2016) 4.4 China Explosives Production, Consumption, Export, Import by Regions (2011-2016) 4.5 Japan Explosives Production, Consumption, Export, Import by Regions (2011-2016) 4.6 Southeast Asia Explosives Production, Consumption, Export, Import by Regions (2011-2016) 4.7 India Explosives Production, Consumption, Export, Import by Regions (2011-2016) 5 Global Explosives Production, Revenue (Value), Price Trend by Type 5.1 Global Explosives Production and Market Share by Type (2011-2016) 5.2 Global Explosives Revenue and Market Share by Type (2011-2016) 5.3 Global Explosives Price by Type (2011-2016) 5.4 Global Explosives Production Growth by Type (2011-2016) 6 Global Explosives Market Analysis by Application 6.1 Global Explosives Consumption and Market Share by Application (2011-2016) 6.2 Global Explosives Consumption Growth Rate by Application (2011-2016) 6.3 Market Drivers and Opportunities 6.3.1 Potential Applications 6.3.2 Emerging Markets/Countries 7 Global Explosives Manufacturers Profiles/Analysis 7.1 Orica Mining Services 7.1.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.1.2 Explosives Product Type, Application and Specification 18.104.22.168 Type I 22.214.171.124 Type II 7.1.3 Orica Mining Services Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.1.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.2 ENAEX 7.2.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.2.2 Explosives Product Type, Application and Specification 126.96.36.199 Type I 188.8.131.52 Type II 7.2.3 ENAEX Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.2.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.3 Maxam Corp 7.3.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.3.2 Explosives Product Type, Application and Specification 184.108.40.206 Type I 220.127.116.11 Type II 7.3.3 Maxam Corp Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.3.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.4 Sasol Limited 7.4.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.4.2 Explosives Product Type, Application and Specification 18.104.22.168 Type I 22.214.171.124 Type II 7.4.3 Sasol Limited Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.4.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.5 Austin Powder Company 7.5.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.5.2 Explosives Product Type, Application and Specification 126.96.36.199 Type I 188.8.131.52 Type II 7.5.3 Austin Powder Company Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.5.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.6 AEL Mining Services 7.6.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.6.2 Explosives Product Type, Application and Specification 184.108.40.206 Type I 220.127.116.11 Type II 7.6.3 AEL Mining Services Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.6.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.7 Chemring Group 7.7.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.7.2 Explosives Product Type, Application and Specification 18.104.22.168 Type I 22.214.171.124 Type II 7.7.3 Chemring Group Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.7.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.8 Incitec Pivot 7.8.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.8.2 Explosives Product Type, Application and Specification 126.96.36.199 Type I 188.8.131.52 Type II 7.8.3 Incitec Pivot Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.8.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.9 AECI Group 7.9.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.9.2 Explosives Product Type, Application and Specification 184.108.40.206 Type I 220.127.116.11 Type II 7.9.3 AECI Group Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.9.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.10 Pyro Company Fireworks 7.10.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors 7.10.2 Explosives Product Type, Application and Specification 18.104.22.168 Type I 22.214.171.124 Type II 7.10.3 Pyro Company Fireworks Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016) 7.10.4 Main Business/Business Overview 7.11 ePC Group 7.12 Alliant Techsystems 7.13 Titanobel SAS 7.14 Hanwha Corp 7.15 Solar Industries India 7.16 LSB Industries 8 Explosives Manufacturing Cost Analysis 8.1 Explosives Key Raw Materials Analysis 8.1.1 Key Raw Materials 8.1.2 Price Trend of Key Raw Materials 8.1.3 Key Suppliers of Raw Materials 8.1.4 Market Concentration Rate of Raw Materials 8.2 Proportion of Manufacturing Cost Structure 8.2.1 Raw Materials 8.2.2 Labor Cost 8.2.3 Manufacturing Expenses 8.3 Manufacturing Process Analysis of Explosives 9 Industrial Chain, Sourcing Strategy and Downstream Buyers 9.1 Explosives Industrial Chain Analysis 9.2 Upstream Raw Materials Sourcing 9.3 Raw Materials Sources of Explosives Major Manufacturers in 2015 9.4 Downstream Buyers 12 Global Explosives Market Forecast (2016-2021) 12.1 Global Explosives Capacity, Production, Revenue Forecast (2016-2021) 12.2 Global Explosives Production, Consumption Forecast by Regions (2016-2021) 12.3 Global Explosives Production Forecast by Type (2016-2021) 12.4 Global Explosives Consumption Forecast by Application (2016-2021) 12.5 Explosives Price Forecast (2016-2021)
Ouchterlony F.,Lulea University of Technology |
Olsson M.,Lulea University of Technology |
Svard J.,Orica Mining Services
Rock Fragmentation by Blasting - Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting, FRAGBLAST 9 | Year: 2010
The crack patterns from contour blasting in Ø48-mm holes with Orica/Dyno Nobel SSE 0.35, 0.5 or 0.9 kg/m string emulsion charges in the Bårarp gneiss quarry have been studied, using both Nonel and electronic detonators. Some 24 blocks from behind half-casts were sawn and the cracks mapped. The crack lengths caused by simultaneously initiated SSE 0.35 kg/m or packaged Ø17 mm Dynotex 1 were practically the same. SSE 0.5 kg/m gave a roughly 50% increase in length. Nonel initiation resulted in longer cracks, as did water-filled holes. Nonel also gave a rougher remaining rock surface and frequently undetonated charges were found on the muck-pile. Earlier damage zone data were used to develop a suggested addendum to the present Swedish damage zone table. The use of simultaneously initiated decoupled light contour charges (q < 0.6 kg DxM/m) in dry holes has a damage suppressing effect compared to normal pyrotechnic initiation. © 2010 Taylor & Francis Group.
News Article | December 8, 2016
TORONTO, ONTARIO--(Marketwired - Dec. 8, 2016) - Dalradian Resources Inc. (TSX:DNA) (AIM:DALR) ("Dalradian" or the "Company") announces results from a third test stope at its Curraghinalt Gold Project in Northern Ireland. Stope 3 is located on the V-75 vein complementing two previous test stopes in the same area. The third stope was used to validate the long-hole mining method on a relatively shallow dipping (50-55°) portion of the vein in comparison to Stopes 1 and 2, which had dips of 73° and 76° respectively. Stope 3 attained an average width of 1.80 metres, with estimated dilution to the designed stope of 64% and removal of an estimated 303 ounces of gold at a grade of 9.41 g/t from 1,001 tonnes of material. "I am particularly pleased with the results from the third stope. This demonstrates our ability to long-hole stope veins at the shallow end of the range that we are likely to encounter at this deposit. The dilution was lower than predicted by the model and resulted in a diluted grade of 9.41 g/t of gold. With the exception of a single wedge failure in the footwall at the end of mining, Stope 3 remained open without support for several weeks. This indicates that we can easily manage dilution from the footwall by using simple low cost methods such as cable bracing." Table 1: Comparison of contained ounces of gold between resource model and test stoping results ** Design grade is based on the 2016 resource model; actual results grade is based on extensive muck sampling *** Design width is the minimum width necessary to recover all of the mineralized material predicted **** Post-mining volume was corrected to reflect removal of a single 190 tonne non-dilutory slab which fell into the stope void in the absence of normal operational ground support methods and after mucking The third test stoping area is in close proximity to the first two test stopes, approximately 60 metres below the surface on the V-75 vein at the deepest point of the current development (see figures 1-3 for location; all figures referenced in this news release can be accessed at http://www.dalradian.com/news-and-events/news-releases/news-releases-details/December-8-2016-News-Release-Figures/default.aspx). This location was selected as it contained shallower dipping veining than in Stopes 1 and 2, thereby testing long-hole mining in a more broadly representative manner. Stope 3 was 15 metres long and 14.1 metres high (see figures 4 and 5). Orica Mining Services aided in the design of the test stoping program, while CMAC-Thyssen worked alongside Dalradian staff in drilling and blasting the test stopes. The design of the stopes was based on 100% recovery of the vein using zipper drilling to reduce the amount of drilling, the powder factor and minimize dilution. The dilution anticipated by the preliminary geotechnical model was 85% on Stope 3 with a length of 15 metres, whereas actual results were 64% dilution with a 15 metre length. Eric Tremblay, P.Eng., Chief Operating Officer, and Greg Hope, MSc, MAIG, Chief Consulting Geologist, Dalradian Resources, are the Qualified Persons who supervised the preparation of the technical data in this news release. Underground development along the veins was sampled by the Production Geologist via chip panel sampling, across the full width of the face for each round on advance. Distinct geological zones were sampled separately (vein separate from wall rock), with a general minimum-maximum horizontal sample width of 0.10 metre to 1 metre and chip sizes approximating 3-4 centimetres. Four to five kilograms of material was chipped with a rock hammer from two thirds the height of each face down to the sill, in volumetric proportion based on relative abundance of mineralization versus gangue. Sample locations were measured from a surveyed control point. Channel samples were saw-cut into the sills of the 170 and 150 western sublevels along the V-75 vein for comparison with face and drill hole sampling. Samples were submitted to ALS Laboratories in the Republic of Ireland. Muck samples were taken continuously throughout the mucking process of each stope, at a frequency of 1 sample taken every two scoop buckets from the stope (each scoop bucket contains an estimate of 2.6 tonnes of muck). Sampling was done by the scoop operator, using a shovel to put muck into the individual sample bags, which allowed a representative sample of both coarse and fine rock fragments to be collected. Sampling was done by the same three individuals over the whole period of the program for consistency and the Production Geologist performed regular audits of the sampling technique. Sample bags were numbered in sequence representing the scoop bucket from which they were taken. The sample bags were tagged and secured by the Production Geologist and samples were submitted to ALS Laboratories in the Republic of Ireland. 367 muck samples were taken from Stope 3, totalling 1.8 tonnes of ore, or an average of 5 kg per sample. Quality assurance and quality control procedures identified no material issues. Face, channel and muck samples were analyzed by a 50 gram gold fire assay with either an atomic absorption, or a gravimetric finish for samples initially reporting over 100.0 g/t gold. ALS Laboratories is accredited by the Irish National Accreditation Board (INAB) to undertake testing, including for Ores and Minerals (INAB P9 703), as detailed in the Schedule bearing the Registration Number 173T, in compliance with the International Standard ISO/IEC 17025:2005 2nd Edition "General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories". Dalradian Resources Inc. is a gold exploration and development company that is focused on advancing its high-grade Curraghinalt Gold Project located in Northern Ireland, United Kingdom. The Company is completing a work program in support of a planning (permitting) application for construction of an operating mine at Curraghinalt. Components of the program include a feasibility study, an environmental and social impact assessment and underground exploration (960 metres of development with associated test stoping). In May 2016, Dalradian announced an updated mineral resource estimate for Curraghinalt, including a 109% increase in gold ounces contained in the Measured and Indicated categories compared with the 2014 resource. The current resource consists of 2.1 million ounces of contained gold in the Measured and Indicated categories (5.61 million tonnes at 11.61 g/t) and 2.3 million ounces of contained gold in the Inferred category (7.13 million tonnes at 10.06 g/t gold). For further information, see the NI 43-101 technical report entitled, "Technical Report for the Northern Ireland Gold Project, Northern Ireland", dated June 17, 2016 and prepared by Dr. Jean-Francois Couture, P. Geo. (APGO#0197) and Dr. Oy Leuangthong, P. Eng. (PEO#90563867), both of SRK Consulting (Canada) Inc. and Stacy Freudigmann, P. Eng. (APEGBC #33972) of JDS Energy & Mining Inc. This news release contains "forward looking information" which may include, but is not limited to, statements with respect to the future financial or operating performance of the Company and its subsidiaries and its mineral project, the future price of metals, test work and confirming results from work performed to date, the estimation of mineral resources, the realization of mineral resource estimates, the timing and amount of estimated future production, costs of production, capital, operating and exploration expenditures, costs and timing of the development of new deposits, costs and timing of future exploration, requirements for additional capital, government regulation of mining operations, environmental risks, reclamation expenses, title disputes or claims, limitations of insurance coverage, the timing and possible outcome of pending regulatory matters and the realization of the expected economics of the Curraghinalt gold deposit. Often, but not always, forward looking statements can be identified by the use of words and phrases such as "plans", "expects", "is expected", "budget", "scheduled", "estimates", "forecasts", "intends", "anticipates", or "believes" or variations (including negative variations) of such words and phrases, or statements that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would", "might" or "will" be taken, occur or be achieved. Forward looking statements are based on the opinions and estimates of management as of the date such statements are made and are based on various assumptions such as the continued political stability in Northern Ireland, that permits required for Dalradian's operations will be obtained on a timely basis in order to permit Dalradian to proceed on schedule with its planned exploration and development programs, that skilled personnel and contractors will be available as Dalradian's operations continue to grow, that the price of gold will be at levels that render Dalradian's mineral project economic, that the Company will be able to continue raising the necessary capital to finance its operations and realize on mineral resource estimates and current mine plans, that the assumptions contained in the Company's Technical Report are accurate and complete, that the results of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment and the Feasibility Study will be positive and that a permitting application for mine construction will be approved. Forward looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of Dalradian to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward looking statements. Such factors include, among others, general business, economic, competitive, political and social uncertainties; the actual results of current and future exploration activities; the actual results of reclamation activities; conclusions of economic evaluations; meeting various expected cost estimates; changes in project parameters and/or economic assessments as plans continue to be refined; future prices of metals; possible variations of mineral grade or recovery rates; the risk that actual costs may exceed estimated costs; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; accidents, labour disputes and other risks of the mining industry; political instability; delays in obtaining governmental approvals or financing or in the completion of development or construction activities, as well as those factors discussed in the section entitled "Risk Factors" in the Company's annual information form. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those described in forward looking statements, there may be other factors that cause actions, events or results to differ from those anticipated, estimated or intended. Forward looking statements contained herein are made as of the date of this news release and the Company disclaims any obligation to update any forward looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or results, except as may be required by applicable securities laws. There can be no assurance that forward looking statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward looking statements.
Hamilton C.,Stawell Gold Mines |
Degay Jr. B.,Orica Mining Services
11th AusIMM Underground Operators' Conference 2011, Proceedings | Year: 2011
Stawell Gold Mines (SGM) is an underground mining operation located in Victoria, Australia. The mining method employed is long hole retreat stoping, utilising up and downholes and artificial concrete pillars. Stawell is currently mining the Golden Gift and Magdala orebodies. Access to the Magdala and Golden Gift deposits is via 6.0 m wide by 5.5 m high declines developed at a gradient of one in eight to one in seven from the surface to a depth of 1500 m, with a planned depth of 1650 m. From the declines, cross cutting drives are developed to intersect the orebodies. Orebodies in the Gift system are discrete lodes which are generally mined from a bottom up centre retreat to minimise geotechnical stresses. Ore development fronts are currently located between 1000 m and 1500 m below surface, with all ore being hauled to the surface using a fleet of 60 tonne underground trucks. With the use of conventional pyrotechnic long period (LP) delays, broken rock of combined ore and waste is thrown 10 m from the face and the materials hauled to the surface. The majority of the mullock from development is consumed in the underground as backfill. With the use of Orica Mining Services eDev™ Electronic Blasting System for Tunnelling, the waste is thrown up to 40 m from the face, while majority of the ore is left 5 - 10 m from the face, effectively segregating ore and waste. This enables significant recovery of gold values with minimal loss and significantly reduced dilution. By using this technique in ore drives with a 30:70 waste to ore ratio, SGM is able to haul 24 000 tonnes less mullock to the surface annually. Resue mining is applied to narrow vein headings and gives a 40 per cent grade increase at the faces as well as increasing the economic footprint of development. This will also contribute to an improved grade profile for the year from 3.98 - 4.16 g/t Au and allow extra capacity for ore haulage from stoping and for milling. This paper describes the application and the successful blast outcomes achieved using the eDev™ Electronic Blasting Systems for resue mining at SGM. Results to date, since commencement in March 2010, have been achieving significant benefits in terms of ore grade as confirmed by geologists grab sample grades. Face advance have also shown improvement with better breakage of perimeter holes giving improved face profile. These benefits are delivering increased productivity and safety performance when compared to other resue firing techniques.
Brent G.F.,Orica Mining Services
International Journal of Mining, Reclamation and Environment | Year: 2011
Life cycle management can assist the mining industry in meeting its stated sustainability commitments. This paper demonstrates how sustainability metrics formulated from a life cycle perspective can be quantified at the operational level using a process model of open cut coal strip mining. An understanding of the material and energy flows of a working pit enables the identification of key areas to target for improvement. The effect of operational changes can also be modelled to determine changes in overall mine sustainability metrics, whether they are more local in nature, such as respirable particulates, or of global concern, such as greenhouse gas emissions. This can facilitate the adoption of more eco-efficient methods of operation, particularly where the focus is on maximising the output of the mine's ultimate utility; namely energy. An example is presented of a more ecoefficient method of blasting which reduces in-pit coal losses. © 2011 Taylor & Francis.
Lawrence J.,Orica Mining Services
Mining Magazine | Year: 2011
Coal & Allied engaged Orica Mining Services to conduct an advanced vibration-management project that would allow it to maintain an efficient mining process, while keeping vibration to agreed levels. The company aimed to conduct blasts within 40m of a high-tension tower, which could supply electricity to a major city. Orica designed the blast pattern for a series of four blasts, using Orica's SHOTPIus-i design software. For each planned blast, the engineers modeled the vibration levels and the probability of exceeding the limit. Hunter Valley Operations and Orica successfully fired four blasts in the first stage of the project. The vibration levels for each blast were below the agreed limit for the high tension tower of 50mm/sec. In the case of wall control, advanced blasting technology reduced overall risk by maintaining the integrity of walls to ensure safe operation, while at the same time increasing production.
Sheldon S.,Orica Mining Services
AusIMM Bulletin | Year: 2011
Scott Sheldon discusses how to assign value to a drill and blast wall control program through reduction in the risk profile. A typical drill and blast improvement program involves changing one or more parameters in the drill and blast process and measuring the impact this change has on the operation. Reaching final pit limits, achieving optimal wall angles, a reduction in the likelihood of wall slips or failures, a reduction in time spent battering down a wall, and not having to introduce remote equipment to work under high risk walls are examples of an economic benefit from a wall control program. The costs involved in cleaning up and remediating wall slips and failures, from loss of resource, single lane ramps, using remote equipment and so on can range from significant to catastrophic. A risk rating is then calculated for the event. If this risk rating is deemed unacceptable then risk mitigation measures are identified and the consequence and likelihood of the event reassessed on the basis of having applied these mitigation measures.
Lovitt M.B.,Orica Mining Services |
Collins A.H.,Orica Mining Services
Tunnelling in Rock by Drilling and Blasting: Workshop Hosted by FRAGBLAST 10 - The 10th International Symposium on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting | Year: 2013
Drill and Blast is a common construction method for the excavation of tunnels in rock. Much has been written about the use of explosives and sequencing to attain an excavation for access/ egress, but not enough emphasis has been placed on the drill design and assistance available for the tunnel (or jumbo) driller. The role of a tunnel driller is a complex and important one which requires skill and experience. The need for holes to be drilled both parallel and sub-parallel is an ability that needs computer support to be carried out with reliability and efficiency, especially where the length of the hole exceeds 4 m. This paper identifies the key design aspects required in the design of long rounds and the reasons why more assistance should be supplied to tunnel drillers to increase their effectiveness. Computer control systems for tunnel drills do exist but the lack of understanding of impact, cost and maintenance issues (from having alternate duties such as bolting and scaling) have limited their ongoing use. This, compounded by a reduction in experienced tunnel drillers, is impacting negatively on the efficiency and cost of drill and blast as a tunnel excavation process. This paper discusses the design aspects of tunnel designing along with a commentary on the explosive charging and sequencing. Jumbo operators will always be required to control the drilling rigs as exception decision-making is needed. Geological conditions, misfires, drill butts (sockets/bootlegs), services, poor blasting outcomes, etc. will provide a computer controlled drilling rig with exceptions it cannot deal with. At present these exceptions are handled by operators, but it is assistance in determining the toe position of a hole that is over 15 m away from the operator, to an accuracy of within 0.1 m that is needed by the operator. This ability to accurately place the toe will affect the advance rate, variance from design and overall tunneling costs. Explosive makers and users have products targeted to improve these performance indicators however fundamental to their performance are the holes drilled to design. More emphasis needs to be put on supporting the drilling cycle of the tunneling process.
Wall J.,Orica Mining Services |
Bottomley L.,Orica Mining Services
11th AusIMM Underground Operators' Conference 2011, Proceedings | Year: 2011
The use of electronic detonators in civil tunnelling applications, to reduce vibration in small firings has been successfully utilised for a number of years. As part of the mining industry's commitment to reducing blast damage during the development cycle in underground mining applications, a series of development blasts using e-Dev™ electronic detonators in a typical mining application was conducted at Resolute's Mt Wright operations in North Queensland in 2010. Results were based on direct comparisons to the current industry standard of non-electric firings as a baseline, with as many parameters as possible being captured during the trial. Development costs are typically high in most underground mines, especially in capital development headings, which are in waste and therefore of no direct economic value, so by being able to accurately fire to design, costs relating to both ground support requirements and volume of material removed, (and therefore haulage required) can be minimised. A direct comparison of overbreak (ground blasted outside of design) and cast (distance rock thrown from blast) was also made during the trial, as well as close monitoring of the drilling accuracy.
Spathis A.T.,Orica Mining Services
Rock Fragmentation by Blasting - Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting, FRAGBLAST 9 | Year: 2010
This is a guide to assessing features of blast-induced fragmentation distributions. Available formulae for fines, mean size, median, minimum size, oversize, cumulative distribution and measurement protocols are reviewed. The recommended approaches are: a crushed zone index model for fines; the Kuznetsov formula for mean size; the median and mode may be inferred from the mean given an analytical model for the size distribution; the minimum size based on a uniform strain rate loading in the absence of other options; oversize based on rules regarding the relative sizes of the burden, joint spacing and acceptable maximum size; it is adequate to use the popular Rosin-Rammler curve for the cumulative distribution although the SWEBREC function offers improvements in the fines region. Field assessment of size distributions can use 2D image analysis or 3D stereoscopic approaches. Both these techniques demand suitable sampling of the data and require more than approximately 64 particles in an image and at least 10 to 100 images. Differences between two distributions may be assessed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic, chi-square statistic or methods based on multiple linear regression. © 2010 Taylor & Francis Group.