Annales de Chimie: Science des Materiaux

Vol. 43, No. 1, February, 2019, pp. 29-36

Journal homepage: http://iieta.org/Journals/acsm

Impact of Blast Design Parameters on Blasted Muckpile Profile in Building Stone Quarries
Abhishek Sharma*, Arvind Kumar Mishra, Bhanwar Singh Choudhary

Department of Mining Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines), Dhanbad 826004, India

Corresponding Author Email: [email protected]

https://doi.org/10.18280/acsm.430105 ABSTRACT

Received: 28 October 2018 The purpose of this research is to investigate the influence of blast design parameters and
Accepted: 12 January 2019 key blasted muck-pile properties. Apart from steel and cement, crushed stone aggregates is
indispensable construction material produced by crushing of raw stone boulders raised from
Keywords: stone quarries through the conventional process of drilling and blasting. Controllable blast
stone quarries, drill-blast design parameters, design parameters i.e. bench height, spacing, burden, stemming, bench stiffness ratio and
muck profile, throw, drop, lateral spread powder factor have been found to influence the blasted muckpile properties to a greater
extent. It has been studied and reported that the properties of blasted muckpile influence the
performance of the loading equipment as well as balance sheet of the mining operations. In
this paper, an attempt has been made to investigate the influence of blast design parameters
and key blasted muckpile properties i.e. throw, drop, and lateral spread. Extensive field
trials and analysis of results revealed that throw, drop and lateral spread of the blasted
muckpile exhibited strong dependence on blast design parameters. Optimum muckpile
profile, as observed in the field and also, recommended by the excavators’ original
equipment manufacturer, in order to achieve the optimum operating performance of
excavators, were recorded at burden value of 20-21 times the hole diameter, spacing to
burden ratio in range of 1.30 to 1.40, stemming to burden ratio between 0.9 to 1.05, bench
stiffness ratio in range of 4.0 to 4.25 and powder factor range of 0.95 to 1.05 kg/cum. The
above conclusions shall be useful for practicing mining engineers for stone quarries in
similar rock mass condition in designing the blast to obtain the optimum muck pile profile
for efficient operation of excavators.

1. INTRODUCTION density, specific gravity, percentage of water absorption,

aggregates crushing value, aggregates impact value, Los
A country's level of human and economic development is Angles abrasion value and stripping value. Due to stringent
closely related to its levels of achievement in physical and requirement on quality, durability and strength aspects, most
social infrastructure. The role of infrastructure is very critical of the stone deposits which serve as source of the construction
in a developing country like India as infrastructure is strongly aggregates possess hard rocks like granite, gneiss, basalt,
related to economic growth and poverty reduction [1]. For gabbro, sandstone, quartzite to name a few [5, 6].
India to maintain the growth momentum, it is essential to Due to tough physical and mechanical properties of these
strengthen infrastructure facilities such as transportation, rock masses, drilling and blasting, by far, remains the most
energy, communication, and so on [2]. A country’s physical economical and productive method of disintegration of rock
infrastructure covers roads and highways, airports, railways, from its mother strata. The conventional cycle of operation
bridges, dams, power plants, metro rail and mono rail systems, being followed consists of drilling of holes, charging of these
urban mass rapid transit systems, defence bases, institutional, holes with explosives and initiation accessories followed by
commercial and residential buildings and factories. blasting, loading of blasted rock of proper size into the
Development of physical infrastructure in India not only transporting vehicle and despatch for further process of
contributes approximately 10 % to its gross domestic product crushing. In the process of crushing, raw stone boulders are
but also accounts for more than 65 % of the country’s total converted into stone aggregates of suitable sizes in various
capital formation [3]. Apart from steel and cement, stages. Some construction applications like rip-rap, gabion
manufactured stone aggregates including crushed sand is an walls, embankment of slopes etc. require the raw stone
essential raw material for any construction mix. Driven by boulders from a quarry to be used in raw form without
emphasis on development of physical infrastructure in India, application of crushing function [7, 8]. Most of the stone
which in turn, fuelled the demand of manufactured aggregates, crushing plant in India have a maximum intake size of (-)
country’s annual consumption of stone aggregates is expected 500mm. Considering the compactness of rock mass and size
to reach a colossal level of 2.5 billion metric tons by 2020 [4]. of the boulders to be loaded, back-hoe hydraulic excavator is
Stone aggregates are manufactured by crushing of raw stone the most common loading equipment used in stone quarries.
boulders which are produced in stone quarries. The However, there are cases where Run-off-Mine (ROM) size is
construction standards followed in India or elsewhere require as low as (-) 250mm, especially where crushing plants located
the stone deposits and crushes aggregates qualify the criterion in vicinity have smaller capacity and intake size. In such cases,
as regards uniaxial compressive strength, loose and bulk front end loader serves dual purpose – loading of raw stone

29
boulders in the quarry and loading of crushed aggregates at the more time is spent on accumulation of material to attain
crushing plant. desired bucket fill factor and hence, productivity with backhoe
Loading of blasted muck is key activity in any mining excavator in this case is low whereas front end loader should
operation which accounts for a considerable portion of the be more productive in this case. Case 2 exhibits muck pile with
overall mining cost. Brunton et al. demonstrated that low spread and high height. This profile provides high bucket
significant savings in mining cost can be made by making the fill factor and forward movement of muck under gravity
loading activity more efficient by means of optimising rock during loading and hence, productivity with back hoe
fragmentation and geometry of the blasted muck pile [9]. excavator is high whereas this profile is difficult to handle with
According to Choudhary the properties of the blasted front end loader. However, in this case, due to tightness of the
muckpile is one of the key factors affecting performance of the muck and less concentration of voids, the digging speed of the
loading equipment [10]. The pile of mineral or rock obtained bucket becomes a challenge. Case 3 shows a case where both
after blasting is called muckpile. Throw, drop and lateral the spread and height of muck are moderate, muckpile is loose,
spread are the properties of the muckpile which significantly concentration of voids is moderate and productivity with back
affect selection and productivity of loading equipment. Throw hoe loaders is reasonably high [16].
is defined as the distance of movement of the centre point of
gravity of a rock mass from its origin in the bench to the centre
of the muck pile formed after blasting [11]. Drop of muckpile Case - 1
Case - 2

is the vertically lowering of the blasted muck from its collar

level and lateral spreading is the horizontal distance up which
the blasted muck lies. Figure 1 illustrates each of these
parameters.
Case - 3

Throw
Drop

Figure 2. Muckpile profile parameters [16]

Bench Height

The above illustration show that muck profile has a

considerable influence on both selection and performance of
excavator. At the same time, throw, drop and lateral spreading
of muck pile are important parameters which indicate the
Lateral spread of the muck efficacy of blast design. Singh et. al. demonstrated that there
are explainable relations among various blast design
Figure 1. Muckpile profile parameters [10] parameters i.e. burden, spacing, stemming, bench height,
bench stiffness ratio, and powder factor and distances of throw
Throw, drop and lateral spread are essential parameters and lateral spread [17]. Rai et al. also found such relation and
which govern looseness of the blasted muck and hence, efforted to augment the muck pile throw and drop to suit
effective loading operation. Tosun et al. stated that few most loading conditions [18].
important parameters for loader efficiency are the loader While there have been a good deal of studies and research
approach angle to the pile, the filling and lifting time of the undertaken to ascertain influence of blast design parameters
loaders, and the bucket fill factor [12]. Different profiles of on blasted muckpile properties in metallic and other major
blasted muckpile and concentration of voids in it determine minerals, such investigations in stone quarries or other minor
digging time, bucket fill factor, and the diggability, which in minerals are limited. Stone quarries in India pose many
turn, influence the loading cycle time and output from the operational and engineering challenges in form of small
excavator. According to Brunten et al., excavator dig time is mining area, lower bench heights, difficult geological
defined as the period from when the bucket engages the conditions, vicinity of residential and other structures, and
muckpile to when it starts to swing or disengage. The bucket deployment of excavators of smaller bucket sizes - dominantly
fill factor is defined as the ratio between the nominal 0.9 m3 to 1.2 m3 - due to requirement of segregation and small
volumetric capacity and the actual volume of material in the production volumes. This paper, supported by structured and
bucket. Diggability can be defined as the ease with which the rigorous field work, efforts to bring out influence imparted by
shovel digs a rock unit. If the dig time is low, the muck pile is blast design parameters on properties of muckpile in Indian
considered to have high diggability, if the digging time is big stone quarries and find out the numerical values of key blast
then the muckpile is considered to have low diggability [13, design parameters which result into the blasted muckpile
14]. profile to provide optimum operating performance of the
Improper throw and drop of blast muck results into tight excavator, as observed in the field as well as recommended by
muck piles lying close to the face which makes digging of the the excavators’ original equipment manufacturers.
blasted muck cumbersome. Optimum throw and drop,
generates desired blasted muckpile geometry which facilitate
the digging of the muck [15]. Basis the spatial correlation of 2. FIELD DESCRIPTION
throw, drop and lateral spread, there could be three different
muckpile profiles resultant from a blast which are shown in Field experiments were conducted in three different
Figure 2. quarries of building stones situated in Bakhrija village of
Case 1 exhibits larger spread, low height of the muck pile Mahendragarh district in the Indian state of Haryana. These
which poses problems with back hoe hydraulic excavators as quarries are located adjacent to each other and are spread over

30
dimensions of 1600 meters in NS direction and 1100 meters in
EW direction with some non-mining / buffer area falling in
between. These quarries are known as Bakhrija Mining Plot 1,
2 and 4 respectively and have sanctioned mining lease areas of
11.5 hectares, 21.65 hectares and 34.64 hectares respectively.
Views of the quarries captured during the experiments are as
per Figure 3.
The petrographic investigation shows that the rock mass
contains 70-75 % quarts, 20-25 % feldspar, 1-2 % mica, 2-3 %
iron oxide. Key geo-mechanical properties of the rock mass Figure 3. View of Bakhirja Plot 2 &4 Masonry Stone
(black quartzite) are furnished in the Table 1. Quarries

Table 1. Key geo-mechanical properties of rock mas in quarries under study

S. N. Physical / Mechanical Property Observed Value Test Protocol

1 Specific Gravity 2.79 gm/cc IS:2386 (Part III)-1963-2011
2 Water Absorption 0.2 % w/w IS:2386 (Part III)-1963-2011
3 Aggregates Impact Value 16 % IS:2386 (Part IV)-1963-2011
4 Aggregates Crushing Value 19 % IS:2386 (Part IV)-1963-2011
5 Los Angles Abrasion Value 25 % IS:2386 (Part IV)-1963-2011
6 Stripping Value 96 % IS:6241 - 2008
7 10 % Fines Value 24 tons IS:2386 (Part IV)-1963-2011

Table 2. Engineering properties of explosives and accessories used during study

S. No. Property Description

Primer Charge Column Charge
1 Weight & diameter of cartridge 2.78 kg, 83mm 2.78 kg, 83mm
2 Nominal density 1.20 g/cc 1.20 g/cc
3 Relative weight strength 85-130 % 75-92 %
4 Relative bulk strength 109-184 % 98-130 %
5 Velocity of detonation (VoD) 3800 m/s 3500 m/s

Instantaneous stemming were hinged, and bench height and burden were
Electric Detonator
altered to get variability in bench stiffness ratio, and its impact
2.5 m Stemming Column on muckpile geometry was recorded. Type of drilling machine,
drill angle, type and make of explosives and accessories, and
Shock tube initiation patterns / firing sequence were kept constant
initiation system
throughout the study period. Drilling was done with
9m pneumatically driven machines with finished hole diameter of
Column Charge (75-
6.5 m 80%) 110mm with drill hole angle kept completely vertical. Holes
were charged with class 2 cartridged slurry high explosives as
primer charge (20-25 %) and class 2 cartridged slurry low
explosives as columns charge (75-80 %). Engineering
Base Charge(20- properties of explosives as provided by the explosive’s
25%)
manufacturer used are as per Table 2.

Figure 4. Cross section of a representative blast hole 134 92 75 92 134

charging at Bakhrija stone quarries

84 67 50 67 84
A total of 40 blasts were included in the study spanned over
a period of 12 months from January 2016 to December 2017.
Variations were produced in four key blast design parameters 59 42 42 59
namely bench height, burden, spacing and stemming which in 25

turn affected other indirect parameters like spacing to burden

ratio, bench stiffness ratio and powder factor. Due attention 34 17 0 17 34
was paid to the fact while varying one factor, other three
factors were kept constant. For first 10 blasts, bench height, FREE FACE
spacing and stemming length were kept constant and burden Trunk line detonators of 17 ms delay

was varied to observe the variation in muckpile geometry. For Trunk line detonators of 25 ms delay
Trunk line detonators of 42 ms delay
next 10 blasts, bench height, burden and stemming were 0,17,42 Firing time (ignoring the common DTH delay)
Surface connection through TLD
pegged and spacing was changed systematically and muckpile Progression of blast initation
properties were measured. In next 10 blasts, bench height,
burden and spacing were pegged and variations were created Figure 5. Layout of firing pattern followed at mines under
in stemming length. In the last ten blasts, spacing and study

31
 Initiation was through combination of instantaneous electric and firing sequence.
detonator and non-electric down the hole delay detonator of Post blasting, throw, drop and lateral spread were measured
450 milliseconds in-built delay. Surface connection was done manually taking offsets and using a steel tape.
using non-electric trunk line delay detonators of 17
milliseconds, 25 milliseconds and 42 milliseconds in-built
delays. A scheme of charged blast hole of 9 meters length is as 3. FIELD EXPERIMENTS - ANALYSIS AND RESULT
per the Figure 4.
Blast holes were arranged in square pattern and V or skewed The data set including blast design inputs and post blast
V type of initiation sequence was followed throughout the muckpile profile are as per the Table 3.
study period. Figure 5 shows the arrangement of drill holes

Table 3. Details of blast design parameters and resultant data set

Burden (m)
No. of holes

Height (m)

Throw (m)

spread (m)
Explosives

Spacing to
Stemming

Stemming
to Burden
consumed

Drop (m)
Quantity

(kg/cum)
Stiffness
Spacing

Powder
Burden

Lateral
Factor
Bench

Bench
S. No.

(cum)

Ratio

Ratio

Ratio
(kg)
(m)

(m)

1 75 9.00 2.00 3.00 2.75 4050.00 4900.00 1.21 12.20 5.70 48.00
2 41 9.00 2.20 3.00 2.75 2435.40 2675.00 1.10 11.20 5.90 46.00
3 40 9.00 2.25 3.00 2.75 2430.00 2525.00 1.04 11.70 5.30 44.00
4 56 9.00 2.30 3.00 2.75 3477.60 3550.00 1.02 12.10 5.10 48.00
5 43 9.00 2.40 3.00 2.75 2786.40 2700.00 No 0.97 11.90 5.00 38.00
6 44 9.00 2.50 3.00 2.75 2970.00 2650.00 Variation 0.89 11.00 4.70 33.00
7 39 9.00 2.60 3.00 2.75 2737.80 2450.00 0.89 11.00 5.20 35.00
8 27 9.00 2.70 3.00 2.75 1968.30 1850.00 0.94 10.80 5.00 37.00
9 50 9.00 2.80 3.00 2.75 3780.00 3250.00 0.86 10.20 4.80 33.00
10 68 9.00 2.90 3.00 2.75 5324.40 4450.00 No 0.84 9.00 3.00 30.00
11 100 9.00 2.30 2.50 2.75 5175.00 6100.00 1.09 Variation 1.18 10.00 5.00 42.00
12 41 9.00 2.30 2.60 2.75 2206.62 2575.00 1.13 1.17 10.30 4.60 43.50
13 107 9.00 2.30 2.70 2.75 5980.23 6700.00 1.17 1.12 11.00 5.70 44.00
14 42 9.00 2.30 2.80 2.75 2434.32 2675.00 1.22 1.10 11.20 5.00 47.00
15 99 9.00 2.30 2.90 2.75 5942.97 6450.00 1.26 No 1.09 11.50 5.20 50.00
16 43 9.00 2.30 3.00 2.75 2670.30 2700.00 1.30 Variation 1.01 12.00 6.20 51.00
17 82 9.00 2.30 3.10 2.75 5261.94 5350.00 1.35 1.02 11.70 4.20 48.00
18 57 9.00 2.30 3.20 2.75 3775.68 3700.00 1.39 0.98 11.20 5.20 46.00
19 43 9.00 2.30 3.25 2.75 2892.83 2800.00 1.41 0.97 11.00 4.90 41.00
20 45 9.00 2.30 3.30 2.75 3073.95 2950.00 1.43 0.96 11.40 3.90 45.00
21 33 9.00 2.30 3.00 2.10 2049.30 2100.00 0.91 1.02 12.60 7.20 64.00
22 20 9.00 2.30 3.00 2.20 1242.00 1300.00 0.96 1.05 12.10 7.00 54.00
23 23 9.00 2.30 3.00 2.30 1428.30 1475.00 1.00 1.03 11.80 6.20 49.00
24 38 9.00 2.30 3.00 2.40 2359.80 2475.00 1.04 1.05 12.00 6.60 50.00
25 78 9.00 2.30 3.00 2.50 4843.80 5325.00 1.09 1.10 10.50 5.20 47.00
26 36 9.00 2.30 3.00 2.60 2235.60 2450.00 1.13 1.10 10.10 4.90 44.00
27 45 9.00 2.30 3.00 2.70 2794.50 3075.00 1.17 1.10 9.00 5.00 39.00
28 68 9.00 2.30 3.00 2.80 4222.80 4575.00 1.22 1.08 9.30 4.70 37.00
29 45 9.00 2.30 3.00 2.90 2794.50 3200.00 1.26 1.15 9.20 5.90 37.00
30 47 9.00 2.30 3.00 3.00 2918.70 3300.00 No 1.30 1.13 7.10 3.80 31.00
31 81 6.00 2.20 2.75 2.25 2940.30 2325.00 Variation 2.73 0.79 5.90 2.70 28.00
32 23 7.00 2.20 2.75 2.25 974.05 825.00 3.18 0.85 7.90 2.30 33.00
33 28 8.00 2.20 2.75 2.25 1355.20 1225.00 3.64 0.90 8.50 2.50 37.00
34 64 11.00 2.20 2.75 2.25 4259.20 4300.00 5.00 1.01 11.90 4.90 59.00
35 82 11.00 2.50 2.75 2.25 6201.25 5475.00 No 4.40 0.88 9.60 5.10 58.00
36 30 6.00 2.00 2.75 2.25 990.00 850.00 Variation 3.00 0.86 4.90 2.10 33.00
37 66 11.00 2.60 2.75 2.25 5190.90 4425.00 4.23 0.85 11.30 5.10 49.00
38 90 11.00 2.70 2.75 2.25 7350.75 6025.00 4.07 0.82 10.75 5.20 41.00
39 44 7.00 2.30 2.75 2.25 1948.10 1600.00 3.04 0.82 8.20 3.10 31.00
40 26 11.00 2.80 2.75 2.25 2202.20 1750.00 3.93 0.79 10.00 4.80 43.00

Graphical analysis and its interpretation on finding keeping spacing and stemming fixed at 3.0 meters and 2.75
relationship between various drill-blast design parameters and meters respectively. Impact of burden on throw, drop and
fragmentation are detailed below. lateral spread is as per Figure 6, 7 & 8.
It was observed that throw, drop and lateral spread of the
3.1 Influence of burden on muckpile properties muckpile decreased with increment in burden values. At low
values of burden, the thickness of burden rock mass beam was
First 10 blasts were studied to ascertain influence of burden low and the explosion energy found less resistance to
on muckpile properties. For a bench height of 9.0 meters, effectively fracture and displace the rock. Also, at low values
burden was moved from 2.0 meters to 2.9 meters while of burden, the ejection velocity of the muckpile was high

32
which results in higher lateral and vertical displacement of
rock mass. As burden was increased, the thickness of burden
rock mass increased and explosives energy encountered
enhanced resistance in displacing the rock volume. This
reduced the ejection velocity of muckpile and quantum of
displacement of rock along horizontal and vertical dimensions
reduces. Desired muckpile profile to provide optimum
performance of excavator was achieved at burden value of
2.25 to 2.30 metres which correspond to 20-21 times the blast
hole diameter. Figure 10. Relation between spacing to burden ratio and
drop of the muckpile

Figure 6. Relation between burden and throw of the

muckpile
Figure 11. Relation between spacing to burden ratio and
throw of the muckpile

Throw, drop and lateral spread of the blasted muckpile

increased up to a spacing to burden ratio of 1.30 and started
decreasing thereafter. Muckpile profile to suit the optimum
loading conditions were recorded when spacing to burden
value was in range of 1.30 to 1.40. Very small values of
spacing, against a fixed burden, caused inadequate and
improper distribution and confinement of explosives energy
Figure 7. Relation between burden and drop of the muckpile which resulted in less horizontal and vertical movement of
blasted material. As spacing was increased to a certain limit
for a fixed burden distance, explosives energy was properly
confined and used in creating radial fractures which resulted
in higher throw, drop and lateral spread. Effective breakage
and rock movement decreased with increase in spacing beyond
certain level as the availability of explosion energy per unit of
area under breakage decreased.

3.3 Influence of stemming to burden ratio on muckpile

Figure 8. Relation between burden and lateral of the properties
muckpile
Next 10 blasts were designed to evaluate impact of
3.2 Influence of spacing to burden ratio on muckpile stemming to burden ratio on muckpile properties. For a bench
properties height of 9.0 meters, stemming was moved from 2.1 meters to
3.0 meters while keeping burden and spacing fixed at 2.3
Next 10 blasts were aimed to evaluate influence of spacing meters and 3.0 meters respectively. Impact of stemming to
to burden ratio on muckpile properties. For a bench height of burden ratio on throw, drop and lateral spread is as per Figure.
9.0 meters, spacing was moved from 2.5 meters to 3.3 meters 12,13 & 14.
while keeping burden and stemming fixed at 2.3 meters and
2.75 meters respectively. Impact of spacing to burden ratio on
throw, drop and lateral spread is as per Figure 9, 10 & 11.

Figure 12. Relation between stemming to burden ratio and

throw of the muckpile
Figure 9. Relation between spacing to burden ratio and
throw of the muckpile

33
 Figure 13. Relation between stemming to burden ratio and Figure 16. Relation between bench stiffness ratio and drop of
drop of the muckpile the muckpile

Figure 14. Relation between stemming to burden ratio and

lateral spread of the muckpile Figure 17. Relation between bench stiffness ratio and lateral
spread of the muckpile
As shown, throw, drop and lateral spread decreased with
increment in stemming over a fixed burden as both horizontal It was observed that throw, drop and lateral spread showed
and vertical movement of muckpile was hampered strong positive correlation with bench stiffness ratio. With
progressively when length of stemming column was increased. increase in the bench stiffness ratio, the burden rock mass
Optimum operating conditions were obtained when stemming beam under flexion became more flexible and less stiff and
to burden ratio was between 0.90 to 1.05. Stemming is the top made the rock mass easier to get deformed and displaced to
most portion of the blast hole which is filled with non- higher dimensions. Muckpile profile which provided optimum
explosive and inert material which serves to confine and retain operating performance of the excavator was achieved when
the explosion gases to effect proper breakage. However, when bench stiffness ratio was in range of 4.0 to 4.25.
stemming was increased beyond a point after such
confinement was achieved, it impacted the result of blast 3.5 Influence of powder factor on muckpile properties
adversely in form of generation of large sized boulders from
the collar region and restricted movement of muckpile because Due to variations made in values of spacing, burden,
increased concentration of oversized boulders hampered the stemming and bench height, powder factor and geological
trajectory of muckpile. conditions, values of powder factor moved from 0.79 kg/cum
to 1.21 kg/cum. Relation between powder factor and muck
3.4 Influence of bench stiffness ratio on muckpile properties are as shown in Figure 18, 19, and 20.
properties

For the last 10 blasts, both spacing and stemming were

pegged at 2.75 meters and 2.25 meters respectively and
variations in bench height and burden were brought in order to
alter the bench stiffness ratio. Bench height was varied from 6
meters to 11 meters; burden was kept fixed as long as variation
in bench height was possible. When a bench height was
repeated for study, burden was changed according to the site
conditions. Influence of bench stiffness ratio on throw, drop
and lateral spread is as shown in Figure 15, 16, and 17. Figure 18. Relation between powder factor and throw of the
muckpile

Figure 15. Relation between bench stiffness ratio and throw Figure 19. Relation between powder factor and drop of the
of the muckpile muckpile

34
 energy to create breakage and cause displacement of rock mass
kept increasing till a powder factor of 1.05 kg/cum was
achieved. However, increasing availability of explosives
energy didn’t mean increased utilization of it. Increasing
powder factor beyond a certain limit caused untoward post
blast effects like early ejection of stemming column, over-
breaks, air blasts etc. which left less explosion energy to cause
actual fracturing and movement of rock mass. Hence, throw,
drop and lateral spread showed decreasing trend after powder
factor value of 1.05 kg/cum approximately. Optimum
Figure 20. Relation between powder factor and lateral spread operating conditions for excavator were obtained at powder
of the muckpile factor values in range of 0.95 kg/cum to 1.05 kg/cum.
All three muckpile properties i.e. throw, drop and lateral 3.6 Variation in inputs and its impact on output
spread exhibited polynomial relation with powder factor.
These values increased from powder factor of 0.79 kg/cum to The range of variation made in blast design parameters and
1.05 kg/cum approximately and started falling thereafter. This the trend and quantification of their impact on blasted
can be explained as that the actual requirement of explosives muckpile geometry is as per the table 4.

Table 4. Summary of changes in input parameters and trend, and variation in muckpile geometry

S. Parameters Base Maximum Range of Trend of relation Change in Change in Change in

No. varied value variation variation throw (%) drop (%) lateral
value (%) spread (%)
1 Burden (m) 2.30 3.0 45 % Inversely proportional 26 % 49 % 38 %
2 Spacing to 1.09 1.43 32 % Downward exponential, 20 % 59 % 24 %
burden ratio increment till Spacing to
burden ratio of 1.3,
decrease thereafter
3 Stemming to 0.91 1.30 43 % Inversely proportional 44 % 47 % 52 %
burden ratio
4 Bench 2.73 5.00 83 % Directly proportional 143 % 148 % 111 %
stiffness ratio
5 Powder factor 1.21 0.79 53 % Downward exponential, 157 % 243 % 129 %
(kg/cum) increment till powder factor
of 1.05 kg/cum, decrease
thereafter

4. CONCLUSION Muckpile throw, drop and lateral spread exhibited directly

proportionate relation the bench stiffness ratio. Most
Key blast design parameters i.e. burden, spacing, stemming, productive blasted muckpile profile was obtained when bench
bench stiffness ratio and powder factor were moved stiffness ratio was between 4.0 and 4.25.
systematically and analysed to measure their influence on Relation between powder factor and blasted muckpile
muckpile properties, namely, throw, drop and lateral spread, properties was found to be downward exponential. Required
in order to ascertain the most optimum set of blast design muckpile conditions were achieved when powder factor was
parameters to achieve muckpile properties for optimum recorded between 0.95 kg/cum to 1.05 kg/cum.
operating performance of the loading equipment. The above conclusions shall be useful for practicing mining
Relation between burden and the throw, drop and lateral engineers for stone quarries in similar rock mass condition in
spread of the blasted muckpile was found inversely designing the blast to obtain the optimum muckpile profile for
proportional. The desired muckpile geometry which provided efficient operation of excavators.
optimum performance of excavator was observed at burden
value of 2.25 to 2.30 metres for a bench height of 9.0 metres.
These values of burden correspond to approximately 20-21 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
times the blast hole diameter.
Throw, drop and lateral spread of muckpile were found to The authors express their sincere gratitude towards the
be related in downward exponential manner with spacing to management of M/s Madaan Associates, New Delhi, M/s
burden ratio. For a bench height of 9.0 metres and burden of Tirupati Viniyoge Private Limited, Kolkata and Gradient
2.3 metres, spacing to burden ratio from 1.30 to 1.40 was Business Consulting Private Limited, Kolkata where the
found to provide the desired muckpile profile. studies were conducted, for their permission, help, support and
Stemming influenced the throw, drop and lateral spread of co-operation. Authors would also like to acknowledge the
the blasted muckpile in inversely proportionate manner. For a support and co-operations extended by the mining team and
bench height of 9.0 metres and burden of 2.3 metres, stemming front-line supervisors of these the companies.
to burden ratio between 0.9 to 1.05 has been found to give the
blasted muckpile profile for optimum operating performance
of the excavator,

35
REFERENCES muckpile shape parameters in low height benches.
Journal of Mines, Metals & Fuels 2016, 19-22.
[1] Pravakar P, Kumar DR. (2009). Infrastructure [11] Rustan A. (1998). Rock blasting terms and symbols.
development and economic growth in India'. Journal of A.A.Balkema, Rotterdam, Brookfield 58.
the Asia Pacific Economy 14(4): 351-365. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781466571785
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13547860903169340 [12] Tosun A, Konak G, Karakus D, Onur AH, Toprak T.
[2] Pradeep A. (2015). Infrastructure in India: Challenges (2012). Investigation of relationship between blasting
and the way ahead, Institute of Economic Growth. pile density and loader productivity. Proceedings of 10th
University of Delhi Working paper series no. E/350/2015. International Symposium on Rock Fragmentation by
[3] Anantha Murthy BS, Abhishek S. (2011). Mining for Blasting, Fragblast 10, New Delhi, pp. 385-389.
sustainable growth of Indian construction industry. https://doi.org/10.1201/b13759-48
Proceedings of Golden Jubilee Seminar on Mining [13] Doktan M. (2001). Impact of blast fragmentation on
Technology for Sustainable Development–MineTech’11, truck shovel fleet performance. Proceedings of the 17th
pp. 29-39. International Mining Congress and Exhibition of Turkey,
[4] Abhishek S, Mishra AK, Choudhary BS. (2018). pp. 375-379.
Sustainable exploitation of building stone in India – [14] Kirmanli C, Ercelebi SG. (2009). An Expert system for
emerging issues. Current Science 15(05): 838-844. hydraulic excavator and truck selection in surface mining.
http://dx.doi.org/10.18520/cs/v115/i5/838-84. The Journal of the South African Institute of Mining and
[5] Bureau of Indian Standards (1971). Specifications for Metallurgy 109: 727-738.
coarse and fine aggregates from natural sources for [15] Piyush R, Yang, HS. (2010). Investigation of some blast
concrete. Indian Standards (IS): 383-1970. design and evaluation parameters for fragmentation in
[6] Indian Road Congress on behalf of Government of India limestone quarries. Journal of Korean Society for Rock
(2013). Ministry of roads. Transport and Highways Mechanics, Tunnel & Underground Space 20(03): 183-
(MORTH) Specification for Road and Bridge Works 5 th 193.
Revision. [16] Chaudhary BS. (2013). Firing patterns and its effect in
[7] Froehlich D. (2013). Protecting bridge piers with loose muckpile shape parameters and fragmentation in quarry
rock riprap. Journal of Applied Water Engineering and blasts. International Journal of Research in Engineering
Research 1(1): 39–57. and Technology 02(09): 32-45.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23249676.2013.828486 http://dx.doi.org/10.15623/ijret.2013.0209005
[8] Toprak B, Sevim O, Kalkan I. (2016). Gabion walls and [17] Singh SP, Doorselaere DV. (2015). The relationship
their use. International Journal of Advances in between blasting parameters and muck pile configuration.
Mechanical and Civil Engineering 3(4): 56-58. Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on
[9] Brunton I, Thornton D, Hodson R, Sprott D. (2003). Rock Fragmentation by Blasting, Sydney, NSW 369-374.
Impact of blast fragmentation on hydraulic excavator dig [18] Piyush R, Yang HS. (2010). Blast design for controlled
time. Proceedings of the Fifth Large Open Pit Mining augmentation of muck pile throw and drop. Journal of
Conference, Kalgoorlie WA, pp. 39-48. Korean Society for Rock Mechanics, Tunnel &
[10] Choudhary BS. (2016). Excavator selection based on Underground Space 20(05): 360-368.

36