Accepted Manuscript

Assessing and controlling of bench blasting-induced vibrations to minimize impacts to

a neighboring community

V.F. Navarro Torres, Leandro G.C. Silveira, Paulo F.T. Lopes, Hernani M. de Lima

PII: S0959-6526(18)30881-3
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.210
Reference: JCLP 12468

To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production

Received Date: 12 November 2017

Revised Date: 20 March 2018
Accepted Date: 21 March 2018

Please cite this article as: Navarro Torres VF, Silveira LGC, Lopes PFT, de Lima HM, Assessing and
controlling of bench blasting-induced vibrations to minimize impacts to a neighboring community, Journal
of Cleaner Production (2018), doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.210.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 1
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Assessing and controlling of bench blasting-induced vibrations to minimize impacts to a

neighboring community

Navarro Torres, V.F.a; Leandro G. C.Silveira ab*; Paulo F.T. Lopesb; Hernani M. de Limab
a
Instituto Tecnológico Vale (ITV), Brazil
b
Department of Mining Engineering, Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto (UFOP), Brazil

PT
Abstract

RI
Blasting is an important operation in mining production but is a source of concern due to its

associated environmental impact; in particular, blasting-induced vibrations may cause

C
structural damage and human discomfort. For decades, communities near open-pit mines have

US
complained of blasting-induced vibrations. This study presents a methodology to predict,
AN
assess, and control ground vibrations in large open-pit mines operating close to a community.

To conduct this study, 178 levels of blasting-induced vibrations were recorded in an area
M

encompassing a large open-pit iron ore mine and a neighboring community located in the

Quadrilátero Ferrífero, state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Collected data were processed with
D

multiple regression techniques to obtain the blasting vibration attenuation law to predict the
TE

levels of blasting-induced vibrations for the locality studied with knowledge of only the

maximum explosive charge per delay and the distance to the blasting point. Brazilian and
EP

international admissibility standards of blasting-induced vibration, the minimum distance

C

between the mine and community and the constants obtained from the regression were used to
AC

establish the maximum explosive charge per delay for an acceptable ground vibration level

that would not cause structural damage and human discomfort. Finally, the proposed

methodology was validated by comparing the predicted ground vibrations levels to measured

values. The results demonstrate that this methodology can be applied to any open-pit mine to

control blasting-induced vibration effects.

 2
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Keywords: blasting-induced vibration, open-pit mining, attenuation law.

1. Introduction

Mining is frequently considered to be a threat to natural surroundings, with effects to air,

PT
water, soil, and biodiversity, even though the mining sector provides energy and raw materials

for several industries (Vintró et al., 2014). The global demand for explosives has been rising,

RI
mainly due to the demands of the mining and construction industries (Ferreira et al., 2015;

Oliveira et al., 2016). Historically, rock blasting has been based on the experience of the

C
operators, whose main objective was to fragment the rock needed for production; however,

US
rock blasting decisions have often neglected blast-induced vibration. Due to the large
AN
populations residing close to mining projects and due to stringent environmental laws and

requirements, scientific concepts must be applied for the control of blast-induced vibrations.
M

Therefore, there has been a proliferation of studies about the environmental impact of mining

activities, particularly involving blasting-induced vibration. Several countries, including the

D

United States of America, Germany, England, France, Spain, Portugal, Australia, India, and
TE

Brazil, have conducted research to establish limits of ground vibration levels to minimize
EP

structural damage and human discomfort (AFTES, 1974; USBM, 1980; NP 2074, 1983, 2004,

and 2015; DIN 4150, 1986; BS, 1990, 1992, 1993, and 1997; CMRI, 1991; CETESB D7 013,
C

1992; UNE 22381, 1993; TNMCP, 2013; NBR 9653, 2004).

AC

Peak particle velocity (PPV), peak vector sum and frequency are the parameters most

often used to assess the structural damage and human discomfort caused by rock blasting.

Frequency plays a key role in vibration assessment because the response of the buildings near

the seismic wave propagation zone depends on the ground vibration frequency (Khandelwal
 3
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

and Singh, 2006) and the human vibration sensitivity depends on the PPV, vibration

frequency, event duration, and event frequency (Faramarzi et al., 2014).

Blasting-induced vibration generally has adverse effect on adjacent structures and on the

human comfort during blasting operations, and the assessment and control of its impact are a

PT
significant matter. According to Dowding (1985), ground vibration is the combined results of

the vibrations induced by compression wave (P-wave), shear wave (S-wave) and Rayleigh

RI
wave (R-wave).

The assessment of ground vibration levels and its deleterious effects have been of

C
considerable interest within the scientific community. There are several studies on this topic

US
exploring different approaches to minimize side effects (Mohamed, 2011; Hudaverdi, 2012;
AN
Álvarez-Vigil et al., 2012; Vasović et al., 2014; Faramarzi et al., 2014; Hajihassani et al.,

2014; Bakhtavar, 2016; Kabwe and Wang, 2016). Kamali and Ataei (2010) used
M

seismographs to perform vibration monitoring of detonations to excavate the Karoun III,

located in Iran, in order to predict the PPV using three techniques: multivariate analysis,
D

empirical laws and artificial neural networks. According to the same authors, although the
TE

three models generated good results, artificial neural networks are the most effective for
EP

predicting the velocity of particles. Artificial neural networks had a coefficient of

determination (R2) of 0.98, whereas the multivariate regression had an R2 of 0.94 and the
C

empirical model had an R2 of 0.92. Athough in the majority of cases in the literature, the
AC

improvement was not much greater and the technique was not easy to be applied in mining

engineering operation practice.

Ghasemi, Ataei and Hashemolhosseini (2012) developed a fuzzy logic mode involving

computational modeling that has the capacity to generate responses to ambiguous situations.

This model was implemented in MATLAB to predict the vibration velocity of particles based
 4
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

on data collected at a copper mine in southwest Iran. The authors concluded that fuzzy logic

was a good predictor of the PPV.

Recently, some authors also used empirical models to predict blasting-induced vibration.

Avellan, Belopotocanova, Puurunen (2017) investigated a case history of Olympic Stadium

PT
renovation in Helsinki, Finland, with a focus on blasting rock masses near the Olympic

Stadium Tower using an empirical model to predict ground vibration, but with predetermined

RI
coefficients. The authors concluded that some points could have been taken into account with

more analytical approach to protect structures in addition to standards of admissibility, such

C
as: underlying ground conditions, rock properties, local geology, surface topography, building

US
structure properties investigation, such as layout, site plan, type of foundations, original
AN
architectural and structural design specifics, explosive quantity, geometry, operational

parameters. Gu et al. (2017) studied the blasting-induced vibration effect on lighthouses

M

during underwater drilling blasting. The authors predicted blasting-induced vibrations based

on an adapted empirical model for blasting in water depth. The methodology was effective
D

and they concluded that PVS predictor has the highest safety factor to protect structures.
TE

Jian et al. (2017) proposed models to predict the vibration safety criteria for surficial rock
EP

mass of open pit slope affected by underground mining blasting operation. The authors also

compared the obtained levels of vibration to local standards.

C

Gui et al. (2018) investigated the blast wave spacial variation of ground vibration
AC

considering field geological conditions, using finite difference method. The authors has

concluded that the simulation results revealed the significance of the rock-soil interface on the

rock blast wave attenuation compared to rock only mode tested, hence using ground vibration

to assess structures safety without taking geological conditions into consideration may be

misleading.
 5
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Although different studies have portrayed the most widely used and new techniques to

predict ground vibration levels, such as artificial neural networks, fuzzy logic, and attenuation

laws, the adopted methodologies are complex and require a high level of computer knowledge

to assess the side effects of blasting operations, particularly in large open-pit mines near

PT
communities and infrastructure.

Iso-vibration maps are useful for visualizing how shock waves propagate through the

RI
ground and air and reach a certain region in the form of blast-induced vibrations or air-blast

overpressure. It is difficult to find examples of the application of iso-value maps of peak

C
vector sum (PVS) and air-blast overpressure in the literature due to the need for several

US
seismographs for the plot.
AN
Geosonics Inc., a company that produces and markets seismographs, has developed a

method called "iso-seismic mapping" to measure the effect of ground vibration by installing
M

multiple seismographs around a mine. The widespread distribution of this equipment as well

as its installation in communities allows one to determine how geology contributes to

D

structural damage or even to the human discomfort caused by vibrations. The construction of
TE

these maps involves interpolation because the available database is based on seismograph
EP

measurement points; contour maps can be predicted and plotted using kriging or other

interpolation techniques.
C

Iron ore mining using open-pit mining operations, which are commonly characterized as
AC

highly productive (Ferreira and Leite, 2015), extremely capital-intensive (Pimentel et al.,

2016) and close to small towns or communities, is widespread in the Quadrilátero Ferrífero

region of the state of Minas Gerais. There are frequent complaints regarding blasting-induced

vibration by local communities near these mines. A study was conducted in an iron ore mine

close to a community to minimize blasting-induced vibrations. This study proposes a

 6
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

methodology to assess and control blasting-induced vibrations and presents the results of a

case study.

2. Materials and methods

PT
The methodology used in this study comprise six major steps, as detailed in Figure 1. For

the case study, the methodology is described in more detail, and the materials used are

RI
reported. The five steps are as follows:

C
1) Ground vibration monitoring in the region located between the mining area and

community using engineering seismographs to determine the PVS, maximum explosive

US
charge per delay (Q), distance between the source of the detonation and measurement point
AN
(D), and frequency of the vibration (f).

2) Computation of the blasting vibration attenuation law of the locality using multiple -
M

regression analysis of the data and Equation (1) proposed by Holmberg and Persson (1979):
D

(1)
TE
EP

where:

is the PVS (mm/s),

C

is the maximum explosive charge per delay (kg), D is the distance between the blast and measurement
AC

points, and

are the constants of the local ground and particularities of the blast.

Different empirical models of the blasting vibration attenuation law are available in the

literature (Attewell and Farmer, 1973; Wiss, 1981; Svinkin, 1999). Equation (1) is effective

and easiest to apply because it uses the real distance instead of the scaled distance.
 7
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3) Prediction of blasting-induced vibration values using Equation (1) for each

measurement point and plotting contour maps using kriging as the interpolation method.

4) Calculation of the maximum explosive charge per delay, Q, for blasting-induced

vibration prediction using Equation (1a):

PT
(1a)

C RI
where:

US
is the admissible adopted standard of the blasting-induced vibration;

a, b, and c are the constants obtained from multiple-regression analysis; and

AN
D is the minimum distance between the mine and the community to ensure that the vibration levels do not

cause structural damage or human discomfort.

M

5) Vibration simulation using a 20-kg steel ball free fall at different heights near

community buildings to observe possible vibration attenuation in these structures.

D
TE
C EP
AC
 8
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Drilling Charging Blasting

Amplitudes and
Monitoring point frequency of vibration

Distance Explosive
(D) charge (Q) PVS (Vr)

PT
Frequency
Database Initial database (f)

RI
Statistics Representative Comparison
analysis database to geology

C
and
Outliers Multiple distance

US
removal regression

No
Acceptable
AN
correlation?
Yes
M

Empiric constants
(a,b,c)
D

Propagation law of Maximum explosive

vibrations charge per delay
(according to standards)
TE

Contour map of
ground vibrations
EP

Figure 1. Methodology used to predict, assess, and control blasting-induced vibration.

C

2.1. Case study in a large open-pit iron mine

AC

2.1.1. Geological and geomechanical description

To properly describe the lithological rock types of the studied mine, the mine geotechnical

team included a special class in the original classification of Bieniawski (1973), which is

saprolite or structured soil. In the context of iron formation, this class presents considerably

higher resistance than that typically obtained for structured soils and extremely weathered
 9
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

rocks from the shale and quartzite alteration that comprises the other lithotypes of the mine

(Galbiatti, 2006).

The adopted class for the iron formation refers to the possibility of excavating and

scarifying rock equipment used in mining to differentiate from the hard horizons only

PT
excavated by blasting (Galbiatti, 2006). The rock was classified according to the

geomechanical characteristics based on RMR (Bieniawsky, 1989) in different classes:

RI
• Special class: characterized by the presence of mature residual soils, transported soils

and friable lithotypes with low cohesion.

C
• Class V (very poor rock mass): presents low resistance, being completely altered and

US
fractured. Geotechnically characterized as very poor.
AN
• Class IV (poor rock mass): characterized by altered and intensely fractured rock.

• Class III (medium mass): presents moderate to high resistance, characterized by low to
M

medium variation, composed of rock mass.

The mine comprises the new class of rock mass covering the majority of the mine area,
D

occurring in the east and west portions of the mine, with a mean thickness of 30 m to 150 m.
TE

They refers to lithotypes of the Piracicaba Group and the shale of the Rio das Velhas
EP

Supergroup, which comprise the hanging wall and footwall of the ore. Class V is found in the

western and southern portions of the mine, with a thickness ranging from 45 m to 110 m.
C

Compact itabirite and shales of the Rio das Velhas Supergroup are found in that region. Class
AC

IV is present in the western part of the exploitation, with a thickness ranging from 10 to 80 m;

only the shale of the Rio das Velhas Supergroup occurs in this class. Class III is found in the

central part of the mine with greater central-north occurrence. The most common group of

rock in this class is compact itabirite, but dolomite itabirite and shale are also found in the Rio
 10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

das Velhas Supergroup in smaller amounts. The geological and geomechanical rock types of

the studied mine are shown in Figure 2.

PT
C RI
US
AN
M
D
TE

Figure 2. Geological and geomechanical map of the studied mine

EP

2.1.2. Blasting-induced vibration data collection

C

To record the PVS and associated frequencies, blasting-induced vibration data were
AC

collected based on 10 blasting tests using 20 engineering seismographs (GEOSONICS®,

model SSU 3000 EZ +) located at different points between the mining area and the

community (Figures 3 and 4). One should pay attention to the number of events registered to

perform the multiple regression analysis instead of the number of seismographs, since it is

fundamental to obtain a representative sample size to perform regression analysis, in this case,
 11
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

a minimum of 66 records would be necessary according to Green’s criteria for a multiple

regression (Green, 1991).. In this particular study, a number of 20 engineering seismographs

were available to conduct the tests. The measurement points were regularly placed over the

monitored site to verify the propagation of the vibration with the increasing distance in

PT
different directions according to lines to verify possible difference in wave propagation, since

when there is joint system, propagation may differ with direction (Nicholls et al., 1971). A

RI
database containing 178 records of blasting-induced vibration events was created,. The

distance (D) between the blasting locality and monitoring point was calculated using the

C
coordinate system of the GPS Garmin® model map, and the maximum explosive charge per

US
delay (Q) of each blast was recorded. A vibration trigger of 0.25–1.02 mm/s and a temporal
AN
window of 5–8 s were established to avoid recording such events as car traffic or even

pedestrians walking. The summarized blasting-induced vibration database is presented in

M

Table 1.
D
TE
C EP
AC
 12
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Figure 3. First distribution of blasting and monitoring points.

PT
C RI
US
AN
Figure 4. Second distribution of blasting and monitoring points.
M

Table 1. Blasting-induced vibration summarized database.

D

Blasting
events Q (kg) Distance (m) PVS (mm/s) Frequency (Hz)
TE

1 1,250 376.18–1,694.00 0.32–1.97 4–10

2 2,000 51.74–1,826.50 0.44–3.75 4–10
3 1,500 384.09–1,845.03 0.51–4.00 4–10
EP

4 1,750 492.00–1,954.70 0.38–2.79 4–10

5 1,000 390.50–1,703.82 0.32–2.03 4–10
6 1,400 100.96–1,621.51 0.38–15.88 4–10
C

7 1,600 321.16–1,608.20 0.38–2.35 4–10

AC

8 1,350 312.25–1,424.15 0.25–5.59 4–10

9 800 597.68–1,649.27 0.25–2.54 4–10
10 2,100 239.64–1,313.48 0.25–6.67 4–10
Q (kg): Maximum explosive charge per delay
 13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

2.1.2. Statistical analysis to obtain the blasting vibration attenuation law

PT
There were 178 PVSs originally recorded. Some outliers were removed by using the

determination of outliers procedure known as the modified Thompson Tau test based on the

RI
study of Olewuezi et al. (2015), leaving 134 PVSs remaining for the creation of a database,

C
which is also composed of the maximum explosive charge per delay (kg) and the distance

from each measurement point to the source of vibration (m). The PVS was used instead of the

US
PPV because the latter frequently has lower values, hence an assessment using PVS is in
AN
favor of safety. The LABFit® software was used for multiple-regression analysis to obtain the

blasting vibration attenuation law from Equation (1).

M
D

2.1.3. Calculation of the maximum explosive charge per delay and contour map of the
TE

blasting-induced vibration
EP

Equation (1a) was used to calculate the maximum explosive charge per delay (Q), and the

minimum distance between the mine and the community (500 m) was applied. To obtain a
C

comprehensive visualization of the propagation of the blasting-induced vibration levels, iso-

AC

vibration contour maps were plotted for each monitoring point using the Surfer® software,

kriging interpolation method, and blasting vibration values calculated with Equation (1).

2.1.4. Method validation

 14
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Blasting monitoring was conducted again to validate the method. Seven seismographs

(five GEOSONICS®, model SSU 3000 EZ + and two INSTANTEL®, model Micromate)

were deployed in the region between the mine and community and in the community itself at

different distances from the blasting points (Figure 5). The maximum explosive charge per

PT
delay applied to the blast was 1,311 kg of emulsion. A vibration trigger of 0.25 mm/s and a

temporal window of 9 s were used. A regression analysis of the measured PVS versus

RI
Predicted PVS was performed using MiniTAB 17®.

C
US
AN
M
D
TE
EP

Figure 5. Locations of the blasting and monitoring points used to validate the
method.
C
AC

2.1.5. Study of ground vibration attenuation in building floors

To study the ground vibration attenuation in the community’s buildings, a simple

calculation was proposed, as shown in Equation (2). Vibration simulations were performed by

a steel ball in free fall and seismographic monitoring nearby and inside of three types of

structures (old, concrete built and steel built).

 15
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

If:

> , so ,. (2)

PT
amplification occurs, otherwise:

C RI
(2b)

US
AN
where:
M

is the PVS in a point n inside or closest to the evaluated building;

is the PVS at a subsequent point to the measurement point in the structure, closest to the source of
D

vibration.
TE

Two seismographs (GEOSONICS®, model SSU 3000 EZ +) were used, and vibration

triggers of 0.13 and 0.25 mm/s were configured according to seismograph location. The steel
EP

ball was dropped at free fall from different heights (1 m, 1.2 m, 1.4 m and 1.6 m). The
C

potential energy was calculated by the product of the mass, gravity and height. The
AC

seismographs were located 8 m and 6 m from the source of vibration.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Comparison of PPV with Brazilian and International Standards

Prior to the present study, under supervision of the authors, the mine environmental team

have conducted blasting monitoring regularly in the community over four months using 2
 16
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

engineering seismographs (INSTANTEL®, model Micromate). A database containing 53

records of blasting-induced vibration events was created. PPV ranging from 0.19 to 3.49

mm/s and frequencies from 2.2 to 250 Hz were registered. The PPV records were compared

with Brazilian and international standards. The maximum charge that induced the PPV ranged

PT
from 800 to 2,100 kg.

Using the PPV values and their associated frequencies, scatter plots of the data were

RI
plotted with the reference values proposed by standards NBR 9653 (Figure 6), USBM 8507

C
(Figure 7) and NP 2074 (Figure 8). Only the records of the monitoring points allocated in the

US
community were considered in these graphs; the community houses were classified as old or

modern according their built date and constituent material to apply the USBM 8507.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

Figure 6. PPV versus NBR 9653

 17
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
C RI
US
AN
Figure 7. PPV versus USBM 8507
M
D
TE
EP
C
AC

Figure 8. PPV versus NP 2074.

 18
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

According to the NP 2074 standard, only sensitive structures, such as old houses, could be

affected by only two registers of vibration. The remaining registers do not exceed the

permissible limits of NP 2074, NBR 9653 or USBM 8507. The calculated PPVs are lower

than the relevant CETESB D7013 and Transport Noise Management standards.

PT
C RI
US
AN
M
D

Figure 9. PPV versus CETESB D7.013 and Transport Noise Management.

TE

Only one vibration record exceeds the vibration limit suggested by Transport Noise
EP

Management to assess human discomfort. In view of these records, rock blasting commonly

practiced in the mine may affect the structures and does not guarantee that there will not be
C

human discomfort according to the main standards evaluated. Hence, a methodology to

AC

control the blast effects was urgently needed.

3.2. Blasting vibration attenuation law

Figure 10 shows the PVS, maximum explosive charge per delay and distance plotted

using the statistical software LABFit®. The largest PVS values are recorded at short
 19
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

distances. They decrease with increasing distance between the monitoring and blast points.

An inverse correlation was also observed for the maximum explosive charge per delay based

on Equation (1). The attenuation law with a determination of 0.87 was obtained from

statistical data processing (Table 2):

PT
(1)

RI
Table 2. Approximated parameters obtained from multiple-regression analysis.

C
US
Parameter Value Standard deviation
a 900 0.64 * 103
b 0.27 0.98 * 10-1
AN
c -1.29 0.28 * 10-1
M

The constants are similar to those described by other authors, including Navarro Torres

and Bernardo (2004), confirming the reliability of these parameters. The determination
D

coefficient of 0.87 is considered acceptable in the literature (Kamali and Ataei, 2010),
TE

particularly for the Quadrilátero Ferrífero geology, which is highly complex and contains

many joint sets. Hence, a useful tool to predict the PVS can be established.
C EP
AC
 20
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
C RI
US
Figure 10. PVS versus maximum explosive charge per delay and distance.
AN
Figure 11 shows the current and future boundaries of the studied mine using Datamine

software®, focusing on the lithology (mostly itabirite) and the marked vertical section from
M

the mine to the community.

D
TE
C EP
AC
 21
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Friable itabirite
Manganese itabirite

PT
High grade friable itabirite
Phyllite
Vertical section

RI
Community border
Current mining border
Future mining border

C
Monitoring point

US
Blasting

1250 m
AN
M

Figure 11. Current and actual mine boundaries highlighting the section from mine
to community.
D

Figure 12 shows the interpreted vertical section highlighting lithology, topography and
TE

PVS versus distance calculated according to the obtained vibration attenuation law. To plot

the PVS versus distance, a maximum charge per delay of 1,500 kg and an abscissa axis origin
EP

beginning at the blast point were considered.

C
AC
 22
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

20,00
PVS (mm/s)
15,00

10,00

5,00

0,00
-1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500
Distance (m)
SW NE

PT
1150
1050
950

RI
850
750
650

C
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Friable itabirite

US
Manganese itabirite
Phyllite
High grade friable itabirite
AN
Figure 12. Lithological vertical section from the mine to the community.

As expected, a decrease in the PVS was observed with increasing distance. The PVS
M

dropped considerably for distances less than 100 m to adjacent points (distances of at least
D

200 m from the blast). This trend is explained by the exponential nature of the attenuation law
TE

and can also be interpreted as a normal attenuation due to lithology, itabirite, and the

expressive decrease in the elevation of local topography, which hinders wave propagation.
EP

According to Nicholls et al. (1971) rock types may influence ground vibrations,
C

propagation may differ with direction specially when there is structural dip, geologic
AC

complexity, anisotropy or any type of lineation, such as gneissic, schistose, or joint system.

By contrast, if a site is a massive rock with horizontal isotropy and uniform overburden or

horizontally stratified little difference in wave propagation would be expected with direction.

In this case, although there were joint sets as depicted in Fig. 2, the greater area of the study

corresponded to the itabirites, which presents moderate to high resistance, characterized by

 23
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

low to medium variation, composed of regular rock mass. Therefore, major abnormalities in

the wave propagation were not observed, only a fastest attenuation. It is valuable mention that

the wave might have been attenuated fastest by possibly propagating in the direction

perpendicular to rock joint set (Wu et al., 1998; Hao et al., 2001)

PT
3.3. Contour maps of blasting-induced vibration

The contour map of blasting-induced vibration based on the database of the monitored

RI
blasts is shown in Figure 13. The PVS reached a maximum of 0.8 mm/s and a minimum of

C
0.2 mm/s in areas closer to the community. These values do not exceed the admissible values

US
of the majority of the international standards, although these values are based on only ten

blasts. Thus, the calculation of the maximum explosive charge per delay is critical for
AN
determining a safe vibration level. Different methods of interpolation may lead to different

contour maps. Thus, UTM coordinates, PVS and kriging were used in this study because the
M

data contained a spatially correlated distance or directional bias.

D
TE
C EP
AC
 24
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
C RI
US
AN
M

Figure 13. Contour map of the blasting-induced vibration.

D

3.4. Maximum explosive charge per delay

To maintain the safety of the community structures, the criteria proposed in the
TE

Portuguese standard NP 2074 (updated in 2015) for common structures (type of structure
EP

prominently found in the community) were used because this standard is rigorous and

includes the frequency and structure type when defining the maximum admissible limits.
C

For comparison, the maximum explosive charge per delay was also calculated based on
AC

the Brazilian (NBR 9653:2005) and American (USBM-8507) standards. Figure 14 shows the

maximum explosive charge per delay calculated by applying the standards and the range of

frequencies of the database. The highlighted point corresponds to the explosive charge value

for the minimum distance between the mine and community, considered as 500 m by the
 25
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

long-term mine plan. The maximum explosive charge per delay for any type of explosive can

be calculated in the form of energy (kWh); the calculation is not restricted to the type of

explosive used in the monitored detonations.

PT
C RI
US
AN
M
D
TE

Figure 14. Calculated maximum explosive charge per delay versus distance based
on different standards for assessing the blasting-induced structural damage.
EP

The maximum explosive charge per delay based on USBM 8507 and NBR 9653 assumed

excessively high values for mine operating practices. NP 2074 suggests a maximum explosive
C
AC

charge per delay of 5,602 kg of emulsion for an admissible value of 3 mm/s for common

structures, type of buildings most often found in the community.

The maximum explosive charge per delay with respect to human discomfort was

recalculated using the Australian standard (Transport Noise Management Code of Practice)

and a maximum admissible value of 2 mm/s for the blasting-induced vibration. The
 26
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

application of such a standard is justified because this code of practice is the most rigorous

with respect to human discomfort and this study considers several internationally recognized

standards.

The maximum explosive charge was also calculated applying the current human

PT
discomfort regulations of the state of São Paulo (CETESB D7.013), Brazil, and a maximum

admissible limit of 4.2 mm/s for the blasting-induced vibration because there is no current

RI
Brazilian standard for this purpose. Figure 15 presents a comparison between the maximum

C
explosive charges per delay based on these standards, highlighting the minimum distance

US
between the mine and community.
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

Figure 15. Calculated maximum explosive charge per delay versus distance based
on different standards for assessing blasting-induced human discomfort.

A maximum explosive charge per delay of 1,234 kg of emulsion was calculated by

applying the Transport Noise Management Code of Practice, and non-executable values

(higher than 10,000 kg) were obtained based on the CETESB D7.013 standard. The maximum
 27
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

explosive charge per delay is lower than the value calculated based on the Transport Noise

Management Code of Practice when using the Portuguese standard (NP 2074) to assess the

structural damage. This value (422 kg of emulsion) is not suitable for blasting activities in the

majority of mines because it is not sufficiently high to match the time sequencing of the blast

PT
design applying a pyrotechnic time delay, which is widely used in mining. For this reason, the

maximum explosive charge per delay adopted in this study is the value derived from the

RI
Transport Noise Management Code of Practice, which is designed to ensure the safety of

structures and minimize human discomfort.

C
Furthermore, the adoption of an electronic delay is highly recommended to ensure the

US
accuracy of the blasting time delay and allow for a wide combination of delay times. Despite
AN
its high unit cost, its use in a correct manner, allows gains in terms of safety, minimizing

blasting-induced vibration and airblast overpressure and even production, as it allows the
M

proper creation of free faces (Bernardo, 2015).

The use of conventional (electrical, non-electric, pyrotechnic) delays does not guarantee a
D

precise timing of the exit sequence of the detonation holes. Since they have pyrotechnic
TE

mixtures as their constituent material, they present a natural variation in the combustion
EP

velocity and thus in the disassembly as a whole. In addition, variations in the velocities

between detonators of the same blast also contribute to error in blast timing, which can reach
C

5%. The use of electronic detonators guarantees an accuracy of approximately 0.01% in

AC

relation to programmed timing due to the chip that is connected to the electronic explosion

throughout the disassembly and to a capacitor (by the detonator) that guarantees its power

(Bernardo, 2015).

Other points to pay attention in this case are the blast parameters design such as: the

stemming and the blasting direction initiation. Proper materials such as gravel in a balanced
 28
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

amount locks the expanding gases and maintain the forces in the borehole until rock begins to

break and hence a minor intensity of airblast overpressure may be generated. Moreover, when

initializing a blast in the opposite direction to the community, less airblast overpressure also

will be expected in the community. In addition to this, according Boyko (2012) there is

PT
another way to decrease seismic waves propagation to community, specifically, the first and

the last blasting lines must contain 30 % less kg of explosives than the others. Therefore,

RI
simple actions as the previously mentioned might contribute to minimize the environmental

impacts in the community.

C
US
3.5. Validation test
AN
The summary of the regression analysis parameters of PVS versus Predicted PVS

resulting from the validation test are reported in Table 3. The measured vibration velocities
M

and those calculated using the attenuation law were compared in Figure 16.
D

Table 3.
Summary of the performed regression analysis of PVS versus Predicted PVS.
TE

Term Coef SE Coef t-value p-value VIF

Constant -0.0667 0.0309 -2.15 0.039
Predicted VS 1.1634 0.0682 17.06 0.000 1.00
EP

R2 0.8982
C
AC
 29
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
C RI
US
Figure 16. Measured PVS versus Predicted PVS.

As the p-value is inferior to the significance level adopted of 0.05, we reject the null
AN
hypothesis and thus accept that the Predicted PVS significantly contributes to explain the PVS

variation as also confirmed with t-test. The variance inflation factor (VIF) equals to 1 presents
M

that there is no collinearity between predictors and the SE Coef is the standard error of the
D

coefficients.
TE

It is also important to mention that there were no complaints about blast-induced

vibration and airblast overpressure from the people of community after the implementation of
EP

this proposed methodology.

C

3.6. Vibration attenuation in structures tested with a steel ball

AC

Table 4 presents the results from the test performed in the old house, built in 1930s decade

and made of clay bricks with an old artisanal wood flooring. There is no attenuation of ground

vibration for the old structure; the majority of the attenuation coefficient values were zero,
 30
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

and thus, amplification may occur. Tables 5 and 6 show the ground attenuation coefficients

for concrete and metallic structures, respectively.

Table 4.
Attenuation coefficient for the old house.

PT
Energy (J) v1(mm/s) v2(mm/s)
196.2 0.7 0.7 0
235.44 0.83 0.76 0

RI
274.68 0.89 1.02 13
313.92 1.08 0.95 0

C
Table 5.

US
Attenuation coefficient for the concrete built house.

Energy (J) v1(mm/s) v2(mm/s) (%)

AN
196.2 0.38 0.76 50
235.44 0.44 0.83 47
274.68 0.44 0.89 51
M

313.92 0.51 0.89 43

D
TE

Table 6.
Attenuation coefficient for the metallic built house.
EP

Energy (J) v1(mm/s) v2(mm/s) (%)

196.2 0.32 0.25 0
235.44 0.38 1.08 65
C

274.68 0.38 1.14 67

AC

313.92 0.44 1.14 61

In the tests performed for the concrete built structure, large attenuation of the vibrations is

observed, with values of the attenuation coefficient of approximately 48%. In the case of the

metallic structure, the attenuation coefficient is 64%, which represents an expressive

attenuation of the vibrations of the ground to structure.

 31
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

The greater attenuation observed in the metallic structure compared to the concrete

structure and old structure is explained by the natural strength of each type of construction;

therefore, the majority of the international standards define limits of PPV based on the type of

structure affected. This approach demonstrates the need for these standards to assess and

PT
calculate a safe level of particle vibration, because there are notorious differences between

structures responses to vibration. Negative values of the attenuation coefficient are due to

RI
errors in the steel ball in free fall; because the procedure was performed manually, a human

force may have acted along with the force of gravity in the ball fall.

C
US
4. Conclusions AN
This study aimed to provide a methodology to assess and control blasting-induced

vibrations in an open-pit iron ore mine and reduce human discomfort and structural damage in
M

the neighboring community. The methodology proposed to control the blasting-induced

vibration was proven to be effective. The attenuation law presented a determination

D

coefficient of 0.87 and was validated by comparing the monitoring records with those
TE

calculated using the attenuation law. Blasting vibration monitoring of the local ground and

recording the vibration levels, distance from the blasting to monitoring point, and the
EP

maximum explosive charge per delay are required to obtain the blasting vibration attenuation
C

law using multiple-regression analysis for the locality.

AC

Vibration attenuation was not observed in the case of the old house using the test a steel

ball in free fall; however, significant attenuation was observed in the concrete and metallic

structures confirming the adoption of stricter values in the case of old houses. The proposed

method to observe this phenomenon can be applied to assess different types of structures with

respect to ground vibration without perform a blasting.

 32
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

The maximum explosive charge per delay is the main parameter controlling the blasting-

induced vibration. Therefore, prior adjustment of the blasting design based on blasting-

induced vibration standards and the minimum distance between the blasting point and

affected locality is recommended. In this methodology, the level of ground vibration that is

PT
considered to be safe depends on the admissibility standards. Thus, different standards could

lead to different values of the maximum explosive charge per delay. A comprehensive review

RI
of the blasting-induced vibration standards should be performed to choose the most suitable

standard when not using local standards. The results also demonstrate that the proposed

C
methodology can be applied to any open-pit mine near communities to reduce the

US
environmental impact of blasting-induced vibrations.
AN
Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Vale Institute of Technology for supporting this research
M

project. They would also like to acknowledge Vale S.A. company for providing the necessary
D

data. In addition, the authors express their deep-felt gratitude to the Universidade Federal de
TE

Ouro Preto for their partnership and availability during the scientific work.
EP

References

ABNT. NBR 9653, 2005. Guia para avaliação dos efeitos provocados pelo uso de explosivos
C

nas minerações em áreas urbanas. Norma de Procedimento. [Guide for assessing the
AC

blasting effects in urban areas]. 13p.

A.F.T.E.S., 1974. Racommandations concernant l’etude des effets sismiques de l’explosif.

Tunn. et Souterr. 2, 89–93. [Recommendations about the study of seismics effects of the

explosives].
 33
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Álvarez-Vigil, A.E., González-Nicieza, C, Lopéz Gayarre, F., Álvarez-Fernandez, M.I., 2012.

Predicting blasting propagation velocity and vibration using artificial neural networks.

International J. of rock mechanics and min. sciences. 5, 108–116.

Attewell, P.B.E., Farmer, I.W., 1973. Attenuation of ground vibrations from piles. Gr. Eng. 6.

PT
Avellan, K. Belopotocanova, E., Purunen, M., 2017. Measuring, monitoring and prediction of

RI
vibration effects in rock masses in near-structure blasting. Procedia Eng. (191) 504-511.

C
Bakhtavar, E., Abdollahisharif, J., Ahmadi, M., 2016. Reduction of the undesirable bench-

US
blasting consequences with emphasis on ground vibration using a developed multi-

objective stochastic programming. International J. of Min, Reclam. and Environ: DOI:

AN
10.1080/17480930.2016.1158964

Bernardo, P.A.M., 2015. Análise comparativa das substâncias explosivas mais utilizadas no
M

desmonte de rochas com explosivos. [Comparative analysis of the explosives most used in
D

blasting] 4° Explomin. Cachoeiro de Itapemirim, Espírito Santo. 16 p.

Bienawski, Z.T. Engineering classification of jointed rock masses. Trans S. Afr. Inst. Civ.
TE

Engrd 15, 335-344. 1973.

EP

Bienawski, Z.T. Rock mass classification in rock engineering. In Exploration for rock

engineering, proc. Of the symp., (ed. Z.T. Bienawski) 1, 97-106. Cape Town: Balkema.
C

1989
AC

Boyko V.V. (2012). Problemi seysmichnoyi bezpeki vibuhovoyi spravi u kar'erah Ukrayini.

Kyiv: Stal. ISBN 978-617-676-002-3. (in Ukrainian). [Problems of seismic security on the

bubble case in Ukraine's quarries].

 34
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

BS – 7385. Part 1, 1990. Evaluation and measurement for vibration in buildings. Guide to

measurement of vibrations and evaluation of their side effects on buildings. British

Standard.

BS – 7385. Part 2, 1993. Evaluation and measurement for vibration in buildings. Guide to

PT
measurement of vibrations and evaluation of their side effects on buildings. British

Standard.

RI
BS – 6472, 1992. Guide to evaluation of human exposure to vibration in buildings (1Hz to 80

Hz). British Standard.

C
BS – 5228. Part 4, 1992. Code of practice for noise and vibrations control applicable to pilling

US
operations. British standard.
AN
BS – 5228. Part 5, 1997. Noise and vibrations control on constructions and open sites. Code

of practice applicable to surface mineral extractions (except coal) sites. British standard.
M

CETESB – Companhia de Tecnologia de Saneamento Ambiental. Norma D7. 013, 1992.

Mineração por explosivo. [Explosives mining] 7 p.

D

CMRI. SandT Project Report-GAP/VI/2, 1991. Investigations into the influence of blasting
TE

pattern and geo-technical properties of the surrounding rock mass on the ground vibration,
EP

fragmentation, flyrock. Central Mining Research Institute, Dhanbad, India. 75p.

DEUTSCHE NORM (DIN 4150). Structural vibration in buildings – effects on structures,

C

1986.
AC

Dinis da Gama, C., 1998. Ruídos e vibrações ligados à utilização dos explosivos e

equipamentos. [Noise and vibration associated with the use of explosives and equipment]

1º Seminário de Auditorias Ambientais Internas. IGM. Lisboa, 9–10 de dezembro. 16 p.

Dowding CH. 1985. Blast vibration monitoring and control. Prentice-Hall.

 35
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Faramarzi, F., Farsangi, M.A.E., Mansouri, H., 2014. Simultaneous investigation of blast

induced ground vibration and airblast effects on safety level of structures and human in

surface blasting. International J. of Min. Sci. and Technol. 24(5), 663–669.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2014.07.006

PT
Ferreira, C., Freire, F., Ribeiro, J., 2015. Life-cycle assessment of a civil explosive. J. of

Clean. Produc. 89, 159–164.

RI
Ferreira, H., Leite, M.G.P., 2015. A Life cycle assessment study of iron ore mining. J. of

C
Clean. Produc. 108, 1081–1091.

US
Galbiatti, H. F. Ruptura oblíqua condicionada por falha transcorrente na cava a céu aberto da

mina do Cauê, Itabira, MG. Dissertação (Mestrado) - Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto.
AN
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia Civil. 2006. 113 p.

Gu, W., Wang, Z., Liu, J., Xu, J., Liu, X., Cao, T., 2017.Water-depth-based prediction
M

formula for the blasting vibration velocity of lighthouse caused by underwater drilling
D

blasting. Shock and Vib. (2):1-9

TE

Gui, Y. L., Zhao, Z. Y., Jayasinghe, L. B., Zhou, Y H., Goh,A.T.C., Tao, M., Blast wave

induced spatial variation of ground vibration considering field geological conditions. Int. J. of
EP

Rock Mech, and Min. Sc.(101) 63-68

Ghasemi, E., Ataei, M., Hashemolhosseini, H., 2012. Development of a fuzzy model for
C

predicting ground vibration caused by rock blasting in surface mining. J. of Vib. and
AC

Control. 19(5): 755-770.

Green, S. B., 1991. How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis? Multivariate

Behavioral Research, 26, 499‐ 510

 36
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Hao, H., Wu, Y., Ma, G., Zhou, Y., 2001. Characteristics of surface ground motions induced

by blasts in jointed rock mass. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Eng. 2001;21(2):85-8.

Holmberg, R; Persson, P.A. Design of Tunnel Perimeter Blasthole Patterns to Prevent Rock

Damage. In Proc. IMM Tunneling. ’79 Conference, London. 1979.

PT
Holmberg, R.,. Explosives and blasting technique. Proceedings of the 1st World Conference

RI
on Explosives and Blasting Techniques, Munich, Germany, 6-8 September, 2000.

Rotterdam: A. Balkema. 235-240

C
Hudaverdi, T., 2012. Application of multivariate analysis for prediction of blast-induced

US
ground vibrations. Soil Dyn. and Earthq Eng. 43, 300–308.

Jian, N., Zhou, C., Luo, X., Lu, S., Zhang, Z., 2017. Vibration safety criteria for surficial rock
AN
mass of open pit slope affected by underground mining blasting operations. The Open and
M

Civ. Eng. J. 11 (1) 627-637.

Kabwe, E.; Wang, Y.M. 2016 Airblast and Ground Vibration Monitoring at Chimiwungo Pit.
D

Geomaterials, 6, 28-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/gm.2016.61003

TE

Kamali, M., Ataei, M., 2010. Prediction of blast-induced ground vibrations in KarounIII

power plant and dam: a neural network. The J. of the South Afr. Inst. of Min. and
EP

Metallurgy, Johannesburg, v.110. 8.

C

Khandelwal, M., and Singh, T. N., 2006. Prediction of blast induced ground vibrations and
AC

frequency in opencast mine: a neural network approach. J. of Sound and Vib. 289(4–5),

711–725.

Mohamed, M.T., 2011. Performance of fuzzy logic and artificial neural network in prediction

of ground and air vibrations. International J. of Rock Mechanics and Min. Sci. 48, 845–

851.
 37
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Navarro Torres, V.F., Bernardo, P., 2004. El “Blastware III” e “Mlinreg.bas” como

herramientas para la prevención y control ambiental de vibraciones en voladuras. [The

"Blastware III" and Mlinreg.bas "as tools for environmental prevention and blasting

vibration control]. Paper presented at V Simposium Internacional de Tecnología de la

PT
Información Aplicada a la Minería 14–17 de setembro, Lima-Perú.20 p.

Nicholls, H.R, Charles F.J, Duvall W.I., 1971. Blasting vibrations and their effects on

RI
structures. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines. 105 p.

C
NP 2074-2015., 2015. Avaliação da influência de vibrações impulsivas em estruturas.

[Impulsive blasting-induced vibration in structures]. Portugal. 17 p.

US
Olewuezi, N.P., Onoghojobi, B., Udeoyibo, C.V., 2015. A comparative study of different
AN
outlier detection methods in linear regression. Pushpa Publishingh, Allahabad, India.

50(3), 171–179.
M

Oliveira, R., Camanho, S.A., Zanella, A., 2016. Expanded eco-efficiency assessment of large
D

mining firms. J.of Clean. Prod. xxx, 1–10.

TE

Pimentel, B.S., Gonzalez, E.S., Barbosa, G.N.O., 2016. Decision- support models for

sustainable mining networks: fundamentals and challenges. J. of Clean. Prod. 112, 2145–
EP

2157.
C

Svinkin, M.R., 1999. Prediction and calculation of construction vibrations, DFI 24th Annual
AC

Members' Conf., Decades of Technology - Advancing into the Future. 53–69.

Transport Noise Management. Code of Practice, 2014. Volume 2- Construction Noise and

Vibration. Australia: Department of Transport and Main Roads (State of Queensland). 25–

27.
 38
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

UNE 22381, 1993. Control de vibraciones producidas por voladuras. [Blasting vibration

control]. Asociación Española de Normalización y Certificación, Madrid.

USBM (United States Bureau of Mines), 1980. Bureau of Mines Report. RI 8507. 59p.

Vasović, D., Kostić, S., Ravilić, M., Trajković, S., 2014. Environmental impact of blasting at

PT
Drenovac limestone quarry (Serbia). Environmental Earth Sci. 72, 3915–3928.

http://dx.doi.10.1007/s12665-014-3280-z

RI
Vintró, C., Sanmiquel, L., Freijo, M., 2014. Environmental sustainability in the mining sector:

evidence from Catalan companies. J. of Clean. Prod. 84, 671–679.

C
Wiss, J.F., 1981. Construction vibrations: State-of-the-Art. American Society of Civil

US
Engineers, ASCE J. of Geotechnical Eng., 107(GT2)
AN
Wu, Y.K., Hao, H., Zhou, Y.X., Chong, K., 1998. Propagation characteristics of blast induced

shock waves in a jointed rock mass. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Eng;17(6):407-12.
M
D
TE
C EP
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
A methodology to predict, assess and control blasting vibration in communities.
Application of sustainable management tools for blasting operations.
The actions achieved a maximum peak vibration inferior to international standards.
Only prior adjustments in blast design were needed to implement the actions.

PT
C RI
US
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC