Anda di halaman 1dari 8

INTRODUCTION

kegiatan peledakan pada operasi pertambangan besar telah menempatkan


penekanan yang signifikan pada kemampuan untuk menyesuaikan fragmentasi
untuk meningkatkan proses hilir. Dalam banyak operasi ini, dampak dari denda
telah diidentifikasi dengan jelas.
Pada tahap konseptual dan kelayakan, studi pemodelan fragmentasi yang
mendukung Tambang masa depan untuk strategi Mill dapat dilakukan melalui
kalibrasi model empiris menggunakan data yang ada; dan jika perlu, melalui
penerapan uji tertentu. Sebuah prasyarat penting adalah klasifikasi yang memadai
dan karakterisasi domain peledakan . Sebagai bagian dari studi kelayakan proyek
perluasan pada operasi tambang terbuka Andina Codelco, program pemantauan
ledakan yang luas domain dilakukan bijih sekunder saat ini ditambang dari "Don
Luis" pit. Tujuan dari program ini adalah untuk mengkalibrasi dan menerapkan
model situs peledakan khusus untuk memungkinkan prediksi tren fragmentasi di
dalam, zona bijih lebih kompeten

DESCRIPTION OF BLASTING DOMAINS


Unit geoteknik merupakan inti pembentukan utama dari lingkungan operasi pertambangan saat
ini dan masa depan di Andina. Pada tambang andina dikelompokkan ke Primer Rock, Batu
Menengah dan Rhyolite dan Dacite cerobong asap. Penelitian ini terutama berkaitan dengan
kalibrasi model fragmentasi empiris di batu sekunder dan simulasi di batu primer.
massa batuan primer telah dideskripsikan sebagai "keras" dan kompeten dengan baik sembuh
gipsum atau Anhydrite diisi Frakturnya, nilai-nilai RMR khas di kisaran 60 sampai 80. massa
batuan sekunder juga dapat dideskripsikan sebagai "keras", namun pada umumnya terdapat
Fraktur dan dengan mengurangi kompetensi massa batuan dengan nilai RMR karakteristik di
kisaran 42 sampai 50.
Relevan dengan pemodelan fragmentasi ledakan adalah tingkat in situ rekah. Seperti ditunjukkan
dalam Gambar 1, statistik jarak keseluruhan berasal dari data frekuensi fraktur menunjukkan
bahwa tingkat rekah jelas lebih intens dalam domain massa batuan sekunder. Hasil dari data
logging core yang tersedia menunjukkan bahwa jarak fraktur Total mungkin selebar 0,4 m di
domain sekunder dan 0,91 m di domain batu primer. analisis menunjukkan bahwa variabilitas
dalam intensitas rekahan tampaknya lebih besar dalam domain batu primer.
Dari pengeboran dan perspektif peledakan domain sekunder dan primer dapat diklasifikasikan
sebagai massa fractured dan gumpal batu masing-masing. Statistik fraktur spasi digunakan untuk
memberikan perkiraan pertama dari berbagai potensi ukuran rata-rata di blok in situ. Ini adalah
parameter input yang diperlukan yang lebih didefinisikan melalui back-analisis atau proses
kalibrasi Model.

Studi Jenis batuan atau unit litologi tothis studi meliputi Granodiorita Cascada (GDCC) dan
Brecha de Turmalina (BXT). Kedua jenis batuan yang ditemukan domain di batu sekunder dan
primer. Dalam kedua kasus, tingkat perubahan tampaknya menjadi faktor themain yang
mempengaruhi kekuatan dan kekakuan. Analisis informasi geoteknik yang disediakan oleh
Andina memungkinkan definisi utuh parameter material batuan dan massa batuan rata-rata yang
digunakan dalam kalibrasi dan pemodelan skenario peledakan yang berbeda. Tabel 1
memberikan ringkasan dari andproperties domain dari GDCC dan BXT jenis batuan.
Tabel 1 menunjukkan bahwa material batuan utuh sedikit kaku pada batuan primer dari dalam di
bandingkan batuan sekunder. Dalam hal kekuatan tekan, tidak ada perbedaan yang signifikan
antara batu GDCC di domain sekunder dan primer dengan nilai rata-rata dari 161 dan 156 MPa
masing-masing. Perbedaan lebih terasa diamati di batu BXT dengan nilai rata-rata dari 135 dan
158 MPa masing-masing.Dari pengeboran dan perspektif peledakan, semua material batuan
dapat diklasifikasikan sebagai keras dan kompeten. Dalam kondisi sulit yang kompeten
kerusakan baru jadi ditentukan oleh kecepatan partikel puncak diperkirakan berada di kisaran
900-1100 mm / s; dan kerusakan diperkirakan berada di kisaran 3.600-4.400 mm / s.
Keseluruhan kerusakan dan fragmentasi potensi diharapkan akan didorong oleh tingkat dan
kondisi rekah; dan karena perbedaan akhir menengah dan kasar dari distribusi fragmentasi
diharapkan antara massa batuan sekunder dan primer. Perlu dicatat bahwa data material batu
yang dikumpulkan oleh geologi dan geoteknik departemen Andina memberikan masukan yang
diperlukan untuk andal menerapkan pendekatan pemodelan stokastik
3 OVERVIEW OF MONITORED BLASTS
The detailed monitoring of production blasts in secondary rock masses has been an important
and necessary component of the model calibration and verification process. As summarised in
Table 2, a total of four production blasts were monitored in the Don Luis pit of the Andina
operation, three were located in the GDCC domain and one in the BXT domain.

4 FRAGMENTATION ASSESSMENT
A detailed fragmentation assessment program was conducted during this study. The detailed
program included the acquisition of images during the excavation of muckpiles as well as the
sieving of a limited number of samples taken from selected regions. As illustrated in Figure 2,
the assessment procedure consisted of sampling lines and profiles taken at different stages of
extraction. This procedure is consistent with best practices in fragmentation assessment using
image analysis methods.

Detailed analysis included both manual editingand the definition of site specific fine correction
factors.These factors were determined directly by the sampling and sieving of fragments in the
areas of interest. Blasting literature shows that reliable estimates of Run of Mine (ROM)
fragmentation can be obtained following procedures similar to those incorporated in this study
(Latham et al 2003 and Sanchidrian et al 2005).
The data obtained from the monitored areas were used in this study to calibrate and verify the
blast fragmentation models implemented in this study. The total number of samples taken in both
the GDCC and BXT domain are summarised in Table 3.

5 BLAST FRAGMENTATION MODELLING


The expected distribution of fragments in the fines and coarse regions is modelled by two
separate distributions based on the recently published Swebrec function (Ouchterlony, 2005).
The Swebrec function has recently shown to be far superior in fitting fragmented rock in the
intermediate and finer end of the fragmentation curve than previous models. The main modelling
framework includes the ability to consider a range of values to key input parameters through the
explicit definition of distribution functions. In this way stochastic simulations can be conducted
to determine a predictive fragmentation envelope that takes into account the variability of rock
material, rock mass, blast geometry and explosive performance parameters. The current approach
also incorporates modelling parameters that can simulate the impact of inter-hole delay timing on
fragmentation (Onederra, 2008).
5.1 Calibration results in secondary ore
As has been extensively discussed in the literature,one of the main limitations of empirical
fragmentation models is their requirement for site specific calibration. This necessary process
generally involves the back analysis or prediction of fragmentation based on measured data and
monitored practices. As mentioned earlier, four production blasts covering GDCC and BXT
secondary rock domains were used to calibrate the proposed fragmentation modelling
framework. The calibration process involved the refinement of estimates associated with rock
mass parameters likely to impact on uniformity,mean fragmentation outcomes and the propensity
of the rock fabric to generate fines during the fracturing process.
Figure 3 summarises the results of comparisons between predicted and measured fragmentation
out comes for one of the blasts in the GDCC domain (3724_10). In this analysis, statistics
associated with rock material input parameters, pattern geometry and explosive performance
were included to generate an expected fragmentation bounded by envelopes of minimum,
maximum and 95% confidence. It is important to note that the fragmentation envelope given by
each simulation is a function of the level of uncertainty or variability assigned to the available
input data.

Figure 3. Summary of calibration results based on monitored production blasts.

5.2 Fragmentation modelling of primary rock


A total of 14 simulations were conducted to quantify relative changes in ROM fragmentation in
primary rock. Table 4 gives a summary of the pattern geometries and powder factor ranges
investigated. As shown, powder factors reflect the use of pattern geometries similar to those
currently implemented at Andina, as well as more aggressive designs which include both
reductions in burden, spacing and stemming lengths. All simulations have maintained the use of
270 mm diameter blastholes using Apex 150 and Apex 165 as the base case explosive products.
It should also be noted that a single hole firing mode was assumed with inter-hole delays of 10
ms.
As discussed earlier, the adopted stochastic approach has allowed the inclusion of distribution
functions to rock material and rock mass input parameters as well as design specific parameters
such as hole and charge lengths. The Latin Hypercube sampling technique was used with
simulations set to 500 iterations.

Table 4. Summary of pattern configurations for GDCC and BXT primary ore domains.
* The explosive Apex 165 is a Heavy ANFO (65% Emulsion) product supplied by Orica Chile.

6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION


Fragmentation modelling results for GDCC and BXT primary ore domains are summarised in
Figures 4 and 5 respectively. Note that only the expected size distribution curves are shown for
comparison purposes. Modelling results demonstrate the influence that changes in pattern
geometry may have on fragmentation, particularly in the intermediate and finer size fractions.
Differences between domains and designs are also summarised in Table 5.
For similar pattern geometries and corresponding powder factors, modelling results suggest that
blasting in the GDCC domain has the potential to generate more fines than in the BXT domain.
Relative differences may be of the order of 3% to 5% between these two domains. As expected,
designs D3 and D6 give the finest fragmentation in the GDCC domain;and designs D9 and D12
give the finest fragmentation in the BXT domain. By comparing designs D2 and D2A, modelling
results suggest that by decreasing stemming lengths by approximately 1 m, a 1% gain is expected
in the amount of fines generated in the GDCC domain. In the BXT domain however the gain is
only approximately 0.5%, as shown by comparing designs D8 and D8A. It is important to note
that model calibrations in the BXT domain were only based on a single production blast. More
datamay be required to improve the predicted capabilities of the model in this particular domain.

Table 5. Summary of fragmentation modelling results in primary ore conditions

Figure 4. Comparison between designs in GDCC primary ore.

Figure 5. Comparison between designs in BXT primary ore.

As discussed earlier, single hole firing conditions were adopted in the modelling calculations, in
this case, a 10 ms inter hole delay was assumed based on estimations of minimum response time
(Onederra, 2007). The current modelling framework was used to investigate potential gains in
fines generation by introducing shorter delays (e.g. 2 ms to 10 ms). Designs D2 and D8 were
used as base cases for the GDCC and BXT domain respectively. Results of the analysis for the
expected values in GDCC are summarized in Figure 6. As shown, for the and 1 size
fractions with the use of inter hole delays of 2 ms, gains of approximately 2 % and 3.5 % may be
achieved in the GDCC. The use of very short inter hole delays (e.g. 2 ms) demonstrates gains in
the intermediate and fine fractions, however as shown in Figure 6, these gains may not be
significant if one is to consider the variation associated with modeling predictions, and in
particular the lower limit predictive envelope. It should also be noted that the inter hole delay
adjustment factors proposed in the current modelling framework (Onederra, 2008) are based on
limited data and further validation will still be required in primary rock conditions.
Although fragmentation may be improved, it is important to note that high intensity blasting
with the use of short inter hole delays may be counter productive if the risk of rock mass damage
is increased and loading productivity is influenced by the lack of muckpile looseness.
Preliminary modeling results have highlighted the need to further quantify the potential impact
of short delays on near field damage and downstream loading productivity. This should be
considered a priority if short inter hole delays are to be used in primary rock production blasting.

Figure 6. Modelling results showing the potential influence of short inter-hole delay times on
fines for design D2 (GDCC Domain).
It is important to note that simulations are indicative of what may be achieved if all measured
and assumed modelling conditions are met. Actual measurable results will undoubtedly be
influenced by the field implementation process. For this reason, the implementation of a Quality
Assurance / Quality Control strategy (QA/QC) was strongly recommended, particularly as
improved designs are implemented in both current and future domains (Secondary and primary
rock). The impact on fragmentation outcomes given by variations in pattern geometry is
demonstrated for design D2 in Figure 7. In this case, a standard deviation of 0.5 m was assumed
for the mean values of burden and spacing. Results show a widening of the predictive envelope,
which can translate into coarser or more bi-modal fragmentation outcomes.

Figure 7. Potential impact on fragmentation outcomes given by simulated variations in pattern geometry