Mitigation of Post-blast Fume in

Soft Ground and Wet Conditions

L Julian1, A Musunuri2, E J Sellers3 and S S Kanchibotla4

ABSTRACT
Fume events in coalmines are typically associated with wet conditions, soft ground and deep holes.
An ACARP research project used laboratory and field testing combined with literature reviews,
numerical models and field investigations to characterise the influence of these conditions on the
propensity for fume. This paper highlights the results for soft ground and wet conditions and
proposes a proactive fume mitigation methodology. A simple numerical model is used to show
how fume arises in soft rock that yields more under the loading of high-pressure, water-resistant
explosive blends than for ANFO. The blends cool more rapidly after detonation into the lower
temperature zone favourable for NO2 production. Low-pressure, high detonation temperature
explosives are loaded or charged into soft ground. Water resistance must be considered because
soft, faulted and fractured ground can lead to fume from degradation by water flow and non-ideal
detonation of product in cracks.
A suite of tests were developed to quantify ANFO and emulsion blend performance over time
that can be carried out in a mobile laboratory on-site. Index tests such as viscosity measurement and
water resistance in beakers are proposed to quantify long-term product performance because small
components, such as surfactant, prill impurities and prill fines, contribute to inconsistent product
performance. Water ingress experiments and detonation tests aligned with field investigations
identified and characterised the role of groundwater in damaging ANFO and causing fume.
Fume risk management is achieved using a proposed proactive fume mitigation methodology to
characterise influences such as seasonal rain variation, groundwater flow hydrogeology, rock mass
strength and structure well ahead of blast design. The design of blasts and selection of explosive
products to consider expected conditions will reduce fume, improve efficiency in the mine and
offer cost advantages.

INTRODUCTION
The deleterious effects of post-blast fumes were reported as
early as 1916 in a medical journal (Irvine, 1916). At that stage,
gas poisoning accounted for a good many deaths in the mines
every year. Considerable work has been done since then to
identify the main chemical reactions and physical characteristics,
such as confinement, that influence fume production. Onederra
et al (2012) attributed the majority of fume to wet conditions,
soft ground and deep holes. They suggested the development
of instrumentation to quantify the environment and charging
characteristics in situ. In parallel, the industry has provided
guidelines to minimise fume production by improving blast
practices and suggesting risk management approaches (eg
DEEDI, 2014). In practice, the blast designer and shotfirer are
unable to quantify the risk as there are limited tools available
to test and characterise the explosive and ground conditions.
The development of on-bench testing, in-hole measurements
and more thorough characterisation of ground conditions were
investigated in ACARP project C23106. Some of the outcomes
of that project are described in this paper, including focusing
on the characterisation of wet conditions and soft ground,
testing the explosive products and the development of a more
proactive fume mitigation methodology.
FUME PRODUCTION FROM DETONATION
The reasons for NO2 production from the detonation of
ammonium nitrate-based explosives are documented in many
papers (eg Rowland III and Mainiero, 2000). The following four
chemical equations represent the detonation of stoichiometric
balanced ANFO, fuel-lean ANFO, fuel-rich ANFO and
deflagration of ammonium nitrate (AN) respectively (Scott,
2009; DEEDI, 2014):
3NH4NO3 + CH2 " 3N2 + 7H2O + CO2 (1)
5NH4NO3 + CH2 " 4N2 + 2NO + 11H2O + CO2 (2)
2NH4NO3 + CH2 " 2N2 + 5H2O + CO (3)
3NH4NO3 + NH4NO3 " 2NO2 + 3N2 + 8H2O (4)

1. GAusIMM, Mining Engineer, JKTech Pty Ltd, 40 Isles Road, Indooroopilly Qld 4068. Email: l.julian@jktech.com.au
2. MAusIMM, Mining Engineer, JKTech Pty Ltd, 40 Isles Road, Indooroopilly Qld 4068. Email: a.munsunuri@jktech.com.au
3. MAusIMM(CP), Principal Mining Engineer, JKTech Pty Ltd, 40 Isles Road, Indooroopilly Qld 4068. Email: e.sellers@jktech.com.au
4. MAusIMM, Mining Consulting Manager, JKTech Pty Ltd, 40 Isles Road, Indooroopilly Qld 4068. Email: s.kanchibotla@jktech.com.au

11TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ROCK FRAGMENTATION BY BLASTING / SYDNEY, NSW, 2426 AUGUST 2015 511
L JULIAN et al

Post-blast, nitrogen must first oxidise to NO. When NO is

present, it will oxidise to form nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and
dinitrogen tetroxide (Hughbanks, 2015) with the reactions:

2NO + O2 " 2NO2 (5)

2NO2 , N2O4 (6)

It can be seen that the fuel balance and the ratio in
which precursors are blended will also influence the fume
propensity. The effects of oxygen balance on the production
of nitrous oxides have been documented by Rowland III
and Mainiero (2000). In an explosive with a neutral oxygen
balance (Equation 1), the N2 must first oxidise to NO. If the
explosive is fuel-lean, then NO is produced directly. In a
fuel-rich, oxygen negative situation, there is reduced N2 and
reduced likelihood of fume (Equation 3).
Explosives approach an ideal detonation state only in
very large quantities with infinitely strong confinement
(Braithwaite, Byers Brown and Minchington, 1996), meaning
that the detonation conditions of bulk explosives can have a
significant influence on the resultant gases. If the confinement
or diameter is reduced, the explosive reacts non-ideally and a
portion of the detonation products could deflagrate instead of
detonating and produce NO2 directly (as in Equation 4). The
correlation between low confinement and the propensity for
increased fume has been reported previously (eg Rowland III
and Mainiero, 2000).
A numerical analysis based on a one-dimensional model by
Furtney, Sellers and Onederra (2013) was used to qualitatively
investigate the relationship between typical rock strength
and the production of NO2. Rock strengths at Queensland
coalmines were found to range from 0.3 MPa to 185 MPa, with
a mean of 34 MPa and a median of 22 MPa. This indicates
that the majority of rocks are on the lower end of the strength
scale. During the detonation, the pressure rises rapidly to
the maximum shock pressure and then falls as the rock fails
and expands under the high shock loading. As the expansion
progresses, the shock pressure decays and gas pressure
achieves equilibrium with the rock strength before venting
into cracks. The equilibrium reaction for conversion between
NO and NO2 (Equation 5) implies that two molecules of NO
are needed to convert to one molecule of NO2. Differentiation
of the equation leads to the rate form:
d 7NO2A 530
= K 5NO?2 ) 7O2A, K = 3.39 ) 10- exp b T l
39
(7)
dt
Therefore, the rate of production of NO2 relates to the
square of the concentration of the NO and is higher at lower
temperatures. It is important to note the dependence of the
reaction on the concentration of oxygen (O2), inferring that
oxygen must be present for the completion of this reaction.
This hints at a reason for delayed fume events when the NO is
trapped within the muck pile and only released once oxygen
is supplied during excavation. Similarly, after the charge has
fired, the lean-fuel detonation (Equation 2) and deflagration
(Equation 4) will start the conversion of reaction products
to additional NO2 with higher concentrations of NO or NO2
respectively. Assuming that the concentration of NO and O2
are given, the only effect on the rate of NO2 production arises
from the rate constant K, which is a strong inverse function
of temperature (Baulch, 1981), meaning that the synthesis of
NO2 is favoured as the temperature drops.
A comparison of resulting temperature time profiles for
generic ANFO and an effective 40 per cent emulsion blend
in two rock strengths is shown in Figure 1. Vixen2009, a
FIG 1 Modelled temperature decrease with time curves for
combinations of two rock models and two explosive models.
non-ideal detonation program, was used to provide realistic
explosive pressurevolume curves (Sellers, 2013). The heavy
ANFO (HANFO) starting from 14 GPa detonation pressure
expands the rock more than ANFO with a 5 GPa detonation
pressure. This causes a more sudden expansion that cools
the detonation products to temperatures below 530 Kelvin,
which are more favourable for NO2 production (Baulch,
1981), as shown in Figure 2. Any further drop in temperature
(eg due to non-ideal detonation) will cause even higher NO2
production rates. Low detonation pressure, high detonation
temperature explosives are indicated in soft ground. ANFO
falls into this category but has no water resistance, which is
problematic since the soft ground is likely to be wet.
FIG 2 Relative NO2 production for combinations of
two rock models and two explosive models.
The effect of water on the physical characteristics of bulk
explosives and their propensity to fume was first investigated
by statistical analysis of the Queensland blast fume database
The database was filtered to identify blasts loaded with at
least 95 per cent of a single product to investigate the fume
propensity of particular products in wet conditions. All
products demonstrated an increased proportion of blasts that
had fume in the presence of water. For example, the effect of
emulsion percentage on fume in HANFO is shown in Figure3.
In either wet or dry conditions, the fume distributions of 30
and 40 percent ammonium nitrate emulsion (ANE) HANFO
are similar, and both are better than 50 percent HANFO. The
50 percent ANE HANFO results in worse fume emissions in
both wet and dry ground. At this level of emulsion, the product
has marginal sensitivity due to the high proportion of base
emulsion that lacks void space for detonation propagation
and yet has insufficient emulsion to protect the prills from
water ingress. The use of sensitisers was not recorded and is
recommended to be added to the database for future analysis.
The effect of rain was also investigated. When a blast was
declared dry prior to loading and it did not rain, 70 percent

512 11TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ROCK FRAGMENTATION BY BLASTING / SYDNEY, NSW, 2426 AUGUST 2015
 MITIGATION OF POST-BLAST FUME IN SOFT GROUND AND WET CONDITIONS
FIG 3 Wet and dry fume distribution of heavy ANFO products.
of blasts resulted in a fume rating of zero. If rain occurred, the
zero fume percentage dropped to 57 percent. To investigate
the cyclic nature of weather events, such as rain, the mean
fume rating was plotted against the recorded monthly rainfall
at Comet, a town located centrally in the Bowen Basin. Figure4
shows that peak fume is delayed by four months from the
peak rainfall. This delay could be caused by the rainwater
charging local aquifers or an alternative seasonal influence.
The project recommends that rainfall amounts are added to
the database and each mine assesses the correlation between
the fume rating and the rainfall and groundwater influx.
FIG 4 Monthly mean fume rating versus rainfall.
Field observations often indicated a difference between
water levels dipped for design and the conditions on the
day. Shotfirers changing the design and using water-resistant
products at the onset of rain during loading was a common
activity. Unfortunately, changing to water-resistant products
at the last minute does not prevent fume. From post-blast
analyses, the presence of a small percentage of waterproof
product that was not planned in the design, as shown in
Figure 5 for a blast with fume rating of five, was found to
be a good indicator of the likelihood of a high fume event
because the non-water-resistant product already charged was
damaged by the time the shotfirer made the change. Damage
FIG 5 Variation in actual and design explosives for a blast experiencing rain.
11TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ROCK FRAGMENTATION BY BLASTING / SYDNEY, NSW, 2426 AUGUST 2015
could also have occurred in the time remaining to complete
the charging. The better alternative is to predict the conditions
and design accordingly.
The presence of geological structures such as faults in
the rock is another aspect of soft or weak ground. Figure 6
shows images from videos taken of a blast at a mine site,
which indicate a sudden change in the heave profile of a blast
across a fault. Most holes dipped in this zone also showed
high water levels. The blast design changed from multiple
decked through-seam blasting to a single deck because the
geology changes across the fault. The increased heave on
the far side, combined with water flow and probably poor
ground conditions, led to poor detonation, rapid expansion
and cooling of the detonation products and a fume event.
A
FIG 6 (A) Heave profile; (B) resulting fume emission due to
changes in geology and blast pattern across a fault.
EXPLOSIVE QUALITY TESTING
To minimise fume prior to loading the explosive, the explosive
must be manufactured with precursors that comprise the
correct chemical and physical attributes and are mixed
homogeneously with a negative oxygen balance. Furthermore,
the product must remain consistent, and any changes in
product selection should be as a result of design decisions
and not poor manufacturing quality control. Once this has
been assured, the environment in which the explosives will
be detonated may be considered. Laboratory tests to assess
the chemical composition of bulk explosives were suggested
in ACARP project C20016 (Cavanough et al, 2013) and further
developed in the current project. These tests include:
water content in ANE by Karl Fischer titration
ANE ammonium nitrate proportion using pH titration
water content in AN prill using a heater balance
513
L JULIAN et al
AN prill size distribution using sieves and a flatbed
scanner
water content of blends by Karl Fischer titration
prill to emulsion ratio of blends.
As it is difficult to send samples to a distant laboratory for
practical quality assurance of product at a mine, a mobile
laboratory was developed in an air-conditioned trailer with
its own fume hood and power (Cavanough et al, 2013).
Practical operating procedures were then developed at a
coalmine in the Bowen Basin. The testing identified that high
accuracy is required and fuel content should be measured to
properly constrain the raw material ratios within the product
and identify the oxygen balance. The project identified other
explosive properties as being important to the prevention of
fume. Oil adsorption testing performed by Zygmunt and
Buczkowski (2007) identified that velocity of detonation (VOD)
and detonation performance improved with AN prill oil
adsorption. Prill fines can contribute to fume and can be readily
determined from sieve tests and image analysis. Prill water
content and prill purity tests are needed as trace elements and
water content are known to increase fume propensity.
Previous fume testing and research has ignored the role of the
emulsifying surfactant that maintains the water in oil matrix
and integrity of the oxidiser. Sanatkaran and Masalova (2015)
found that the type, blend and quantity of the surfactants can
greatly vary emulsion rheology, sleep time and performance
under shear conditions. Aging times ranged from 16 to 45 days
for three different surfactants and fell further to between zero
and ten days after five cycles of pumping. Thus, it is vital to test
the product actually produced by the mobile manufacturing
unit because many small chemical and physical processes can
alter the performance of the product actually delivered down
the hole. Future research can identify the relationship between
fume emission and impurity chemistry.
Beaker water ingress tests are proposed as an index test
for the quantification of long-term water resistance. Due to
the legal and safety restrictions on handling explosives and
explosive precursors, water ingress testing was investigated in
the laboratory using inert substitutes. Urea prill and paraffin-
based moisturiser imitated the physical characteristics of AN
prill and emulsion respectively. On-site, arrangements need
to be made to store, monitor and dispose of the explosive
products to meet explosive regulatory requirements.
Approximately 75 ml of each blend was placed in each
beaker, which was then filled with 125 ml of green-coloured
water (Figure 7a) and filmed using time-lapse photography.
In the various blends, the prills gradually dissolved in the
FIG 7 (A) Beaker test on pseudo blend; (B) honeycombing in the pseudo 50 percent blend;
(C) honeycombing in the 50 percent ammonium nitrate emulsion (ANE) heavy ANFO.
514 11TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ROCK FRAGMENTATION BY BLASTING / SYDNEY, NSW, 2426 AUGUST 2015
water, forming a conduit through the moisturiser and leaving
a honeycomb structure (Figure 7b). Since the detonation of
the blend is driven by pore collapse in the prills, the loss of
prill structure will reduce sensitivity and lead to low-order
detonation within the remaining emulsion. The ingress
rate was found to depend on the amount of emulsion
coating. Honeycombing was also observed on-site in a real
50 per cent ANE HANFO exposed to water over a period of
12hours (Figure7c) and is probably a contributor to the poor
performance of this product in the statistical analysis (Figure3).
WATER INGRESS TESTING
Groundwater ingress though seams (Figure 8a) was identified
in the mining visits and hydrology report (Reading, 2014)
as being crucial to the understanding of fume mitigation.
Groundwater flowing along aquifers may create a number
of water flow conditions on the blast pattern (Figure 8b).
Holes 1 and 2 indicate closed holes that act as stand pipes
with similar water dip levels. The surface may be below, in or
above the aquifer, depending on the water pressure. Adjacent
holes (hole 3) may drain into other seams or coal layers and
appear dry but have water flowing along the sides. Other
holes (hole 4) may be recharging slowly, meaning that dip
levels do not indicate the flow of water on the sides. A typical
coal blast is loaded with a bottom charge of water-resistant
product to prevent water ingress and a deck of ANFO above
to save costs (hole 5). Contrary to expectations, the longer,
non-water-resistant ANFO deck will more likely be in contact
with seams containing flowing or pressurised water. The effect
of water ingress on ANFO already in place and the efficiency
of proactive measures for sealing blastholes against water
ingress from aquifers and rain (hole 6) using water-resistant
explosive blends or other systems such as gas bags needed to
be investigated.
To determine the effect of flowing groundwater on the
explosive product and perform water ingress testing in a
more realistic environment, two groundwater simulators
were designed and constructed to simulate slow and fast
water ingress (Figure 9a). Five minutes after water is added
to the slow ingress test containing ANFO (Figure 9b), water
starts flowing down the side of the pipe and limited slumping
is observed. The fast ingress results in water across the entire
hole and immediate slumping. In another test, left overnight,
the slow ingress (Figure 9c) showed slumping and water,
but fuel separation though the prill structure seems intact. In
contrast, the ANFO in the fast ingress tester dissolved totally
and leaked away (not shown).
 MITIGATION OF POST-BLAST FUME IN SOFT GROUND AND WET CONDITIONS

Design options to reduce ingress by placing water-resistant

A product below and across the aquifer were studied with the
ingress testers. As shown in Figure 10, placing a small deck of
pseudo 70 percent HANFO (red square) above the prill led
to ponding on the deck with minimal ingress after 21 days.
However, placing the deck across the opening of the dynamic
flow simulator led to water trickling between the pseudo
emulsion deck and the pipe walls. This continued for over
24 hours, resulting in the degradation and dissolution of the
pseudo ANFO that was below the pseudo emulsion deck. The
performance of the products in field conditions needed to be
understood, but the large product quantities in these tests
causes difficulties in complying with regulations and site
procedures.
A field test was needed that tests the actual product and
conditions while complying with safe work practices
and explosives control regulations. An in situ test, shown
B schematically in Figure 10c, was devised and demonstrated
on a blast pattern on-site. Water is poured onto the product
in a standard blasthole. A water-resistant explosive deck
may then be placed on top of the main charge (red dotted
square). The change in water level over time is then regularly
measured through a perforated electrical conduit. This level
can be measured to the millimetre with an electronic water
dipper. A dummy hole drilled to the stem depth and also filled
with stemming is placed alongside as a control to measure
water ingress though the rock. In one blasthole loaded with
70 percent emulsion blend, the water drained immediately,

FIG 8 (A) Water ingress through seam on-site;

(B) schematic of observed flow conditions on a blast.

These tests indicate the significance of water ingress rate

in causing fume. If the prill is totally dissolved in a rapidly
flowing aquifer, the solution is likely to drain and leave an
empty hole or only the booster will fire. However, if the
prills remain with the fuel washed off, the mixture is fuel-
lean and will react as in Equation 2, directly producing NO,
or even deflagrate and produce NO2 as per Equation 4. On-
bench observations suggest that the current measure of water
recharge (1 m in 30 min) is not sensitive enough to identify
damaging flow levels and is often not applied properly in the FIG 10 Ingress test with (A) deck below opening,
rush to deliver production. (B) deck at opening and (C) in situ.

FIG 9 (A) Water ingress test units; (B) after five minutes in ANFO dynamic ingress (left) and trickle ingress (right); (C) trickle ingress overnight in ANFO.

11TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ROCK FRAGMENTATION BY BLASTING / SYDNEY, NSW, 2426 AUGUST 2015 515
L JULIAN et al
even though video had confirmed the absence of cracks in
the stem zone. This implies leakage alongside the product.
Unfortunately, the blast was fired sooner than planned and
long-term data on the other holes could not be obtained.
DETONATION TESTING
Once there is water ingress, it is necessary to understand
how much will cause fume. Detonation tests were performed
on 20 kg of ANFO in 1.5 m lengths of 150 mm diameter
PVC pipes and recorded using a high-speed camera, high-
definition camera, infrared camera and Microtrap VOD
recorder. Some pipes were sealed while others were allowed
to drain. The VOD results for each saturation test are shown
in Figure 11. Ultra high-speed video at 64 000 frames per
second (Figure 12) identified clear differences between the
detonations; the detonation front can be seen deteriorating
as the exposure of ANFO to water increased. At detonation
velocities of 3000m/s, only about 25 percent of the product is
reacting as per Equation 1 (Sellers, 2013), with the remaining
low-order detonation or deflagration producing fumes. Up
to 30 per cent of water by mass draining through the pipe
FIG 11 Velocity of detonation results.
FIG 12 (A) ANFO rinsed with 2 L of water; (B) ANFO rinsed with 6 L of water; (C) ANFO rinsed with
2 L of acid; (D) ANFO rinsed with 5 L of acid; (E) ANFO saturated with water.
516 11TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ROCK FRAGMENTATION BY BLASTING / SYDNEY, NSW, 2426 AUGUST 2015
has little effect on detonation velocity, although it introduces
increasing fume. Saturation without drainage prevents
detonation.
The presence of fume immediately after the detonation was
captured in the multiple exposures of the high-definition
video stills immediately after the detonation, as shown in
Figure 13. The most significant fume observed occurred in
ANFO rinsed with 2 L of acid, which also had one of the highest
VOD measurements. This shows that low-order detonation
is not the only reason for fume and that contaminants may
contribute in ways not yet understood.
Soft ground is often associated with cracking and cavities
that can intersect blastholes. ANFO can flow into these cavities
that are far less than the products critical diameter (Maniero,
2007). To test this hypothesis, wedges were constructed using
a section of 150 mm PVC pipe and two sections of 3 mm thick
plywood and loaded with ANFO. The significant production
of fume, as shown in Figure 14, confirms that this reduction
in detonation quality is a cause of fume events in soft and
fractured ground.
FUME MITIGATION METHODOLOGY
Current explosive fume mitigation and risk management
systems (eg DEEDI, 2014) are reactive and require blast
designers and shotfirers to confirm parameters such as
explosive quality, water ingress and ground strength without
suitable techniques for quantification. A more proactive fume
mitigation methodology is suggested. The methodology
identifies contributors to fume and removes their influence as
soon as possible. The stages include:
Characterisation of long-term influences, such as seasonal
rainfall variation, groundwater flow, rock mass strength
and structure (Stedman, 2014), and the presence of catalysts,
 MITIGATION OF POST-BLAST FUME IN SOFT GROUND AND WET CONDITIONS
A A
FIG 13 High-definition footage for (A) ANFO rinsed with 2 L of water,
(B) ANFO rinsed with 6 L of water and (C) ANFO rinsed with 6 L of acid.
such as carbon, acid or organics, must be completed well
ahead of the blast design. This requires input from mine
geology, hydrogeology and geotechnical departments and
should be an ongoing, integrated process.
Regular explosive testing on the products being charged
directly into the hole using index tests such as the beaker
test for water ingress to map changes in the quality of
explosive product over time and provide confidence that
the product quality has not varied.
Design blasts ahead of time for expected conditions,
including possible rainfall and long-term groundwater
seepage that may arise some months after the end of the
rainy season. This approach will reduce fume, improve
efficiency at the mine and offer cost advantages.
Apply process flows that focus on the proactive prevention
of post-blast fume at the design and implementation
phases. In the design phase, it is imperative that adverse
conditions are identified prior to designing the blast. Once
the conditions are known, the optimal explosive can be
selected. In soft ground, explosive products with low
detonation pressure products with ample water resistance
must be used.
Explosives that will increase the propensity for fume must
be identified and excluded from use for the given blast.
11TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ROCK FRAGMENTATION BY BLASTING / SYDNEY, NSW, 2426 AUGUST 2015
FIG 14 (A) Detonation of wedge; (B) resulting fume.
The blast size can then be determined as a function of the
sleep time of the explosives considering the likelihood of
operational delays and planning changes.
The implementation of the design must be undertaken
to the design with systems in place to manage necessary
variations to the plan. Last minute changes on a blast
pattern to add water-resistant product during rain can be
minimised by planning ahead and charging blasts with
suitable products proactively. The ingress and detonation
tests showed how the damage to the product can be done
almost instantaneously and that changes are likely to be
too late to prevent fume.
Site systems must empower necessary changes to design
to be undertaken with minimal disruption to the loading
process while ensuring that the correct decision has been
made and the propensity for fume has been minimised.
Finally, reactive systems, such as wind direction
simulation, gas detectors and emergency evacuation
plans, must remain as backup.
CONCLUSIONS
An ACARP project investigating ways to mitigate fume
events has led to the development of a suite of tests to
quantify explosive performance over time that can be carried
out in a mobile laboratory on-site. At the same time, the
laboratory and field testing has provided new insights into
contributors to fume production and identified shortcomings
in the current data collected for the national fume databases.
A simple model has shown how soft rock yields more under
the loading of high-pressure, water-resistant explosive blends
than for ANFO. The blends cool more rapidly into the lower
temperature zone favourable for NO2 production. Faulted
517
L JULIAN et al
and fractured ground can lead to fume from non-ideal
detonation of product in cracks as well as from degradation
of the product due to water flow through the broken ground.
Field studies showed that last-minute changes to a blast
pattern to add water-resistant product during rain does not
necessarily mitigate the production of fume. Such changes
are considered to be too late to prevent fume. Detonation of
ANFO in pipes with various quantities and rates of water
ingress showed how damage to the product can be done
almost instantaneously. The adoption of a more proactive
fume mitigation methodology is suggested. Blasts should be
designed ahead of time for expected conditions, including
possible rainfall and long-term groundwater seepage that
may arise some months after the end of the rainy season. This
approach will reduce fume, improve efficiency on the mine
and offer cost advantages.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors acknowledge the funding from the Australian
Coal Industrys Research Program (ACARP) as part of project
C23016. Gary Cavanough and Miguel Araos are thanked
for their contribution to testing. Site teams, Steve Simmons,
Vishwa Bhushan, Lindsay Ford and Keith Smith are thanked
for their support and assistance.
REFERENCES
Baulch, D L, 1981. Evaluated Kinetic Data for High Temperature Reactions:
Homogeneous Gas Phase Reactions of the H202 System, 433 p (CRC
Press: Boca Raton).
Braithwaite, M, Byers Brown, W and Minchinton, A, 1996. The use of
ideal detonation computer codes in blast modelling, in Proceedings
5th International Symposium on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting
Fragblast 5 (ed: B Mohanty), pp 3744 (Balkema: Rotterdam).
Cavanough, G, Torrance, A, Onederra, I, Bailey, V and Parra, H,
2013. A method to assess and minimise the potential for fume
generation from blasting, final report for project C20016, The
Australian Coal Association Research Project.
Department of Employment, Economic Development and
Innovation (DEEDI), 2014. Management of oxides of nitrogen in
open cut blasting [online], Queensland Government. Available
from: <https://www.dnrm.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_
file/0010/212500/qld-guidance-note-20-mgmt-oxides-nitrogen.
pdf> [Accessed: 20 September 2014].
518 11TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ROCK FRAGMENTATION BY BLASTING / SYDNEY, NSW, 2426 AUGUST 2015
Furtney, J K, Sellers, E and Onederra, I, 2013. Simple models for the
complex process of rock blasting, in Proceedings 10th International
Symposium on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting Fragblast 10 (eds:
PK Singh and A Sinha), pp 275282 (Balkema: Rotterdam).
Hughbanks, T, 2015. Introduction to chemical kinetics [online], Texas
A&M University. Available from: <http://www.chem.tamu.
edu/rgroup/hughbanks/courses/102/slides/slides15.pdf>
[Accessed: 15 January 2015].
Irvine, L G, 1916. Gassing accidents from the fumes of explosives,
British Medical Journal, 29 January, pp 162166.
Maniero, R J, Harris, M L and Rowland III, J H, 2007. Dangers of
toxic fumes from blasting, in Proceedings 33rd Annual Conference
on Explosives and Blasting Techniques, Volume 1, Nashville
(International Society of Explosives Engineers: Cleveland).
Onederra, I, Bailey, V, Cavanough, G and Torrance, A, 2012.
Understanding the main causes of nitrogen oxide fumes in
surface blasting, Mining Technology, 121(3):151159.
Reading, L, 2014. Investigating water flows into blast holes, report for
JKTech, Centre for Water in the Minerals Industry, Sustainable
Minerals Institute, University of Queenland.
Rowland III, J H and Mainiero, R, 2000. Factors affecting ANFO
fume production [online], Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. Available from: <http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/
mining/userfiles/works/pdfs/faafp.pdf> [Accessed: 15 June
2014].
Sanatkaran, N and Masalova, I, 2015. Interfacial behaviour of oil/
oil and oil/water soluble binary surfactants and their effect on
stability of highly concentrated W/O emulsions, Colloid Journal,
77(1):7781.
Scott, A, 2009. Open Pit Blast Design Analysis and Optimisation, 149 p
(Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral Research Centre: Indooroopilly).
Sellers, E J, 2013. Comparisons of explosive performance measures
in theory and practice, in Performance of Explosives and New
Developments (eds: B Mohanty and V K Singh), pp 1726 (Taylor
& Francis Group: London).
Stedman, H, 2014. Integrating blastholes into exploration data to
improve coal recovery and modelling, in Proceedings Ninth
International Mining Geology Conference 2014, pp 237242 (The
Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).
Zygmunt, B and Buczkowski, D, 2007. Influence of ammonium nitrate
prills properties on detonation velocity of ANFO, Propellants,
Explosives, Pyrotechnics, 32(5):411414.