2021
DOI: 10.1007/s42461-020-00374-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Empirical Approach Based Estimation of Charge Factor and Dimensional Parameters in Underground Blasting

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The appropriate blasting method should be selected based on the burial depth of the deposit [129]. For shallow deposits, either drilling-blasting [130] or chamber-blasting [131] methods can be employed. Usually, drilling blasting is preferable for shallow-buried thick deposits due to its more pronounced cost-effectiveness [132].…”
Section: Permeability Modification Technique For In Situ Leachingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The appropriate blasting method should be selected based on the burial depth of the deposit [129]. For shallow deposits, either drilling-blasting [130] or chamber-blasting [131] methods can be employed. Usually, drilling blasting is preferable for shallow-buried thick deposits due to its more pronounced cost-effectiveness [132].…”
Section: Permeability Modification Technique For In Situ Leachingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Kuz-Ram equation [34] is the most common empirical model for assessing surface blasting [43]. It evaluates blast fragmentation using design parametersexplosive characteristics, blast geometry, amount of explosive used, and rock factors.…”
Section: Kuz-ram Estimation Of 50% Passingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The charging quantity, quality along with blast design parameter impacts the fragmentation from a rock blasting operation. Himanshu et al (2021) have computed the optimal dimensional parameters for underground blast using empirical rock fragmentation models. The excess scattering in the delay detonators have major influence on the profile of breakage in the face blast.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%