Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Selection of Blasting Design Parameters Affecting Peak Particle Velocity—a Case Study

  • Published:
Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study has been conducted in surface limestone mine to select the controllable blasting design parameters affecting the peak particle velocity (PPV) for assessment of ground vibration. The study aims at using two prominent statistical tools, namely, principal component analysis (PCA) and stepwise selection and elimination (SSE) techniques for identifying the key controllable parameters affecting the PPV. For determining the correlation coefficient between blasting design parameters and PPV from 44 field scale trial blasts, multi-variate linear regression (MLR) technique was done. It was found that the PCA and SSE eliminated a huge number of controllable parameters to identify the most important parameters, affecting the PPV. The PCA eliminated 6 number of parameters while SSE eliminated 5 number of parameters, and the coefficients of determination (R2) obtained were 0.616 and 0.584 for PCA and SSE respectively. The predictor equations were evolved, and these equations were used to validate the PPV results for another set of 21 field scale trial blasts. The predictor equations have been found to be fairly accurate in predicting the PPV values. Further, the PCA technique provides very near prediction of PPV with high degree of correlation in comparison to SSE technique. The paper highlights the role of state-of-art statistical tools in selecting the blasting design parameters affecting the PPV in field-scale blasting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chen G, Huang SL (2001) Analysis of ground vibrations caused by open pit production blasts. J Fragblast 5:91–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chen W, Hasanipanah M, Rad HN, Armaghani DJ, Tahir MM (2019) A new design of evolutionary hybrid optimization of SVR model in predicting the blast-induced ground vibration. J Eng Comput 12:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  3. Amiri M, Hasanipanah M, Amnieh HB (2020) Predicting ground vibration induced by rock blasting using a novel hybrid of neural network and itemset mining. J Neural Comput Appl 9:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hagan TN (1980) Rock breakage by explosives. In: Gasdynamics of explosions and reactive systems. Elsevier, pp 329–340

  5. Rosenthal MF, Morlock GL(1987) Blasting guidance manual. In: Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, United States Department of the Interior, USA

  6. Khandelwal M, Singh TN (2006) Prediction of blast induced ground vibrations and frequency in opencast mine: a neural network approach. J Sound Vib 289(4-5):711–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ding X, Hasanipanah M, Rad HN, Zhou W (2020) Predicting the blast-induced vibration velocity using a bagged support vector regression optimized with firefly algorithm. J Eng Comput 23:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  8. Yang H, Rad HN, Hasanipanah M, Amnieh HB, Nekouie A (2020) Prediction of vibration velocity generated in mine blasting using support vector regression improved by optimization algorithms. J Nat Resour Res 29(2):807–830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bhandari S (1997) Engineering rock blasting operations. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands

  10. Saadat M, Khandelwal M, Monjezi M (2014) An ANN-based approach to predict blast-induced ground vibration of Gol-E-Gohar iron ore mine, Iran. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 6(1):67–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hasanipanah M, Golzar SB, Larki IA, Maryaki MY, Ghahremanians T (2017) Estimation of blast-induced ground vibration through a soft computing framework. J Eng Comput 33(4):951–959

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hasanipanah M, Amnieh HB, Khamesi H, Armaghani DJ, Golzar SB, Shahnazar A (2018) Prediction of an environmental issue of mine blasting: an imperialistic competitive algorithm-based fuzzy system. Int J Environ Sci Technol 15(3):551–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Roach PK, Verster WF (2006) Discussing the detonation effects of large charges. In: SABO Conference. pp 15–17

  14. Davies B, Farmer IW, Attewell PB (1964) Ground vibration from shallow sub-surface blasts. J Eng 217(5644):553–559

  15. Ambraseys NN, Hendron AJ (1968) Dynamic behavior of rock masses, rock mechanics, In: Stagg and Zeinkiewicz (eds.). Engineering Practice, John Wiley and Sons Inc., London, pp 203–227

  16. Dowding CH (1992) Suggested method for blast vibration monitoring. Int J Rock Mech Min Geomech Abstr 29(2):143–156

  17. Duvall WI, Fogelson DE (1962) Review of criteria for estimating damage to residences from blasting vibrations. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, R.I. 5968

  18. Nicholls HR, Johnson CF, Duvall WI (1971) Blasting vibrations and their effects on structures. US Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, Washington, DC, pp 656–660

    Google Scholar 

  19. Jolliffe IT (2002) Principal components in regression analysis. In: Principal Component Analysis. Springer, New York, pp 167–198

  20. Tiryaki B (2008) Predicting intact rock strength for mechanical excavation using multivariate statistics, artificial neural networks, and regression trees. J Eng Geol 99(1-2):51–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Majdi A, Beiki M (2010) Evolving neural network using a genetic algorithm for predicting the deformation modulus of rock masses. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 47(2):246–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Aler J, Du Mouza J, Arnould M (1996) Evaluation of blast fragmentation efficiency and its prediction by multivariate analysis procedures. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 7(33):315A

    Google Scholar 

  23. Martínez-Martínez J, Benavente D, Ordóñez S, Garcia-del-Cura M (2008) Multivariate statistical techniques for evaluating the effects of brecciated rock fabric on ultrasonic wave propagation. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 45(4):609–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Wang M, Wright J, Brownlee A, Buswell R (2016) A comparison of approaches to stepwise regression on variables sensitivities in building simulation and analysis. J Energy Buildings 127:313–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Khandelwal M, Singh TN (2007) Evaluation of blast-induced ground vibration predictors. J Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 27(2):116–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Verma AK, Singh TN (2013) Comparative study of cognitive systems for ground vibration measurements. J Neural Comput Appl 22(1):341–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Krabbe P (2016) The measurement of health and health status: concepts, methods and applications from a multidisciplinary perspective. London, UK, Academic Press, pp 113–115

  28. Pearson KL III (1901) On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. J London, Edinburgh, Dublin Philos Mag J Sci 2(11):559–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hotelling H (1933) Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into principal components. J Educ Psychol 24(6):417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Jackson DA (1993) Stopping rules in principal components analysis: a comparison of heuristical and statistical approaches. J Ecol 74(8):2204–2214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Smith G (2018) Step away from stepwise. J Big Data 5(1):32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Efroymson MA (1960) Multiple regression analysis. In: Ralston A, Wilf HS (eds) Mathematical methods for digital computers. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kecman V (2007) Foreword. In: Cios KJ, Pedrycz W, Swiniarski RW, Kurgan LA (eds) Data mining: a knowledge discovery approach. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  34. Pan Y, Yang C, An R, Sun Y (2016) Fault detection with improved principal component pursuit method. J Chemom Intell Lab Syst 157:111–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Montgomery DC, Peck EA, Vining GG (2012) Introduction to linear regression analysis. John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA

  36. Polhemus NW (2005) How to: Deal with multi-collinearity when fitting a regression model using STATGRAPHICS Centurion. Statpoint Technologies, Inc. pp 1–18

  37. Jolliffe IT, Cadima J (2016) Principal component analysis: a review and recent developments. J Philos Trans R Soc A: Math Phys Eng Sci 374(2065):20150202

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  38. Gajjar S, Kulahci M, Palazoglu A (2018) Real-time fault detection and diagnosis using sparse principal component analysis. J Process Control 67:112–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sarkhosh M, Ghasemi JB, Ayati M (2012) A quantitative structure-property relationship of gas chromatographic/mass spectrometric retention data of 85 volatile organic compounds as air pollutant materials by multivariate methods. J Chem Cent J 6(2):S4

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors express their deep sense of gratitude towards the staff and management of the open cast limestone mines for their excellent cooperation and support throughout the field work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mining Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, U.P, 221005, India

    Punit Paurush, Piyush Rai & Suresh Kumar Sharma

Authors
  1. Punit Paurush
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Piyush Rai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Suresh Kumar Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the design and implementation of the research, to the analysis of the results, and to the writing of the manuscript and also read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Punit Paurush.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Paurush, P., Rai, P. & Sharma, S.K. Selection of Blasting Design Parameters Affecting Peak Particle Velocity—a Case Study. Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration 38, 1435–1447 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-021-00408-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-021-00408-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation