Development of a Multiplication Factor for the Kuz-Ram Model to Match the Fragment Size Obtained from Wipfrag Image Analysis
Authors
-
Department of Mining Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Raipur - 492010, Chhattisgarh ,IN
Rajesh Kumar Das -
Department of Mining Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Raipur - 492010, Chhattisgarh ,INPrakash Y. Dhekne
-
Department of Mining Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Raipur - 492010, Chhattisgarh ,INSunny Murmu
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18311/jmmf/2023/34116Keywords:
Blasting, Blast Fragmentation, Kuz Ram Model, Mean Fragment Size, Statistical Analysis, WipFrag Image Analysis,Abstract
The degree to which the rock is fragmented by blasting operations significantly impacts the productivity of the opencast mining operation. Over image analysis-based tools, the Kuz-Ram empirical model is preferred for determining the mean fragment size of a blasted muck pile. The fragmentation analysis results by the Kuz-Ram model are said to report the overestimation of the size of the fragments. On the other hand, while accurate, measuring the mean fragment size by image-based analysis is also time-consuming and expensive. Therefore, in the present research, the fragmentation difference index (Fdi) is introduced as a new multiplication factor to reduce the discrepancy in the results obtained using the Kuz-Ram model and the image-based analysis. The error minimization method of least squares is used to formulate the objective function of Fdi. The proposed equation is tested using data sets that weren't used in the model's development. Statistical indicators viz. the coefficient of determination (R2 ) and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) have been used to evaluate the model's performance. These are found to be 0.80 and 0.007, respectively. The values obtained by multiplying Fdi by the Kuz-Ram results match those of the Wipfrag study, with an average error of 2.09%. Therefore, the suggested methodology will assist the field engineers in cost-effectively calculating the mean fragment size before blasting utilizing only the findings from the Fdi and Kuz-Ram models.
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
References
Agrawal A, Choudhary BS, Murthy VMSR, Murmu S. Impact of bedding planes, delay interval and firing orientation on blast induced ground vibration in production blasting with controlling strategies. Meas J Int Meas Confed. 2022; 202:111887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2022.111887 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2022.111887
Murmu S, Maheshwari P, Verma HK. Empirical and probabilistic analysis of blast-induced ground vibrations. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci. 2018; 103:267–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.01.038 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.01.038
Maheshwari P, Murmu S, Verma HK. Modeling of blast induced damage distance for underground tunnels. Indian Geotech Conf. 2019; 617–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6466-0_57 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6466-0_57
Lawal AI. A new modification to the Kuz-Ram model using the fragment size predicted by image analysis. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci. 2021; 138:104595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2020.104595 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2020.104595
Ouchterlony F, Sanchidrián JA. A review of development of better prediction equations for blast fragmentation. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng. 2019; 11:1094–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2019.03.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2019.03.001
Kuznetsov VM. The mean diameter of the fragments formed by blasting rock. Sov Min Sci. 1973; 9:144–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506177 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506177
Cunningham CVB. Fragmentation estimations and the kuz-ram model-four years on. Proc 2nd Int Symp Rock Fragm by Blasting. 1987; 475–87.
Hoser AA, Madsen AO. The Kuz-Ram fragmentation model – 20 yearson. Bright Conf Proc. 2005; 201–10. https://doi.org/10.1107/S2053273316018994 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1107/S2053273316018994
Spathis AT. A correction relating to the analysis of the original Kuz-Ram model. Fragblast. 2004; 8:201–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/13855140500041697 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13855140500041697
Kabwe E. Velocity of detonation measurement and fragmentation analysis to evaluate blasting efficacy. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng. 2018; 10:523–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2017.12.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2017.12.003
Ozkahraman HT. Fragmentation assessment and design of blast pattern at Goltas Limestone Quarry Turkey. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci. 2006; 43:628–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2005.09.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2005.09.004
Shehu SA, Yusuf KO, Hashim MHM. Comparative study of WipFrag image analysis and Kuz-Ram empirical model in granite aggregate quarry and their application for blast fragmentation rating. Geomech Geoengin. 2022; 17:197–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/17486025.2020.1720830 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17486025.2020.1720830
Cunningham CVB. The Kuz-Ram model for prediction of fragmentation from blasting. Proc 1st Int Symp Rock Fragm by Blasting. Sweden. 1987; 439–57.
Lilly PA. An empirical method of assessing rock mass blastability. Proc Large Open Pit Mine Conf Newman. 1986; 89–92.
Tosun A, Ongen T, Karakus D, Onur AH. Development of the Kuz-Ram model to blasting in a limestone quarry. Arch Min Sci. 2014; 59:477–88. https://doi.org/10.2478/amsc-2014-0034 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amsc-2014-0034
Adebola JM, Ajayi OD, Peter Elijaho O. Rock fragmentation prediction using Kuz-Ram Model. 2016; 16(5).
Wimmer M, Ouchterlony F. 2D image analysis using WipFrag software compared with actual sieving data of Kiruna magnetite loaded from a drawpoint. 2009.
Maerz NH. Reconstructing 3-D block size distribu- tions from 2-D measurements on sections. in: FRAGBLAST 5 Work Meas Blast Fragm, Montreal, Canada. 1996; 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203747919-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203747919-7
Murmu S, Budi G. A probability-based risk assessment of roof strata weighting in longwall panels. Arbian J Geosci. 2021; 14:362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-021-06637-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-021-06637-y
Murmu S, Budi G. Study on the mechanism, prediction, and control of coal wall spalling in deep longwall panels utilizing advanced numerical simulation methodology. Geofluids. 2022; 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5622228 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5622228
Dhekne PY, Pradhan M, Jade RK, Mishra R. Boulder prediction in rock blasting using artificial neural network. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences (JEAS). 2017; 12.
