TD report juneau garage 7 07€¦ · Terra Dinamica LLC 5 Meadow Brook Road Granby, CT 06035 Tel:...

Terra Dinamica LLC 5 Meadow Brook Road

Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506, Fax: (860) 844-0507

[email protected], www.terradinamica.com

1

July 25, 2007 Don Beard Tetra Tech/KCM, Inc. 230 S. Franklin Street Juneau, Alaska 99801 Re: CBJ Downtown Parking Garage, 3310013A-050 Dear Don, I have reviewed the documentation and proposed specifications for the Juneau Parking Garage. This project is typical of metropolitan blasting operations and can not be viewed as a normal blasting project. The 2 main considerations are blast induced damage to buildings, but more importantly, public safety. The blasting can be carried out safely in regards to these two considerations utilizing techniques developed for this type environment. The following are the main points to consider in the blast design for control of vibration and flyrock:

1. A vibration limit with a peak particle velocity of 2 inches/second is more then adequate on all inhabited structures. Any historic structures, etc, have already settled and seen much more detrimental nature influences then blasting.

2. The depth of cut for each blast should not exceed 12 feet plus 1-2 feet of subdrill. This is to control rock movement and vibration.

3. Explosives diameters should not exceed 2 inches. A lot of this project will use 1.5” product. ANFO/bulk explosives should not be used on this project. Most all of the accidents I have seen in these environments have been caused by overloading, which is much easier with bulk. Also, the reduced gas pressure of cartridge explosives helps to ameliorate excessive flyrock.

4. Line drilling should be used around the perimeter of the project for wall control and for mitigation of vibration. In areas with a high final wall, presplitting can be used if vibration limits can be met. This can be done as deep as needed, but ANFO/bulk should not be used.

5. In areas where the vibration scaled distance is less then 35, a seismograph array should be used. This array can be used to calculate actual vibration at structures of question. In tight blasting situations, seismographs can report false data due to aliasing. (see attached paper on the subject)


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506, Fax: (860) 844-0507

[email protected], www.terradinamica.com

2

6. A minimum of 2 layers of rubber blasting mats should be used. 7. A test blast program should be utilized with a minimum of 10 test blasts. The

first 5 blasts should increase explosives weight/delay and blast size with each test until then anticipated production level is reached. Tests 5-10 should be small production blasts. These tests will allow the development of a regression analysis of the vibration and also allow for pattern adjustment, etc. Normally, the first blast breaks nothing.

8. A blast plan should be submitted that includes the test blast program. I have included a plan as an example.

9. The blasting specifications should be rewritten. I have attached edited specs in ADOBE, but they should be totally rewritten. Cushion blasting and other things should be eliminated. Controlled blasting is actually taking place on every blast, so this should be done to reflect it.

10. There should be a minimum of $5,000,000 in general liability insurance for the blasting contractor.

The cost of this project should range from $45-60 per bank cubic yard. This depends on the contractor’s overhead and experience. Please contact me with any questions. Frank Lucca M.I.Exp.E. President


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

1

BLAST PLAN Date:

PROJECT:

CONTRACTOR:

Blast Design: Frank J. Lucca M.I.Exp.E.

President


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

2

Introduction The blasting on this project will be completed by Terra Dinamica LLC in conjunction with ________________. The blast plan follows and is based on the specifications for this project and New York City FDNY regulations. All specifications will be followed. DRILLING & BLASTING PROGRAM

Permits __________________ and Terra Dinamica LLC will obtain all necessary site-specific blasting permits from the local regulatory bodies. All federal permits for the purchase and use of explosives (ATF) have been obtained. Safety All crews are trained in the proper use and application of explosives and are additionally trained in construction safety. They are licensed in New York City to handle explosives. Daily “tailgate” safety talks will be scheduled each morning before work begins. Warning Signs & Guarding (according to NYC FDNY)

• Warning Signs will be erected in locations around the blast area and will be legible from a distance of at least 200 feet if possible. Signs will be mounted on fences surrounding the project and all access points.

• Blaster- in- charge will designate guarding positions. All guards will have method of communication to Blaster-in-Charge and visibility of area of concern.

• After blast, Blaster-in-Charge will inspect and signal all clear. Site Control

The actual blasting area will be under the control of CCJV/TD personnel at all times. THE BLASTER-IN-CHARGE HAS TOTAL AUTHORITY OVER THE SITE AND CAN PROHIBIT ANYONE FROM ENTERING.

• Explosive Transportation and Storage:

o ExploPowder will provide daily delivery of explosives. Onsite, type 3 magezines or “dayboxes” will be used per FDNY code. All leftover explosives products from the days activities will be removed at the end of shift by ExploPowder.

• Records

NYC required records will be used.


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

3

• Blasting Control and Wall Control o Blasting operations will occur Monday through Friday during Daylight

Hours between the hours of 8:00am and 6:00pm. No blasting will be conducted on Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holidays.

o Blasting will not occur during the time of Mass at the Catholic church adjacent to the project.

o Test blasting and production blasting will be performed to FDNY regulation and variances for changes of products and blast pattern geometry will be applied for during the test blast program and initial production blasting schedule. Also, variances may continue to be applied for throughout the project if different explosives technology or technique is better suited to complete the project.

o Blasting Mats or equivalent will be used to cover all blasts to ameliorate flyrock possibilities.

o Line Drilling will be utilized for perimeter/wall control. Line Drilling will consist of utilizing a 3 inch to 4.5 inch diameter borehole on 6 inch to 24 inch spacings. This will be determined after a test section has been completed.


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

4

Blast Pattern

Blast Plan Summary/Means and Methods The blasting program will start utilizing the standard blasting practices by FDNY regulations. The test blast program will occur the first 1-2 days. A minimum of two test blasts will be used to determine optimum blast design parameters. Blastholes will be drilled under the direction of a New York City licensed blasters. Top hammer hydraulic rock drills will be used. After holes are drilled, they will be loaded with cartridged explosives and non-electric. Holes will then be stemmed or filled in with gravel to confine explosives. The blastholes will then be connected by a licensed blaster and then rubber mats or other suitable cover will be used to cover the blast.

Line Drill

Relievers

Trim Row: 12 feet deep

Production: 12 feet deep

6”

1 ft

2 ft

Line Drill: 3.5 inch holes on 6 inch spacings: grade plus 2 feet

Relievers: 2.5 inch hole on 1 foot spacings: grade plus 1 foot

Trim Row: 2.5 inch holes on 2 foot spacings: Cut depth plus 1 foot

Production: 2.5 inch holes on a 3 x 3 staggered pattern: Cut depth plus 1 foot

2 ft

1 ft

3 ft

3 ft

6 “ spacing

*** 2.5 inch holes must be used on all holes except the line drill.

NO EXCEPTIONS


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

5

The first blasts will incorporate decking to reduce the pounds of explosives detonated per delay. All holes throughout the project may incorporate decking. The test blasts will increase in size by both “explosives pounds per delay” and by actual blast size. By the third to forth test blast, they will be the approximate if not actual size of the production blasts. At this point, blasthole detonation sequencing (timing) and blasthole geometry (burden, spacing, stemming height, square or staggered patterns) will be tested to optimize the blasts for vibration, fragmentation, and productivity. Also during this time, multiple seismographs will be installed at intervals around the blast area. From this data, a vibration regression analysis will be performed. From this data, calculations can be made as to the amount of explosives that can be detonated per delay so as to not exceed vibration limits. This is usually calculated to the 95% confidence line. Blasthole initiation sequencing or “timing” will be utilized to blast the least amount of pounds of explosives “per delay” as possible and to create the largest amount of relief. EXPLOSIVES PRODUCTS Explosives and initiation products will be those manufactured and supplied by Austin Powder Company. ExploPowder is the distributor of these products in the New York City five boroughs. The products include the following: Emulex® 520 & 927, Red-D-lite®, and the Shockstar® Series Nonelectric Shocktube Detonators. See “Equipment and Product” Section for technical data and MSDS information.


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

6

Blast Design The first blast will be approximately eight to ten decked (two explosive decks/hole depending on depth) blastholes. The test blasts will increase in size by both “explosives pounds per delay” and by actual blast size. By the third to forth test blast, they will be the approximate if not actual size of the production blasts. At this point, blasthole detonation sequencing (timing) and blasthole geometry (burden, spacing, stemming height, square or staggered patterns) will be tested to optimize the blasts for vibration, fragmentation, and productivity. The test blast program will determine the actual blast parameters used in the production blasts. Blasthole diameters will be up to 2.5 inches and utilize 1.5 inch explosives cartridge diameter. In blasting, excact blasthole depths, patterns, and timing can not be used on each and every blast. Field adjustments must be implemented by the blaster-in-charge. This is especially true when loading the blastholes closest to the free face of the bench. Blasthole Drilling and Loading Sequence

1. Blaster-in-Charge will “layout” area to be drilled by marking with paint or other means the locations of the blastholes.

2. Blastholes will be inspected and measured by the blaster-in-charge. 3. Blastholes will be charge with explosives and stemmed to the proper load and

depth. 4. Blastholes will be connected of “tied-in” by the blaster-in-charge after deciding

on the timing to be used. Timing will be based on field conditions. 5. Blastholes will be covered with blasting mats or equivalent material. 6. Blast area will be cleared to a distance of blasters and FDNY discretion. 7. Blast will be initiated. 8. After blast is initiated, blaster-in-charge will inspect area for misfires or other

dangers. 9. Blaster will signal all clear.


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

7

All Blastholes will be “decked” to reduce the charge weight per delay. Design Name Test 1 Test 2 Production Required (bcy) 12 21 Bench Height (ft) 6 7 Hole Angle (deg) 0 0 Rock Density (g/cc) 2.7 2.7 Column Charge

Cartridge Emulsion

Cartridge Emulsion Density (g/cc) 1.17 1.17 Energy (cal/g) 781 781 Diameter (in) 1.500 1.500 Length (ft) 2.0 3.0 Weight (lb) 1.8 2.7 Hole Length (ft) 7 8 Burden (ft) 2 3 Spacing (ft) 3 3 Subdrill (ft) 1 1 Decking (ft) 1 1 Stemming (ft) 4 4 Confinement Factor 1.91 1.91 Volume Shot (bcys/hole) 1 2 Charge Weight (lb) 2 3 Charge Weight/delay (lb) 1 1.8 Powder Factor (lb/bcy) 1.34 1.15 Energy Factor (kcal/ton) 209 179 Blastholes 9 9


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

8

Design Name Test 3 Test 4 Production Required (bcy) 27 45 Bench Height (ft) 8 10 Hole Angle (deg) 0 0 Rock Density (g/cc) 2.7 2.7 Bottom Charge

Cartridge Emulsion

Cartridge Emulsion Density (g/cc) 1.17 1.17 Energy (cal/g) 781 781 Diameter (in) 1.500 2.25 Length (ft) 0.0 1.0 Weight (lb) 0.0 1.8 Column Charge

Cartridge Emulsion

Cartridge Emulsion Density (g/cc) 1.17 1.17 Energy (cal/g) 781 781 Diameter (in) 1.500 1.500 Length (ft) 4.0 5.0 Weight (lb) 3.6 4.5 Hole Length (ft) 9 11 Burden (ft) 3 3 Spacing (ft) 3 4 Subdrill (ft) 1 1 Decking (ft) 1 1 Stemming (ft) 4 4 Confinement Factor 1.91 1.91 Volume Shot (bcys/hole) 3 4 Charge Weight (lb) 4 6 Charge Weight/delay (lb) 2 3 Powder Factor (lb/bcy) 1.34 1.82 Energy Factor (kcal/ton) 209 282 Blastholes 10 10


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

9

Design Name Production 1 Production 2 Production Required (bcy) 40 60 Bench Height (ft) 10 10 Hole Angle (deg) 0 0 Rock Density (g/cc) 2.7 2.7 Bottom Charge

Cartridge Emulsion

Cartridge Emulsion Density (g/cc) 1.17 1.17 Energy (cal/g) 781 781 Diameter (in) 1.500 3.000 Length (ft) 0.0 1.0 Weight (lb) 0.0 3.6 Column Charge

Cartridge Emulsion

Cartridge Emulsion Density (g/cc) 1.17 1.17 Energy (cal/g) 781 781 Diameter (in) 1.500 1.500 Length (ft) 6.0 5.0 Weight (lb) 5.4 4.5 Hole Length (ft) 11 11 Burden (ft) 3 3 Spacing (ft) 3 4 Subdrill (ft) 1 1 Decking (ft) 1 1 Stemming (ft) 4 4 Confinement Factor 1.91 1.91 Volume Shot (bcys/hole) 3 4 Charge Weight (lb) 5 8 Powder Factor (lb/bcy) 1.61 1.82 Energy Factor (kcal/ton) 251 282 Blastholes 12 14


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

10

Seismology Seismographs can give erroneous data if they are affected by other energy sources besides the blast. Also, geophone decoupling and/or the operational limits of the seismographs being exceeded can cause erroneous data. This can be determined by examining the seismograph for atypical waveforms and also by looking at the USBM graph for a chaotic array of vibration points. The waveforms can be examined to determine if they are valid readings and for the data that they measure, which is, peak particle velocity, frequency, acceleration, and ground strain (displacement). Acceleration and ground strain can also be approximated and/or estimated using various techniques once the peak particle velocity and frequency are known. Utilizing data from other seismographs, peak particle can be checked for accuracy. Also, by using a continuing regression analysis for the whole project and each unit, data can be checked for accuracy. Vibration Monitoring A vibration regression analysis will be used during the test blast program and updated on a daily basis throughout the project to insure the vibrations stay below project and state limits. During the production blasting, multiple seismograph monitoring locations will be used. The ongoing regression analysis calculates the 95% confidence line for vibration prediction based on the explosives confinement factor and the volume of explosives detonated within an 8 milliseconds/delay interval. Ongoing regression analysis insures that no matter the pattern being utilized, proper explosives weights can be used to stay under the vibration limits. Using explosives cartridges, it will be much easier to adjust explosives volume per delay.


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

11

The following is a sample regression analysis using the 95% confidence line and Oriard’s formula: PPV = K(D/w^.5)^-1.58.

Terra Dinamica LLCLinear Regression Analysis September 29, 2003Sample RegressionThis program performs a linear regression analysis of blast data. It will predict peak particle velocity for given distance & charge weights. It will also produce a Maximum Charge Weight vs.Distance table for a given PPV value based on the regression analysis calculations.

Three catagories of data are required: Distance From BlastMaximum Charge Per DelayPeak Particle Velocity

A MINIMUM OF 30 DATA SETS ARE REQUIRED FOR RELIABLE ANALYSISDistance Charge PPV S. D. Distance Charge PPV S. D.

1 158 27 0.26 30 26 105 15 1.15 272 160 27 0.25 31 27 103 15 0.65 273 233 4.5 0.16 110 28 240 9 0.27 804 233 4.5 0.16 110 29 213 10 0.69 675 233 4.5 0.15 110 30 212 10 0.3 676 240 4.5 0.12 113 31 185 7 0.66 707 155 16 0.25 39 32 190 7 0.4 728 157 16 0.32 39 33 172 7 0.6 659 145 16 0.4 36 34 175 7 0.38 66

10 148 16 0.38 37 35 202 31 0.67 3611 160 43 0.61 24 36 200 31 0.37 3612 165 43 0.4 25 37 182 9 0.37 6113 230 14 0.16 61 38 185 9 0.2 6214 130 14 0.65 35 39 160 9 0.47 5315 132 14 0.51 35 40 163 9 0.23 5416 232 19 0.2 53 41 165 18 0.55 3917 105 12 0.44 30 42 168 18 0.26 4018 107 12 0.33 31 43 187 48 0.99 2719 225 25 0.2 45 44 185 48 0.51 2720 102 19 0.65 23 45 157 3 0.45 9121 103 19 0.42 24 46 162 3 0.31 9422 95 10 0.94 30 47 192 9 0.69 6423 97 10 0.44 31 48 189 9 0.4 6324 228 37 0.3 37 49 161 3 0.38 9325 230 37 0.26 38 50 163 3 0.31 94

The 95 % confidence equation is : PV = 6.3671 *(SD)^ -0.5464


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

12

Terra Dinamica L.L.C. September 29, 2003Linear Regression AnalysisSample Regression

Max. charge wt / 8ms : 2 lb

Predicted PPV for Given Charge Weight( Charge weight = 2.00 lb )

Distance PPV Distance PPV Distance PPV(ft) (ips) (ft) (ips) (ft) (ips)5 3.193 275 0.358 1,400 0.147

10 2.187 300 0.341 1,500 0.14115 1.752 325 0.326 1,600 0.13720 1.497 350 0.313 1,700 0.13225 1.325 375 0.302 1,800 0.12830 1.200 400 0.291 1,900 0.12435 1.103 425 0.282 2,000 0.12140 1.025 450 0.273 2,100 0.11845 0.961 475 0.265 2,200 0.11550 0.907 500 0.258 2,300 0.11255 0.861 525 0.251 2,400 0.10960 0.821 550 0.245 2,500 0.10765 0.786 575 0.239 2,600 0.10570 0.755 600 0.233 2,700 0.10375 0.727 625 0.228 2,800 0.10180 0.702 650 0.223 2,900 0.09985 0.679 675 0.219 3,000 0.09790 0.658 700 0.215 3,250 0.09395 0.639 725 0.210 3,500 0.089100 0.621 750 0.207 3,750 0.086110 0.590 800 0.199 4,000 0.083120 0.562 850 0.193 4,250 0.080130 0.538 900 0.187 4,500 0.078140 0.517 950 0.182 4,750 0.075150 0.498 1,000 0.177 5,000 0.073160 0.481 1,050 0.172 5,250 0.071170 0.465 1,100 0.168 5,500 0.070180 0.451 1,150 0.164 5,750 0.068190 0.438 1,200 0.160 6,000 0.066200 0.425 1,250 0.156 6,250 0.065225 0.399 1,300 0.153 6,500 0.063250 0.377 1,350 0.150 6,750 0.062


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

13

Sample Regression

Below is the Velocity Attenuation Curve of the blast site data. The 95 % upper bound confidence level has also been plotted on the chart.

50 Data Pairs are represented in this regression curve.

Velocity Attenuation Curve

Upper Bound 95 % Confidence Level

0.1

1

10

100

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

14

Vibration Prediction at Set Distances

7 lbs./delay 150 K Factor

Distance' PPV- ips

100 0.45 200 0.15 300 0.08 400 0.05

1000 0.01 5280 0.00


Granby, CT 06035 Tel: (860) 844-0506

15

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Applied Explosives Technology For Construction and Mining – Stig O. Olofsson/Dyno, 1997

Blast Vibration Monitoring and Control – Charles H. Dowding, 1985

Construction Vibrations – Charles H. Dowding, 2000

Efficient Blasting Techniques – Blast Dynamics, 1994

Explosives: An Engineering Tool- Giorgio Berta, Italesplosivi, 1990

Explosives Engineering, Construction Vibrations and Geotechnology, Lewis Oriard, 2002

Engineering Geology – Richard E. Goodman, 1993

Explosives and Rock Blasting, Atlas Powder Company, 1987

The Effects of Vibrations and Environmental Forces, Lewis Oriard, ISEE, 1999

Guide to Underwater Explosive Excavation, J.S. Bower, 1977

ISEE Blasters Handbook, 17th Edition, 1998

Surface Blast Design, Konya and Walter, 1990

Terra Dinamica LLC Research, 1998-2003

Various Bulletins and Reports- US Army Corp of Engineers, US Bureau of Mines, OSM, etc.

Vibration From Blasting – David E. Siskind, 2000.

of 6

Seismic Results

Radial Vertical Transverse Serial

# Location GPS (UTM) Dist. (ft)

Velocity (ips)

Freq. (Hz)

Velocity (ips)

Freq. (Hz)

Velocity (ips)

Freq. (Hz)

PPV (ips)

Airblast (dB)

Accel. (g’s)

E N E N E N E N E N E N E N E N E N E N

AWilliams

Seismic Notes:

AWilliams

Radial Velocity (ips) Freq. (Hz)

AWilliams

Vertical Velocity (ips) Freq. (Hz)

AWilliams

Transverse Velocity (ips) Freq. (Hz)

AWilliams

SD

of 6

Shot Diagram:

Tight Construction Blasting: Ground Vibration Basics, Monitoring, and Prediction

By: Frank J. Lucca, Terra Dinamica LLC Introduction This is the first white paper in a series that is being prepared for close-in or tight blasting situations. These papers are basic and should be used as an introduction to blasting in municipal environments and other locations where close-in blasting is needed for rock excavation. Effective blast design and optimization requires that a multitude of variables be choreographed into a single event. These variables include but are not limited to safety, borehole diameter, borehole depth, stiffness ratio, stemming height, stemming type, burden, spacing, subdrill, explosive type, explosive energy, explosive quantity, initiations systems, delay pattern, and the geology must be taken into account. In close-in or tight construction blasting (1 foot to 20 feet), there is less margin for error because of the proximity of structures affected by flyrock and vibration effects. There has been considerable study from the US Bureau of Mines and other government agencies on vibration and airblast effects from surface mining operations. But, there has been little research conducted on construction blasting and even less on the effects of close-in blasting. Due to this, the current municipal regulations do not reflect the type of blasting and blasting effects generated by tight blasting. These regulations are extremely conservative and becoming more so on a daily basis. The current trend for engineers writing construction specifications is that if a 2-inches/second limit is good, a lower limit must be much better. They do not take into account the different type of blast geometry, explosive energy, vibration wave frequencies, building construction, or geology encountered. Blasting is an engineering science, but since it is not an exact science, it is also an art. In construction blasting, especially tight blasting, this is even truer. Anybody with an engineering or geologic background through either education or experience can read basic handbooks and understand the concepts and methods of blasting, but even the most educated will not truly understand or be able to do blast design, specification writing, monitoring in tight blasting situations without actual hands-on experience.

Terra Dinamica L.L.C.- Effective Blast Design and Optimization Copyright 2003

Author: Frank J. Lucca

1

Sound blast designs are based on the following 4 factors: 1. Explosive Energy Confinement. 2. Explosive Energy Distribution. 3. Explosive Energy Level. 4. Explosives Application Experience.

Explosive energy confinement, distribution, and level can be calculated using basic explosive engineering formulas found in most handbooks. Explosives Application Experience is developed over time using different techniques and products in different types of applications and geologies. The following document has been prepared using sound explosives engineering principles and the extensive experience of the author gathered during tight construction blasting projects, regular construction blasting, quarry blasting, and mining operations around the world. This is a basic primer for the explosives engineer and blasters who have to perform blasting operations in tight quarters and municipalities. Blast induced Ground Vibration In a simplified version of what happens when explosives are detonated in a blasthole, the chemical reaction of the explosives produces a high pressure, high temperature gas. This gas pressure (detonation pressure) crushes the rock adjacent to the blasthole. The detonation pressure decays or dissipates quickly. The second phase, which immediately follows or is in conjunction with detonation phase, is the shock and stress wave propagation phase. When the wave front moves forward, it will encounter discontinuities and/or interfaces. At these points, some energy is transferred across and some is reflected back. During and after the stress wave propagation, high pressure, high temperature gases extend radial cracks and any discontinuity, fracture, or joint. The explosive energy will always take the path of least resistance. Once the blasted rock is separated from the bedrock, no further fracturing occurs because the gas pressure escapes. This entire process occurs within a few milliseconds from detonation of the explosives. In basic terms, the energy not utilized in the breakage process is wasted energy. This energy is dissipated in the form of vibration, airblast, and watershock (charges in open water). Vibration is a wave motion created from an energy source, in the case of rock blasting; the source is explosive energy and rock movement. Vibration wave motion is normal and



2

caused by many things including walking, running, cars, hammering, door slamming, and natural seismic events. Primarily, blast induced ground vibrations are the result of the detonation pressure pushing the blasted rock away from the bedrock. This large force against the bedrock or unbroken portion causes the bedrock to vibrate. When the vibration is transmitted through the ground, this is called propagation. The propagation velocity is the speed at which the vibration waves travel. As vibration waves travel away from the energy source the vibration is reduced or decays, this is called seismic attenuation. Properly designed blasts utilize the majority of explosive energy to break the rock. Poor designed blasts will have higher vibration levels due to wasted energy. To understand blast-induced vibration, one must understand the following vibration components and terminology. A good example that is seen in many texts as an explanation of vibration is the following example. The ground vibration caused from blasting is similar to the motion of a floating object placed in the water near the energy source. The distance between the wave crests that move the object is the wavelength. The speed at which they travel outward from the energy source and moves past the object is the propagation velocity, the particle velocity is the speed at which the object bops up and down, and the frequency is the number of times the object bops up and down in one second. In blasting, ground particles oscillate in response to a vibration wave. This oscillation is measured in particle velocity. The maximum rate is the Peak Particle Velocity (PPV). In blasting this is measured in inches per second or millimeters per second. Velocity is a measure of the distance that could be traveled by particles in 1 second, measured in inches/sec (ips) (also known as speed in layman’s terms). e.g. 60mph means something will travel 60 miles in 1 hr, 1 ips means a particle would move 1 inch in 1 second. The actual time that particles are moving is much less than 1 second, so even if we measure 2 ips, the ground may only actually move 0.2 inches if ground movement only occurred for one 10th of a second. Particle motion is defined as ground particles oscillating in response to the arrival of the vibration wave. There are basically 2 types of vibration waves, Body Waves and Surface Waves.



3

Peak Particle Velocity is the maximum rate of particle movement; displacement is the distance the particle moves back and forth or the distance a particle or object moves from its position of rest. The change in displacement over a unit of distance is called strain. Besides Peak Particle Velocity, the frequency is one of the most important factors controlling the response of structures. Frequency is the number of times the particles move back and forth in one second. This back and forth motion can also be referred to as oscillations. The number of oscillations/second or cycles/second that a particle makes under influence from the vibration wave is measured in Hertz (Hz). Frequency is dependent on site geology, distance to the blast, and delay sequencing (hole firing time). The nature of the effect of frequency allows tight blasting without damage and also can allow higher peak particle velocities. Within 1-2 meters or 3 to 7 feet, blast frequencies can be many thousands of hertz. Although, they attenuate or decay quickly, the frequency can still be extremely high at a monitoring point under 20 feet. These frequencies can be so high that normal equipment cannot measure the level. Structural dynamics research has shown the importance of vibration wave frequency in tight blasting situations. In many cases, blast limits and specifications are based on blasting situations in mining and quarrying. Frequency, although looked at in regards to standard blasting limits is hardly ever taken into account when designing specifications for tight blasting. When structures are excited by blast vibrations, that may be equal in all variables, except frequency, the structure in question will respond much differently to a ground motion with a principal frequency of 20 hertz as opposed to a ground motion with a principle frequency of 150 hertz. To complete tight construction blasting projects in a cost effective, timely manner, and with minimal impact on surrounding structures, it is imperative that the explosives engineer understands the importance of frequency in specification writing, blast design, and interpretation of results. Also, it is important for the explosives engineer to have a firm grasp of other methods to define vibration wave peak. During the monitoring of a blasting project, the term acceleration maybe used to define the vibration wave peak or intensity. Acceleration should always be examined in terms



4

of the principal frequency and should not be used as a stand-alone limit. Acceleration (a) is defined as the velocity per unit of time. As an example would be the car commercial that states “ 0-60 in 10 seconds ”. The car is accelerating to 60 miles/hour in 10 seconds, which means there is a speed (velocity) that is calculated over time. The acceleration would be 6 mph/second. The combination of vibration wave peak particle velocity (the peak speed the particle moves from rest to highest displacement and back down like the bobbing cork example stated earlier), and the frequency (number of movements in 1 second) are used to calculate acceleration. The gravitational acceleration on the earth’s surface (constant of 386.4 inches/second² = 1 gravity (g)) is used to convert the acceleration measurement (which is measured in inches/second²) to gravity. The formula used is for approximate maximum acceleration is:

4.386***2. fVpiAccel =

Where: Units of acceleration = gravity, V= PPV (ips), f = frequency (Hz). We can calculate acceleration or measure it with the seismograph. When acceleration is calculated instead of measured, the number is usually much lower then the actual result because the vibration wave is not a true sinusoidal curve. This is also the reason when using acceleration and frequency to convert to peak particle velocity in inches/second that it too is an approximation. But, this can give us a good approximation of what’s happening. In close-in blasting situations, high accelerations can make the perceived vibration seem more intense and can also make the seismic data unreliable. Seismographs To measure blast vibration, we use instruments called seismographs. The geophone is the part of the instrument that contains sensors. The geophone must be firmly attached to the material that is being monitored. If the geophone moves more than the material, it has decoupled. When monitoring close-in construction, this can readily occur especially if vibration wave acceleration is exceeding 1 g. When acceleration exceeds 1 g, it is much more likely that the seismograph sensor or geophone will experience decoupling.



5

As an example, if a board is sitting on top of a table, and the table experiences some type of force, the board will move much more than the table. In this example, the board is equivalent to the geophone. When a blast occurs, the rock is barely shaking or vibrating, but the geophone moves. The vibrations being recorded are actually the geophone moving, not what the rock is experiencing. There are other problems that may occur to seismographs when used for close-in monitoring. These include exceeding the operational limits of the transducer and/or aliasing. Inside of the geophone are the instruments that measure the vibration. In most commercial seismographs, these instruments are called Seismic Velocity Transducers. A coil moving through a magnetic field measures the output of the transducer. In cases where the vibration frequency is high (over 250 Hz), the peak particle velocity approaches four inches/second, acceleration is over 1 g, or the geophone is placed in an area that will experience a multitude of different wave types at the same time, transducer decoupling may occur. This happens when the coil inside of the magnetic field moves enough to disrupt the magnetic field. This is exceeding the operational limits of the transducers. Acceleration transducers or accelerometer seismograph units can be employed for close-in monitoring in the near field, but do not function well for midfield or far field monitoring. Again, if setup in the wrong location, it too can generate anomalous readings. Using the same table and board example: If someone pounds on the table, the board will jump or bounce up. If a bag of sand is placed on the board, it will be held down. Although, a large enough force applied to the table will still move the board and sand bag. Because the instruments are being set up so close to the blast, no amount of cover will keep the geophone from moving more than the rock. Also, as first example demonstrates, even if the geophone is not decoupling, the transducer can be stressed beyond the operational limits. Aliasing is a phenomenon, which can occur whenever a signal is not sampled at greater than twice the maximum frequency of the signal. This causes high frequency signals to appear at low frequencies. Also, to measure the amplitude correctly in high frequency situations, the sample rate must be at least 4-5 times of the actual frequency being monitored.



6

Frequencies in the extreme near field can be as high as 6000 Hz. Although, this signal attenuates quickly, it can still be many hundreds of hertz within 20 feet of a blast. This will exceed most commercial blasting seismograph operational limits and will generate erroneous data. In other words, if an attempt is made to use normal commercial seismographs in the extreme near field to monitor blasting, the operational limits of the seismic transducers or data collectors will be exceeded in the particle velocity and frequency measurements, which will generate incorrect data. Vibration Waves To understand vibration control in tight blasting, the explosives engineer must understand vibration wave construction and phenomenon. Blast induced vibration waves can be divided into three main categories: compressive, shear, and surface. To measure the motions, three perpendicular components of vibration motion must be measured. They are as follows: Ground vibration direction

1. Transverse- horizontal motion at right angles to the blast.

2. Vertical – Up and down movement 3. Longitudinal (Radial) - Horizontal movement along a

line between the recorder and the blast. The three main vibration wave types can be divided into body waves and surface waves. Body waves propagate through the body of the rock or soil. One type of body wave is known as P-Waves (Compression and Tension Waves). P-Waves are Push/Pull waves and they are the compression/dilatation in the direction of wave travel. They travel in the following mediums: solids, liquid, gas. The compression creates a change in volume of the medium. An example of these types of waves occurs when a rope or string is stretched and vibrates. The other type of body wave is the S-Wave. This is a transverse wave that moves at right angles to the direction of wave travel. These waves can only travel in a solid medium. S-Waves create a change in shape of the medium. An example would the flexing a rope. The rope moves up and down, but the wave travels to the other end. At small distances as those seen in close-in blasting, blasts produce predominantly body waves. These body waves propagate outward somewhat spherically until they contact



7

any boundary. These boundaries can include another layer of rock, free face, fracture, joint, surface, or soil. When body waves arrive at these intersections, surface and shear waves are produced. Surface Waves travel along the outer surface layer of rock. They do not penetrate into the rock mass. The wave motion of surface waves decreases with depth. 1 wavelength in depth is equal to zero motion or no surface wave. Surface waves are larger than body waves but travel slower (Frequency). These are the waves, which cause most of the vibration problems and complaints. These waves are the large energy carriers and produce the largest motions. There are two basic types of surface waves, the Love Wave and the Rayleigh Wave. Love Waves are transverse waves that propagate in a surface layer on top of another medium (Soil overlying rock). Rayleigh waves travel in the free surface and the particle motion is elliptical. When blasting in the extreme near field (under 20 feet) without a soil layer, these surface waves are almost non-existent. For the development of regulations, the studies and research performed mostly involved the measurement of surface waves at large distances. In tight blasting situations, the body waves are the dominant waves and create surface waves when interacting with structures. Normally when body waves interact with a free surface, the peak particle velocity is doubled. If a seismograph is setup in an incorrect location such as near structures, etc, this doubling phenomenon will cause erroneous data. Transmission and reflection of vibration waves also affect the peak particle velocities. In the case of two equal compression waves colliding, the stresses will add and double. Once they pass, they will resume their initial form and continue. In conditions where two opposite waves (compression and tension) collide, the stresses will cancel one another and then continue on and resume their initial form. If a seismograph is setup in an area where there are a multitude of surfaces and structures, the interaction of the vibration waves with each other, surfaces, and structures may cause the seismograph readings to be erroneous and not representative of the actual peak particle velocities affecting the structure. Seismographs should be setup outside of the structure of concern. If seismographs must be setup inside or on the structure of concern, an analysis should be completed that



8

indicates the damping and/or the amplification effect of the structure. When monitoring inside of a structure or extremely close to the blast, an array of seismographs should be used in various locations to insure that the proper readings are being recorded. Using vibration prediction formulas, and information from the seismograph array, a good approximation of the peak particle velocity can be calculated at the point or seismograph in question. Many regulations and studies incorporate the use of scaled distance for some basic vibration prediction and blast design starting points. Scaled Distance Scaled Distance (SD) is a scaling factor that relates similar blast effects from various charge weights of the same explosive at various distances. Scaled distance is calculated by dividing the distance to the structure of concern by a fractional power of the weight of the explosive material. There are two excepted scaled distance formulas used in blasting, square root scaling and cube root scaling. Square root scaling is the general formula used in most regulations and general blasting situations, where the charge can be considered linear. Cube root scaling is used for blasting in the extreme near field where the charge can be considered a point charge or in explosions involving very large quantities, such as those created by nuclear explosions. Ambraseys and Hendron first suggested cube root scaling for use in prediction of blast vibrations in the year 1968. Square Root Scaling Many times when construction-blasting specifications are encountered, designing to a certain square root scaled distance factor is required. This is useful as a beginning estimate for vibration control and provides a conservative and safe charge weight for the test blast program. Since explosives confinement is not taken into consideration, there can and usually is a large variation in results, especially in tight blasting situations. It should be noted that small charges generate vibrations with higher frequencies and smaller displacements.



9

A 1.5-lbs. (.68 kg) charge of explosive will USUALLY generate more vibration than 3 - 1/2-lbs. (.2 kg) charges even when detonated at the same time. Square Root Scaled Distance Formula Scaled Distance (SD) = Distance Structure Weight^0.5 Or, Weight = (D/SD)² Cube Root Scaling Cube root scaling should be used for vibration prediction in the extreme near field (under 20 feet) in construction blasting. Cube root scaling can also be used as the basis for the prediction of frequency, but that will not be discussed here. Cube Root Scaled Distance Formula Scaled Distance (SD) = Distance Structure Weight^0.33 Or, Weight = (D/SD) ³ Delay Sequencing Blasting regulations usually state that only a certain amount of explosives may be detonated per delay, this has come to be know as the 8 millisecond delay window or 8 ms window. What this means is that amount of explosives being detonated at a given time not overlap with other blastholes being detonated within 8 ms. Years ago, researchers realized that charges needed to be separated to achieve optimum fragmentation and vibration response. At the time, the explosives initiation systems available could provide a separation of at least 8 ms on paper, so, 8 ms was recommended as the minimum time needed for separation of charges. Separation of charges is extremely geology dependent. With the advent of modern electronic microsecond accurate initiation systems, this author believes that this be viewed on a case-by-case basis after analysis of the area to be blasted is completed.



10

Vibration Prediction Basic prediction of peak particle velocity can be achieved using Oriard’s formula, which follows: PPV = K x (D/W^½)^-1.6 = (SD)^-1.6 x K

• PPV = Peak Particle Velocity in inches/second (ips) • SD = Scaled Distance • ^-1.6 = to the -1.6 power • K = Confinement Factor

Lower Bound: 20 Average: 150 Upper bound: 242 Highly confined: 605, To calculate the “K ” factor, use the following

formula: K = PPV/(D/W^½)^ 1.6 Example: PPV = 1.4 ips, lbs. = 7, D = 20’ K = 1.4/(20/7^½)^-1.6 K = 35.62 1. Calculate Scaled Distance = SD = Distance/Weight^½ 2. Calculate SD to the –1.6 power 3. Multiply by the “ K ” factor. – Choose the “K ” factor or

calculate from previous blasts. 4. K x SD^-1.6 equal to your predicted PPV. 5. K factor has huge significance. 6. If this formula is used well, it can be accurate. This

formula is used in regression curves, but “K ” factor and power are calculated from the data.



11

Peak Particle Velocity Prediction Table for various SD & K. Table: SD = Scaled Distance, K = confinement factor Lower Bound Average Upper Bound

SD/K 20 75 150 160 205 242 605 10 0.50 1.88 3.77 4.02 5.15 6.08 15.20 15 0.26 0.98 1.97 2.10 2.69 3.18 7.94 20 0.17 0.62 1.24 1.33 1.70 2.01 5.01 25 0.12 0.43 0.87 0.93 1.19 1.40 3.51 30 0.09 0.32 0.65 0.69 0.89 1.05 2.62 35 0.07 0.25 0.51 0.54 0.69 0.82 2.05 40 0.05 0.21 0.41 0.44 0.56 0.66 1.65 45 0.05 0.17 0.34 0.36 0.46 0.55 1.37 50 0.04 0.14 0.29 0.31 0.39 0.46 1.16 55 0.03 0.12 0.25 0.26 0.34 0.40 0.99 60 0.03 0.11 0.21 0.23 0.29 0.35 0.86 65 0.03 0.09 0.19 0.20 0.26 0.30 0.76 70 0.02 0.08 0.17 0.18 0.23 0.27 0.68 75 0.02 0.07 0.15 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.60

Vibration Prediction with Hendron’s Formula & Cube Root Scaling Using the formula: PPV = K x (D/w^.33)^-1.6, vibration for very close-in or tight blasts can be predicted in the same format as using Oriard’s formula except substituting cube root scaled distance factor for the square root scaled distance factor. To predict vibration and check the output information recorded by seismographs in a seismograph array, both formulas can be used to determine the correctness of data. When setting up a seismograph array, seismographs are setup at the closest point of concern to the blast. In tight blasting situations, as explained earlier, this can lead to erroneous data. Special units can be purchased or built specifically for this type of situation, but this can be costly and time consuming. To validate data, other seismographs should be setup in-line and behind the closest unit.



12

The following diagram shows a typical seismograph array:

Seis A

Seis B

Seis C

Blast Area

Seis A

Seis B

Seis C

Blast Area

Data: 4 lbs/delay Seismograph A = 15 feet from blast, PPV = 1.40 ips Seismograph B = 35 feet from blast, PPV = 0.53 1ps Seismograph C = 50 feet from blast, PPV = 0.30 ips Extrapolation of the data follows: First, calculate the K factor for Seismographs B & C. Seis B: K = 0.53/(35/4^.5)^-1.6 = 51.66, Seis C: K = 0.30/(50/4^.5)^-1.6 = 51.73 Second, take the average of the two K factors = (51.66 + 51.73)/2 = 51.69 = 51.70 Third, calculate the expected Peak Particle Velocity for seismograph A and compare the data. Because seismograph A is under 20 feet, we can assume the blastholes will act as a point charge and use Hendron’s formula, which uses cube root scaling. Use the average K factor developed from the array and replace in Hendron’s formula: PPV = K x (D/W^.33)^-1.6 = 51.70 x (15/4^.33)^-1.6 = 1.41 ips The actual reading taken from the seismograph was 1.40 ips. The calculated reading (1.41 ips) and the seismograph “ A ” reading are basically equal and it can be assumed the seismograph is accurate.



13

If the geophone of seismograph “ A ” has decoupled or the readings are above the operational limits of the unit, this technique can be used to give an estimate of probable peak particle velocity at seismograph “A ”. This technique should only be used after thorough research and investigation into the response and accuracy of the seismograph array. Another technique used for vibration prediction is the use of a regression analysis. Regression Analysis Regression Analysis is the process of estimating peak particle velocity (dependent variable) statistically from the independent variables of explosive weight/delay and distance to the structure of concern (scaled distance). Peak particle velocities tend to decrease with the increase of scaled distance. This means that the by plotting the data on a log-log graph will give the appearance of a linear relationship. From this data, an equation for the best fit or mean can be developed as: PV = K x (SD)^s Where PV = the particle velocity and K is the y-intercept, it represents the value of the line when it intercepts the particle velocity axis at a scaled distance of 1. “S ” is called the slope. The slope represents the decrease in particle velocity as the scaled distance increases. From the standard deviation of the data, confidence intervals can be determined, which are based on an amount of explosives/delay that can be detonated at a certain distance. For example, a confidence range of 50% means that 50% of the data will fall below the 50% confidence line. If the analysis generates data that is interpreted based on a vibration limit of 1.0 inch/second, that 8 lbs/delay of explosives can be detonated at 20 feet and statistically, 50% of the peak particle velocities will be below 1 inch/second. Normally, in blasting, a 95% confidence line is calculated. To develop a good analysis, a minimum of 30 – 35 data sets need to be analyzed. If done properly and enough seismographs are used, this can be accomplished and begun in the test blast program. Regression analysis should be continued throughout the project and blast design should be adjusted accordingly.



14

A typical regression analysis graph using square root scaled distances follows as an example.

Velocity Attenuation Curve

U pper Bound 95 %

Confidence Level

0.1

1

10

100

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00

Utilizing the techniques of regression analysis and the vibration prediction formulas, blasts can be optimized and designed with confidence for close-in or tight blasting. The added benefit of high frequencies helps to reduce the potential of vibration effects and damage. DEFINITIONS OF VIBRATION EFFECTS AND DAMAGE All houses crack from environmental forces. These forces include temperature change, humidity change, and settling. Other forces interact with structures and also cause damage. It is extremely difficult to distinguish between blast-induced damage and normal aging effects. 1. Threshold effects- refers to hairline cracks that may or

may not be seen by the naked eye (75 microns or less). Threshold effects do not damage the structural integrity of the structure.

2. Minor Damage- Cracks that are visible to the naked eye but do not effect the structural integrity of the structure. May or may not be repaired. It usually depends on the aesthetic appearance. Quarry and construction blasting with PPV as low as 2-3 ips (50.8 mm/s – 76 mm/s) has been known to damage houses, but in a



15

normal house, it usually takes between 5.5-6.5 ips (137 mm/s – 165 mm/s) or higher.

3. Major Damage- Damage from blasting usually does not reach these levels. This type of damage is associated with earthquake levels of vibration. Usually involves structural damage.

Various government agencies have based regulations and blast limits on results of studies of large scale blasting operations. The types of blast designs, explosives, and blast pattern geometry are much different then those encountered in tight or close-in construction blasting. Normally, in tight blasting situations, small diameter explosives (2 inch or less) are used in short blast holes (12 feet or less). Whereas, in large-scale long-term blasting operations, 8-inch diameter charges (or greater) over 40 feet deep are employed. These large charges create large surface vibration waves that are large energy carriers and have low frequencies. In tight blasting situations, it is not uncommon to have vibration frequencies as high as 1000 hertz at 15 feet and many thousands within 5 feet. Also, the propagation velocity of the wave is so fast at these short distances, the peak particle velocity only lasts for a short duration. With these high velocities and frequencies, structure damage potential is low, especially with concrete and brick structures. Below are common residential criteria developed by various regulatory agencies, they should not be applied to close-in or tight blasting situations.



16

Range of Common Residential Criteria and Effects 0.5 ips 12.5 mm/s

Bureau of Mines recommended guideline to prevent threshold damage in plaster-on-lath construction near long-term, large-scale surface mines with large scale blasting operations. (RI 8507)

0.75 ips 19.1 mm/s

Bureau of mines recommended guideline to prevent threshold damage in sheetrock construction near long-term, large-scale surface mines with large scale blasting operations. (RI 8507)

1.0ips 25.4 mm/s

OSM regulatory limits for residences near long-term, large-scale surface mines with large scale blasting operations at distances of 300 – 5000 feet (9840 m – 16,400 meters).

2.0ips 50.8 mm/s

Widely accepted limits for residences near construction blasting and quarry blasting. (BuMin Bull 656, RI 8507, various codes, specifications, and regulations). Also allowed by OSM for frequencies above 30 Hz.

5.4 ips 137 mm/s

Threshold effects to the average house subjected to quarry blasting vibrations. (BuMin Bull 656)

9 ips 229 mm/s

About 90% probability of Threshold damage from construction or quarry blasting vibrations. (BuMin Bull 656)

20 ips 508 mm/s

For close-in construction blasting, minor damage to nearly all houses, structural damage to some. For low-frequency vibrations, structural damage to most houses.

NOTE THE ABOVE CRITERIA APPLY ONLY TO RESIDENCES, NOT TO ANY OTHER FACILITIES OR MATERIALS

ISEE BLASTERS HANDBOOK- 17TH EDITION Below are recommendations based on the author’s experience for a starting point to develop acceptable levels or vibration limits for close-in blasting (under 20 feet). Safe and Conservative Blasting Limits Peak Particle Velocity Structure

2.0 ips – 51 mm/s Residential Homes with plaster on lath construction

2.5 ips – 64 mm/s Residential Homes with sheetrock construction 3.0 ips – 76 mm/s Commercial Structures/buildings 3.0 ips – 76 mm/s Wooden Bridge 5.0 ips – 127 mm/s Well-cured concrete- can vary up to 375ips 5.0 ips – 127 mm/s Steel/reinforced concrete bridge 5.0 ips – 127 mm/s Buried pipelines- blast out of fracture zone. 15.0 ips – 381 mm/s Cased drill holes

Tight blasting around reinforced concrete structures can be looked at as though the concrete is manmade rock. Lewis Oriard has done considerable work in researching effects on these structures. This author has used his basic recommendations many times without a problem. The following is referenced in the International Society of Explosives Engineers Blasters handbook and books by Oriard (see bibliography). When blasting outside the boundaries of concrete the results are variable and are dependent on how the concrete was poured, type of reinforcement, and raw materials used.



17

Tests have shown concrete not to generate cracks until 375 ips was reached and craters not forming until 600 ips. The author does not recommend using these as limits, but it shows the variability of concrete. In 1976, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) developed limits based on Oriard’s research and investigation. These are still conservative and can be applied to concrete footing, walls, dams, bridges, etc. The limits are based on concrete age and distance from the blast. A distance factor (DF) was developed to multiply by acceptable peak particle velocity limits based on the age of the concrete in hours and days. The following charts show the concrete age, allowable peak particle velocity, and distance factor. These are used to generate allowable conservative limits for blasting. Concrete Age Allowable PPV- IPS (mm/s) x Distance Factor

(DF) 0 - 4 hours 4 ips (102 mm/s) x DF

4 hrs. - 1 day 6 ips (152 mm/s) x DF 1 - 3 days 9 ips (229 mm/s) x DF 3 - 7 days 12 ips (305 mm/s) x DF 7 - 10 days 15 ips (381 mm/s) x DF

10 days and up 20 ips (508 mm/s) x DF Distance Factor (DF) Distance = 0 - 50 ft (0 – 15 m)

DF = 1.0

Distance = 50 – 150 ft (15 –46 m)

DF = 0.8

Distance = 150 - 250 ft (46 –76 m)

DF = 0.7

Distance = >250 ft (76 m) DF = 0.6 For example, if concrete is 1.5 days old and blasting is 15 feet away, the allowable peak particle velocity would be 9.0 ips. Age: 1-3 days = 9 ips Distance 15 feet, DF = 1.0 9.0 ips x 1.0 = 9.0 ips If the structure is above ground (freestanding wall, etc), this limit can be divided in half for safety. Example: 9 ips ÷ 2 = 4.5 ips As can be seen, residential and conventional limits should not be placed on tight or close-in blasting operations, especially on concrete reinforced structures.



18

Thorough research needs to be completed before any limits and specifications are written for the blasting operations. Too often, engineers are hired to write blasting specifications that do not have the appropriate experience to develop specifications that will allow safe and efficient blasting without undue limitations. Many times blasting specifications are developed for public relations and public perception. The following graph comes from a study completed by the US Bureau of Mines in the early 1980’s. As can be seen, individuals are extremely sensitive to vibration. When most individuals experience blast-induced vibration, it seems to be much higher in intensity then actual. BLASTING COMPLAINTS

Peak Particle Velocity- ips, mm/s % of Complaints < 0.10, 2.54 1.0% 0.10, 2.54 1.5%

0.20, 5 5.0% 0.40, 10.2 10% 0.60, 15.2 15% 1.00, 25.4 20% 1.50, 38 40%

2.00, 50.8 50% 4.00, 101.6 70%

Regulations are in place to reduce complaints. As can be seen from the above information, damage normally will not occur in properly functioning and designed blasts. Damage is normally caused by long duration vibration waves with high peak particle velocities and low frequencies. For example, an earthquake can have peak particle velocities of 30 ips or greater with frequencies below 1 hertz and last many seconds. To a human, a blast vibration wave with a peak of 1.5 ips and a frequency of 40 Hz and duration of 0.5 seconds may feel just as intense.



19

Summary When writing specifications, constructing blast designs, and investigating blasting related complaints in close-in or tight blasting situations, it must be remembered that the regulations developed for blasting are usually not based on tight blasting situations. Thorough and complete research and investigation needs to be started and kept on-going throughout the project duration to insure that blasting can be completed cost effectively and efficiently without causing damage to surrounding structures, equipment, personnel, and keeping neighbor and abutter complaints to a minimum. The vibration frequency component is key in developing blast designs for tight blasting situations. If blasting limits are created that are different then current blasting regulations in-place in states and/or municipalities, then the limits should be based on a combination of frequency, peak particle velocity, and the type of structure affected by the blast induced vibration. Monitoring tight blasting situations can be difficult. The proper equipment needs to be purchased or built specifically for these types of projects. This should be part of the blasting specification. The specification should also take into account monitoring location. If equipment cannot be obtained that can monitor the blast from the proper locations, specifications can be developed for monitoring from a farther location based on vibration wave attenuation.



20



21

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Applied Explosives Technology For Construction and Mining – Stig O. Olofsson/Dyno, 1997

Blast Vibration Monitoring and Control – Charles H. Dowding, 1985

Construction Vibrations – Charles H. Dowding, 2000

Efficient Blasting Techniques – Blast Dynamics, 1994

Explosives: An Engineering Tool- Giorgio Berta, Italesplosivi, 1990

Explosives Engineering, Construction Vibrations and Geotechnology, Lewis Oriard, 2002

Engineering Geology – Richard E. Goodman, 1993

Explosives and Rock Blasting, Atlas Powder Company, 1987

The Effects of Vibrations and Environmental Forces, Lewis Oriard, ISEE, 1999

Guide to Underwater Explosive Excavation, J.S. Bower, 1977

ISEE Blasters Handbook, 17th Edition, 1998

Surface Blast Design, Konya and Walter, 1990

Terra Dinamica LLC Research, 1998-2003

Various Bulletins and Reports- US Army Corp of Enineers, US Bureau of Mines, OSM, etc.

Vibration From Blasting – David E. Siskind, 2000

TD report juneau garage 7 07€¦ · Terra Dinamica LLC 5 Meadow Brook Road Granby, CT 06035 Tel:...

Documents

Transcript of TD report juneau garage 7 07€¦ · Terra Dinamica LLC 5 Meadow Brook Road Granby, CT 06035 Tel:...