Journal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés

Vol., No., Month, Year, pp. **-**

Journal homepage: [Link]

Effect of Natural Fissuring on Blasting Results in the Quarry : Case of study Aïn El Kebira,
Algeria
Chemseddine Derbal1, Adel Djellali2, Moussa Attia2*, Fares Zaamouche3, Anissa Belkhiri3
1
Mining Laboratory, Mining Institute, Echahid Cheikh Larbi Tebessi University, 12002, Tebessa, Algeria
2
Environmental Laboratory, Mining Institute, Echahid Cheikh Larbi Tebessi University, 12002, Tebessa, Algeria
3
Mining Institute, Echahid Cheikh Larbi Tebessi University, 12002, Tebessa, Algeria

Corresponding Author Email: [Link]@[Link]

[Link] ABSTRACT

Received: In this paper, we delve into the intricate challenge of adjusting fragmentation levels in
Accepted: mining operations. This adjustment is often hindered by a range of factors, including
natural fractures, those induced by previous blasts, cleavage, and the inherent
Keywords: approximations in the geometric and load parameters utilized in blast design. While
Fragmentation zones, fracturing, oversized existing research has predominantly focused on optimizing the progress of mining
blocks, detonics, digital mapping, blasting, activities, taking into account power and grade distribution, we argue for the crucial need
to incorporate the evolving nature of fractures within the rock mass. This integration is
advancement direction, block diagram.
of paramount importance, as fractures have the potential to significantly impact the
stability of the rock mass and influence the choice of blasting techniques. By considering
the evolution of these fractures, we aim to achieve a greater degree of control over the
blasting process, which in turn will have substantial implications for technical,
economic, and safety aspects of mining operations. Our study systematically analyzes
the influence of these factors in the formulation of blasting plans. To initiate this process,
we employ geometric modeling techniques, making use of digital cartography and
stereography tools. The ultimate objective is to minimize the volume of oversized
materials in the mining process. To provide a practical illustration of these principles, we
present a case study involving the measurement of rock fragmentation resulting from
blasts conducted at the limestone quarry in Aïn El Kebira, situated in the Setif province
in northeastern Algeria.

1. INTRODUCTION and fragmentation. Other researchers have favored a micro-

static approach to the problem of solid explosive fracturing
Currently, the consumption of raw materials continues to and fragmentation [4]. Today, a variety of numerical models
grow on a global scale. The exploitation of useful mineral address rock breakage and fragmentation but have yet to
reserves is of paramount importance for the economic yield a reliable and precise prediction of particle size
development of countries worldwide. The primary objective distribution based on knowledge of rock geometry,
of any mining enterprise is to ensure the optimal exploitation mechanical, and physical properties [5].
of its resources while taking into account their various For example, in the quarries of Krivoï-Rog (formerly in the
technical, economic, and human characteristics [1]. USSR), the percentage of oversized fractions in rocks with a
The use of explosives for rock fragmentation in mining is hardness of f=12 and higher does not exceed 0.5%, while the
often referred to as both a science and an art. In the early percentage of -400mm fractions constitutes 75-90%. In rocks
years, chemists worked diligently to develop stable and with a hardness of up to f=12, the percentage of these
powerful explosives and to formulate explosive mixtures for fractions constitutes 92-97% [6].
various applications. In recent years, the need to minimize Achieving high indices in the degree and uniformity of
blasting costs and control the impact of these parameters on rock fragmentation through explosives paves the way for the
fragmentation quality has driven in-depth studies. Research introduction of cyclic and continuous technology in quarries.
in this field encompasses computer modeling, explosive This technology involves the movement of ore within the
preparation, and high-speed photography [2]. Despite the quarry using cyclic means (excavators, rail transport, trucks)
continuous efforts of scientists and engineers to optimize the and conveyors to the processing sites [7]. For economically
fragmentation process, achieving precise control over these rational application of combined technology, it is necessary
factors remains an ongoing challenge [3]. for the ore blasted by explosives to consist of less than 80%
With the advent of high-speed computers, significant of the -400mm fraction [8]. The maximum economic effect
efforts have been directed towards continuous, discontinuous, of combined technology is achieved when the fractioning rate
and continuous-discontinuous models to describe fracturing is -300mm within the range of 77-85% [9]. Therefore, for the
widespread application of combined technology and future Technological Services of the Construction Materials
continuous technology in quarries, the primary task in Industry) are analyzed with precision and updated
upgrading drilling and blasting operations is to enhance the information. This work is based on firsthand observations,
quality of rock fragmentation [10]. measurements, and determinations, as well as expert reports
The pathways for improving the technical and economic [12]. The blasting methodology is based on geometric
performance of drilling and blasting operations are as follows modeling and the use of original formulas never published
[11]: before. A comprehensive analytical summary forms the
- Modernizing methods and modes of rock destruction backbone of this article. Digital mapping brings a fresh
through explosives; optimizing drilling and blasting scientific perspective and provides all the necessary data for
parameters; and rationally selecting mining drilling its compilation [13].
techniques, instruments, and explosives to increase their
efficiency. 2. PROBLEM STATEMENT
- Developing and introducing new explosives, types of
drills, and their working components, along with a new The scientific problem at hand revolves around the need to
technology for drilling and blasting in quarries. reduce the considerably high volume of oversized materials
- Developing methods for rock destruction based on the in our working conditions (See Figures: 1 and 2), where there
use of new types of energy and forms of their utilization. is clear evidence of suboptimal energy management at the toe
This article, by its subject matter, directly enters what we of the bench. This deficiency hinders our ability to achieve an
commonly refer to as the prospects for the future increase in the gas energy effect of the explosive used [14].
modernization of drilling and blasting operations. To stay This article is structured around three significant scientific
current, we chose to work in the mining conditions of Ain El tasks. The first involves an analytical study related to the
Kebira (sedimentary limestone), where the presence of two design of blast patterns using an empirical approach. The
systems of fracturing and a third, diffuse system with no second task employs digital mapping to obtain the necessary
preferential orientation was first observed [12]. tools for geometrically characterizing the rock mass in the
The occurrence of oversized fractions is sometimes most modern and useful manner possible. Finally, the third
remarkably high (40%), a staggering figure. The data task pertains to the design of a blast pattern based on the
exclusively provided by CETIM (Center for the Study and recommendations derived from our study [15].

(a) Case of Medjounes I (b) Case of Medjounes II

Figure 1. Pile displaying a high rate of oversized materials to be processed

(a) Case of Medjounes I (b) Case of Medjounes II

 Figure 2. Blast resulting in the fragmentation of large oversized blocks beyond the mid-range +400mm

The estimated rate reaches a high limit of 40% in some areas, with a median value of 20% for the entire deposit, a confirmation
later validated through the use of photoplanimetry.

3. METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE VOLUME OF modern software tools such as ArcGIS, Rockworks, Python,
OVERSIZED MATERIALS etc., the purpose is to [17]:
1). Precisely orient our boreholes perpendicular to the
The volume of oversized materials was determined predominant (major) fracture system.
through photogrammetry, as illustrated in Figure 3: 2). Choose the optimal progression direction based on
grade distribution, power (which is not an issue for us, given
that we are dealing with a massive deposit in a mountainous
terrain), and the requirements for effective fragmentation
control.
For digital mapping, two topographic maps at a 1/50000
scale were used to locate the site (See Figure 4), situated in
the neighboring Algerian cities of Sétif and Kherrata. A
digital terrain model from digital photos was also employed
to digitize the discontinuities of the deposit, including
fractures and bedding joints.
The data was primarily processed using the ArcGIS and
Rockworks software programs to calculate statistical
parameters.

4.1 Delimitation of deposits and site location

Figure 3. Diagram of the equipment setup for capturing a
photoplane image of the blasted rock slope

The planimetry measurement method is one in which the

volume of oversized materials is determined as the ratio of
the total surface area of the oversized pieces in the plan to
the overall surface area over which the measurement is
taken.
In situations where precise measurements are required
within a pile of rocks, a favorable spot is photographed, and
then the analysis of the photos is carried out at a specific
scale. This method is referred to as photoplanimetry [16].

4. DIGITAL MAPPING

The maps were initially imported into the ArcGIS

software and georeferenced to UTM WGS 84 coordinates.
The property boundaries from the cement factory were
added using the "Display data" function. By employing the
"Add Shapefile" function, the property boundary was
delineated (See Figure 5).

Figure 5. Site Location Map

4.2 Processing of satellite images and extraction of

lineaments and discontinuities

Figure 4. Digital Elevation Model (DEM)

Prior to the conception of any blasting pattern, a

geometric characterization of the mining rock mass is
methodologically necessary. Regarding digital mapping,
where we have digitized Wülff's templates and obtained
block diagrams depicting grade distribution using various
 directions), along with field measurements using a
geological compass, photos were taken and
imported into ArcGIS. By creating shapefiles, the
discontinuity lines were digitized as shown in the
photos below.

(a)

To obtain good results, the extraction and identification of

discontinuities were carried out in a semi-automated
manner, involving several distinct steps:
 Step 1: Initially, lineaments were extracted using
visual interpretation and the Hill-shade function
(See Figure 6) in the ArcGIS software from the
generated image of the SRTM DEM (See Figure
7).

Figure 6. Digital Elevation Model (DEM) Map, Shaded

Bedding joints
Study Area

Figure 7. Map of Extracted Lineaments from the Hill-

shade Function

Figure 8 displays the rose diagram depicting the

orientation of lineaments resulting from the statistical
analysis of digitized fracture lines using ArcGIS. Artificial
elements such as tracks and other linear structures were
excluded from the interpreted lineaments. The extracted
lineaments were overlaid onto the satellite image for
verification, and some of these lineaments were confirmed
in the field. The Rockworks software was utilized to extract
statistical parameters (number and length) and create the
rose diagram in angular increments of 10° [18]. (b) Fractures

Figure 9. Rose diagram of discontinuities digitized from

field photos and final dip

The processing of statistical parameters using the

Rockworks software enabled the creation of the rose
diagram of directions (see Figure 10).

Figure 8. Rose diagram of the lineaments extracted using

the Hill-shade function

 Step 2: To gather a substantial number of

measurements of discontinuities (lengths, dips,
 Angle °

Angle °

Angle °

Angle °

Angle °

Angle °

Angle °

Angle °

Angle °

Angle °
8 5 32 20 0 21 32 0 25 21
16 5 34 20 0 21 32 16 1 21
16 5 16 20 0 21 32 16 12 5
16 5 16 20 13 21 32 9 12 16
16 5 32 22 12 2 28 11 21 16
16 42 32 22 35 2 28 35 15 16
9 42 32 38 0 42 32 36 17 21
9 42 32 38 0 42 21 36 3 21
9 42 5 38 1 42 21 36 7 21
9 42 32 38 4 42 6 36 1 21
65 21 32 38 4 42 6 36 0 21
29 5 32 38 4 26 6 16 0 21
Figure 10. Rose diagram of discontinuities digitized 29 21 32 39 4 26 6 16 0 21
from field photos and final dip 29 21 11 39 4 26 7 16 22 21
29 21 32 0 4 26 7 16 25 21
32 23 4 26 8 11 32 22 4 26
 Step 3: In the absence of a software tool for
7 16 32 22 4 26 7 16 32 26
calculating dips, a script was created in the
16 26 16 7 35 25 16 26 16 7
PYTHON programming language within the 35 26 23 26 9 6 32 1 28 7
Google COLAB environment. This allowed for the 9 1 32 26 5 15 9 2 32 26
calculation of the dip angle of the layers based on 5 15 9 7 32 16 32 30 20 30
the geometric data of the lines digitized on the 32 1 4 26 2 5 32 25 4 26
bedding joints, namely, the coordinates x1 y1 at the
beginning of a line and the coordinates x2 y2 at the Figure 11. Python code for calculating the dip angle of
end of a line (See Figure 11). layers

240 dip angles have been calculated and are listed in the
following table:

Table 1. Dip Angles Calculated for 240 Measurements

 Step 4: Using the Rockworks software for block

diagram drawing, a conceptual schema of the
deposit was created based on geological surveys in
the "Medjounes II" part of the deposit. An Excel
file containing the coordinates of geological
surveys, depth, and CaO content was imported
using the "Solid" function to proceed with the
schematization of the 3D terrain model showing
the distribution of CaO content (See Figure 12).
 micro-delay blasting patterns, blasting in confined spaces,
Figure 12. Block Diagram illustrating the CaO content pre-splitting, and more.

5. DEVELOPMENT OF A BLASTING PLAN 5.2 Calculation of the blasting plan parameters

5.2.1 Theory for calculating specific explosive
Many referenced authors do not present a clear consumption
methodology for rock blasting under Algerian conditions. In
this work, using modern digital mapping tools and reliable For the destruction of rock masses down to a specific
references from leading institutions, we are addressing the particle size, a certain amount of energy needs to be
development of an explosive blasting methodology that expended (energy capacity, etc.). This dependency is known
takes into account the Algerian mining conditions [19]. based on the fundamental laws of fragmentation and
Upon reviewing the existing research, it is evident that remains true for explosive destruction [2].
the understanding of the explosive working mechanism
remains unresolved due to the lack of precise observation
means for all detonation sequences and the rather complex
mathematical interpretations that result. Unfortunately,
explosives still remain a destructive agent when they could
be an effective regulator of fragmentation [20].

5.1 Classification of Methods for Controlling Rock

Fragmentation with Explosives

The known methods for controlling the fragmentation of (a) Mechanical fragmentation
rock masses with explosives can be classified based on
various factors [21]:
Adjustment through the influence of the explosion on the
rock mass can be achieved by varying:
a) Specific explosive consumption calculated.
b) Diameter of the charge.
c) Type of explosive used.
d) Charge construction.
e) Orientation of the initiation of continuous charge.
f) The order of initiation of parts of the discontinuous (b) Rock fragmentation by explosives
charge.
g) Quality of stemming and its length, and more... Figure 13. Force diagram
During the change in the character of the charge's effect
in the regulated fragmentation zone, the part of the energy However, there are several distinguishing features
transmitted in the practically unregulated fragmentation between explosive fragmentation and mechanical
zone varies, resulting in changes in the dimensions of these fragmentation. Mechanical fragmentation has a two-sided
zones and the intensification of fragmentation in the mass. force pattern (Fig.13.a), whereas explosive fragmentation
Adjustment of the explosive effect on the rock mass in (except for oversize reduction and tight-space blasting)
the unregulated fragmentation zone can be achieved by the exhibits a one-sided force pattern (Fig.13.b).
interaction of adjacent charges and groups of charges In mechanical fragmentation, different pieces of rock are
through the variation of: involved, while in blasting, fractured rock masses of
a) Hole layout and the number of rows. significant dimensions are encountered. The fissures and
b) Delay intervals and the sequence of charge firing, heterogeneity during blasting facilitate the division of large
bench height, hole layout patterns on the bench. rock pieces and reduce the specific energy capacity for
Methods for controlling fragmentation can be divided into
destruction. During blasting, fissures act as a barrier to the
two classes: expansion of energy, reducing the possibility of
The first class relates to methods that ensure the desired fragmentation and often increasing the specific explosive
level of fragmentation: specific explosive consumption, consumption required to achieve the desired particle size
calculated diameter, and hole layout. [22].
The second class includes methods that allow for The smaller the diameter of the charge, the less likely the
changing the level of fragmentation in limited zones and do energy expansion screen effect is between the charge and
not exclude the flow of oversized fractions. This the free surface of the bench.
encompasses various methods that may reduce the volume With an increase in specific explosive consumption, the
of oversized material by 10-20%, including the use of degree of fragmentation in the rock mass increases more
discontinuous charges (solid, air, water stemming), charges intensively over the output (Fig.14). Then comes the so-
with empty or water-filled intervals in sub-drilling or called state of saturation of the rock mass with blast energy,
between the charge and stemming, sequential initiation of where it can't absorb a large amount of energy spent
different parts, reverse initiation of continuous charges, unnecessarily on rock dispersion. In this case, the change in
different types of explosives with varying detonation fragmentation intensity remains insignificant, and the curve
velocities, densities, and volumetric energy concentrations, roughly parallels the x-axis. The curve's smoothness is also
paired hole blasting, block blasting from high benches, influenced by the direction of practically unregulated
combination of charges with different diameters and lengths,
fragmentation [14,15]. Figure 15. Dependency of the oversize output rate on q
For a small charge diameter (d < 150mm), the curve for different rock categories. [4]
passes lower, and in some cases, it can even reach the x-axis
(in this case, the oversize output is zero). With a large As the acceptable rock fragment size changes, the content
charge diameter (d > 250mm), the curve passes higher, and of this fraction in the rock mass also varies. The slope angle
practically, for any specific explosive consumption (q), it's of the lines and the flow rate of the large fractions in the
impossible to achieve a zero-oversize output; in other non-regulated fragmentation zone change. Therefore, the
words, there are minimum values for the oversize output, threshold values for specific explosive consumption change,
denoted as Vct and Vtc [21]. but the methodological principle of choosing q to ensure the
The curve intersects the y-axis at a point that represents minimal oversize flow remains the same [15-17].
the content of oversize material in the rock mass before With increasing fragment sizes, all the lines shift
blasting. downward, meaning the specific explosive consumption
decreases. To determine its value, if you know the content
of the large fraction in the mass (the point on the line on the
ordinate axis), it is necessary to carry out one or, preferably,
two experimental blasts with selected different specific
consumptions, plot the large fraction flow rate obtained on
the graph, and connect the point on the ordinate axis to the
point obtained using a straight line. By extending this line to
its intersection with the line representing the minimum
oversize flow rate, you can find the threshold value of q.
Beyond this threshold, it is not rational to go because, in this
zone, the curve of the large fractions' flow rate with varying
specific consumption already levels off [20].
Most often, it is not practical to apply the specific
consumptions determined in this way because they result in
a broad rock pile and mining operations that are not feasible
according to the technology. When carrying out
Figure 14. Dependence of the oversize output on q for experimental blasts, you should select rock blocks with
different charge diameters and their rock breakability. 1-2: similar properties based on hardness and fissuring and use a
Oversize output from the unregulated fragmentation zone, method for conducting experimental blasts developed by
1_for d1, 2_for d2. [4] researchers from the Moscow Mining Institute [22].
The practical method for determining specific explosive
Depending on the rock's fissure category and the consumptions for 234 mm diameter holes, taking into
permissible fragment size in the operations, this value can account the fissuring of the rock mass and the strength
vary from 100% to 0. properties of its components, is based on the fundamental
When calculating explosive consumption, it is practical to work of Academician Rjevsky, V. V.[6]. The dependence of
replace the curves on the graph with straight lines. In this q on rock strength properties (hardness coefficient f) during
case, the precision of the results obtained falls within the the blasting of divisions to fragment sizes less than 100 mm
range of 15-20%, which is generally acceptable. The is as follows:
selection of a rational specific consumption is a techno-
economic issue that is resolved based on the cost of 2 2
extracting valuable minerals for all processes. However, in q=f .e .b . σ c 0 , 73.10 .0,349 (1)
most cases during blasting, efforts are made to minimize the
oversize output, aiming for a value close to 0%. Where:
In the graph (Fig.15) showing the variation of q for a This formula is analogous to the theoretical formula by
given charge diameter and different rocks based on their Academician Rebinder, P.A., encompassing the laws of
workability, the percentage of oversize blocks (dhg > Patinger, P.R., and Kirpitchev, V.L.[6].
700mm) in the rock mass before blasting is plotted on the y-
2
axis. σ c S p Pn
2
Kw = + (2)
2E V
The formula contains the following variables:
K : A coefficient for unit conversion into the SI system.
w : The specific energy consumption for rock
fragmentation in J/m³.
σ c: The uniaxial compressive strength of the rock in
Pascals (Pa).
E : The rock's modulus of elasticity in Pascals (Pa).
Pn: The specific surface energy in J/m².
S p : The new surface area created in square meters (m²).
V : The volume of the rock to be fragmented in cubic
meters (m³).
 Let us apply the notion of fragmentation coefficient K frag Taking into account the dependencies obtained
as the ratio of the surface of the block before the shot (S n) previously:
and the surface after the shot (Sp). Afterwards, the energy
expenditure equation, for the case of fragmentation at the q=q s ¿) (8)
explosive, takes the form:
We obtain :
2
σc
W= +θ K frag + ε (3)

( )
2
2E dc ρ
q=q s ( 0 , 6+3 , 3.10 . d charg . d c ) .
−3 5
.e .( ) (9)
dk 2, 6
Where:
θ: Coefficient taking into account energy expenditure for
fragmentation; And finally :
ε: Coefficient taking into account energy losses.

( )
2
The processing of the results of the experimental shots dc
q=( 0 ,77.10 σ c +0,345 ) . ( 0 , 6+3 ,3.10 . d charg(10)
. dc ) .
−8 −3 5
made it possible to design the above formula as follows: dk
2
σc Where:
W= +1111,004 K frag +39,693 (4)
2E q: specific consumption calculated to obtain the required
degree of rock fragmentation, Kg/m3;
Taking for the average conditions σc 2/(2E) = 11.10-4 and b: coefficient taking into account the degree of cracking
returning to the specific consumption taking into account the of the rock;
mechanical equivalent we will have : a: coefficient taking into account the energy expenditure
to overcome the connections between the divisions;
Qs =25.10
−10
. σ c + 2 ,6 K frag +0,093 (5) dc: average diameter of the division in the massif, m;
dk: admissible (fixed) dimension of the piece, m;
e: relative working capacity of the explosive;
The dependence of the fragmentation coefficient on the
ρ: density of the rock, t/m3.
limit of the rock to compression according to experimental
data in the form:
Based on the generalization of firing work through
−10
experience in quarries and the method proposed by
K frag =20.10 σ c +0,0965 (6) researchers of the Moscow Mining Institute and the
Scientific Research Institute of Ferrous Metals, a
The specific consumption characterizing the classification on the firingability of massifs of rocks was
fragmentation of the divisions in Kg/m3: established when applying loads of Φ 250 mm and
according to which it is recommended to choose the specific
−8 consumption of the explosive (Table 2).
q s=0 ,77.10 σ c + 0,345 (7)

Table 2. Rock Classification Based on Drillability for Quarries. /4/

Distance Content of Approximate categories (group)

Category Calculated specific between divisions in the Compressi Rock of rocks
(class) of consumption, Kg/m3 natural massif (%), ve strength density,
rocks cracks of size of rock, Pa t/m3
according all +500 +1500 According to
to Class Class systems Professor Seloern
drawability limit average in the Protodiakonov forability
massif, m 's scale
I 0,12-0,18 0,150 0,10 0-2 0 100-300 1,40-1,80 VII-VI V-VIII

II 0,18-0,27 0,225 0,10-0,25 2-16 0 250-450 1,75-2,35 VI-V VI-X

III 0,320 0,20-0,50 10- 0-1 300-650 2,25-2,55 V-IV IX-XII

0,27-0,38
52

IV 0,450 0,45-0,75 45- 0-4 300-900 2,50-2,80 IV-IIIa XI –XIII

0,38-0,52
80

V 0,600 0,75-1,00 75- 2-5 700-1200 2,75-2,90 IIIa-III XIII-XV

0,52-0,68
98

VI 0,780 0,95-1,25 96- 10-30 1100-1600 2,85-3,00 III-II XIV-XVI

0,68-0,88
100

VII 0,88-1,10 0,990 1,20-1,50 100 25-47 1450-2050 2,95-3,20 II-I XVI-XVIII
 VIII 1,10-1,37 1,235 1,45-1,70 100 43-63 1950-2500 3,15-3,40 I XVII-XX

IX 1,37-1,68 1,525 1,65-1,90 100 58-78 2350-3000 3,35-3,60 I XIX-XX

X 1,855 1,85 and + 100 75-100 2850 and + 3,55 et +

1,68-2,03

The distinctive features of the proposed classification there is a trend toward using large-diameter holes, especially
include: the introduction of about ten categories that group for high-capacity quarries.
the various rock formations encountered in quarries, taking
into account their main properties, which significantly 6. RULES TO BE ADOPTED BEFORE ANY DESIGN
influence the results of fragmentation, namely, fissuring and
mesh hardness. According to this classification, for each It is necessary to adapt inclined boreholes to the main
quarry, no more than four types of rock are selected, taking fissure system, as studies and tests demonstrate through the
into account the required specific consumption. This four cases in the following figure:
approach eliminates one of the main drawbacks of existing
classifications: in each quarry, there are rocks that are
easily, moderately, and difficult to drill, but the specific
consumption of explosives for mass blasting for a given
category can vary by two times or more. When using the
given classification, the corresponding drillability categories
are chosen based on the specific consumption of explosives.
This approach provides an objective characteristic of the
specific rock formation [23].
In the future, within this classification, it is advisable to
replace the mesh hardness with impact resistance
(resilience), which to a large extent characterizes the
destruction of the mesh during blasting. It is necessary to (a)
take into account the degree of water saturation in the rock
masses to be blasted, as well as the methods of transitioning
from the standard blasting conditions of the given
classification to other conditions (different bench heights,
charge diameters, explosive types, permissible fragment
sizes, micro-delay schemes, etc.) [24].
Other authors provide its approximate value, which is
determined based on experimental results or industrial
blasting, taking into account rock properties. The specific
consumption of explosives for multi-row blasting is applied
for the first row from the tables provided, but for the second
and subsequent rows, it is increased by 5-10% in rocks of
fissure categories I-III and by 10-15% in rocks of categories
III-X.
(b)
5.2.2 Theory of Calculating Charge Diameter

For quarries, the following specific features of boreholes

can be formulated [25]:
1. For rocks in the drillability category I-III, it is
advisable to choose the largest possible diameter
(250-300 mm).
2. For rocks in the drillability category IV-VIII, as well
as homogeneous category III rocks in the case of the
possibility of using multi-row delay blasting, the
preferred diameter is (200-250 mm).
3. For rocks with large meshes in drillability category
VIII-X, as well as heterogeneous and often (c)
alternating category III rocks, it is advisable to
reduce the charge diameter to 150 mm.
Since the output of mined material per meter of borehole
is proportional to the square of the charge diameter, in this
case, the efficiency of drills increases with the amount of
material drilled by large-diameter holes, and the drilling cost
per cubic meter decreases. That's why in modern conditions,
 Figure 17. Initiation direction of charges: a) From bottom to
top, b) From top to bottom, and c) Mixed (recommended).
[8:10]

7. PROPOSED SCHEME

1. Determination of drillability (standard q): The

resistance of rocks to blasting is characterized by the
specific standard consumption of explosives. It is
determined by the following formula:

q ét =0 , 02 ( σ comp + σ dép +σ tr ) 2 γ (11)

(d)
Where :
Figure 16. Destruction process on different fissure models: σcomp: Compressive strength of rocks; kgf/cm2;
a) vertical fissure model; b) horizontal fissure model; c) σdép: Displacement strength of rocks; kgf/cm2;
inwardly inclined fissure model, and d) outwardly inclined σtra: Tensile strength of rocks; kgf/cm2;
fissure model. [8:10] γ : Density; kg/m3.

The geometric representation of fissures is achieved σcomp =75,74 MPa= 772,4 Kgf/cm2 (Medjounes I)
through digital mapping and other stereoscopic canvases σcomp =104,15 MPa=1062,03Kgf/cm2 (Medjounes II)
like the Wulff net, which provide information about the
number of fissure systems and their orientations. For the σdépl: It is the resistance of the rock to displacement; it
initiation direction of the charges, the following scheme is depends on the compressive stress and can be calculated
recommended when planning multi-row blasting: using the following formula:

σ dép=( 0 , 13 ÷ 0 ,33 ) σ comp (12)

σdépl=0,23×772,4 = 177,65 kgf/cm2(Medjounes I);

σdépl=0,23×1062,03 = 244,26kgf/cm2(Medjounes II).

The tensile strength, which is determined by the

following empirical formula:

σ t=( 0 ,08 ÷ 0 , 12 ) σ comp (13)

(a)
σt=0,10x772,4=77,24 Kgf/cm2 ; Medjounes I
σt=0,10x1062,03=106,20 Kgf/cm2 ; Medjounes II.

Table 3. Initial data

resistance σdépl kgf/cm2
Compress
resistanc
e σcomp

Tensile strength σt
ion

Displacement
Ps (g/cm3)

Kgf/cm2

(b)
Kgf/cm2
(Mpa)

Medjounes I 2,76 75,75 772,4 177,65 77,24

Medjounes II 2,68 104,15 1062,03 244,26 106,20

𝑞é𝑡=0,02 (772,4+177,65+77,24) +2. 2,76 = 26,07 g/m 3 ...

𝑞é𝑡=0,02 (1062,03+244,26+106,2) +2. 2,68 = 33,61

Medjounes I;

g/m3 ... Medjounes II.

(c)
Table 4. Classification of rock by drillability index
 Rock drillability Qét Classes Categories
Medjounes I → Difficult tirability, Class III, Category 14. level
Medjounes II → Very difficult tirability, Class IV, Very easy drillability ≤10 I 1, 2,3,4,5
Category 17. Average drillability 10,1÷20 II 6, 7, 8, 9,10
Difficult drillability 20,1÷30 III 11, 12, 13, 14,15
2. The drillability of rocks can be determined using the Very difficult 30,1÷40 IV 16, 17, 18, 19,20
empirical formula of Academician Rjevsky. drillability
Exclusively difficult 40,1÷50 V 21, 22, 23, 24,25
drillability
Df =0,007 ( σ comp +σ dép ) +0 , 7 ρ (14) 3. Hole Diameter Determination: We choose a hole
diameter based on the initial recommendations
Df=0.007(772.4+177.65)+0.7*2.76= 8.58; easy proposed in our analytical summary, considering
drillability, category 8; Medjounes I. both quantitative and qualitative criteria (based on
Df=0.007(1062.03 + 244.26) + 0.7*2.68 = 11.02; the categories of fissuring and drillability). For our
moderate drillability, category 11; Medjounes II. case, we adopt: D = 150 mm.
Table 5. Rock Classification by Drillability Index
q=q ’ . K ex (18)
Degree of Df Classes Categories
Drillability q' is chosen from the table of q selection in this article,
Very easy drillability 1÷5 I 1, 2,3,4,5 equal to 0.45 kg/m3.
Average drillability 5,1÷10 II 6, 7, 8, 9,10
Difficult drillability 10,1÷15 III 11, 12, 13, 14,15 K ex =A ét / A u (19)
Very difficult 15,1÷20 IV 16, 17, 18, 19,20
drillability
Exclusively difficult 20,1÷25 V 21, 22, 23, 24,25 Kex = 1.1
drillability Aét: Standard Explosive - Ammonite N6GV
Au: Used explosives (Marmanite III and Anfomil)
The permissible particle size of large blocks after blasting q = 0.45 x 1.1 = 0.49 kg/m3 (Medjounes II)
is limited by the following conditions: Similarly for Medjounes I, where q = 0.40 x 1.1 = 0.44
kg/m3.
a. By the capacity of the loader bucket:
Length of the hole:
C ≤ 0 , 8 √E
3
(15)
H
L= +l (20)
C ≤ 0 , 8 √ 8≤ 1 , 6 ¿m)
3 sin β sf

Where : With: β = 75°

C: maximum block size, (m);
E: loader bucket capacity, m3. The length of the subdrilling is determined by the
following formula:
b. According to the capacity of the truck's bed (or
volume). The volume of the truck's bed is 34.2 m 3, so l sf =k s . D (21)
the average diameter of the rocks (pieces) will be
equal to: Other authors propose the following formula : []

C ≤ 0 , 5 √V
3
(16) l b=0.75. w (22)

C ≤ 0 , 5 √34 ,2 ≤ 1 ,62 ¿m)

3 lb = (20÷30)*D=29*0.15=4.35 m (Medjounes I)
lb = (20÷30)*D=30*0.15=4.5 m (Medjounes II)
c. By the size of the crusher's opening:
Determination of the line of least resistance:
C ≤ 0 , 8. b (17)
W=√
p2 +4 mqpHL− p (23)
With: 2 mqH
b : Crusher's feed opening: b= 1300 mm;
C ≤ (0.8*1.3) ≤ 1.04 m , with a threshold value : C ≤ m = 0.95 for both Medjounes I and II.
1.04m.
This value is the most suitable for cement limestone
Based on the obtained results, the acceptable block size is based on the academic experience of former Soviet trainers
set at 1.04 m. Any block not meeting this dimension will be who have worked in Algeria []. The explosives used are
considered an oversized rock and will require a secondary Marmanit III and Anfomil, so the recommended initiation
fragmentation operation (secondary blasting) to reduce its rate is 20%.
size.
3
∆=0 , 20 ×0 , 95+ 0 ,80 × 0 , 90=0 ,91 kg /m
 P=785. d . . ∆
2
(24)  1st row:

2
P=785 × ( 0,150 ) × 0 , 91=16 , 07 kg/m Qch (30)
l ch = 1

1
P
W=√
2
16 , 07 + 4 ×0 , 95 × 0 , 44 ×16 ,07 × 15× 17 , 55−16 , 07
=5 ,54
Q chm 192 ,33
2× 0 , 95 ×0 , 44 ×15 lc h = = =11 ,97 m(Medjounes I)
1

(Medjounes I) P 1
16 ,07
Qch 197 , 46
l = = =12 , 29 m (Medjounes II)
W=√
1
2
16 , 07 + 4 ×0 , 95 × 0 , 49 ×16 , 07 ×15 ×17 ,62−16 , 07 ch
P 16 , 07
=5 , 32m
1

2× 0 , 95 ×0 , 49 ×15
(Medjounes II)  2nd row:

Calculation of W according to safety conditions: Qch (31)

l ch = 2

W ≥ Htgα +c (25)
2
P

This sentence means: "Htgα+c=15 . tg85°+3=4.13m Q ch

155 ,18
Htgα+c=15×tg85°+3=4.13m; therefore, the conditions are
lc h = =
=9 , 66 m (Medjounes I)
2

P
2
16 , 07
met." Qch 159 , 23
It's confirming that the calculated value of 4.13 meters l ch = = 2
=9 , 91 m (Medjounes II)
satisfies the specified conditions. P
2
16 , 07

The distance between the holes in the first row: - Jam length:

a=m .W (26)  1st row:

l b =L−l ch (32)
a=m .W =0 , 95 ×5 , 54=5 ,26 m (Medjounes I) 1 1

a=m .W =0 , 95 ×5 , 32=5 , 05 m(Medjounes II)

l b =L−l ch =17 ,55−11, 97=5 ,58 m (Medjounes I)
1 1
The distance between rows of holes: staggered pattern l b =L−l ch =17 , 62−12 , 29=5 , 33 m(Medjounes
due to the shape of the blocks. 1 1

II)
b=0 , 85. a (27)
 2nd row:
b=0 , 85. a=0 ,85 × 5 ,26=4 , 47 m (Medjounes I)
l b =L−l ch (33)
b=0 , 85. a=0 ,85 × 5 ,05=4 , 29 m (Medjounes II) 2 2

- Load quantity of a hole: l b =L−l ch =17 ,55−9 , 66=7 , 89 m (Medjounes I)

2 2

l b =L−l ch =17 , 62−9 , 91=7 ,71 m (Medjounes II).


2 1
1st row:
(28) - Mining mass flow:
Qc h =q .W . H . a1
1

Qc h +Qc h (32)
Qch =q . W . H . a1=0 , 44 ×5 , 54 × 15× 5 ,26 Jm= 1 2

1
2. L . q
¿ 192 ,33 kg/tr (Medjounes I)
Qc h =q .W . H . a1=0 , 49 ×5 , 32 ×15 ×5 , 05 Qc h +Qc h 192 , 33+155 , 18
=22 , 50 m3 /m
1

¿ 197 , 46 kg/tr (Medjounes II) Jm= 1 2

=
2. L . q 2 ×17 , 77 ×0 , 44
(Medjounes I)
 2nd row:
Qch +Q ch 197 , 46+159 , 28
(29) Jm= 1 2
= =20 ,66 m3 /m
Qch =q . W . H . b
2
2. L. q 2 ×17 , 62 ×0 , 49
(Medjounes II)
Qch =q . W . H . b=0 , 44 × 15× 5 ,26 × 4 , 47
2 - Volume of a block:
¿ 155 , 18 kg/tr (Medjounes I)
Qc h =q .W . H .b=0 , 49 × 15× 5 , 05× 4 ,29
2
V = 1988,5m 3 (Medjounes I)
¿ 159 , 23 kg/tr (Medjounes II) V =14963 m 3 (Medjounes II)

- Load length:
 - The length of drilled holes required for a block: by great cracking which represents the most important factor
considerably influencing the results of the shot ;
V - The analysis of the methods developed by researchers in
∑ L= J (33)
the field of adjusting fragmentation taking into account the
m
cracking of the massif showed that their application remains
limited and cannot be generalized for Algerian limestone
V
11988 , 5
∑ L= J =
22 ,50
=532 , 82 m (Medjounes I) quarries including Ain El Kebira;
- The work carried out and the observations made during the
m
V 14969 experimental firings made it possible to demonstrate that the
∑ L= J = 20 , 66 =724 ,25 m (Medjounes II) determination of the number of cracking systems as well as
m the geometrization of the natural blocks is necessary, which
allows the good management of the energy of the firing in
- Number of holes drilled: the rock massif;
- The analysis of the experimental results obtained under the

N tr =
∑L (34) conditions of Djebel Medjounes makes it possible to
recommend the division of the block to be pulled into three
L sub-blocks in accordance with the cracking density:
a) dm <dc for dm= 0.2÷1.04m (strongly cracked mass);
N tr =
∑ L= 532
=30 ,36 ≅ 30 holes(Medjounes
b) dm ≤ dc for dm= 1.04÷1.20m (moderately cracked mass);
L 17 ,55 c) dm >dc for dm= 1.2÷2 m (slightly cracked mass).
I) We can conclude that obtaining a better adjustment of the
fragmentation must take particular account of the opening of
N tr =
∑ L = 724 , 25 =41 , 1≅ 41 holes (Medjounes the cracks, the roughness of the latter and the material of
L 17 , 62 their filling, the inclination of the loads in relation to the
II) system main cracking, etc.; and for the determination of the
specific consumption we recommend the formula developed
- Number of sounders: by Koutousov because it takes into account the main factors
which influence the fragmentation adjustment.

Ns=
∑L (35)
To determine the parameters of the drilling and blasting
R s .n ps . N j work, the parameters of the meshes in the massif must be
considered. For this we recommend the following main
532 parameters with discontinuous loading:
Ns= =2,357 ≅ 03 sounders
224 ×1 ×1
a) (dm=0.2m) << dc, shock blast: q = 0.35 kg/m3; a=3.5m;
furukawa(Medjounes I)
d=168mm;
532 b) (dm=1.04m) ≤ dc, classic shot: d=150mm; a=3.96m;
Ns= =3,325 ≅ 04 sounders
160 × 1×1 c) (dm=2m) >dc, intense shot: d=104mm; a=4m.
Atlas copco (Medjounes I)
724 , 25 The direction of progression adopted is not the one that
Ns= =3 , 23≅ 04 sounders ensures the best firing performance, work on digital
224 ×1 ×1 cartography confirms this.
furukawa (Medjounes II)
724 ,25 REFERENCES
Ns= =4 , 53 ≅ 05 sounders
160 × 1×1
Atlas copco (Medjounes II) [1] Pavloudakis, F., Roumpos, C., & Spanidis, P. M.
(2022). Optimization of surface mining operation
(RsFurukawa = 224 m/shift), (Rs Atlas Copco = 160 based on a circular economy model. In Circular
m/shift). Economy and Sustainability (pp. 395-418). Elsevier.
[Link]
8. CONCLUSION AND PERSPECTIVES [2] Zhang, Z. X., Sanchidrián, J. A., Ouchterlony, F., &
Luukkanen, S. (2023). Reduction of fragment size
In the present work we have contributed to solving a current from mining to mineral processing: a review. Rock
problem which results in the improvement of fragmentation Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 56(1), 747-778.
in the conditions of the limestone quarry of the Ain El [Link]
Kebira cement plant (reduction of the volume of oversizes [3] Bustamante, M. M., Roitman, I., Aide, T. M., Alencar,
and improvement of the technical indices - economic). A., Anderson, L. O., Aragão, L., ... & Vieira, I. C.
The results obtained made it possible to draw the following (2016). Toward an integrated monitoring framework to
conclusions and recommendations: assess the effects of tropical forest degradation and
recovery on carbon stocks and biodiversity. Global
- The geological study of the limestone deposits of Algeria change biology, 22(1), 92-109.
and in particular in Ain El Kebira as well as the [Link]
bibliographic analysis have shown that the latter are affected [4] Mi, J., Grant, P. S., Fritsching, U., Belkessam, O.,
Garmendia, I., & Landaberea, A. (2008). Multiphysics
modelling of the spray forming process. Materials
 Science and Engineering: A, 477(1-2), 2-8. Geosciences, 15(23), 1742.
[Link] [Link]
[5] Latham, J. P., Munjiza, A., & Lu, P. (1999). Rock [18] Scheiber, T., Fredin, O., Viola, G., Jarna, A., Gasser,
fragmentation by blasting—a literature study of D., & Łapińska-Viola, R. (2015). Manual extraction of
research in the 1980′ s and 1990′ s. Fragblast, 3(3), bedrock lineaments from high-resolution LiDAR data:
193-212. [Link] methodological bias and human
[6] Pittman, K. L. (1984). Rock quality as a guide to perception. Gff, 137(4), 362-372.
fragmentation (Doctoral dissertation, University of [Link]
Nevada, Reno). [19] Rudakov, M., Babkin, R., & Medova, E. (2021).
[7] Moghrani, R., Aoulmi, Z., & Attia, M. (2023). Hybrid Improvement of working conditions of mining workers
RPI-MCDM Approach for FMEA: A Case Study on by reducing nitrogen oxide emissions during blasting
Belt Conveyor in Bir El Ater Mine, Algeria. Journal operations. Applied Sciences, 11(21), 9969.
Européen des Systèmes Automatisés, 56(3). [Link]
[Link] [20] Chen, W., Li, X., Lu, F., Li, Z., & Zhang, Z. (2015).
[8] Habib, K. M., Shnorhokian, S., & Mitri, H. (2022). Parallel control to fragments of a cylindrical structure
Evaluating the application of rock breakage without driven by explosive inside. Mathematical Problems in
explosives in underground construction—a critical Engineering, 2015.
review of chemical demolition agents. Minerals, 12(2), [Link]
220. [Link] [21] Singh, P. K., Roy, M. P., Paswan, R. K., Sarim, M. D.,
[9] Baneshi, M., & Bahreini, S. A. (2018). Impacts of hot Kumar, S., & Jha, R. R. (2016). Rock fragmentation
water consumption pattern on optimum sizing and control in opencast blasting. Journal of Rock
techno-economic aspects of residential hybrid solar Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 8(2), 225-
water heating systems. Sustainable Energy 237. [Link]
Technologies and Assessments, 30, 139-149. [22] Li, X., Zhu, Z., Wang, M., Shu, Y., Deng, S., & Xiao,
[Link] D. (2022). Influence of blasting load directions on
[10] Bamford, T., Medinac, F., & Esmaeili, K. (2020). tunnel stability in fractured rock mass. Journal of Rock
Continuous monitoring and improvement of the Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 14(2), 346-
blasting process in open pit mines using unmanned 365. [Link]
aerial vehicle techniques. Remote Sensing, 12(17), [23] Yuksek, S. A. L. İ. H. (2019). Mechanical properties of
2801. [Link] some building stones from volcanic deposits of mount
[11] Fedotenko, V., & Esina, E. (2018). Substantiation of Erciyes (Turkey). Materiales de
the Technology of Efficient Transition to High Bench Construcción, 69(334).
Stripping of Thick Coal Seams. In E3S Web of [Link]
Conferences (Vol. 41, p. 01044). EDP Sciences. [24] Mostafaei, A., Elliott, A. M., Barnes, J. E., Li, F., Tan,
[Link] W., Cramer, C. L., ... & Chmielus, M. (2021). Binder
[12] Isheyskiy, V., & Sanchidrián, J. A. (2020). Prospects jet 3D printing—Process parameters, materials,
of applying MWD technology for quality management properties, modeling, and challenges. Progress in
of drilling and blasting operations at mining Materials Science, 119, 100707.
enterprises. Minerals, 10(10), 925. [Link]
[Link] [25] Behr, H. J., Stehli, F. G., & Vidal, H. (Eds.).
[13] Martinez-Marquez, D., Mirnajafizadeh, A., Carty, C. (2012). Observation of the Continental Crust through
P., & Stewart, R. A. (2018). Application of quality by Drilling II: Proceedings of the International
design for 3D printed bone prostheses and Symposium held in Seeheim, October 3–6, 1985.
scaffolds. PloS one, 13(4), e0195291. Springer Science & Business Media.
[Link] [Link]
[14] Gorakhki, M. H., & Bareither, C. A. (2017).
Sustainable reuse of mine tailings and waste rock as
water-balance covers. Minerals, 7(7), 128.
[Link]
[15] Salmi, E. F., & Sellers, E. J. (2021). A review of the
methods to incorporate the geological and geotechnical
characteristics of rock masses in blastability
assessments for selective blast design. Engineering
Geology, 281, 105970.
[Link]
[16] Isheyskiy, V., Martinyskin, E., Smirnov, S., Vasilyev,
A., Knyazev, K., & Fatyanov, T. (2021). Specifics of
MWD data collection and verification during
formation of training datasets. Minerals, 11(08), 798.
[Link]
[17] Djellali, A., Sarker, D., Benghazi, Z., & Rais, K.
(2022). Geospatial-based approach for susceptibility
assessment of expansive soils using a new multicriteria
classification model. Arabian Journal of