The Effect of Initiation Time Delay and Sequencing on Rock Damage in Multi-Hole Blasting
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rock fracturing by blasting is the most common and efficient method of rock fragmentation in mining operations. The fragmentation size affects the productivity and costs of downstream operations and is influenced by the rock mass and blast design encountered. The encountered rock mass is the unmodifiable parameter in blasting. Therefore, blasting improvements can be achieved through blast design, which includes explosive selection, geometrical design, and initiation sequencing and delays. Stress wave interactions between blastholes can improve or diminish fracturing. The analysis conducted in this study through numerical modelling indicates an improvement in blast outcomes with appropriate delay and sequencing in some cases. The optimum delay ensures the formation of fractures on the succeeding blasthole and constructive interactions with the stress wave from the preceding blasthole, increasing the stress pulse and fracturing. While it is insignificant in intact rock blasting, the firing sequence is vital when blasting through the contacts of soft and hard rocks or joints, depending on the infill material. Sequential initiation and the firing direction do not improve fracturing in all cases; for example, when blasting through an empty joint, the joint acts as a free face with minimum to no interaction of the stress wave from adjacent charges. In such cases, simultaneous initiation can be used with caution based on the intensity of induced vibrations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it