Methodology for quantitative analysis of muck pile volume using specific mining software
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2236130818711Keywords:
Volume, Fire plan, Benches, Software, Micromine, Blasting rockAbstract
This work presents a quantitative analysis methodology of blasted rock volume. Field topographic information was collected regarding the blasting of mining benches in a limestone mine, and these data plus the blast holes layout were used to generate a digital model of the benches with the Micromine software. Besides allowing the visualization of the 3D wireframe models with the spatial arrangement of the blast holes, it was possible obtain the volumes of the solids that is the actual rock volume generated by the blasting, and compare it with the estimated volumes, based on the estimated dimensions of the benches only. Despite the minor discrepancies observed in terms of volume, the results showed significant improvement on the visualization aspects and were useful to detect problems related with the blasting plan as burden distance above or below the optimal and deviations of blast holes.
Downloads
References
BITENCOURT, M. F. Metamórficos da região de Caçapava do Sul, RS: geologia e relações com o corpo granítico. SIMPÓSIO SUL-BRASILEIRO DE GEOLOGIA, 1. Porto Alegre. Anais... Porto Alegre: Sociedade Brasileira de Geologia, pp.37- 48 (1983).
BORTOLOTTO, O. J. Petrografia dos mármores de Caçapava do Sul. Ciência e Natura: V. 9 - p. 37-65, (1987).
DORNELES, F.T., Controle e previsão de vibrações e ruídos gerados por desmonte de rochas com explosivos. 2013.
GAMA, C. D.. Vibrações na atmosfera e nos terrenos adjacentes pós detonação de explosivos – quantificação da sua afetação ambiental. Acústica 2008, Coimbra, Portugal: Universidade de Coimbra, (2008).
KONYA, C. J. Blast Design. Montville, Ohio, USA: Intercontinental Development Corporation, pp. 246 (1995).
MOURA, A.L. Uma Proposta para a Triangulação de Delaunay 2D e Localização Planar de Pontos em OCaml. Uberlândia, MG: Universidade Federal de Uberlandia, Faculdade de Engenharia Elétrica. (2006).
PORCHER, C. A.; LOPES, R. C. Ministério de Minas e Energia. Companhia de Pesquisa de Recursos Minerais - CPRM. Programa Levantamentos Geológicos Básicos do Brasil. Cachoeira do Sul, Folha SH.22-Y-A.,. Estado do Rio de Grande do Sul. CPRM, (2000).
RIBEIRO, M. Geologia da Folha de Bom Jardim, Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: DNPM, Boletim 2 (1970).
RICARDO, H. de S; CATALANI, G. Manual Prático de Escavação- terraplanagem e escavação de rocha. Ed. Pini, pp. 176 (1990).
RODRIGUES, E.G. Relatório de estágio de Curso Técnico em Mineração. Tubarão, Brasil: Escola Educacional Técnica SATC, (2011).
SEN, G.C. Blasting Technology – For Mining and Civil Engineers. Sydney, Austrália: University of New South Wales Press LTD., pp.154 (1995).
WILDNER, W.; RAMGRAB, G. E.; LOPES, R. C.. Ministério de Minas e Energia. Companhia de Pesquisa de Recursos Minerais - CPRM. Programa Levantamentos Geológicos Básicos do Brasil. Mapa geológico do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul, CPRM, (2008).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Ethical guidelines for journal publication
The REMOA is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
