Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 8 – uploaded by latifa ouadif

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 8. Berm below the level expected

Figure 8 Berm below the level expected

Related Figures (29)

Table 1. Geotechnical parameters of the MH3 pit recommended by the geotechnical study in 2005
Table 1. Geotechnical parameters of the MH3 pit recommended by the geotechnical study in 2005
Table 2. Dimensions of the MH3 pit recommended by the geotechnical study in 2005
Table 2. Dimensions of the MH3 pit recommended by the geotechnical study in 2005
Figure 4. State of MH3 pit slopes indicated by section: (A) 1600N Meas, (B) 1600 N mined
Figure 4. State of MH3 pit slopes indicated by section: (A) 1600N Meas, (B) 1600 N mined
Figure 5. State of MH3 pit slopes indicated by section: (A) 2400N Meas, (B) 2400 N mined
Figure 5. State of MH3 pit slopes indicated by section: (A) 2400N Meas, (B) 2400 N mined
Figure 6. State of MH3 pit slopes indicated by sections: (A) 2800N Meas, (B) 2800N mined
Figure 6. State of MH3 pit slopes indicated by sections: (A) 2800N Meas, (B) 2800N mined
Figure 7. Berms above the level expected
Figure 7. Berms above the level expected
Table 3. Parameter of the blast holes
Table 3. Parameter of the blast holes
Figure 9 shows a MH3 pit wall implementation. This layout was shot a few days after it was drilled. Figure 9. MH3 pit border implementation: (A) numeric implementation, (B) onsite implementation
Figure 9 shows a MH3 pit wall implementation. This layout was shot a few days after it was drilled. Figure 9. MH3 pit border implementation: (A) numeric implementation, (B) onsite implementation
Figure 10. Blasting results Figure 11. (A) Form of the rupture observed on the front, (B) topographic surveys of the slip
Figure 10. Blasting results Figure 11. (A) Form of the rupture observed on the front, (B) topographic surveys of the slip
fracture was found on the pit slopes. This fracture was scanned and surveyed at the request of the monitoring team (Figure 11).
fracture was found on the pit slopes. This fracture was scanned and surveyed at the request of the monitoring team (Figure 11).
Table 4. Geotechnical parameters of the MH3 rock.
Table 4. Geotechnical parameters of the MH3 rock.
Figure 12. Overview of the length of the instability
Figure 12. Overview of the length of the instability
Figure 13. (A) MH3 pit walls with a coefficient D = 1, (B) MH3 pit wall with a coefficient D = 0.7
Figure 13. (A) MH3 pit walls with a coefficient D = 1, (B) MH3 pit wall with a coefficient D = 0.7
Table 5. Explosive characteristics used in the mine The approximate results of the loading density calculation for a variety of borehole diameters (see Table 6): Table 5 summarizes the characteristics of the ANFO >xplosive used at the MH3 pit.
Table 5. Explosive characteristics used in the mine The approximate results of the loading density calculation for a variety of borehole diameters (see Table 6): Table 5 summarizes the characteristics of the ANFO >xplosive used at the MH3 pit.
Table 6. Loading density as a function of diameter. It is clear that increasing the diameter maximizes the vibrations responsible for fresh fractures [18].
Table 6. Loading density as a function of diameter. It is clear that increasing the diameter maximizes the vibrations responsible for fresh fractures [18].
Figure 14. (A) Drill machine at MH3, (B) Form of the drilling holes
Figure 14. (A) Drill machine at MH3, (B) Form of the drilling holes
Figure 16. The use of air decks in blast holes diameter
Figure 16. The use of air decks in blast holes diameter
Figure 15. Heat maps showing vibration intensity around blast holes of 102, 150, and 251 mm diameter
Figure 15. Heat maps showing vibration intensity around blast holes of 102, 150, and 251 mm diameter
Figure 19. Implementation of the pit blast rows using pipes The proposed blasting scheme is illustrated in Figure 19. We drilled a platform 300m long and 460m wide, the row on the pit wall is divided according to the nature of the tests as cited Figure 20A:
Figure 19. Implementation of the pit blast rows using pipes The proposed blasting scheme is illustrated in Figure 19. We drilled a platform 300m long and 460m wide, the row on the pit wall is divided according to the nature of the tests as cited Figure 20A:
Figure 18. Form of the pipes used
Figure 18. Form of the pipes used
Figure 20. Drilled row scheme on the pit wall side: (A) platform 300m long, (B) divided platform according to the tests, (C) Test borehole
Figure 20. Drilled row scheme on the pit wall side: (A) platform 300m long, (B) divided platform according to the tests, (C) Test borehole
Figure 21. Test Platform before the blasting To control over-break, the creation of loose rocks, and produce a competent final wall, these blasting tests have After the blasting and loading of the waste rock piles, a topographic survey for the test line is requested to rule on the reliability of the method performed as indicated in Figure 22.
Figure 21. Test Platform before the blasting To control over-break, the creation of loose rocks, and produce a competent final wall, these blasting tests have After the blasting and loading of the waste rock piles, a topographic survey for the test line is requested to rule on the reliability of the method performed as indicated in Figure 22.
Figure 22. Topographical results of the tests
Figure 22. Topographical results of the tests
Related topics:
Open pitCivil Engineering and Architecture
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved