Affiliation:
1. Department of Mining Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, King Abdulaziz University (KAU) , Jeddah , Saudi Arabia
Abstract
Abstract
The conventional blasting rock excavation method is the main means of rock breakage because of its high productivity, and it is relatively inexpensive compared to other methods. However, it raises safety concerns and can negatively impact the environment. The major disturbances that may be induced by this method include flyrock, gas emissions, and vibrations. This review discusses some nonexplosive rock breakage methods, particularly the hydraulic splitter and expansive chemical agents, that can be employed instead of the conventional blasting method and analyzes their potential effectiveness in rock breakage. Hydraulic splitting machines and expansive chemical agents were studied in the context of the literature. This review showed that hard rock breaking can be executed effectively and safely using alternative methods, which have a wide range of advantages, including safe operation, ease of use, and environmental friendliness, over conventional explosive methods. Moreover, as modern nonexplosive methods, hydraulic splitting machines and expansive chemical agents can generate pressure of up to 43 and 30–44 MPa to induce stresses in rocks, respectively. Owing to safety and environmental restrictions on conventional blasting, the application scope of the modern methods can be increased in the future.
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
Reference73 articles.
1. Res J, Wladzielczyk K, Ghose A. Environment-friendly techniques of rock breaking. 1st edn. United States: CRC Press; 2003.
2. Babaeian M, Ataei M, Sereshki F, Sotoudeh F, Mohammadi S. A new framework for evaluation of rock fragmentation in open pit mines. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng. 2019;11(2):325–36. 10.1016/j.jrmge.2018.11.006.
3. Kanchibotla SS, Morrell S, Valery W, Loughlin PO. Exploring the effect of blast design on SAG mill throughput at KCGM. Proc mine to mill conf, Brisbane; 1998. p. 1–16, [Online]. Available: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Exploring+the+effect+of+blast+design+on+SAG+mill+throughput+at+KCGM&btnG=
4. De Silva RV, Gamage RP, Anne Perera MS. An alternative to conventional rock fragmentation methods using SCDA: a review. Energies. 2016;9:11. 10.3390/en9110958.
5. Caldwell T. A comparison of non-explosive rock breaking techniques. Proceedings of materials science; 2005. p. 1–7, [Online]. Available: http://www.ats.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/2005-Tina_Caldwell.pdf
Cited by
19 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献