Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />WHEXSIopeEvaluation <br />PLATE 4 -SCHEMATIC WALL BLAST PATTERN - 60° SLOPE <br />• <br />• <br />Currer~+ nn~-,o <br />Section View <br />.. J <br />Ultimate Wall <br />~ ~ <br />Plan View <br />AdrianBrown <br />• ~~ • <br />1 <br />~g~ I <br />• t~ • <br />~~ <br />. 5' <br />i~ <br />• <br /> <br />i <br />NOTES: <br />1. Blasting pattern is schematic. The <br />pattem will need-to be modified using <br />the same concepts to accommodate <br />the 30 end 35 foot bench designs for <br />the other walls. <br />2. Spacing, stagger, and delay pattern <br />for the~blasting system should be <br />Ultimate Wall determined in the field. The delay <br />pattern should result in blasting to the <br />face, with the trim row the last to be <br />detonated as the blast moves through <br />the area (to avoid wall damage). <br />3. Trfmf row spacing is maximal. Prior <br />testing;m volcanic rock in the Main <br />Cresson Mine indicates that 5 feet is <br />the maximum spacing that can <br />producie an effective trim face. <br />4. Sub drill on face (trim) row is <br />deliberate. It facilitates avoiding a hard <br />toe. ,and will assist in avoiding a "kick <br />out" w~dge at the base of the slope. It <br />should,also help mining the toe. <br />5. The first and second main rows are <br />intended to straddle the future crest, <br />and are drilled to grade. This is <br />intended to result in a hard crest. <br />6. Some overhang will occasionally <br />occur as a result of the vertical trim <br />row. This is acceptable, as the design <br />does not require any unprotected <br />personnel to operate under any <br />overha ~ g. <br />Report 1385L.200309017 <br />25 <br />Sub-drilled 5' I <br />