Report

on

impacts

of

blasting

activities

Nakatooke quarry.
An Assessment of the baseline survey.

in

the

vicinity

of

1.

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 3
1.1.

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................. 3

1.2.

EARTH

AS A BUILDING MATERIAL: ................................................................................................... 3

2.

WHY THE ASSESSMENT? ................................................................................................................ 4

3.

THE BLAST AND ITS INTERACTION WITH STRUCTURES ........................................... 5

3.1.

THE

NATURE OF THE BUILDING MATERIAL ..................................................................................... 5

3.2. THE GROUND VIBRATION

3.3. MEASUREMENT
3.4. SAFE

OF

LEVELS OF

AND

AIR BLAST ..................................................................................... 6

DAMAGE POTENTIAL .......................................................................................... 7

GROUND VIBRATIONS

AND

AIR BLAST. ......................................................... 8

4.

FINDINGS -VIBRATION MONITORING RESULTS .............................................................. 11

5.

CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 11

6.

ACTIONS TAKEN ................................................................................................................................. 12

7.

RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................................................... 12

7.1.

IMPLEMENTATION

OF

LIMITS ............................................................................................................. 12

6.1.1

Existing Recommendations ......................................................................................... 13

6.1.2

Recommendations for Isimba quarry site..................................................... 13

8.

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................ 13

9.

APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................................... 14

9.1.

APPENDIX-1 :RECORDS

OF

VIBRATION MONITORING. .............................................................. 14

9.1.1

Vibration Readings 01 .................................................................................................... 14

9.1.2

Vibration Readings 02 ................................................................................................... 16

1. Introduction
1.1.

Abstract

The purpose of this report is to assess the impact of the Construction

and

blasting

activities

at

Nakatooke

quarry

on

the

structures

of

the

residents in the vicinity of Isimba HPP and to make recommendations

aimed

at

mitigating

or

limiting

the

possibility

of

damages

due

to

operation of heavy machinery or blasting activities.

The aim of this article is to assess the impact of blasting activities on
the

structural

Uganda.

integrity

The

report

of

also

mud

and

covers

wattle

structures

recommendations

vernacular

to

operation

of

for

machinery. The structures assessed are located within a 2 km radius of

the Nakatooke quarry located in Kayunga district.

1.2.

Earth as a building material:

In scientific

terms,

earth is

referred

to

as

loam.

It

is

a mixture of

clay, silt (very fine sand), sand and occasionally, larger aggregates. It is
used

all

over

unbaked

bricks

the

world

(mud

in

several

bricks/adobes);

forms,

these

compressed

being

unbaked

handmade
bricks

(soil

blocks) or compacted within formwork (rammed earth). In Uganda, the

most common structures within rural communities are mud and wattle
constructions.

Owing

to

the

fact

that

loam

is

not

standardized

construction material, information on its performance as a construction

material

has

been

scarce.

However,

the

need

for

an

analysis

of

its

performance has been brought about by the opening up of quarries for

large scale industrial constructions. The aggregates

were excavated by

blasting, which was carried out within the framework of conditions that
take

into

account

standardized

structures

materials such as burnt clay bricks

built

with

the

or concrete blocks.

conventional
However, the

performance of mud and wattle structures does not seem to have been
factored

into

compliances

the

required

framework
for

the

of

considerations

attainment

of

that

permits

govern
for

the

blasting

activities.
In light of this, the need for an assessment of the performance of mud
and wattle structures under the cited conditions cannot be understated
since blasting activities can have a significant vibration output that has
been known to damage structures.
In order to assess the performance of the subject structures, a baseline
survey was carried out on the structures within a 2 km radius of the
blasting

epicenter

so

as

to

assess

their

initial

conditions.

During

the

initial survey it was noted that the structures varied in terms of the
characteristics. This was attributed to the differences in the amounts

and

types

of

workmanship

clay
as

used

well

as

for
the

the

construction,

form

of

the

silt

construction,

be

content,

the

adobes,

soil

it

blocks or rammed earth.

2. Why the assessment?

The need for the assessment stemmed from the fact that the areas in
the

vicinity

of

communities

the

for

quarry

whom

were

the

previously populated by

only

option

in

terms

of

several

building

rural

material

was and still is, the use of mud and wattle. This is because mud and
wattle is the most abundantly available building material, requiring little
or

no

technology

for processing.

This

lead to

a significant population

675 within the proximity of the dam area alone. These Project Affected
People

were

compensated

and

the

land

was

handed

over

to

the

Contractor for commencement of works on the Construction of Isimba

Hydro

Power

Plant.

However

the

communities

adjacent

to

the

Project

boundaries are still impacted by the blast waves that occur due to the
detonation

of

between

500

and

as

much

as

3500

Kg

of

ammonium

Nitrate emulsion explosives. These blasting activities carried out at the

quarry are approved and a license for the activity has been obtained by
the Contractor. However, the permit conditions only oblige the permit
holder to clear a 300m radius within the vicinity of the blast epicenter.
The blasting activities have been noted to propagate the effects of the
blast wave as far as 5 km away, where the clients offices are situated.
Whereas these may not necessarily damage the concrete block buildings
of the Contractor and the Client, the homes of the locals are mostly
mud and wattle and as such require an independent assessment of the
impacts of the blasting activities.
With Projects of this scale and magnitude, there are stringent measures
put

in

place

to

protect

the

interests

of

the

local

communities.

Community sensitization has been conducted to inform the locals of the

potential impact of the blasting activities and of the notice and warning
system that
not

change

communities

warns
the

of

fact

will

imminent
that

have

to

blasting

structures
bear

the

activities.

cannot
impacts

be
of

However,

shifted
the

and

blasting

this

does

the

local

activities.

Despite incentives by the EPC Contractor, getting the local communities

to

temporarily

moved

further

from

the

epicenter

of

the

blasting

activities has not been easy to accomplish. The number of households

was just too numerous and the locals will still have to return to their
homes after the blasting activities are completed. A simple disturbance
allowance

does

little

or

nothing

damaged by the blast waves.

to

restore

or

maintain

structure

3. The blast and its interaction with structures

3.1.

The nature of the building material

It has been observed that the impacts of the blasting activities are not
so easily ascertained mainly due to the varying degrees of workmanship
during

the

construction

of

the

mud

huts.

However,

there

have

been

claims that some brick houses have developed cracks as a result of the
blasting at the quarry. In view of the claims the EPC Contractor has
been

requested

to

conduct

vibration

monitoring

at

varying

distances

from the epicenter of the blasting activities.

The main inherent difficulties with regards to working with adobe are:

1. Loam is not a standardised building material

Depending on the site where the loam is dug out, it will be composed
of

differing

amounts

characteristics,
preparation
differ.

of

In

therefore,
the

order

necessary,

by

and

types
may

correct

to

judge

applying

of

clay,

differ

mix
its

or

silt,

from
a

site

specific

characteristics

additives,

one

and

needs

to

aggregates.

Its

site,

and

the

application

may

also

and
to

alter
know

these,
the

when

specific

composition of the loam involved.

2. Loam mixtures shrink when drying

Due to evaporation of the water used to prepare the mixture (moisture
is required to activate its binding strength
shrinkage

cracks

between 3% and

will

occur.

The

linear

and to achieve workability),

shrinkage

ratio

is

usually

12% with wet mixtures (such as those used for mortar

and mud bricks), and between 0.4% and 2% with drier mixtures (used
for rammed earth, compressed soil blocks). Shrinkage can be minimised
by reducing the clay

and the

water

content, by optimising the grain

size distribution, and by using additives.

3. Loam is not water resistant

Loam

must

be

protected

against

rain

and

frost

especially

in

its

wet

state.
The above stated have made it difficult to determine the actual impact
of

the

blasting

activities.

In

addition,

some

of

the

structures

had

evident pre-existing damage most likely due to poor workmanship and

possibly

due

resistance.

to

the

However,

shrinkage
it

was

of

said

the
that

soil
the

as

well

as

the

pre-existing

poor

water

damage

was

worsened by the impacts of the blasting activities.

Given the potential for damage to property and the substantial nuisance
caused to the local population it is vital to have the impacts quantified
so as to determine limits and mitigation measures where applicable and
possible. The damage to property can be caused directly by ground
wave movements or indirectly via potentially unstable soil or rock
conditions in the vicinity of the quarry site (e.g. soil liquefaction, slope

failure). Air blast is not considered to be a significant factor in causing

damage to structures but is a significant nuisance to the local
communities in the vicinity of the quarry.
In view of the above, records of vibration monitoring will be used to
assess the impact and determine measures of mitigation if need be.

3.2.

The Ground Vibration and Air Blast

The detonation of an explosive charge in a blast hole results in intense

dynamic stresses around the blast hole. This is caused by the sudden
acceleration of

rock mass by the detonation gas pressure

exerted

on

the hole wall. Consequently, a wave motion is set up in the ground as

the strain waves
Different

are transmitted through the surrounding rock mass.

mechanisms

of

breakage

fragment

the

rock

mass

(crushing,

radial cracking etc) and this impact is localized to the fragmentation

zone. The rest of the energy is propagated through the strain waves of
lower

intensity,

unable

to

cause

permanent

deformation

to

the

rock

mass. The Strain waves propagate through the medium as elastic waves,
oscillating the particles through which they travel. These waves in the
elastic

zone

display

visco-elastic

behaviour

and

as

such,

the

strain

waves are attenuated over distance since a fixed amount of energy gets
spread

over

larger

mass

of

material

with

increase

in

distance.

However, larger amounts of explosives can still result in the propagation

of

ground

vibrations

large

enough to

cause

damage

to

structures

by

causing dynamic stresses that exceed the material strength.

The following are some of the vibration predictor equations:

where v is the peak particles velocity (mm/s), Q MAX the maximum

charge per delay (kg), R the distance between blast face to vibration
monitoring point (m), and K and B the site constants,
which can be
determined by multiple regression analysis.

3.3.

Measurement of Damage Potential

Particle velocity is generally adopted worldwide as the best criterion for

relating
ground
vibrations
to
building
damage.
Levels
of
ground
vibrations are also determined by measurement of displacement or
acceleration of a particle at the site.
The
following
equations
show
the
relationship
between
velocity,
displacement and acceleration:

Eventually however, the performance of a structure will depend on a

multitude of factors, some of which include the type of foundation,
underlying ground conditions and the building construction as well as
the state of repair of the structure.
Guidance on the levels of vibrations above which buildings could be
damaged is mainly derived from BS 7385*, however, for detailed
engineering analysis, criteria other than the vibration levels may need
to be considered.
So as not to overlook the impact of human exposure to blast induced
vibrations, reference is made to BS 6472-2:2008.
Typical damage that can be expected in relation to the threshold value
of the peak particle velocity experienced in the ground waves from the
blasts are indicated in table 1.(Reference 5), from which it is evident that the
onset of plaster cracking in a house occurs at a threshold peak velocity
of 50mm/s (2in./s). This criteria is universally accepted in North
America.
table 1:

Type of
Structure
Type of Damage
Rigidly Mounted
Trip Out
Mercury Switches
Houses
Plaster Cracking

Peak Particle Velocity

Threshold at Which Damage
Starts
mm s kv per sec
1225

0.5

50

2
Set initial Limit of
125 mm/s (5 in. per
sec) Maximum at the
Crusher

Cracks in Blocks
Concrete Block
as in a New
House
Cased Drill Holes
Horizontal Offset
Retaining Walls.
Loose Ground
Mechanical
Equipment
Pumps
Compressors
Prefabricated
Metal Building on
Concrete Pads
Shafts Misaligned
Cracked Pads
Building Twisted
and
Distorted

3.4.

200

375

15

1000

40
Beyond 250 rwn/
(10 In per sec) Mafor
Damage Starts. Such
as Possible Cracking
of Cement Block

1500

60

Safe levels of Ground Vibrations and Air Blast.

This report's recommendations for reducing ground vibrations and air

blast levels are aimed at minimizing distress to people as well as
avoiding damage to buildings. Since humans respond to levels of ground
vibrations and air blast considerably lower than those necessary to
induce structure damage, the limits recommended construction projects
are quite conservative. As mentioned in Section 3.3, particle velocity is
used as a parameter for damage assessment. It should be noted that at
a Construction site such as Isimba HPP, there are multiple sources of
these vibrations and therefore the limits recommended depend on the
vibration source as defined below:
Blasting
Pile Drivers, vibratory rollers and traffic
Air blast.
The current acceptable levels of ground vibration from blasting are
recommended as in Australian Standard AS 2187-983 (Reference 1).
These are shown in Table 2.
Table 2 acceptable levels of ground vibration from blasting

Notes:

1. In a specific instance, where substantiated by careful investigation, a value of peak

particle velocity other than that recommended in the table may be used.
2. The peak particle velocities in the table have been selected taking no consideration of
human discomfort and the effect on sensitive equipment within the building. In
particular, the limits recommended for buildings types 2 and 3 may cause complaints.

Blasting: The control of blasting procedures to limit ground vibration

levels to those outlines in Table 1 should automatically limit air blast
overpressures to safe levels with respect to building damage. The
proposed maximum levels are shown in Table 3 below.
Table 3 -maximum air blast levels

Pile drivers, Vibratory Rollers and Traffic:

The Construction Site has heavy machinery many of which could serve
as a source of Vibrations. Ground vibrations caused by these sources
are of a continuous nature usually lasting for extended time periods.
Because of this, it is proposed that vibration limits should be set at
lower levels than from blasting. A peak particle velocity (VRmax) limit of
5 mm/sec is therefore recommended. Tynan (Reference 2) contains a
handy user guide applicable to vibrating rollers which approximates the
recommended limit. It is shown in Table 4.
The actual results attached herein as appendix - 1 indicate for
instance that at a distance of 400m, the vibration readings are 13
mm/s, which is close to the range indicated in table 2. However, it
should be noted that the charge used was over 2000 kg, With
adjustments to the quantities of charge used, the vibrations can easily
be brought down to well within more tolerable limits.

Table 4a: user guide applicable to vibrating rollers

* Values in brackets are those suggested to keep claims and complaints to an acceptably low level. For complaints to be stopp ed
completely in residential areas, these values would possibly be needed to be increased still further.

Table 4b:Air Blast:

Fig.

3.4 - 1 Response of the Human body to mechanical vibration (Goldman, 1948)

Fig. 3.4 - 2 Human and Structural response to sound Pressure levels.

4. Findings -Vibration monitoring results

The vibration monitoring is conducted using a seismograph with analysis
software. The seismograph consists of a 3-axis velocity transducer and
a data acquisition storage device. The blasting analysis software provides
features for graphical output of the wave forms in each of the 3 axes
and a comparison of the measured peak particle velocities and
frequency content. The 3 axes correspond to the radial, transverse and
vertical components to the velocities measured. The blast records
analyzed are taken from data of 5 blasts. The derived data is attached
as Appendix-1.

5. Conclusions
The nature of the building material used by the majority of the locals
has certain inherent characteristics which make identification of actual
impact of the vibration caused by blasting somewhat problematic. The
shrinkage which occurs as the adobe dries, causes crack which are
easily mistaken for cracks caused by vibrations due to blasting. That is
not to say that cracks due to blasting do not occur, but rather, it
implies that the material is not as strong as the Concrete or burnt
brick buildings that are within the same range from the blast
epicenter. Claims have also been made by owners of houses made of
burnt brick, however, in some instances, visual investigations of these
cracks seemed to indicate that the damage was a pre-existing condition
since the surfaces of the cracks showed signs of aging. These were
compared with cracks on buildings were it was evident that the cracks

had only recently been formed. The types of structures and the quality
of workmanship was also analyzed during the baseline survey.
It can be concluded from the findings and from comparisons with
international practices, that the determining factor in setting up a limit
for the vibrations is the human factor and its response to the
vibrations. The Effects of vibrations become intolerable to humans at a
levels appreciably lower than the levels at which structural damage
occurs. It is therefore only fair that the limits should be set based on
these limits as is common practice internationally.
It should also be noted as an example that limits used in the US of
peak particle velocity of 12.5 mm/s (0.5 in./s) have been known to
reduce the number of complaints by a factor of three compared to
50mm/s (2 in./s). In comparison, the United States Bureau of Mining
(USBM) recorded complaints on one construction site as high as 30%
at
50 mm/s, 10% at 12.5 mm/s and 1% at 2 mm/s, which is just the
perceptible range. The current blasting code for Ontario, Canada calls
for a maximum peak particle velocity of 10 mm/s.
6. Actions taken
The EPC Contractor has put in place programs to sensitize the local
residents of the possible impact of the blasting activities. This has been
done in accordance with the Explosives' management plan that was
submitted by the EPC Contractor. The local communities also stand to
gain from transfer of skills that is going on as the local workforce
interacts with foreign Contractor. This transference of skills most of
which occurred during the initial stages of the Project as the EPC
Contractor Constructed the Camps, could serve as a template for the
further development of the region as the locals lean to build better.
This is even more pertinent in view of the fact that some of the
structures/Buildings within the 2 km radius of the Blast epicenter had
showed signs of cracks. Some of these were attributed to poor
workmanship.
7. Recommendations
7.1.

Implementation of Limits

Different limits may apply depending upon whether there are national
guidelines in use prior to the introduction of this Report. The EPC
Contractor is guided by the conditions pertaining to the permits
obtained for the blasting activities. It may turn out that the limits
recommended by this report may not be consistent with National
guidelines on blasting activities. In such cases the applicable limits are
those set down in the Licence or Authority.
Ground vibration and air blast levels are generally measured at the
nearest sensitive site. However, in the interests of minimising potential
negative impacts on the local communities, monitoring has been
conducted at various distances from the blast epicentre to establish
magnitude of ground vibrations propagated to given distances.

6.1.1
Existing Recommendations
In international practice, Work Authorities

or

Licence

Conditions

set

limits for air blast and ground vibration measured at sensitive sites
and these are set as follows:
Ground vibration at sensitive sites should be below 10mm/s (ppv*)
at all times, and
Airblast at sensitive sites should be below 120dB (Lin Peak*) at
all times.
6.1.2
Recommendations for Isimba quarry site
The levels for vibrations and Airblast for the communities in the
vicinity of Isimba HPP's quarry are recommended as follows:
Ground vibration at sensitive sites should be below 5 mm/s (ppv)
for 95% of all blasts.
Airblast at sensitive sites should be below 115dB (Lin Peak) for
95% of all blasts.
In view of the above, the EPC Contractor is advised to limit the
quantities of explosives used so as to ensure that the ground
vibrations and airblast are limited to the ranges indicated above.
Note: In situations where the location or the nature of the operations
mean that this is not
subject to the relevant

achievable,
authorities

these
being

standards may be varied,

satisfied that all effected

people have given informed consent).

8. References
1. Standards Association of Australia (SAA). Explosives Code AS2187-983
Part, Use of Explosives.
2. Tynan A.E. (1973). Ground Vibrations, Australian Road Research Board
Special Report.
3. BS 7385-2:1993: Evaluation and measurement for vibration in
buildings. Part 2: Guide to damage levels from ground borne
vibration.
4. BS 6472-2:2008: Guide to evaluation of human exposure to vibrations
in buildings. Part 2: Blast induced vibrations
5. Surface Mining. Second Edition, edited by Bruce A. Kennedy, Society
for mining, metallurgy and Exploration (US).

9. Appendices
9.1.

Appendix-1 :Records of Vibration Monitoring.

9.1.1

Vibration Readings 01

Distance from Epicenter

400m

Number of Holes
Total Charge
(Kg)
i.
Velocity Graph

139
2034

ii.
Results:
Maximum Velocity
Frequency

0.13 cm/s
22.3 Hz

9.1.2

Vibration Readings 02

Distance from Epicenter

Number of Holes

310 m
148

Total Charge

3456

(Kg)

i.

Velocity Graph

ii.
Results:
Maximum Velocity
Frequency

0.4311 cm/s
22.2 Hz