Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 110

Bulletin 656

BLASTING VIBRATIONS

AND .THEIR EFFECTS ON STRUCTURES

By Harry R. Nicholls, Charles F. Johnson, and Wilbur I. Duvall

US Department of Interior
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement
Kenneth K. Eltschlager
Mining/Explosives Engineer
3 Parkway Center
Pittsburgh, PA 15220

Phone 412.937.2169
Fax 412.937.3012
Keltschl@osmre.gov

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF MINES
CONTENTS

Page Page
List of Symboll - - - 'ri 4.2.2-Propagation law - - - - - - - 52
Abstract - I 4.2.5---Effect of charge weight for
Chapter I.-General introduction I instantaneous blasts 54
1.1-lntroduction _ I 4.2.4--Effect of delay interval and
1.2-lndustry meeting - - - - - - - - - 2 number of holea - - - - - - - -
U-History - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 4.2.5-Comparilon of milliaecond
U-General approach to the problem ---- 5 delayed blaata with instantaneous
1.5-References --------~------- 4 blasts ~-------------- 40
Chapter 2.-lnstrumentation ------ 5 4.5---Wa as a scaling factor-------- it
2.1-Introduction ----------- 5 4.!.1-Experimental procedure ----- it
2.2-;-~e dynamic response of a 4.!.2-Data analysis --------- 41
selSIIllc transducer -------- 5 4.4--Effect of method of initiation ----- 50
2.2.1-Di.splacement transducer - - - - 6 4.4.1-Experimental procedure---- 52
2.2.2-Velocity transducer ----- 6 4.4.2-Data analysis ---------. 55
2.2.5---Acceleration transducer ---- 7 4.5-Effect of geolog-_', including direction
2.5---Descriptions of typical sei.smographl --- 7 of propagation an~ overburden ------
2.4---Seisrnograph stability --------- 8 4.5.1--Geology and direction ------
2.5--Seisrnograph calibration ----- 10 4.5.2-Effect of rock type on vibration
2.6-lnstrumentation used by the Ieveii ------------ 55
Bureau of Minea ---------- 10 4.5.!-0verburden -------- 59
2.7-References -------- 12 4.6-Application of Fourier analysis
Chapter 5.-safe vibration Ieveii for residential techniques to vibration data ------ 59
structures ------------------ 15 4.6.1-Displacement and acceleration
5.1-lntroduction ----------- 15 from particle velocities ----- 60
5.2-5tatistical study of published data on 4.6.2-Comparison of instantaneous
ground vibrations and damage ------ 15 and delay-type blasting through
5~.1-Investigationa by the Fourier techniques - - - - - - - 60
) Bureau of Mines ----- 15 4.7-References ---------- 65
5.2.2-Investigations by Langefon, Chapter 5.-Generation and propagation of air
Kihlstrom, and Westerberg -- 14 vibrations from blasting ---------- 64
5.2.5---lnvestigations by Edwards and 5.1-Introduction ---------- 64
Northwood ------- 14 5.2-Previously published data - - - - - - - 64
5.2.4--stati.sticalstudy of damage data - 18 5.!-Bureau of Mines data-------- 67
5.5---Data from other inveatigaton -- 19 5.4--References ------------- 68
5.4--Additional Bureau of Mines data --- 20 Chapter 6.-Estimating safe air and ground
55-Building vibrations from normal vibration Ieveii for blasting - - - - - - - - 69
activities --------- 21 6.1-lntroduction ------------- 69
5.6-Reliability of particle motion 6.2-Estimating vibration limits with
calculations -------- 21 instrumentation ---------- 69
5.7-Recommended safe ground vibration 6..5-Estimating vibration limits without
Ieveii ----------- 22 instrumentation ----------- 70
5.8-Published data on air vibrations and 6.4-Use of scaled distance as a blasting
damage ----------------- 25 control ------------ 70
5.9-Recommended safe air blast pressure 6.5-Estimating air blaat limits ----- 72
levels ------------- 27 Chapter 7.-Summary and concluaiona ---- 75
5.10-Human response and ita effect on 7.1-5ummary -------------- 'IS
safe vibration Ieveii -------- 27 7.2-Concluaiona - - - - 75
5.11-Referencea --------- 29 Adnowledgmenta ----------- 75
Chapter .f.---Generation and propagation of ground Explanation of Appendices ------ 76
vibrations from blastiDJ --------- !10 Appendix A.-Plan views of test sites - - - - - 76
4.1-Introduction ------- 51 Appendix B.-5hot and loading data ---- 86
4.2-Milli.Jecond-delayed blasts venus Appendix C.-Particle velocity and frequency
instantaneous blasts ........................................ 52 data ----- 92
4.2.1-Experimental procedure ---- 52 Appendix D.-Geologic description ------ 104

ILLUSTRATIONS
Fig.
2.1. Mau-spring-dashpot model of a seismic transd~cer -----------~------
2.2. Theoretical response curves for a typical displacement or velocity transducer - - - - - -
2.!. Theoretical response curves for a typical acceleration transducer -------...
Fis. Page
2.4. Horizontal location of centrr of gravity of a lamina ..--------- 9
2.5. Vertical location of center of gravity of a aeismograph ............................- - - - 9
2.6. Frequency responae curve of linear amplifier------------ II
2.7. Frequency responae curve of velocity gage ..................................................- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - II
S.l. Displacement versus frequency for obaerved damagle, Bureau of Minaa .....................................- - - 15
S.2. Displacement versus frequency for ohaerved damage, La.ngefors and others ------------ 16
S.!J. Displacement versus frequency for obaerved damage, Edwards and Northwood - - - - - - - - 17
S.4. Displacement versus frequency, combined data with ecommended safe blasting criterion ---------- 18
U. Comparison of displacements from integration and simple harmonic motion calculations ------ 2S
S.6. Comparison of particle velocities as recorded and from displacements ------------- 2-i
S.7. Particle velocity versus frequency with recommended safe blasting aiterion ---- 25
S.8. Particle velocity versus frequency for no damage data.............................................._ _ _. 26
S.9. Subjective responae of the human body to vibratory JI>tion (after Goldman) ----------- 27
S.IO. Complaint history, Salmon Nuclear Event, with superposed subjective response---- 28
4.1. Vibration records for 1-hole blast ................................. -------------- S2
4.2 Vibration records for 7-hole instantaneous blast ................................................- - - - - - - - - - SS
4.!1. Vibration records for 7-hole, 9-milliaec.ond-delayed blast ...................... - - - - - - - - - - - - - S-i
4.4. Vibration records for 7-hole, !4-millisecond-delayed blast ................... ------------- !15
4.5. Particle velocity versus distance .for 1 and S.hole blasts .......................- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - S6
4.6. Particle velocity versus distance for 7 and 15-hole blasts ...............................-...................... ... !17
4.7. Particle velocity versus distance for a lhole and 2m ultiple-row blasts ........................................................ S8
4.8. Comparison of effect of charge weight on level of vibration from instantaneous and millisecood-delayed
blasts ....................................................................................................................... .............................. S9
4.9. Peak particle velocity versus distance, radial component ..............................................................-............... 4S
4.10. Peak particle velocity versus distance, vertical component .................................----------- 4-i
4.11. Peak particle velocity versus distance, transverse component ...............................................- - - - - - - - 45
4.12. Particle velocity intercepts versu~ charge weight per delay, radial component--------------- 46
4.1S. Particle velocity intercepts versu5 charge weight per delay, vertical component ..............- - - - - - - 48
4.14. Particle velocity intercepts versus charge weight per delay, transverse component ....................-................. 48
4.15. Peak particle velocity versus scaled distance, radial component ............ ------------------ 50
4.16. Peak particle velocity versus scaled distance, vertical component .......................................... _....................... 51
4.17. Peak particle velocity versus scaled distance, transverse component .......- ......................................-............ 52
4.18. Three methods of initiating blasts .................................................................................._ ............------ 55
4.19. Effect of direction, Jack Quarry, peak particle velocity versus scaled distance ...............................-............. 55
4.20. Effect of direction, Culpeper Quarry, peak particle velocity versus scaled distance........................................ 56
4.21. Effect of direction, Centreville Quarry, peak particle velocity versus scaled distance .....................-.............. 56
4.22. Combined data, limestone and dolomite quarries, peak particle velocity versus scaled distance ... _........... 57
4.23. Combined data, diabaae quarries, peak particle velocity versus scaled distance ................................................ 57
4.24. Combined data, granite-type Quarries, peak particle velocity versus scaled distance .....................-.............. 58
4.25. Sandstone quarry data, peak particle velocity versus scaled distance .... ,......................................................... 58
4.26. E1fect of overburden, peak particle velocity versus scaled distance .................................................-.............. 59
4.27. Comparison of particle velocity and displacement in the time and frequency domains ................................ 60
4.28. Spectral amplitudes, radial and vertical components, from a llhole, 9-millisecond-delayed blast .................... 61
4.29. Spectral amplitudes, radial and vertical components, from a 7-hole, 9-millisecond-delayed blast ------ 62
4.!10. Particle motion trajectories, SOO feet from an instantaneous blast .................................................-............. 6S
4.31. Radial-Vertical particle motion trajectories, 300 feet from 3-hole and 7-hole, 9-millisecond-delayed blalts .. 6S
5.1. Combined data plot, overpressure versus scaled distance ........................................................... ----- 66
6.1. Comparison of particle velocity data from different shots within a quarry ...................................................... 70
6.2. Combined velocity data from all quarries in Bureau of Mines studies .......................................----- 71
6.S. Nomogram for estimating safe charge and distance limits for scaled distances of 20 and 50 ft/lb~ --- 72

A 1. Weaver Quarry ............................................------------------------------------- 77


A 2. Webster City Quarry .................................- ...................................................................................- - - - 77
A S. P &: M Quarry ...................... ____.................................................................................................................. 77
A 4. Ferguson Quarry ........................................................................................:............................... 78
A 5. Shawnee Quarry .......................- ....- ................................ -..................................------------- 78
A 6. Hamilton Quarry .......................................................- ...........................................................- ........ -........... 78
A 7. Flat Rock Quarry ...............................................................-............................................................................... 78
A 8. Bellevue Quarry ...................................................-............................................................................................. 79
A 9. Bloomville Quarry ......................................- ........- -.......................... -.............................................. 79
AlO. Washington, D.C. Site ...............................------------------------------------- 79
A-ll. Poughkeepsie Quarry ............................................. _ ..- ........................................................- - - - - 79
Al2. West Nyack Quarry .............................--------------------------........................................................... 80
Alll. Littleville Dam Site .............................................................................................................................................. 80
A-14. Centreville Quarry .............................................- .......................................................................----- 80
A-15. Manassas Quarry ................................................................................................................................--........... 80
A-16. Strasburg Quarry ....................................... ~ .......................................................................................-........... 81
A-17. Chantilly Quarry .................................................................................................................................................. 82
A-18. Culpeper Quarry .....................................................------- ..................... _ .................................. _........... 82

iY
Fig. Page
A-19. Doswell Quarry - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 82
A-~. Riv~onQuanJ----------------~------------------------------ IU
A-21. Jaclc. Quarry - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IU
A-22. Buchanan Quarry .. IK
A2.5. Hi-Cone Quarry - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IK
A24. Union Furnace Q u a r r y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 85
A-25. Roclc.ville Quarry - 85

TABLES
Table
2.1. Average magnification of displacement leitmograplu - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Paro
5.1. Vibrations &om noxmal activities - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21
4.1. Factorial design and shooting order-------- 31
4.2.
43. Summary of quarry-blasting
Average nand tesu -_________________
ltandard deviatiolll. ---- . _ _ _ _ _ __
S5
S9
4.4. Particle velocity intercepu at 100 feet 40
4.5. Average particle velocity intercepts for single bole and
milli!leOOnd-delayed blasts .......... ;------------+------------------ 41
42
4.6. Quarry blast data ------..:-.......... ----------
4.7. Average slopes. {J1 --.. - - - --------------
46
4.8. Summary of K, 1, afJ., and H 1 data--- ----------------------- 47
4.9. Values of lit - ...........................-...................... ------------- 49
4.10. Slopes and intercepts &om combined data .. -------------------- 49
4.11. Summary-method of initiation tesu .................. ---------~---------------- M
5.1. _Charge and overpressure data for W. E. Graham and Sons. Manassas Quarry, Manassas. Va. - - - - - - 67
5.2. Charge and overpressure data for Culpeper Crushed Stone Company Quarry, Culpeper. Va. -------- 67
5.!. Charge and overpressure data for Chantilly Crushed Stone Company Quarry, Chantilly, Va. ------- 67
5.4. Charge and overpressure data for New York Trap Roclc. Corporation Quarry, West Nyaclc., N.Y. ---- 67
5.5. Charge and overpressure data for Superior Stone Company, Buchanan Quarry, Greensboro, N.C. --- 67
5.6. Charge and overpressure data for Superior Stone Company, Hi-Cone Quarry, Greensboro, N.C. ----- 67
5.7. Charge and overpressure data for Southern Materials Corporation, Jaclc. Stone Quarry, Petersburg. Va.... 67
5.8. Charge and overpressure data for Rockville Crushed Stone, Inc. Quarry, Roclc.viUe, Md. - 67

B- 1. Shot and loading data for Weaver Quarry, Alden, Iowa -------------------- 87
B- 2. Shot and loading data for Moberly Quarry, Webster City, Iowa --------------:------- 87
B- 3. Shot and loading data for P &: M Quarry, Bradgate, Iowa ...................------............................_ ... 87
B 4. Shot and loading data for American Marietta Quarry, Ferguson. Iowa _ ................... _ _ ..............- .... 87
B 5. Shot and loading data for Marble Cliff Quarries, Shawnee, Ohio ------------.. --..----- 87
B 6. Shot and loading data for Hamilton Quarry. Marion, Ohio ......- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 88
B- 7. Shot and loading data for Flat Roclc. Quarry, Flat Roclt, Ohio ----------------------- 88
B 8. Shot and loading data for France Stone Company Quarry, Bellevue, Ohio ----..............................- - ... 88
B 9. Shot and loading data for France Stone Company Quarry, Bloomville, Ohio ---------....--- 88
B-10. Shot and loading data for Theodore Roosevelt Bridge Construction Site, Washington, D.C ........ - ........,.-.. 88
Bll. Shot and loading data for New Yorlt Trap Roclc. Corporation, Clinton Point Quarry, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. 89
B-12. Shot and loading data for New York Trap Jloclc. Corporation Quarry, West Nyack, N.Y.------ 89
B-13. Shot and loading data for Uttleville Dam Construction Site, Huntington, Mass. ----..---- 89
B-14. Shot and loading data for Fairfax Quarries, Inc. Quarry, Centreville, Va. .....................- - - - - - - - 89
B-15. Shot and loading data for W. E. Graham&: Sons, Mana~~as Quarry, Manassas, Va. ------------ 90
B-16. Shot and loading data for Chemstone Corporation Quarry, Strasburg, Va.......------------- 90
817. Shot and loading data for Chantilly Crushed Stone Company Quarry, Chantilly. Va. ---------- 90
B-18. Shot and loading data for Culpeper Crushed Stone Company Quarry, Culpeper. Va. --- 90
B-19. Shot and loading data for General Crushed Stone Company Quarry, Doswell, Va. - - - - - - - - - - - 91
820. Shot and loading data for Riverton Ume &: Stone Company Quarry, Riverton, Va. ..- ..---------- 91
B-21. Shot and loading data for Southern Materials Corporation, Jaclc. Stone Quarry, Petersburg. Va. - - - - 91
B-22. Shot and loading data for Superior Stone Company. Buchanan Quarry, Greensboro, N.C. - - - - - - 91
B-23. Shot and loading data for Superior Stone Company, Hi-Cone Quarry, Greensboro, N.C. 91
B-24. Shot and loading data for Warner Company Quarry, Union Furnace, Pa. - - - - 91

C. 1. Particle velocity and frequency data for Weaver Quarry, AideD, Iowa -- 9S
C- 2. Particle velocity and frequency data for Moberly Quarry, Webster City, I o w a - - - - - - !H
C- 3. Particle velocity and frequency data for P &: M Quarry,' Bradgate, Iowa .........---------- !H
C- 4. Particle velocity and frequency data for America Marietta Quarry, Ferguson, Iowa ------------ !H
c. 5. Particle velocity and frequency data for Marble Cliff Quarries, Shawnee, Ohio ------.. - - - - - !H
C 6. Particle velocity and frequency data for Hamilton Quarry, Marion, Ohio ..-------------..- - - 95
c. 7. Particle velocity and frequency data for Flatroclt Quarry, Northern Ohio Stone Company. Flatrock, Ohio 95
c. 8. Panicle velocity and frequency data for France Stone Company, Bellevue, Ohio .......... ~--------- 95

.,
Table Page
C- 9. Particle velocity and frequency data fo.r France Company Quarry, Bloomville, Ohio ................................ 96
C-10. Particle velocity and frequency data for Theodore Roosevelt Bridge Construction Site, W:uhington, D.C. 96
Cll. Particle velocity and frequency data for N.Y. Trap Rock Corporation, Clinton Point Quarry, Pough
keepsie, N.Y. ---------------------------- 91
C-12. Particle velocity and frequency data for N.Y. Trap Rock Corporation Quarry, West Nyack, N.Y.---- 91
C-15. Particle velocity and frequency data for Littleville Dam Construction Site, Huntington, Mass. --- 98
C-14. Particle velocity and frequency data for Fairfax Quarries, Inc. Quarry, Centreville, Va. ............................ 98
C-15. Particle velocity and frequency data for W. E. Graham and Sons, Mana.ssa~ Quarry, ManassaJII, Va. .......... 99
C-16. Particle velocity and frequency data for Chemstone Corporation Quarry, Strasburg, Va. ............................ 100
Cl7. Particle velocity and frequency data for Chantilly Crushed Stone Company Quarry, Chantilly, Va. ............ 101
C-18. Particle velocity and frequency data for Culpeper Crwhed Stone Company Quarry, Culpeper, Va. ........ 101
C-19. Particle velocity and frequency data for General Crushed Stone Company Quarry, Doswell. Va. --- 101
C-20. Particle velocity and frequency data for Riverton Lime and Stone Company Quarry, Riverton, Va. .......... 102
C-21. Particle velocity and frequency data for Southern Materials Corporation, Jack Stone Quarry, Petersburg,
Va. ----------..------..--------------------- 102
C-22. Particle velocity I.Jld frequency data for Superior Stone Company, Buchanan Quarry, Greensboro, N.C..... 102
C-2!. Particle velocity and frequency data for Superior Stone Company, Hi-Cone Quarry, Greensboro, N.C. .... 102
C-24. Particle velocity and frequency data for Warner Company Quarry, Union Furnace, Pa. - - - - - - lOS

"
LIST OF SYMBOLS
A - Amplitude of vibration for displacement, n - Exponent.
velocity, or acceleration. P - Peak overpressure.
- Trace deflection for acceleration. R - Radial component of motion.
- Trace deflection for displacement. r Damping factor.
- Trace deflection for particle velocity. re - Critical damping factor.
a - Peak acceleration. a - Spring constant.
- Peak horizontal acceleration. T - Transverse component of motion.
- Peak vertical acceleration. -Time.
- Exponent of charge weight in general propa u - Peak displacement.
gation Jaw. " - Peak velocity.
D Distance. V - Vertical component of motion.
E. R.. Energy Ratio. W - Charge weight.
Driving force. x - Instantaneow amplitude of indicated dis-
'F.
f
Vertical force.
Frequency.
placement.
x., x.. x. - x coordinates.
g - Acceleration of gravity. X. x coordinate for center of gravity.
H - Particle velocity intercept for tcaled propa y., y., y, - y coordinates.
gation equation. y. - y coordinate for center of gravity.
It - Intercept of regression line. a - Exponent of charge weight in scaled propa-
k - Constant or intercept of regression line. gation law.
t. - Proportionality constant or magnification for fl - Exponent in scaled propagation Jaw.
acceleration seismograph. 1 -Angle.
k. - Proportionality constant or magnification for I' - Coefficient of friction.
displacement seismograph. .. Iff Standard deviation about the regression line.
k. Proportionality constant or magnification for + - Phase angle.
velocity seismograph. ., - Angular frequency.
m Mass.
BLASTING VIBRATIONS
AND. THEIR EFFECTS ON STRUCTURES

ABSTRACT
This report presents the results of the Bureau of Mines 10-year program to
study the problem of air blast and ground vibrations ~nerated by blasting. The
program included an extensive field study of ground vibrations; a consideration
of air blast effects; an evaluation of instrumentation to measure vibrations;
establishment of damage criteria for residential structures; determination of
blasting parameters which grossly affected vibrations; empirical safe blasting
limits; and the problem of human response. While values of 2.0 infsec particle
velocity and 0.5 psi air blast overpressure are recommended as safe blasting limits
not to be. exceeded to preclude damage to residential structures, lower limits are
suggested to minimize complaints. Millisecond-delay blasting is shown to reduce
vibration levels as compared to instantaneous blasting. and electric cap deJay
blasts offer a slight reduction in vibration levels as compared to Primacord delay
blasts. Vibration levels of different blasts may be compared at common scaled
distances, where scaled distance is the distance divided by the square root of the
maximum charge weight per delay. Geology, rock type, and direction affect
vibration level within limits. Empirically, a safe blasting limit based on a-scaled
distance of 50 ftflb"' may be used without instrumentation. However, a knowledge
of the particle velocity propagation characteristics of a blasting site determined
from instrumented blasts at that site are recommended to insure that the safe
blasting limit of 2.0 in/sec is not exceeded.

CHAPTER I.-GENERAL INTRODUCTION


1.1-INTRODUCTION plaints, but if large-scale nuclear devices are used
Using explosives to break rock generates air-. for mining purposes, complaints from under-
and ground-borne vibrations which may have ground blasting operations will become a major
detrimental effects on nearby structures. A problem. This problem is currently being in-
variety of complaints attributable to vibrations vestigated by the Atomic Energy Commission
from blasting have always been received by the (AEC).
quarrying industry, producing stone or aggregate Some complaints registered are legitimate
from surface excavations, the mining industry claims of damage from vibrations generated by
producing ore from open-pit mines, and the con- blasting. However, other complaints are not
struction industry producing road cuts, pipe line, valid, and the reported damage has resulted from
and foundation excavations. Blasting operations natural settling of building, poor construction, et
associated with underground mining and excava- cetera. In general, complaints have been suf-
tion work are relatively immune to these com- ficiently numerous to constitute a major problem
for operators engaged in blasting and emphasize
1 !upuvllo..,. ~CQPhyaldat.
GeaphYJidJt. the need for technological data to evaluate vibra-
~S..puv;_, mean:h physlal IC!entllt, AU aulbon are with the
.........er Milliq Jlaearc:h Cle!Uer, Bureau ol WlDa, Dellt'ft', Colo. tion problems associated with blasting. Both the
1
2 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECI'S ON STRUCTUltES

operators and the general public nee<! adequate program on blasting vibrations and their effects
safeguards based upon factual data to protect on structures was developed and initiated by the
their specific interests. Industry needs a reliable Bureau. The major objectives of this program
basis on which to plan and conduct blasting were
operations . to minimize or abolish legitimate 1. To establish reliable damage criteria, i.e.,
damage claims and eliminate the nuisance the relationship between the magnitude of the
variety of complaint. The public would benefit by ground vibrations and the damage produced in a
the absence of condi dons which would create structure and
damage. The problem has been of major concern 2. To establish a propagation law {or ground-
to Federal, State, and local governments, indus- borne surface vibrations that could be used to
tries engaged in blasting, explosive manufac- predict the relationship between the magnitude
turers, insurance companies, and scientists. of the ground vibration and the size of the ex-
During the post World War II period, the plosive charge, the effect of shot-to-measurement
growth in population, urbanization, new high- point distance, and the other variables which
way programs, and the need for more con- have a qtajor effect on the magnitude or char-
struction materials increased the problem of acter of the ground vibrations. The other vari-
complaints from blasting. In addition, the need ables might include explosive type, method of
for quarries and construction near urban centers initiation, geology, and directional effects.
and the simultaneous urban sprawl acted to bring Additional objectives .were to evaluate the
operators engaged in blasting and the public into vibration measuring equipment currently used
a closer physical contact. In many cases, housing and to develop specifications for new instru-
and public buildings were actually built on mentation, if warranted. The degrt>! of. signifi-
property adjoining quarries. Naturally, the num- cance of air blast in causing damage to structures
ber of complaints increased drastically. During was also to be established.
the same time period, rapid advancements and
improvements were made in applicable instru- 1.5 HISTORY
mentation, primarily seismic gages, amplifiers,
and recording equipment. There was also ex- Many investigations had been conducted both.
tensive research in closely related fields. The in the U.S. and other countries on the effects of
Defense Department and other groups studied air and ground vibrations from blasting on
damage to structures from explosive and other residential and other type structures. One of the
impulse-type loading. The Bureau of Mines and first such. studies reported. in this country was
other investigators studied both empirically and made in 1927 by Rockwell (8).4 From blast-effect
theoretically, the generation and propagation of studies instrumented with displacement seismo-
seismic waves in rock and other media. graphs and falling-pin gauges, Rockwell con-
In 1958 the Bureau of Mines decided to rein- cluded that quarry blasting, as normally
vestigate blasting vibration phenomena becauSe conducted, would not produce damage to resi-
of the pressing need for additional blas\ing vibra- dential structures if they were more than 200 to
tion information, the availability of improved SOO feet distant from the quarry. He also pointed
seismic instrumentation, and the availability of out the need for "securing accurate quantitative
applicable seismic information from investigators measurements of the vibrations produced by
in other disciplines. To assure that the research blasting".
effort was directed toward the solution of the The Bureau of Mines conducted. an extensive
most urgent problems, industry support was investigation of the problem of seismic effects of.
solicited and obtained to establish a cooperative quarry blasting during the period 19SO to 1940.
research program. This study represented the first major effort to
establish damage criteria for residential struc-
1.2 INDUSTRY MEETING tures and to develop a generalized. propagation
law for ground vibrations (II) . The recom-
In 1959 representatives of the cooperating mended criteria of damage were based upon the
groups, quarry operators, scientists from industry resultant acceleration experienced by the struc-
and educational institutions, and members of tures. Consideration of all data indicated an ac-
the Bureau of Mines technical staff engaged in celeration of I .0 g was the best index of damage.
blasting research attended a conference, held at Accelerations ranging between 0.1 g and 1.0 g
the Bureau of Mines facility at College Park,
Maryland. As a result, a comprehensive research Italic oumben in parm~ mer to refen:aca at the eacl
of eac.h diapter,
GENDAL INTilODUCI'IOH 5

resulted in slight damage. Accelerations of less example, New Jersey and Massachusetts specified
than 0.1 g resulted in no damage. A propaga- an Energy Ratio of 1.0 as the allowable limit for
tion law relating displacement amplitude, charge blasting operations. Pennsylvania adopted a dis-
weight, and distance was developed empirically placement amplitude of 0.0.3 inch as a safe
from data from many quarry blasts, but its use blasting limit. Blasting operations conducted by
was recommended only within specified distances or for the U.S. Corps of Engineers and the New
and charge weights. York State Power Authority specify a damage
In 194.3 the Bureau published the results of a criterion based on an Energy Ratio of 1.0.
study on the effect of air blast waves on structures In 1957 Teichmann and . Westwater (10)
(12). The results indicated that windows were presented a brief but informative state-of-the-art
always the first portion of a structure to be summary on the subject of blasting vibrations,
damaged. An overpressure of 0.7 psi orless would including ground movement, air blast, human
result in no window damage, while overpressures susceptibility, legal aspects, and other topics.
of 1.5 psi or more would definitely produce dam- In 1958, as the result of an extensive series of
age. The main conclusion of this study was that tests to study vibrations from blasting, Langefors,
damage from air blast was not a major problem Kihlstrom, and Westerberg proposed damage
in normal quarry operations. criteria based on particle velocity in the ground
Damage criteria for structures subjected to near a structure (6). A particle velocity of 2.8
:vibration were advanced by Crandell in 1949 (1) infsec was cited as a damage threshold above
and were based upon measured vib~tion levels in which damage J.bight begin to occur. In 1960
the ground near the structure. A consideration of Edwards and Northwood presented the results of
the energy transmitted through the ground re- their study in which six structures were subjected
sulted in his use of the quantity identified as En- to damage from vibrations due to blasting (2)
ergy Ratio (E.R.) and defined as the ratio of the From the evaluation of data obtained from an
square of the acceleration in feet per second assortment of instrumentation, including ac
squared and the square of the frequency in cycles celeration, particle velocity, and displacement
per second. His tests showed that when the measurements, they concluded that particle
Energy Ratio in the ground was less than .3.0, velocity was the most reliable quantity on which
.3.0 to 6.0, and greater than 6.0, nearby structures to base damage criteria, and they proposed a safe
were in damage zones considered safe, caution, limit of 2 infsec particle velocity.
and danger, respectively. Crandell pointed out
that displacement and frequency could also be 1.4 GENERAL APPROACH TO THE
used to determine the Energy Ratio.
PROBLEM
In J950 Sutherland reported (9) the results .
of a study of vibrations produced in structures The available data as discussed in section Ul
by passing vehicles. No harmful effects on the and the general state of the art of the blasting
structures were associated with vibrations from vibration technology represented the starting
the nearby movement of heavy vehicles. It was point for the Bureau study. The first objective of
shown that people perceived vibrations at much the program was the development of reliable
lower levels than would cause any damage to damage criteria. Since the acquisition of sufficient
structures and that vibrations causing extrem!! and reliable vibration damage data would be a
discomfort to a person would barely cause plastc!r long and costly process and since a considerable
damage in a structure. Two additional published effort had been expended on this subject by the
papers (J # 4) discussed the relationship of seis- Bureau and other investigators, it was believed
mic amplitude and explosive charge size. Both that the most profitable approach would be to
established a propagation law for a specific site conduct a comprehensive study to evaluate the
with little application elsewhere. In 1956Jenkins published experimental data pertaining to dam
(5) discussing the data of Reiher and Meister age. This study would determine if published
(7) on human response to vibratory motion and data relating vibr~tion amplitudes and frequen
the response to blasting vibrations, stated that des to damage could be pooled to establish one
the public should be made aware of the fact that set of reliable damage criteria. If the data could
the average person can feel vibrations from one- not be pooled, results would indicate the direc
hundredth to one-thousandth of the magnitude tion of further investigation to establish reliable
necessary to damage structures. damage criteria. Additional data involving dam
Several states and organizations adopted dam age from blasting vibrations would be obtained .if
age criteria during the period 1949 to 1960. For possible. The determination of which quantity
4 BLASTING VIBRAnONS AND THEDt EF)"ECI'S ON STRUcnJlll:l

(displacement, particle velocity, or acceleration) Recommendations for safe levels of vibration


was most closely associated with damage to struc- permissible in structures, safe levels of airblast
tures would provide optimum selection of gages overpressure, and human response and the re-
and instrumentation. sulting problems are discussed in Chapter S. The
The use of three-component seismographs or generation and propagation of air blast and
gage stations enabling the recording of motion ground vibrations and the variables which grossly
in three mutually perpendicular directions was affect them are discussed in Chapters 4 and 5 and
considered a necessity, because seismic quantities, a general propagation law derived. Chapter 6 is
such as displacement, particle velocity, and ac- devoted to the problem of estimating safe vibra-
celeration are vector quantities. Examination of tion levels.
published vibration data from blasting revealed
the serious limitation in the data that results 1.5 REFERENCES a
when only one or two three-Q>mponent stations 1. Crandell, F. J. Ground Vibration Due to Blasting and
were employed to record seismic data from any It. Elfecu Upon Structures. J. Boston Soc. Civil
one shot. It was decided to use six to eight three- Edgineen, Apri11!H9, pp. 222-245.
component gage stations as an array to record 2. Edwards, A. T., and T. D. Northwood. Experimental
Studies of the Elfecu of Blasting on ~tructurea.
data from each quarry blast to overcome this The Engineer, v. 210, Sept. 50, 1960, pp. 558-546.
limitation. J. Habberjam, G. M., and J. Il. Whetton. On the Ilela
In the determination of a propagation law tionship Between Seismic Amplitude and Cb.arF
of Ex_plosive Fired in Routine Blasting Operations.
that would be useful at any site and to avoid Geopllysics. v. 17, No. 1, January 1952, pp. 116-128.
considering the nearly infinite variety of struc 4. Ito, lchiro. On the Relationship Between Seismic
tures, damage criteria were based on the vibra Ground Amplitude and the Quantity of Explosives
tion levels observed in the ground near the in Blasting. -.eprint &om Memoirs of the Taculty
of Eng., K.yoto Univ., v. 15, No. 11, April 1953,
structure rather than on exposed rod or in struc pp. 579-587.
tures. A comprehensive program to evaluate 5. Jenkins. J E. Human Respoo!IC to Industrial Blasting
existing instrumentation was planned which Vibrations. AIME Trana., Mining Engineering.
May 1956, pp. 555--538.
included shaking table tests to study linearity, 6. Langeforr, U.. Kih!Jtr&ll, B., and H. Westerberg.
useful amplitude and frequency range, and a Ground Vibrations in Blasting. Water Power v. 10,
sensitivity calibration as a function of frequency February 1958, pp. 335-338, !1~595. 421-424.
and amplitude. T. Reiher, H., and F. J. Meister. Die Empfindlichkeit des
Menschen gegen Enchuetterungen (Sensitivity of
Most published data indicated that damage Human Beings to Vibration). Forschung auf dem
from air blast was insignificant in routine blast Gebert des lngenieurwesens (Berlin), v. 2, February
ing operations. Evaluation of air blast effects was 1931, pp. !181-586.
to be initiated after the major factors con 8. RodweU, E. H. Vibrations Cau!ICd by Quarry
Bwting and Their Elfec:t on Structures. Rod
tributing to ground vibrations had been studied, Producu, vol. !10, 1927, pp. 58-61.
rather than divide the recording capabilities to 9. Sutherland, H. B. A Study of Vibrations Produced in
study the two phenomena simultan~usly. Structure by Heavy Vehicles. Proc. of the Thirtieth
This report reviews and summarizes the Annual Meeting of the Highway Research Board,
Ottawa, December 1950, pp. 406-419.
Bureau program to restudy the problem of vibra- 10. Teichman, G. A., and R. Westwater. Blasting and
tions from quarry blasting. Data from 171 blasts Associated Vibrations. Engineering. April 12, 1957,
at 26 different sites are presented. Published data PP 460-465.
from many other investigators have been con- 11. Thoenen, J. R .. and S. L. Windes. Seismic Elfecu of
Quarry Blasting. BuMines Bull. 442, 1942, 85 pp.
sidered in the analysis. The results include an 12. Windes, S. L. Damage From Air Blast. BuMines R.ept.
evaluation of instrumentation, recommended in- of lnv. 3708, 1943, 50 pp.
strumentation specifications, and gage placement
procedures. . Titles cncloled In puenthaes arc traDIJatJo1111 from the lanpqe
In wbicb the lccm wu ~' puWiiW.
CHAPTER 2.-INSTRUMENTATION

2.1-INTRODUCTION 2.2-THE DYNAMIC RESPONSE OF A


SEISMIC TRANSDUCER
The Bureau of Mines program of research in . The typical portable seismograph consists of a
the field of vibrations &om quarry blasting in seismic transducer, a timer, and a recording sys.
eluded objectives to evaluate currently used tem. The recording S)!Stem may be a peak-reading
vibration-measuring equipment and to develop volt meter, a photographiC paper recorder, or a
instrumentation for use in the research program. direct-writing paper recorder. The timer is an
The instrumentation then widely used to moni~ accurate frequency generator which puts timing
tor blast vibrations was of the portable seismo- lines on the piper record. The seismic transducer
graph type with three adjustable feet. These is a device for converting ground motion to a
instruments were designed to measure displace- varying voltage or to a similar motion of a spot
ment or acceleration and to record the compo- of light which is recorded on a moving strip of
nents of motion along with timing lines on a light sensitive paper. Seismic transducers can be
moving strip of light sensitive paper. The tripod- designed to respond linearly to either particle
like feet pen.titted easy leveling of the machines. displacement, velocity, or acceleration.
However, some instability of the machines was A seismic transducer can be modeled by a
noted, and a theoretical study of the stability of mass-spring-dashpot system as shown in figure
three-point mounted portable seismographs was 2.1. The differential equation for such a system
made by Duvall (1). Calibration studies of three under forced vibration conditions is
portable displacement seismographs and a port- d2 x dx
able acceleration seismograph were made (4, 8). mdt2 + r dt + sx = F cos t (2.1)
The instrumentation developed by the Bureau where t = time
of Mines for measuring blasting vibrations was x = instantaneous amplitude of indi
housed in a mobile van-type laboratory and con- cated displacement
sisted of particle velocity gages, amplifiers, and a
direct writing osci11ograph to record either
particle velocity or displacement by integrating
the particle velocity. Because airborne vibrations
were recognized as a major factor in the com- (r)
plaints presented to agencies involved in blast (s) X
ing, gages to measure the airborne vibrations

~_l
were included in the instrumentation. Mounting
of particle velocity gages was subjected to critical
examination, and a standard technique for
coupling the gages to soil was devised (6)
The dynamic response of a seismic transducer
is presented to provide the mathematical basis Mass (m)
for a brief description of the three types of seis.
mographs. The stability of three-point mounted
seismographs and calibration studies of two types
of portable seismographs are included to
complete the objective of evaluating vibration
measuring equipment. The instrumentation
developed for use in the research program and Fcoswt
the technique for coupling gages to the soil are Figure 2.1.-Ma.sHpring..duhpot model of a
briefly described. seismic tramducer.
5
6 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR. EFI'ECl'S ON sntUC11JRES

m = inertial mass trace amplitude decreases toward zero and that


r = damping factor for driving frequencies large compared to ..,.
s = restoring force or spring constant that the trace amplitude is proportional to the
F = driving force acting on the system driving displacement and the constant k. becomes
"" = 21l'f = angular frequency the magnification constant for the transducer.
f =frequency. Thus, an ideal displacement transducer should
A solution to equation 2.1 is have a low resonant frequency which requires a
F cos (t - 41) low restoring force or spring constant and a large
x =[r2(112+ (s-m.2)2]~ (2.2) mass, and the useful operating frequency range
is above the resonant frequency of the system.
where the phase angle 41 is given by Typical theoretical response curves for a dis-
41=tan- r,. . (2.5) placement transducer are shown in figure 2.2.
s-m.s
2.2.2-Velocity Transducer
The resonant frequency of the undamped system For a velocity transducer the driving force is
(r = 0) is represented by the peak velocity, v, and the trace
Clllo=211'fo=vs/m. (2.4) deflection is proportional to the rate of change
The critical damping factor re is given by of the indicated displacement. Thus,
re=2m..,. (2.5) dx
A.,.=k,.dt (2.12)
From equations 2.4 and 2.5, equations 2.2 and
2.S become where k,. is the proportionality constant. From
x= F cos (t-41) equations 2.6, 2.8, and 2.9, equation 2.12 becomes

mw2(4 ~./' (: )2+


0
<::
-1)2]~
(2.6) A.,.=_ k,.v sin (Cilt-+) . (2.lS)
[4(!..)2(!!!2)2+ ( 111 ~ -1)2]~
and re ,__
Equation 2.15 shows that as the driving fre-
2 (!.) (!..) quency decreases from 111o to 0, the trace deflection
+=tan-1. lllo re (2.7) decreases toward zero, and as the driving
1- (!. )2 frequency becomes large compared to the
lito
resonant frequency, the trace amplitude becomes
For a sinusoidal driving force the peak ac- proportional to the driving.velocity and the pro-
celeration, a, is related to the peak velocity, v, portionality constant kT becomes the magni
and the peak displacement, u, by fication constant for the transducer. Thus, the
a=wv=Cil2u (2.8) theoretical response curves for a velocity trans-
and the force required to drive the system is ducer are identical in shape to those for a dis-
F=ma. (2.9) placement transducer as given in figure 2.2.
Seismic transducers can be designed to measure
the particle displacement, velocity, or accelera- It

tion of the driving force. Therefore, three basic


transducer types are of interest. 10

2.2.1-Displacement Transducer
For a displacement transducer the driving
force is represented by the peak displacement, u,
and the trace deflection, A,., on the record is pro-
portional to the indicated displacement, x. Thw,
-
A,.= t..x (2.10)
where k. is the proportionality constant. From
equations 2.6, 2.8, and 2.9, equation 2.10 becomes
A,.= kau cos(t-;4\) (2.ll)
0
..Pt..
\0.

[4 (!..) 2 (Clllo) '+ (o -1)2]~
re 111 2

From equation 2.11, it is evident that as the Figure 2.2.-Theoretical response curves for a
driving frequency decreases from t~to to 0, that the typical displacement or velocity ttansducer.
7

11.1
0 8
;:)
!::
..J
a.
:1
4(

11.1

...~
4(
..J
11.1
a:

0 0.1!5 0.30 0.4!5 1.20 1.35


w
Wo

.
Figure 2.3.-Theoretical respon.se curves for a typical acceleration t:ransducer

Therefore, an ideal velocity transducer should The magnification of the transducer is (k.m) fs.
have a low resonant frequency, which implies a Typical theoretical response curves for an ac-
low spring constant and a large mass, and the celeration transducer are shown in figure 2.5.
useful operating frequency range lies above the Thus, an ideal acceleration transducer should
resonant frequency of the system. have a high resonant frequency which implies a
2.2.!J-Acceleration Transducer large spring constant and a small mas.s, and the
useful operating frequency range is below the
For an acceleration transducer, the driving resonant frequency of the system.
force is represented by the peak acceleration, a,
and the trace deflection is proportional to the
indicated displacement. Thus, 2.!J-DESCRIPTIONS OF TYPICAL
SEISMOGRAPHS
A.=k.x (2.14)
where k. is the proportionality constant. From The typical ~table displacement seismo-
equations 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, and 2.9, equation 2.14 graph consists of a rigid case. with a three-point
becomes mount and leveling screws, which houses a
timing mechanism, a recording mechanism, and
m
Jc.a- coa (.,t-<t) three inertial pendulums having axes that are
A.= s . (2.15) mutually perpendicular and oriented so that the
[4(!..)1(.!..)2+ (1- .... )1]\!1 motion of one is vertical and the other two are
re ... =
Equation 2.15 shows that as increases above-..
horizontal. Motions with respect to the inertial
masses of the pendulums are indicated by the
the trace deflection decreases to zero and as deflection of light beams on a strip o photo-
decreases from .,.. to 0, the trace deflection be- graphic paper. The beams of light are deflected
comes proportional to the driving acceleration. by mirrors attached to the arms o the pen-
8 BLASTING VIBltAnONS AND 11IEDl BFECTS ON STRUCTUU:s

dulums. The displacement of the case is magni- modeled by a mass-spring-dashpot system, and
fied optically and mechanically so that the its output is proportional to the gage displace-
deflection of the light beam on the strip chart is ment as shown by equation 2.15. The resonant
25 to 150 times greater than the case motion. The ftequency of the gage is high, usually 10 to 100
response of the displacement seismogr~pb is de- times the measured frequency. Thus, tbe mass
scribed by equation 2.11. The resonant frequency is small, and the spring constant is large.
is low (1-4 cps), and the trace deflection is There are two general types of indicating and
proportional to the displacement. The dynamic recording systems. Suitable electronic circuits
range of the instrument is defined as the ratio of may be employed to either cause a meter to de-
the largest usable deflection of the trace to the flect and indicate the peak vector output of the
smallest that can be meaningfully measured. The gages relative to standard gravity, or a light
dynamic range is limited by the slipping or source and a galvanometer may be used to expose
tilting of the instrument and the width of the a moving strip of light sensitive paper. The latter
trace on the strip charL Because the magnifica- system preserves the wave form, while the former
tion of these instruments is fixed, the dynamic indicates only the peak acceleration. Because the
range is limited to about 20. Thus, a seismograph gages are not physically located in the case of the
with a minimum trace deflection of 0.1 inch and instrument, they can be attached to a type of
a magnification of 150 would be capable of mount that is not subject to the same limitations
measuring displacements ranging from 0.000667 of accel~ation as the three-point-mount displace-
inch to O.OlSS inch at frequencies ranging from ment seismographs. As the magnification of this
5 to 40 cps. kind of seismograph is variable, the dynamic
The typical portable velocity seismograph sys- range is broad and is limited by the linear re-
tem consists of two units. Three orthogonal gages sponse of the electronicS and indicating circuits,
are contained in a case. Electronic amplifiers. cables, and components. These seismographs
batteries, a light source, a timing device, galva- have a useful operating frequency range from
r,:>meters, and a recording camera are contained about 2 to 250 cps.
in a separate :case. The case containing the gages
is designed to match the soil density so it can be 2.4-SEISMOGRAPH STABIUTY
coupled firmly to the soil (6) . Thus, it does not A seismograph which sits on the ground or
have the same limitation of dynamic range as do the floor of a building can give false records if
the three points or trlpodmounted displacement the instrument slips or tilts. The vibration level
seismographs. The three gages measure the verti- at which instability occurs is determined by the
cal and horizontal components of particle friction between the feet apd the surface, the
velocity. Each gage can be represented by a mass- spacing of the feet, and the distribution of mass
spring-dashpot system whose response is df'- above them.
scribed by equation 2.1S. The resonant frequenci The rigid body motions of portable seismo-
of the gage is low, typicaJly between 2 and 5 cps. graphs were theoretically investigated by Duvall
Thus, the mass of the system is large, and the (I) . The rigid body motions of a portable seis-
spring is soft. Because the magnification of the mograph are completely described when the
seismograph is variable and is dependent upon translational and rotational motions are sped
the electronic circuits, the dynamic range of the fied. The first condition for dynamic equilibrium
seismograph is large. Through the US& of stable is that there must be no rotation of the seismo-
electronic circuits, the particle velocity output of graph about a vertical axis, assuming that the
the gages can be recorded directly or integrated three feet are frictionless. Figure 2.4 shows a
to record displacement or differentiated to record cartesian coordinate system containing a lamina
acceleration. The camera records the light traces with three equal forces, F, acting at points (x1,
from the galvanometers on a moving strip of Yt) (x2, Y2), and (xa, Ya) at an angle I from the
light sensitive paper along with timing marks axis. The center of gravity is at point (X.:. Ye).
generated by the timing device. These seismo- If there is to be no rotation about a vertical
graphs have a near-linear frequency response axis, the sum of the moments about the center
from about 2 to 250 cps. of gravity must be zero. Thus: (Ye - y1) F cos
The typical portable acceleration seismograph I + (Ye - Y2) F cos I + (Ye - Ya) F cos I
uses three external gages that can be positioned + (Xc -x1) F sin I + (X. -x2) F sin I
to measure the vertical and horizontal com- + (Xc - xa) F sin I 0. = (2.16)
ponents of acceleration. Each gage can be If equation 2.16 is to be true for all values of 1.

----- ~
JNSTatlli.ENTATION 9

F
Figure %.5.-Vertkallocation of center of gravity
of a Seismograph.

contribute one-third of the total horizontal ac-


---------------------------x
Figure 2.4.-Horizontal location of center of
celerating force ma111 where m is the mass of the
instrument anq a11 is the horizontal acceleration.
gravity of a laminL The inertial force resisting the driving force is
then equal to it and opposite in direction. A
second force mg due to gravity acting on the mass
the sum of the coefficients of cos (J and sin (J must is directed downward.
be zero. The condition of no rotation about the axis
Therefore. AB is that the moment of the force ma11 be less
than the moment of the force mg. Thus.
DG ma11 cos e!S.DG mg sin e
and (2.17) or (2.18)
= Y1+Y2+Ya all g tan e.
Yfl s . The sliding of a seismograph is resisted by the
Thus, the condition for no rotation about a friction between the feet and the surface. This
vertical axis is that the center of gravity of the frictional force is dependent upon the coefficient
seismograph must be located at the centroid of of friction, p.. and the mass of tlJ.e machine, m.
the feet. The condition of no slippage is that the inertial
If tht center of gravity of the seismograph were force must not exceed the frictional force. Thus,
located at the centroid and in the plane of the ma11 < p. mg. (2.19)
feet, the same type of solution would hold for Because the coefficient of friction is usually less
rotation about a horizontal axis. However, all than unity, slipping may occur at less than 1 g.
portable seismographs have a center of gravity When the seismograph is subjected to vibratory
that is located some distance above the plane of motion, the vertical force, F.,, may be thought of
the feet. This configuration is shown in figure as oscillating about some steady value,
2.5. F.,=mg+mil... sin .t
The feet of the seismograph are located at where a., is tlJ.e vertical acceleration.
points A, B, and C. Point 0 is the centroid of the Therefore, the minimum vertical force is
triangle ABC. Because tilting will normally occur
by the raising of one of the feet, the rotation axis F., min=m (g-a.,). (2.20)
will lie along the lines between two of the feet. Thus, from equations 2.19 and 2.20. the maxi-
For convenience, line AB has been selected for a mum horizontal acceleration before slipping oc-
rotation axis. The center of gravity of the seismo- curs is
graph is located above the plane of the feet at a11 max !S. p. (g-a...). (2.21)
point G. Equation 2.21 shows that horizontal accelerations
A motion of the surface in a direction normal of 1 g cannot be measured with a seismograph
to the line AB will cause a force to be generated simply resting on a surface when it is subjected
to accelerate the mass. This force will be dis- to vibratory motion. If the seismograph is spring
tributed among the feet so that each foot will loaded to the ground with an additional vertical
10 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON S'l'ltUCTUllES

force, accelerations greater than i g can be dynamic magnification of the Sprengnether and
measured (7) . Leet instruments tended to depart from the
static magnification values.
2.5---SEISMOGRAPH CALIBRATION All three displacement seismographs displayed
an objectionable (20 percent) amount of eros.
Three portable displacement seismographs and talk (that is. measured motion in the nondri~en
one acceleration measuring seismograph were directions after subtraction of the table motmn
calibrated in accordance with the objectives of in the nondriven directions) This crosstalk in-
the research program. The four seismographs creased with frequency in the same manner as
that were tested were the Seismolog,t Spreilgne- dynamic magnification increased with frequency.
ther. Leet. and Blastcorder instruments (4, 8). The centers of mass of the three displacement
The calibrations were performed by subjecting seismographs tested were found to be consider-
each component of measurement of each in ably removed from the centroids of the triangles
strument to a sinusoidal motion on a shaking formed by the feet of the three point mounts.
table. This Jsulted in instability of the machines at
Tests of the displacement seismographs were low vibration levels and severely limited the
performed with two conditions of coupling: dynamic range of the recordings.
1. The instruments were vibrated while simply The Blastcorder made use of external gages
sitting on emery cloth cemented to a driven which were calibrated separately. Double-back
plate. . ... tape was used to affix each gage to the shaking
2. The instruments were vibrated while bolted table. The results of the calibration showed that
by the feet to the driven pdte. the usable frequency range was 12 to 30 cps. In
Each component of motion was studied sepa- this range, the average accuracy of measurement
rately. The frequency and amplitude of motion was 0.1 g. The internal calibration gave con-
were independently varied to test the frequency sistent results with a standard deviation of 1
response and the linearity of each instrument for percent. The three gages exhibited different
both coupling conditions. The usable frequency sensitivity and varied as much as 9 percent.
range for the seismographs tested was found to Because the output of the Blastcorder indicated
lie between 5 and 40 cps. None of the instru- the output directly in ternts of standard gravity.
ments exhibited a linear response above 0.4 g no determination of magnification was made.
for the unbolted coupling condition. The calibration studies of portable seismo-
Magnifications for the displacement seismo- graphs discloSed inherent dynamic instability of
graphs are summarized in table 2.1 which shows the machines as the vibration levels approached
0.4 g. To provide guidelines for the improve-
Table 2.1.-Averagc magnificatiora of displacement ment of the stability of portable seismographs
. Rilmograph
and to update the machines. design requirements
Dynamic Static for a portable seismograph to measure particle
Seismograph magnification ' mqnification 1
velocity were presented by Duvall (2) . At least
Seismolog ........................ 54 10 50 two manufacturers have remodeled their dis-
Sprengnether ...............-. 89 10 75
Leet .........--.. 31 11 50 . placement seismographs. and at least one manu
Avcraae for all c:ompoMnll meuured.
facturer has built and marketed a portable
Manufac:tun:Tt valu.,. seismograph to measure particle velocity.
the average dynamic magnification measured for 2.6-INSTRUMENTATION USED BY THE
all components for each machine. as well as the BUREAU OF MINES
static magnification listed by each manufacturer.
Throughout the operating frequency range t!te The instrumentation requirements for the
magnification of the instruments tended to m- Bureau program were determined by a study of
crease with frequency. Within the limits ~f the variables involved in the measurement of
reliability of the measurements. the dynamtc blast-induced vibration in the ground. in the air.
magnification of the Seismolog showed good and in structures. A preliminary study of vibra-
agreement with the static magnification for all tion damage to structures showed that the de-
components and both cou,pling conditions. The gree of damage to a structure was more closely
related to particle velocity than to the displace-
''RdeRnc" to specific company or brand ~ames It made to ment or acceleration of the ground vibration that
facilitat" undentandlq and don not Imply "ndorwUienl by tbe caused the damage (J) Also as particle velocity
Bur.,au of Mina.
JNSTR.UMDITATION 11

could be recorded directly or converted to either


displacement or acceleration by a single integra- frequency response (within 5 percent) from 0
tion or differentiation, particle velocitr was to 2,100 cps.
selected as the quantity to measure in the The linear-integrating amplifiers were selected
ground. for ruggedness and simplicity of operation. Veloc
ity output from the gages could be recorded
The measurement of air-blast waves by the directly or integrated to furnish displacement
Bureau of Mines was initially done with micro- data. Acceleration could be recorded directly or
phone-type devices (5, 11) During World War integrated to provide velocity data. The fre-
II, these studies were taken over by the armed quency response of the amplifiers was flat (within
forces, and their results showed that dynamic 5 percent) from 5 to 5,000 cps as shown in
pressure was the best quantity to measure in the figure 2.6. Step attenuators on each amplifier
air and to correlate with damage to struc:- provided control of the output signal level. Cali-
tures (9). bration of the amplifiers for each recorded blast
Using these guidelines, instrumentation was was performed by using a variable frequency
developed .for use with a mobile laboratory oscillator and a microvolter to provide a known
housed in a 2~-ton van-body truck. To provide input signal which was then recorded by the
sufficient instrumentation for the study of proga- system witht the controls set for the blast re-
gation of seismic waves and their loss of ampli- cording.
tude with distance, a !$6-channel direct-writing The velocity gages were adjustable to operate
osdllograph, 24 linear-integrating amplifiers, and in either vertical or horizontal positions. The
12 carrier-type amplifiers, along with velocity resonant frequency of the gages was 4.75 cps. and
gages and accelerometers, were provided. The they were damped at 65 per cent critical. The
carrier-type amplifiers were replaced later with frequency response of the gages is shown in
linear-integrating amplifiers. Power to operate figure 2.7. The gages were periodically calibr:<1ted
the equipment was provided by a gasoline-driven on a shaking table to maintain them within 2
AC power plant housed in a trailer. percent of the manufacturer's specifications. De-
Six pressure gages with mounting mechanisms, fective gages were returned to the manufacturer
tripods, and preamplifiers were provided for the for repair. .
measurement of air waves resulting from the The problem of coupling the gages to the soil
blasts. The pressure gages were calibrated at the for making measurements at or near the soil .
Naval Ordnance Laboratory, White Oak, Md. surface was studied. Several l\ifferent coupling
An auxiliary 12-channel direct-writing oscillo- methods were compared (6). The following
graph was used to augment the recording capa criteria were established for a satisfactory gage
bility and to allow portable operation when used mount:
in conjunction with a small auxiliary power 1. There should be no evidence of "ringing
plant. Two-conductor shielded cables on reels or resonance in the output of a velocity gage
were provided with waterproof connectors to con- from the vibration produced by a sharp hammer
nect the gages to the amplifiers through an input blow to the surface of the soil at a distance of
panel located in the side of the van-body. 10 feet.
The 36-channel direct-writing oscillograph con- 2. The velocity record should resemble the
tained fluid damped galvanometers that directed velocity wavelet shapes that are predicted by
light beams on a 12-inch wide light sensitive re- Ricker's theory (1U).
cording paper which was driven at the rate of S. Good reproducibility should be obtained
17~ inches per second. Ten-millisecond timing
from repeated hammer blow tests.
4. Good reproducibility should be obtained
lines were produced on the paper by a light
from repeated mounting of the gage.
beam passing through a slotted rotating cylinder. Four types of gage mounts were tested:
Because the accuracy of these timing lines was de- I. A single gage was attached to a steel plate
pendent upon the frequency of the portable welded to a steel pin which could be driven into
power plant, a secondary means of time control the bottom or the sides of a square hole in the
was maintained by recording the output of a soil. One mount was required fCX' each com-
100-cps tuning fork controlled oscillator. This ponent of the vibration.
provided a timing accuracy of about 1 percenL 2. Three gages were attached to the sides of a
The Huid damped galvanometers had a resonant cube of metal welded to a steel pin driven into
frequency of !$,500 cps and maintained a Bat the soiL
12 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON STR.UCTVRES

1.0 I I
200 r I I
!.>

.. .a -
~
.5
~
- ~
ui .6~ I
~
..
.2-100 ~ -
.~
0
> e
1-
:::>
A - ,:
!.:
80!- -
fl.
1-
:::>
0
;:::
t: 60
~
-
1&1
en I .
I I I
401

10 100 1,000 10,000 100.000
10 100 1.000 10.000
FREQUENCY, cps FREQUENCY, cps
~
Figure 2.6.-Frequency respome curve of linear Figure 2.7.-Frequency respome cune of Telocity
amplifier. gage.

3. Three gages at right angles were attached to 2.7-REFERENCES


an angle bracket welded to a steel pin driven
into the soil. 1, ~avaU, Wilbur I. Design Criteria for Portable SdJmo.
Jrllphs. BuMines Rept. of lnv. 5708, 1961, 6 pp.
4. Three gages were attached to the inside of 2. - - . Design Requirements for Instrumentation
an aluminum box at right angles to one an- To Record Vibrations Produced by Blasting.
other. The box was buried in the soil. The box BuMines Rept. of Inv. &187, 1964, 7 pp.
mount was designed to approximately match the 5. DuvaU, Wilbur 1., and David E. F.bon. Review of
Criteria for Estimatinl Damage to Residenc:a From
soil density. . Blasting VibratlonL uMines Rept. of Inv. 5968,
A designed test randomized the variables that 1962, 19 pp. .
could not be controlled. The test results showed 4. F.bon, David E .. and Charles F. Johnson. Calibra
tion Studies of Three Portable Seismograplu.
that the mounts carrying three gages on a cube BuMines Rept. of Inv. 6009, 1962, 21 pp.
or an angle bracket resonated or "rang" with 5. Ireland, A. T. Design of AlrBiast Meter and CaJi..
each hammer blow. The single gage mounts and brating Equipment. BuMines Tech. Paper 655.
the box mounts produced identical wave forms 1942, 20 pp.
6. Johnson, Charles F. Coupling Small Vibration Gages
that satisfied the four gage criteria for a satis- ~o Soil, Earthquake Notes, v. !5, September 1962.
factory gage mount. However, because it is not pp. 40-47.
possible to drive pins firmly into all types of soil, 7. Langefon, U., and B. l.ihlstriSm. R.ock Blasting. John
the box mount was selected for use in the re- Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1965, pp. 262-2&1.
8. Meyer, Alfred V. C. and Wilbur I. DuvaU. Calibra-
search program. tion Study of a Peak-Reading Acoelerograpb.
The gage system used by the Bureau !lnd other BuMines Rept. of lnv. 6026, 1962, 6 pp.
investigators consists of three mutually perpen 9. Perkins, Beauregard, Jr. Forecasting the Focus of Air
dicular gages representing two horizontal and Blasu Due to Meteorol~ca1 Conditions in the
Lower Atmosphere. Ballistic Rese:arcb Laboratories
one vertical component which are commonly re- Rept. No. 11[8, October 1960, 72 pp.
ferred to as radial, vertical, and transverse. 10. Ricker, Norman. The Form and Nature of Seismic
Radial signifies a horizontal gage, oriented radial Waves and the Structure of Seismograms, Geo-
physics, vol. 5, No. 4, October l!HO, pp. 348-!166.
to the source if the source is projected vertically 11. Tboenen, J. R.., and S. L Windes. Seismic Effects of
to the horizontal plane of the gage. Quarry Blasting, BuMines Bull. 442, 1942, 83 pp.

j
,

CHAPTER 3.-SAFE VIBRATION LEVELS FOR RESII)ENTIAL STRUCTURES

8.1-INTRODUCTION Assembly and analysis of data was completed,


and a summary bulletin published in 1942 (H).
One of the primary objectives of this research Vibration amplitudes were measured with
program was to establish reliable damage criteria
variable capacitance displacement seismometers.
for structures subjected to blasting vibrations. Horizontal and vertical seismometers were used
Of the literature reviewed, only five papers con-
so that motion in three orthogonal directions
tained specific data on the amplitude and fre... could be measured at each station. The outputs
quency of vibrations associated with damage
of up to 12 seismometers were recorded simul-
evaluation of structures (J-4, 7, JJ-14). The
taneously on a 12-channel oscillograph.
data from these investigations have been compre-
. hensively studied to .provide a set of damage Vibration amplitudes were recorded from
criteria and to establish a safe vibration level for many quarry blasts A major difficulty was en-
countered in locating buildings suitable in all
residential structures. The analysis shows that
respects for determining blast-induted damage.
particle velocity is more directly related to struc
Structures available for damage tests generally
tural damage than displacement or acceleration. fell into two categories: 1. those in such a state
The effect of air blast waves and their effects on of disrepair as to be useless for testing, 2. those
structures does not generally create a damage adjacent to other buildings which precluded
problem in normal blasting operations. The mag- testing. These same conditions prevailed in the
nitudes of safe and damaging overpressures for Bureau's current test series.
structures are discussed and methods of reducing
On Bureau-operated property, one house was
overpressures are considered in tJtis chapter. This
available for testing. Blasts were set off in a
chapter also discusses the human response to
mine adit some 75 feet beneath the structure
blasting operations, its psychological aspects, and
with instrumentation near and in the structure.
its relation to vibration levels. Successively larger shots (from 10 to 195 pounds)
8.2-STATISTICAL STUDY OF PUBLISHED were fired until damage (cracking o~ plaster)
DATA ON GROUND VIBRATIONS AND was observed. A review of previous recordings
DAMAGE made in houses during quarry blasting which re-
sulted in no damage indicated that displacements
A statistical study has been made of the data at damage were 5 to 20 times those experienced
presented by Thoenen and Windes (H) , Lange- in normal blasting operations with explosive
tors, Kihlstrom and Westerberg (7}, and Ed charges ranging from 1 to 17,000 pounds.
wards and Northwood (4). These three papers Because these tests indicated that damage oc-
provide sufficient amplitude and frequency data curred at greater displacements than those oc-
from blasting vibrations and an assessment of curring from ordinary quarry blasts, a renewed
damage to structures for detailed analysis. In "attempt was made to obtain structures to be
addition, the instrumentation in these three blast-loaded to damage. Again, no suitable struc-
investigations was adequate to record the ampli tures were located. Therefore, damage was in-
tudes and frequenciesobserved. Test conditions. duced by mechanical means. The mechanical
while not ideal, were adequate, and the proce- vibrator was of the unbalanced rotor type driven
dures used were good. by an electric motor. Both force and frequency
8.2.1-Investigations by the Bureau of Mines were adjustable with upper limits of 1,000
pounds and 40 cps. respectively. A total of 1-i
From 1980 to 1942, the Bureau of Mines con structures near quarries were tested to determine
ducted an extensive research program to study building response, damage indices, and compara-
the seismic effects of quarry blasting. The first 5 tive e.ffect of quarry blasting. Construction was
years were spent in developing instrumentation frame, brick, or stone, and the height ranged
and techniques needed for field measurements. from one to three stories. Recordings of vibra-
Field tests were conducted from 1985 to 1940. tions were made from vibrating the building as a
15
14 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND TIU:1R. EFFECfS ON STRUcrt.JRE.S

whole, vibrating individual wall or floor panels,. ect in Stockholm which required the use of
and from quarry shots. As the buildings or build- explosives near buildings. The amplitude of vi-
ing members were taken to damage, examina- brations attenuated very little with distance from
tions for damage were made as well as recordings the blast since both the charge location and the
of vibrations in and near the buildings. Apart buildings were set in rock. This seemed to dictate
from the data included in the present analysis, the use of small explosive charges. However,
two very interesting features were pointed out by larger blasts were desirable to improve the
the results. First, for ordinary residential struc- economy of the operation. The principle of using
tures, the vibration level necessary to produce larger blasts resulting in minor damage which
damage is much greater than that resulting from could be repaired at moderate cost was therefore
most quarry blasts. Second, vibrating structures adopted. This procedure enabled the investiga-
at resonance, in the amplitude and frequency tors to record and analyze a large amount of data
range of Thoenen and Windes' tests, is no more on damage to buildings from blasting.
destructive than at any other frequency. A Cambridge vibrograph was used to record
In six of the 14 buildings tested, 160 me- vibrations in and near the buildings. This in-
chanical :vibrator tests were made about the dam- StrUIDFnt is a mass-spring displacement seismo-
age point as defined by the failure of plaster. graph system that records on celluloid strips. The
Amplitudes ranged from 1 to 500 mils and fre- instrument was weighted or clamped to the sup-
quencies from 4 to 40 cps. To relate vibration porting surface whenever accelerations greater
amplitudes and frequencies to damage, three than 1 g were expected to prevent the base of the
classifications of damage were proposed based instrument from leaving the surface at high ac-
upon the degree of failure of plaster. These in- celerations. Because early tests indicated that the
. dices of damage were: level of vibrations in horizonta.: and vertical di-
I. Major damage (fall of plaster, serious rections were of similar magnitude, later tests
cracking) involved only vertical measurements.
2. Minor damage (fine plaster cracks, opening Results from more than I 00 tests were ana
of old cracks) lyzed. Vertical ground displacements ranged from
3. No damage. 0.8 to 20 mils; frequencies, from 50 to 500 cps.
In modern dry wall construction similar evidence The investigators were aware that the frequencies
would probably be observed in the spackling at observed were generally higher than those re-
joints and corners. It should be noted that any ported elsewhere. After studying the instrumenta-
index of damage is gradational between degrees tion and test conditions, they concluded that the
of s~verity of damage. There is no sharp distinc- higher frequencies were real and not a conse-
tior. between classifications. It should also be quence of instrumental difficulties.
noted that many other factors, including aging. A damage severity classification based upon
settling, and shrinkage, result in similar failure. failure of plaster similar to that used by the
The amplitude, frequency, and damage data are Bureau of Mines but with four degrees of severity
shown in figure 3.1. The Bureau report of these was proposed. However, they concluded that
data (H) recommended an index of damage particle velocity was the best criterion of dam-
based upon acceleration. If accelerations were age and related particle velocity and damage as
less than 0.1 g. no damage was expected; from follows:
0.1 to 1.0 g, minor damage; and greater than 1.0 1. 2.8 infsec, no noticeable damage
g, major damage. Duvall and Fogelson showed 2. 4.3 infsec, fine cracking and fall of plaster
statistically (2) that these data gave contradic- 3. 6.! infsec, cracking
tory results, because major damage correlated 4. 9.1 infsec, serious cracking.
with particle velocity, while minor damage cor- For purposes of comparison these data have
related with acceleration. been divided into three classes-major, minor,
and no damage-and are shown in figure S.2.
!.2.2-Investigations by Langefors, Kihlstr5m, Statistical analyses of these data show that the
and Westerberg degree of damage, both major and minor, cor-
relates with particle velocity.
A report (7) by Langefors, Kihlstr5m, and
Westerberg, published in 1958, desaibed exten- S.2.S-Investigations by Edwards and Northwood
sive studies of the relationship between damage
and ground vibrations from nearby blasting. The Edwards and Northwood {4) conducted a
data were obtained during a reconstruction proj- series of controlled blasting tests on six resi-
15

Standard deviation
A Major damage
Minor damage
o No damage

.1

en
Q)
.s::;
(,J
.5
,_.:
zIJJ
::E
IJJ
(J 0
0
:5
Q..
0
y Major damage
en
c 0 'slope=-122
0

.01
0 ' '.,
0
0
''
\ Minor damage
0 slope=-2.00

0
"
0

'(
\
.001
0
\
1 10 100
FREQUENCY, c.p.s.
Figure 5.1.-D.i.splacement YeriJUI frequency for observed damage, Bureau of HiDes.
16 BLASTING VlBRATIONS AND THEm EFFECTS ON S11lUC'l1J1t.l'.3

81
.s::.
(.)
.5 CD
...=
z .01
00
0
LLJ &0
::E 0 0 0
LLJ
(.)
:5
0..
en
25
Standard deviation
A Major damage .

0
Minor damage
No damage
00

000 0
.001 0 0
" 0

10 100 600
FREQUENCY, c.p.s.
Figure 5.2.-Displacement venus frequency for observed damage, Langefors and othen.

dential structures slated for removal at the St. rial, and three were on a well-consolidated gladal
Lawrence Power Project. The buildings selected till.
were old but in good condition with frame or To determine which quantity was most useful
brick construction on heavy stone masonry in indicating damage risk, acceleration, particle
foundations. In contrast to the buildings in the velocity, and displacement were all measured.
Swedish tests which were located on rock, three The instrumentation included: unbonded strain
of the buildings were on a soft sand-clay mate- gage-type accelerometers, Willmore-Watt velocity
SAFE VIBRATION LEVELS FO.. U:SIDI:NTLU. Sl'llUC'l'UlUtS 17

-+
Standard deviation
Major damage
tJ.
Minor damage
o No damage
b.
.,
Q.)
0
.c 0 b.
u
.5 0
0
Major damage slope=-0.64
,_: .1
zUJ 0
0
::iE 0
UJ 0
(.)
0
s0..
en 0

"
"" ">
0

',
0

o "
0 .

Minor ~amage slope=-0.83 ~

Figure 3.3.-Displacement versus frequency for observed damage, Edwards and Northwood.

seismometers, and Leet and Sprengnether kismo- that the soil between individual charges and the
graphs. Precautions were taken to insure that structure being tested was undisturbed. Record-
true ground motion was measured. The dis- ings from 22 blasts showed displacements ranging
10 placement seismographs were secured to their from 10 to 550 mils and frequencies. from 5 to 30
bearing surface with chains to insure reliable cps. The data are presented in figure 3.3.
operation when accelerations exceeded 1.0 g. Edwards and Northwood classified damage
Records from velocity gages and accelerometers into three categories:
were obtained on photographic or direct-writing 1. Threshold-opening of old aacb and for-
oscillographs. Gages were installed in or near the mation of new plastic aacb.
structures. Some difficulty was experienced in 2. Minor-superficial, not affecting the
recording particle velocity. because the particle strength of the structure.
motions often exceeded the limit of the seismom- 3. Major-resulting in serious weakening of
eters. Therefore, most of the observations were the structure.
displacements or accelerations. They concluded that damage was more closely
Charges, buried at depths of 15 to 30 Jeet, were related to particle velocity than to displacement
detonated progressively closer to the buildings or acceleration and that damage was likely to
until damage occurred. Charge sizes ranged from occur with a particle velocity of 4 to 5 infsec. A
47 to 750 pounds. Special precautions insured safe vibration limit of 2 in/sec was recommended.
18 BLASTING VlBRAnONS AND nnmt EFFECI'S ON STJI.UCI'URD


Safe blasting criterion-----
v=2.0 in/sec



e
a
Bureau of Mines
Langefors
}
Major damage data

Edwards and Northwood
Bureau of Mines }
Langefors Minor damage data
Edwards and Northwood

200 400 600

Figure 8.4.-Displacement venus frequency, combined data with recommended safe blasting aiterion. 1
As in section !.2.2, these data have been divided
into three classes--major, minor, and no dam-
age-and are shown in figure ~U.
Statistical analyses of their data showed that
particle velocity correlated with major damage
ment amplitude versus frequency data. Three
degrees of damag~ severity are considered; no
damage, minor damage, and major damage.
Minor damage is classified as the formation of
new fine cracks either in plaster or dry wall
I
J
data. For minor damage data, the statistical joints or the opening of old cracks. Major dam
analyses were inconclusive. age is serious aacking of plaster or dry wall and
!.2.4-Statistical Study of Damage Data
Figure 8.4 shows a composite plot of displace-
fall of materia], and it may indicate structural
damage. The data presented individually in the
three previously discussed papers have all been
1
~

i
;.
'i

j
SAFE VIBRATIOM LEVELS FO'Il JlE.Sm.ENTIAL SI'RUC'I'URES 19

converted to displacement and plotted versus lS-3-DATA FROM OTHER


frequency. . INVESTIGATORS
Statistical tests on the individual sets of data
In 1949 Crandell (J) reported results from a
related to major damage indicate that a slope of
study of damage to structures. Insufficient data
-I on a displacement-frequency plot on log-log
were published to permit inclusion of these re-
coordinates must be accepted. A slope of -I'
sults in the analysis of section 8.2.4. Vibrations
corresponds to a constant particle velocity. Using
from blasting, pile driving, and industrial ma-
standard statistical analysis techniques. these
chinery were recorded on accelerographs. Cran-
data can be pooled, and a single regression line
dell introduced a quantity which he called
used to represent all the major damage data.
Energy Ratio, or E. R., which is defined as:
Moreover, it can be s.'town that the slope of the
regression line must be -1, rather than 0, or a
E.R. =-
p
-2. This result indicates that the regression line,
representing all major damage data considered, E. R. = 16,rPu2 (8.1)
corresponds to a constant particle velocity rather E. R. = -h'v
than constant displacement or acceleration, re- where a = peak acceleration, ftjsec2,
spectively. The magnitude of this particle veloc- u = peak displacement, ft,
ity is 7.6 injsec and is shown as a dashed line in v = peak velocity, ftjsec,
figure 3.4. and f = frequency associated with peak am-
Statistical tests of the individual sets of minor plitude, cps. t
damage data are inconclusive. Only the data of The first two terms he derived from a considera-
Langefors show that a slope of -1, indicating tion of kinetic energy, and the relationship be-
a constant particle velocity, is acceptable while tween a, u, and v if simple harmonic motions are
rejecting hypothetical slopes of 0 and -2 repre- assumed (see equation 2.8, where is equal to
(It

senting constant displacement or acceleration. 21rf) . Although not used by Crandell, the third
However, statistical tests show that the thr~ sets equation of 8.1 is presented to illustrate that
of data can be pooled and represented by a Energy Ratio is proportional to particle velocity
single regression line. Statistical tests of the squared. He concluded that a value of E. R.
pooled minor damage data indicate that a equal to 8.0 was the threshold limit of damage
slope of -1, representing a constant particle to structures, below 8.0 was a safe zone, between
velocity, cannot be rejected and that slopes of 3.0 and 6.0 was .a caution zone, and an E. R. of
0 and -2 can be rejected. Thus, the pooled 6.0 or greater was defined as the danger zone. An
minor damage data correspond to a constant E. R. of 8.0 is equivalent to a particle velocity of
particle velocity with a value of 5.4 injsec as 3.8 injsec, and 6.0 is equivalent to 4.7 injsec.
shown in figure 3.4. These zones are in good agreement with Bureau
Analysis of the pooled major and minor dam results.
age data show that both sets of data are statis- In 1962 Dvorak (J) published results from
tically correlated with constant particle velocity. studies of damage caused by the seismic effects
It is significant that these data were obtained by of blasting. Explosive charges ranging from 2 to
different investigators using different instrumen- 40 pounds were detonated at distances of 16 to
tation, procedures, and sources and a wide va 100 feet from the buildings. The ground was a
riety of house structures on different types of semihardened day containing lenses of sand,
foundation material. Therefore, a damage usually water-bearing. The buildings were one to
criterion based on particle velocity should be ap- two stories of ordinary brick construction.
plicable to a wide variety of physical conditions. The shots were instrumented with mechanical-
Other investigators have proposed damage cri- optical displacement seismographs of three types:
teria and defined three or more zones of dam- Cambridge, Somet, and Geiger. These were
age. Because the data did not have homogeneous placed in or near the structures. The natural
variance when pooled, the outer limits of the frequencies of these instruments were within the
damage zones could not be determined statisti range of the observed frequencies. The Cam-
cally. Therefore, Duvall and Fogelson (2) recom- bridge system with natural frequencies of 8.5
mended a safe zone and a damage zone. A cps for the horizontal and 5.5 cps for the vertical
particle velocity of 2 injsec was proposed as a direction presented the most serious problem.
reasonable separation between the safe and dam- The observed frequencies of the seismic data
age zones. were in the range of 1.5 to 15 cps. An additional
20 BLASTING VDilATIONS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON STilt1CTURES

source of trouble, not discussed by Dvorak, may consisted of examining cracb, establishing natu-
have been the tendency of these instruments to ral cracking rates, and correlating any increase in
leave their supporting surface at accelerations of rates after a nuclear detonation with observed
1.0 g or more. Edwards and Northwood (1) and particle velocities. The peak particle velocities at
Langefors and othen (7) recognized this prob- selected sites within the complex of 4! buildings
lem and weighted or clamped their instruments. under study were within a factor of 2. No fre-
Displacements of 6 to 260 mils were measured quencies were reported. The particle velocities
at frequencies ranging from 1.5 to 15 cps. The observed when the rate of cracking was above
four degrees of severity of damage, considered normal were in the range of 0.04 to 0.12 infsec.
and correlated with plaster or structural damage, Wall noted that the cracks at these low levels
were were no more severe than those occurring natu-
1. No damage, rally and may represent an acceleration of nor-
2. Threshold-minor plaster cracking, mal cracking. He concluded that ..it appears that
S. Minor-loosening and falling of plaster, this cracking would have occurred naturally in a
minor cracking in masonry, and matter of time."
4. Major-serious structural cracking and The size of explosion, distance, and assessment
weakening. of damage (increase in rate of cracking) may
Dvorak correlated damage with particle veloc- place these results in a domain different from the
ity; threshold damage occurring at particle veloc- usual blasting operations. The results may be
ities between 0.4 to 1.2 infsec, minor damage valid but only applicable to very large blasts.
from 1.2 to 2.4 infsec, and major damage above
2.4 infsec. He stated that these limits are con- 5.4-ADDITIONAL BUREAU OF
servative compared to other investigators. MINES DATA
The observed frequency range is lower than
would be expected from the charge sizes and In October I 969, the Bureau participated in a
distances involved. This may have been a result test program, sponsored by the American Society
of the instrumentation problem previously of Civil Engineen (ASCE), to study the response
pointed out. Consequently, because of the in- of a residential structure to blast loading. Previ-
strumentation problem and the low frequencies ously described instrumentation (see section 2.6)
reported, the results have not been included by was used to record ground and house vibrations
pooling with other data. from a series of 10 explosive blasts detonated in
In 1967 Wall (14) reported on seismic-induced glacial till. Shot-to-house distances ranged from
damage to masonry structures at Mercury, Nev. 200 to !5 feet. Charge weights ranged rom 1
Two of the objectives of the study were to to 85 pounds. Particle velocities in the ground
determine the validity of particle velocity as a varied from 0.091 to 11.6 in/sec. Particle velocities
damage criterion and the level of velocity at in and on the house at ground or floor level
damage. The buildings were generaJJy of con agreed generally with those measured in the
crete block construction and Jess than 5 years ground outside the house. Measurements at the
old. The buildings were inspected 6r cracking roof level of the house show an amplification of
before and after nuclear detonations at the up to a fact~ of 2.0 compared to ground re-
Nevada Test Site. Charge sizes are not listed but sponse. Frequencies ranged from 5 to 40 cps and
must be assumed to be greater than normally were higher in the vertical component than in
encountered in other blasting operations. The the radial and transverse component.
detonations were at distances ranging from 100,- The structure investigated was more sub-
000 to 290,000 feet from the buildings. stantial than most present-day residences due to
The instrumentation consisted of three-com- a massive field-stone foundation and to l-inch
ponent moving coil seismometers, responsive to planking on the studs under the dry wan in some
particle velocity, and accessory recording equip- rooms. Through the eighth blast in the series
ment (not described) . The seismometen were there had been no observable damage. Maximum
placed on the ground near the buildings. The particle velocities recorded at the house in the
particle velocity used was the vector sum of the . ground through test 8 were: radial, 5.56 infsec;
three components. vertical, 6.86 infsec; and transvene. 1.71 infsec.
The buildings were experiencing cracks due to The vibrations from test 9 opened new cracks in
natural reasons (use, settling, shrinkage, temper- the walls and ceiling of an upstain room. Maxi
ature cycling, etc.). Therefore, the damage study mum particle velocities in the ground at the edge

- ji'
74
.
SAFE VIB1lAnoN J...E\'EU FOa RESIDENTIAL STJI.UCTUllltS 21

Table 5.1.-Vl1:lndoal fram - . . 1 acti'Yitia

Particle velocity in room Particle velocity in adjaeent


room
Activity
Radial Vertic:a! Transverse Radial Vertical Transverse
in/sec in/see in/see in/sec in/see in/see
Walking - - - - 0.0091(. 0.187 0.372 0.00129 0.00102
.0578 .0155 .00167 0.0281 .00227
---
.0600
.00770
.120
.00210
.0300
.00229 .0626 .00462
---
.0100
.00600
.0600
.0110
.007
.00400 ---
---
.00800 .0200 .00700 --
Door closing .0110 .0558 .OU9 .00170 .00153
.0150 .00500 .0125 .0970 .00963
.008 .0100 .00800
Jumping - .0524 4.03 1.05 .120 .219 .551
120 .219 .551 .0158 .0289 . .0101
1.00 2.500 1.70 .00450 .0100 .0045
.500 5.00 1.10
Automatic wuher _._ _ _ .00340 .00400 .00340
Clothes dryer
Heeldropa
.00500
.0100
.00500
.0100
.00500
.0100
_..t..._ __
--
.0800
.0200.
.600
.200
.0300
.0200 .006 .0100 -:006-
.900
.0500
3.500
.450
.400
.0700 .009 .014 -:oos-
.0100 .200 .00900 ----
of the house from test 9 were radial, 12.7 infsec; tion levels of some of these activities are listed
vertical, 22.2 infsec; and transverse, 5.0 infsec. in table 5. I.
Although particle velocities were in excess of The data in table 3.1 indicate that walking.
the 2.0 injsec safe blasting limit, no damage was door closing, and the operation of an automatic
observed through test 8. The vertical velocity in clothes washing machine and dryer do not nor-
the ground from test 9 was 11 times the safe mally generate vibrations that approach a dam
blasting limit. The fact that particle velocities aging level. It is interesting to note that the
generated prior to damage exceeded the safe vibrations from these sources are approximately
blasting limit is probably attributable to the . the same as those generated by a quarry blast
substantial construction of the house. Although and felt at a scaled distance of 100 ftjlb~ (sec
the 2.0 infsec particle velocity criterion is ob- sections 4.! and 6.4) .
viously conservative for construction of this type, Jumping in a room generates vibrations that
it is a satisfactory and reliable criterion that are potentially damaging. "Heel drops," made by
can be used for all types of residential structures. standing on the toes and suddenly dropping full

5.5---BUILDING VIBRATIONS FROM


.. weight on the heels, can also be potentially
damaging. However, the large amplitude vibra-
NORMAL ACTIVITIES tions resulting from these more violent activities
are localized and do not affect the entire struc
The normal activities associated with living in ture as do ground vibrations. Thus, although the
and maintaining a home give rise to vibrations potential for causing damage is present, it is con-
that are, in some instances, capable of causing fined to a small specific area within the structure,
minor damage to plaster walls and ceilings in and the probability of damage is thereby re-
localized sections of the structure. To complete duced.
the study of vibrations from quarry blasting and
their effects on structures, instrumentation was 3.6--RELIABIUTY OF PARTICLE
placed in several homes to record the vibrations MOTION CALCULATIONS
from walking. door closing. jumping, and oper
ating mechanical devices, such as an automatic Analysis of particle motion amplitudes,
Washing machine and a clothes dryer. The vibra- whether in terms of displacement, particle veloc-
. ~

j
.:;

22 BLAmNG VIBII.ATlONS AND THEIR EFFECI'S ON STkUC'nJRES


!
]
ity, or acceleration, often leads inyestigators to tion is done in the frequency domain. Figure 5.5
calculate one or more of these quantities from shows the plot of displacement integrated from
the others. The mathematical relationships are velocity versus displacement computed from ~
u = fvdt or v = dujdt (S.2) velocity and frequency, as the abscissa and ordi-
v = fadt or a= dvjdt (!U) nate, respectively. The line with slope of 1.0
indicates the locus of points which would result
where if the displacements calculated by the two
u = displacement, methods were identical. The bulk of the points
v = particle velocity, falling below the line indicates that displace-
a = acceleration, and ments calculated by assuming simple harmonic
t =time. motion are generally less than displacements
from integrated velocities which are mathemati-
The integration or differentiation can be done cally correcL
either electronically or mathematically. Neither Because most calculations treating the pub-
of these techniques could be applied to the pub- lished.. data were from displacement or accelera-
lished data, because the original records were not tion to particle velocity, the next step was to
available. take the synthesized displacement-time records,
An alternative procedure permits calculation read the peak amplitude and associated fre-
of the other quantities from a given recorded quency. These values were used to calculate
quantity using the relationships of equation 2.8: particle velocities assuming simple harmonic mo-
u = v j21rf or v = 2,..fu (S.4) tion. The calculated particle velocities were
v = aj2,.. or a = 2,..fv (5.5) plotted versus recorded particle velocities for the
where f is the frequency of the seismic trace, same traces as shown in figure S.6. Again, the line
where the peak amplitude is observed. Equations with a slope of 1.0 shows the relationship of cal
culated and recorded values if they have a 1:1
8.4 and 3.5 may be used if the motion is simple
harmonic. This is not the case with seismic mo- ratio. Since most of the points fall below the
tion which is generally aperiodic. The authors of line, calculated values are generally less than
the published papers used these relationships recorded velocities.
either directly or indirectly. Duvall and Fogelson It should be noted that the calculation of dis-
placements as shown in figure 5.5 is directly
(2) used this treatment directly or indirectly
analogous to the calculation of particle velocity
when analyzing the data from the three pub-
data frcm recorded acceleration data. The re-
lished papers. The need to establish the reliabil
sults, shown in figures 5.5 and S.6, indicate that
ity of using equations 5.4 and 8.5 on aperiodic
data was pressing, particularly when the data particle velocities calculated from either displace-
were being used to establish damage criteria. ment or acceleration data assuming simple har-
monic motion will generally be less than particle
Particle velocity records obtained during the
velocities recorded directly. It is obvious that a
current test series were used to evaluate the use
damage criterion of particle velocity calculated
of equations 8.4 and 8.5. Data from kveral shots
from displacement and acceleration has a built-in
of different charge size and distribution were
safety factor. If the data of figures S.5 and S.6
selected for analysis. The data used included
fe11 above the lines. a risk factor would have
radial, vertical, and transverse components and
resulted.
represented a cross section of the data available.
The peak amplitude and its associated frequency
were read for the selected velocity-time records. 5.7-RECOMMENDED SAFE GROUND
Equation 8.4 was used to calculate the displace- VIBRATION LEVELS
ment for these data. The same velocity-time
records were digitized, input to a computer, and On the basis of the statistical study o pub-
the velocity amplitude spectra calculated. These lished data and the recommendations of the
spectra were integrated in the frequency. domain investigators. Edwards and Northwood, and
to provide displacement amplitude spectra from Langefors and others. particle velocity is more
which displacement-time records were syn- closely associated with damage to structures than
thesized. The peak displacement could then be either displacement or acceleration. Figure 8.7
determined for each recording. This is the same shows particle velocity venus frequency on a log
as applying equation 5.2 to the original data to log plot. These have generally been convened to
determine displacement, except that the integra- particle velocity from. displacement or accelera
SAFE VIBJlAnON LEVELS FOR RESIDENTIAL STRUC'l'tllt.I'.S

5.5
om
om
.-di

1.0
ult
wo
nts
ce-
aic

!lts
tti

ly 0

ty
~

lt

[\o

e
a
r1 7 8 9 10 II
!l
ii
1:
DISPLACEMENT FROM VELOCITY, u =!vdt, x 10"' inches
3

Figure !1.5.-Comparison of d.isplac:emenu from integration and simple hannonic motion


calculatiou.

tion by the Bureau or the original investigators be considered-a safe zone and a damage zone.
assuming simple harmonic motion. This, of Based upon the data of figure 5.7, a reasonable
course. builds in a safety factor (see section 5.5) separation between the safe and damage zones
The particle vdocity at damage from the recent appears to be a particle velocity of 2.0 in/sec.
ASCE-Bureau of Mines test is shown in figure 5.7. All of the major damage points and 94 percent
Figure !1.7 shows the major and minor damage of the minor damage points lie above this line.
data with c:Onstant velocity Jines of 7.6 infsec and The only data points below the 2.0 in/sec line
5.4 infsec drawn through their average points. are from the early Bureau data which have the
The damage criteria suggested by other investiga- largest standard deviation.
tors are shown also. The recommended safe vibration criterion of
The Bureau recommends that only two zones 2.0 infsec particle velocity is a probability type
24 BLASTING VIBitATIONS AND THUR EFFECTS ON STI.UC'l'VJtD

1.5

Figure 5.6.-Comparison of particle velocities u recorded md from diaplacemaita.

criterion. If the observed particle velocity exceeds or acceleration are measured, particle velocity
2.0 inf!!!c in any of the three orthogonal com- should be calculated only by integration or
ponents, there is a reasonable pro"t,ability that differentiation, either electronically or mathe--
damage will occur to residential structures. The matically. Calculations which assume simple har-
safe vibration criterion is not a value below monic motion yield particle velocities which are
which damage will not occur and above which in general too small. The velocity gages should
damage will occur. Many structures can experi- preferably be mounted on or in the ground
ence vibration levels greatly in excess of 2.0 rather than in the structure, because most of
infS!!C with no observable damage. For example, the data used in establishing the damage
figure !.8 pre!l!nts velocity data from tests in criterion were obtained in this manner. Mount
which damage was not observed. However, the ing of gages in the ground alleviates the necessity
probability of damage to a residential structure of considering the responses of a large variety of
increa!l!s or decrea!l!s as the vibration level in- structures. Particle velocity should be observed
creases or decreases from 2.0 in/sec. in three mutually perpendicular directions: a
Having ascertained a safe vibration criterion, vertical component, a horizontal component
the next logical step is to qualify the conditions radial to the source projected on a horizontal
under which the best assessment of vibration plane, and a horizontal component transverse to
levels can be made. Obviously, particle velocity the source. The safe vibration criterion is ba!l!d
should be measured directly with instrumenta- upon the measurement of individual com-
tion which responds to particle velocity and with ponents, and if the particle velocity of any com-
an adequate frequency response. If displacement ponent exceeds 2.0 in/sec. damage is likely to
SAFE VIBRATION LEVELS FOR U:SID.ENTL\L STRUcnJU:S

e
-Major damage
l v=7.6 in/sec e
1 rMinor damage tiP 0
1
1
1
v=5.4 in/sec ~ A
.~0
UIO
'I ae 61:)"'
.,.
a a a a
~8
c
- 6
>!"
....
~-----~-~~--~--~~-~--
L. ....,.. _ _ _ A~~t..
I

A
. . . ----~
a
. "
a 'II- a
..::ii!...a-a.--
A e 0
;ti .._,
04 ~~
0. A r -
e0

.......
~
A

A
rP
0 amoge zone
----r
-----~
,,
~ 2~--------------------------------8---------------------------~
u
t= Safe zone So f e blast1ng

cnterion I'1..1 ~
i Crandall ER=3..0, v=3.3 in/sec-: It
1
Longefors v=2.8 In/sec--:
Edwards and 1I
Northwood v=2.0 in/sec--J
Bureau of Mines v=2.0 in/sec-- 1

0 Bureau of Mines }
5 a Langefors Major damage data

.2
A



Edwards and Northwood
e..... af Mines
Langefors
I Minor damage data
A Edwards and Northwood
<:> ASCE-BuMines Test

'
r .I
I 1000

Figure 17.-Particle Telodty Temu frequency with recommended safe blaating aiteriou.

occur. Since seismic motion is a vector quantity, overpressures to break window panes. Some
individual components must be considered. panes were broken by an overpressure of 1.0 psi.
and all panes failed and plaster walls experienced
.!1.8-PUBUSHED DATA ON AIR minor damage at overpressures of 2.0 psi or
VIBRATIONS AND DAMAGE more. Higher overpressures caused more serious
failures. such as masonry cracks. Plaster cracks
Windes (U, 16) reported on the Bureau of were generally found to be caused by ftexing of
Mines' 1940 study in the early 1940's of the air wall panels by building vibrations induced by air
blast problem associated with quarry and mine blast. The condition of the glass in the windows
blasting. He concluded that window glass failure contributed directly to the damage experience.
occurred before any other type of structure Poorly mounted panes which have been pre-
failure due to air blast. Explosive charges were stressed by improperly inserted glazier's points
detonated in air to induce sufficient air blast or other causes, may fail when subjected to over-
26 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON sr:R.VC'I"URES

>=
1-
u
g
w
>

<:> Bureau of Mines


a Langefors
.t. Edwards and Northwood
J No damage data

0 ASCE-BuMines Test

Figure !.B.-Particle 'Velocity 'ftl'IUS frequency for no damage data.

pressures as low as 0.1 psi. Charges of explosives Research Laboratories (9, 10) were similar to
detonated in boreholes at similar explosive-to- those of Windes. Glass panes forced in to frames
window distances as used in the open air blasts so as to be under constant strain were found to
did not produce failure of window panes due to crack when subjected to overpressures o( 0.1 psi.
air blast overpressure. On the basis of these Properly mounted panes were subject to cracking
Bureau studies, Windes concluded that under at overpressures of 0.75 psi or greater. Air blast
normal blasting conditions the problem of dam pressures of only O.OS to 0.05 psi could vibrate
age from air blast was insignificant. loose window sash which might be a source of
The results of an extensive study of the air complaints but would not represent damage.
blast overpressure problem made by the Ballistic As a routine procedure, Edwards and North-
SAFE VIBRATION LEVELS FOJI. RESIDENTIAL STllUCTlTRES 27

wood (4) measured air blast pressure during to cause damage. The occasion~ legitimate
their vibration studies. The measured overpres- damage claim can .result from many unknown
sures ranged from 0.01 to 0.2 psi at locations out causes perhaps the best being that any damage
side the six structures being blast loaded. These criterion is a probability-type criterion.
pressures were considerably below the levels ex- Vibration levels that are completely safe for
pected to cause damage. None of the damage that structures are annoying and even uncomfortable
occurred in any of the six structures was at- when viewed subjectively by people. Figure S.9
aibuted to air blast. has been adapted from Goldman (5) to show the
Air blast is not considered to be a significant subjective response of the human body to vibra
factor in causing damage to residential structures tory motion. These limits are based on the re-
in most blasting operations. However, air blast sults for sinusoidal vibration. Similar results have
and the attendant transmission of noise may be a not been determined for nonsinusoidal vibra-
major factor in nuisance type complaints. tions. Predominant frequencies generated by
blasting are commonly in the range from 6 to 40
S.9-RECOMMENDED SAFE AIR BLAST cps. If a building is being vibrated to a particle
PRESSURE LEVELS velocity of 1.0 infsec, the building is considered
safe, but the vibration level as viewed sub-
The recommended safe air blast pressure level jectively by people is intolerable. At a particle
of 0.5 psi is based on a consideration of the re- velocity of 0.2 infsec, the probability of damage
sults reported in section S.8. If some panes of to a building is nil, al\d yet the vibration level is
glass will fail at overpressures of 0.75 psi and all viewed as quite unpleasant or annoying by some
would be expected to fail at 2.0 psi or more, 0.5 people.
psi provides a reasonable margin of safety. Dam- The superposition of the perceptible, unpleas-
age to plaster walls at overpressures greater than ant, and intolerable limits on the case history
1.0 psi would thereby be precluded. The recom plot of particle velocity versus percentage of
mended level would not alleviate the problem of
prestressed glass panes failing at 0.1 psi or loose IOr-----~----~----~~--------~----~-r-r~
sash vibration. These two conditions would con- 8
tinue to result in complaints. However, most 6
routine blasting operations designed to limit
4
vibrations to less than 2.0 infsec do not generate
air blast overpressures that are significant factors 2 in/sec
in causing damage to residential structures. The J~!! .J!r:E:!!:!!!...IJ'.!!.!t
u
air blast pressures from buried explosive charges
.......
CD

and from charges properly stemmed in boreholes c: I


are an order of magnitude or more below the ~ 0.8
pressures required for damage. Sadwin and >- .6
Duvall (12) pointed out that optimum use of
t::
(.)

explosives to break rod results in less energy 0 .4


..J
available to generate air blast overpressures. UJ
>
.2
UJ
S.IO-HUMAN RESPONSE AND ITS EFFECT 11 ..J
(.)
ON SAFE VIBRATION LEVELS i= .I
a: .08
Legitimate damage claims result when per ~
Q.. .06
sonal or property damage is caused by seismic
or air blast waves from blasts. The advances .04
~n blasting technology during the past 25 years,
mcluding blasting procedures, damage criteria, .02
knowledge of seismic wave propagation, moni-
toring instrumentation, and a more knowledge-
able blasting profession have minimized claims
rtsulting from real structural damage. More FREQUENCY, cpa
and more blasting operators instrument their
own blasts or subscribe to a consulting service Figure 5.9.-Subjective response of the human
to insure vibration levels below those necessary body to Vl'bratory motion (after Goldman).
SAFE VIBRATION LEVELS FOR. llESIDE.NTIAL STR.UcrtJRES 29

not really solve the problem. The only possible Ground Vibrations in Blasting. Water Power,
solution is to keep vibration levels and air blast February 1958, pp. 335-338, 390-395, 421-424.
8. Peterson, A. P. G., and E. E. Gross, Jr. Handbook of
pressures well below the safe vibration criteria Noise Measurement. General Radio Co. West
and concentrate on noise abatement. Concord, Mass., 5th ed., 196!, p. 4.
9. Perkins, Beauregard, Jr., Paul H. Lorain, and Wil
liam H. Townsend .. Forecasting the Focus of Air
3.11-REFERENCES Blasts Due to Meteorol~>~Pcal Conditions in the
Lower Atmosphere. Ballistic Research Laboratories
1. Crandell, F. J. Ground Vibration Due to Blasting and Rept. No. IllS, October 1960, 77/.p.
Its Effect Opon Structures. J. of the Boston Soc. of 10. Perkins, Beauregard, Jr., and Willis . Jackson. Hand
Civil En~eers, April 1949, pp. 222-245. book for Prediction of Air Blast Focusing. Ballistic
2. Duvall, Wtlbur 1., and D. E. 'Fogelson. Review of Research Laboratories Rept. No. 1240, February
Criteria for Estimating Damage to Residences 1964, 100 pp.
From Blasting Vibrations. BuMines Rept. of Inv. 11. Power, D. V. A Survey of Complaints of SeismicRt--
5968, 1962, 19 pp. lated Damage to Surface Structures Following the
S. Dvorak, A. Seismic Effects of Blasting on Brick Salmon Underground Nuclear Detonation. Bull. of
Houses. Prace geofyrikeniha Ustance Ctiskoslovenski the Seis. Soc. of America, v. 56, No. 6, Deeember
Abdemie Ved. No. 169. Geofysikalni Sbomil:, 1962, 1966, pp. 1411J-1428.
pp. 189-202. 12. Sadwin, L. D., and W. I. Duvall. A Comparison of.
4. Edwards, A. T .. and Northwood, T. D. Experimental Explosives by Cratering and Other MethOds. Trans.
Studies of the Effects of Blasting on Structures. The of SME of AlME, v. 232. June 1965, pp. 111-115.
Engineer, v. 210, Sept. SO, 1960, pp. 55&-546. 15. Thoenen, f. R .. and Windes, S. L. Seismic Effects of
5. Goldman, D. E. A Review of Subjecuve Responses to Quarry Blastin'S. BuMines Bull. 442, 1942, 8! pp.
Vibrating Motion of the Human Body in the 14. Wall, J. F., Jr. Sew;mic-Induced Architectural Damage
Fttquency Range, 1 to 70 cycles per second. Naval to Masonry Structures at Mercury, Nevada. Bull.
Medical Res. lnst. Rept. No. 1, Project NM 004001, of the Seis. Soc. of America, v. 57, No. 5, October
Mar. 16, 1948, 17 Pf
6. Kringel, J, R.. Contro of Air Blast Effect Resulting 15.
1967, pp. 991-1007.
Windes, S. L. Damage From Air Blast. Progress R.t--
From Blasting Operations. Mining Congr. J., April port 1. BuMines Rept. of Inv. 5622, 1942. f8 pp.
1960, pp. 51-56. 16. - - . Damage From Air Blast. Progress Report 2.
7. Langefors, Ulf, Kihlstrom, B., and Westerberg, H. BuMines Rept. of Inv. !708, 194!, 50 pp.
I
.1

CHAPTER 4.----GENERATION AND PROPAGATION OF


GROUND VIBRATIONS FROM BLASTING
4.1-INTRODUCriON overburden extending back from a working face
for 1,000 feet or more.
A major objective of the program was to de-
termine a propagation law for ground-borne Among the gross factors studied were a com-
t surface vibrations. Of primary interest were the parison of vibration levels from millisecond-
delayed blasts and instantaneous blasts, the
If relationships among the size of. the explosive
charge, shot-to-gage distance, and the magnitude proper charge weight to be used in scaling data
I
of the ground vibration. Other variables con- from different blasts, and the scaling factor to be
I
I sidered were explosive type, method of initiation, used (6, 7). In addition, the effect of the method
geology, and directional effects. of blast initiation on vibration amplitudes was
The effect of distance and charge weight on investigated, as well as such variables as direction
the vibration level is basic to all blasting vibra- of propagation, overburden thickness. site, and
tion studies. Many types of propagation laws or rock type. Most quarries or blasting operations
equations have been proposed. The most widely use a particular type or types of explosive that
accepted form is best suit their needs. Explosive type varied
A= kWbDD, (4.1) within and among quarries and could not be con-
where A is the peak amplitude, W is the charge trolled. Therefore, the site effect includes the
weight, D is the distance, and k, b, and n are effect of using different explosives at different
constants associated with a given site or shooting sites.
procedure. Both theoretical and empirical Fourier spectra analysis methods were used on
methods have been used to estimate values of b a limited amount of the data where particular
and n. Typical values found in the literature for results were desired, such as those arrived at in
b range from 0.4 to 1.0 and for n from -1 to section 3.6. The technique was not used ex-
-2 (1, 4, 5, 9-12, 14-17). The quantity, A, may tensively in a routine manner but only as a de-
be the peak amplitude of particle displacement, vice to provide specific results.
velocity, or acceleration, and k and n will vary The basic instrumentation used in these tests
correspondingly. For purposes of the present (described fully in Chapter 2) consisted of up to
study, particle velocity only was recorded and 36 particle velocity gages and amplifiers and two
analyzed, because it correlated most directly with direct-writing oscillographs. The gages were gen-
damage (see Chapter 3) . erally mounted in or on the overburden, on steel
A reasonable aim in any scientific research is to pins driven in the sides of square holes in the i
obtain reliable data with a minin1um expendi- soil, or in boxes buried in square holes in the f
ture of experimental effort. This requires that soil. Occasionally the gage boxes were attached ~
the variables to be studied be controlled in a directly to the rock surface with cemenL The ,. j
known manner and that other contributing normal gage array consisted of several stations.
factors be held constant or randomized. The de- each at a successively greater shot-to-station
sired degree of control was not always attained distance and each with 5 gages oriented in three
in the study of quarry blasting vibrations. Quarry mutually perpendicular directions from the shoL
operators, justifiably, were often reluctant to vary At some quarries, extended arrays with only
factors, such as method of initiation, hole size, vertically oriented gages were used. At other
burden, spacing, etc., because such changes could quarries, the azimuth between arrays or parts
result in additional operating costs. Therefore, it of an array was changed either to study direc-
was necessary to visit a large number of quarries
and with the dose cooperation of the quarry
tional effects or because of difficulty in maintain-
ing a si~gle azimuth due to terrain or physical
obstructions.
..1
-i
operators select the necessary conditions of ex-
plosive placement and initiation, terrain, over Refraction tests were conducted in some of the '
burden, etc. Most of the quarries selected were in quarries to determine overburden depths and
relatively flat terrain, with more or less uniform seismic propagation velocities. Arrival times on
30
GENERATION AND PROPAGATION OF GROUND VIBRATIONS FRO BLASTING SI

the recordings from quarry blasts wer~ also ana- used. Detonating fuse between holes connected
lyzed to determine velocities through the rock. the charges together in series for the instantaneous
beneath the overburden. blasts. Delay intervals were achieved by placing a
A total ofl71 blasts were recorded at 26 sites. 9, 17, or two 17 millisecond-delay connectors in
The charge size ranged from 70 to 180,550 aeries with the detonating fuse between adjacent
pounds per blast and from 25 to 19,625 pounds holes of the round. Only one hole per delay was
per delay. The number of holes per shot ranged used.
(rom I to 490. The rock. types included lime- The study also included five single-hole and
stone, dolomite, diorite, basalt. sericite schist. two multiple-row millisecond-delayed blasts. For
trap rock., granite, granite-gneiss, and sandstone. the two multiple-row blasts, the maximum num-
ber of holes per delay was four for one round and
4.2-MILLISECOND-DELAYED BLASTS six for the other.
VERSUS INSTANTANEOUS BLASTS An attempt was made to randomize the shoot-
In the 1940's and 1950's, millisecond-delay ing order and position along the face for these
blasting became an accepted technique for re- blasts to remove bias due to these variables. The
ducing vibrations from blasting and as a better necessity to efficiently mine the face prevented
method for breaking rock.. The main variables complete randomization. In addition, the tests
associated with a millisecond-delayed blast in a involving multiple-rows and 9 millisecond-
given rock. are the delay interval, the number delay intervals were "added to the program after
of delay intervals, and the number of holes the other tests had been completed.
per delay interval. Although previous work. by Hole diameter, depth, spacing, burden, and
other investigators had shown that millisecond- loading procedure were held constant for these
delayed blasts produce .smaller vibration ampli- tests. Spacing and burden were 15 and 10 feet,
tudes than those produced by instantaneous respectively. All holes were 6 inches in diameter
blasts employing the same total charge w.: ight, and 36 feet in depth. Stemming was about 15
the effect of these variables on the vibrations pro- feet. A 200-pound charge of explosives in 5-inch
duced by millisecond-delayed blasts was not diameter sticks was loaded into each hole.
thoroughly understood. A plan view of the test area at the Weaver
For the first phase of the field program, the Quarry near Alden, Iowa, is shown in Appendix
following problems were selected for study: (I) A, figure A-1. The location of each quarry blast
to determine the propagation law for the ampli- is identified by test number, and the area of rock.
tude of vibrations produced by both instan- breakage is indicated by broken lines. The in-
taneous and millisecond-delayed quarry blasts, strument arrays were placed along the straight
(2) to determine if the level of vibration at lines shown on the map and are identified by a
various distances from the blast area is controlled number signifying the corresponding blast and
by either the length of the delay interval or the area. In general, each instrument array was di-
number of delay periods in a millisecond-delayed rectly behind the blast area and approximately
quarry blast, and (S) to compare vibration levels perpendicular to the face. The main exception
from instantaneous quarry blasts with those from was the array used for Shot 14. The gaps shown
millisecond-delayed blasts. between the blast areas represent the rock.
. quarried when vibration studies were not con-
4.2.1-Experimental Procedure ,,- ducted. The distance to the gage stations along
The factorial design and shooting order used each array was measured from the center of the
to study vibration levels from instantaneous and blast area.
millisecond-delayed blasts is given in table 4.1. Up to 24 particle velocity versus time records
For these 12 tests, only a single row of holes was were obtained from each of the 19 quarry blasts.
Typical recordings are shown in figures 4.1
Table 4.1.-Factorial design and shootiDg order
through 4.4. The vertical lines represent 10-
by test number millisecond intervals. Each record trace is identi-
fied as to component of particle velocity and
Delay interval, msec:.
No. of the distance from blast to gage. R, V, and T
holes 0 9 17 34 represent the radial, vertical and transverse com-
3 ------- 2 19 3 6 ponents. The center trace of each record is the
17 ------- 8 20 5 7 100 cps reference timing signal from a standard
5 ------- 12 21 11 13 oscillator.
32 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECfS ON STRUC'l't11tF3

r- -
I
I
! i '
~i
ill
v IV I
;

I
I I
I l

I I
I I .I
I I I
I I I

I I I
I
I
II
'T I

I !
I 11
I
I II
0 100 200
R Radial
V Vertical
T Transverse

Figure 1-1.-Vibration records for lhole blast.

Table 4.2 summarizes . the quarry blasts in termine the effect of charge weight; third, to
strumented in this test. For more complete shot determine the relation between instantaneous
information on these and other tests see Appen and millisecond-delayed blasts. These three steps
dix B, table B-1. Table C-1 in Appendix C are, of course, interdependent. The approach
presents the particle velocity and frequency data used did not include imposing preconceived
for the shots in this series. ideas based upon existent empirical or the~
The time duration of the seismic vibration for retical results but was based upon a statistical
the instantaneous blasts averaged 200 millisec analysis of the data.
onds and for the millisecond-delayed blasts
averaged 200 milliseconds plus the product of 4.2.2-Propagation Law
the length of the delay interval and the number Plots of peak. particle velocity venus distance
of delays. were made on log-log coordinates. The data. as
The analysis of the data was conducted in a shown in figures 4.5 to 4.7, are grouped by test.
sequential manner: first. to determine propaga number of holes per blast, and by radial, verticaL
tion laws for data from each blast; second, to de- and transverse components. The linear grouping

- ---
,
GENER.AnON AND PROPAGAnON OF GltOUND. VJBitAnONS FROM BLASTING

0 100 200
R Radial
V Vertical Scale, milliseconds
T Transverse

Figure 4.2.-Vibration records for 7-hole instantaneous blast.

of the data permits their representation by an error of n, the standard deviation about regres-
equation of the form: sion, and the average standard error of intercepts
v = kD (4.2) .. are given in table 4.S. The average value of n
where v = peak particle velocity, in/sec; " for each component was used to calculate a new
D = shot-to-gage distance, 100 feet; particle velocity intercept for each set of data.
k = intercept, velocity at D = unity; The individual values for these intercepts are
n =exponent or slope. given in table 4.4 for each component. These
The values of k and n were determined for intercepts are the values of k from the following
each set of data by the method of least squares. equations:
Statistical tests showed that a common slope, n, Vr = k..D-1 (4.5)
could be used for all data of a given component v,. = k,.D-l.Tt {4.4)
and that the values of k were significantly dif v, = kJ)-1.2. (4.5)
ferent at a confidence level of 95 percent. The
average values of n, for each component were where v is the particle velocity.4t infsec, D is
significantly different, and a grand common slope the distance from blast to gage expressed .in
for all components could not be used. The aver hundreds of feet, and r, v, and ~note the com
age values of n for each component, the standard ponent.
BLAsTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIJl EFFECfS ON STRUCTURES

0 100 200
R Radial
V Vertical
T Transverse
~

Figure 4.5.-Vibration records for 7 hole, 9-millisecond-delayed blaat.

4.2.!---Effect of Charge Weight for Instantaneous K = intercept of regression line at W = I


Blasts pound, infsec;
The data from the instantaneous blasts were and W = charge weight, pounds;
studied to determine the effect of charge weight b = slope of regression line and exponent
on the level of vibration. The particle velocity ofW.
intercepts (table 4.4) were plotted as a function
of charge weight (figure 4.8) . The resultant The determination of b and K by the method
of least squares results in the following equa 1!
linear grouping of the data indicated that each
group could be represented by an equation of tions: l
the form: k.. = 0.052 wo.u, (4.7)
l
""-~
k = KW", (4.6) lt..,. = 0.071 WO'Ill, (4.8)
where k = velocity intercept at 100 feet, infsec; ka = 0.0.35 wo.tT, (4.9)

.<3
GEN:ER.AnON AND PllOPAGAnON OF GROUND VIBRAnONS FJlON BLASTING 55

0 100 200
R Radial
v Vertical Scale, milliseconds
T Transverse

Figure 4.4.-Vibration records tor 7-hole, 54-millisecond-delayed blast.

Number of Holes per Delay, Charge/delay, Total


Test holes delay tnseC pounds eharge,
f pounds
2 ----- s 3 0 600 600
a --------- 3 1
1
17
0
200
200
600
4 ------ 1 200
I ---------- 7 1 17 200 1,400
6 -------~--- s 1 34 200 600
7 -------- 7 1 34 200 1,400
7 0 1,400 1,400
98 ---------
........................................ 7
1 1 0 200 200
10 --------- 1 1 0 200 200
11 ----------- 16 1 1'1 200 3,000
~ ------- 16 16
1
0
34
8,000
200
3,000
1,000
1 ---------- 16
14 ---------- 1 1 0 100 100
18 --------- 1 1 0 200 200
~ --------- 3 1
1
9 200
200
600
21 --------- 7 9 1,400
2'1 ---------- 16 1 9 200 3,000
32 ........................................
-------- 21 13 4 17 800 2,600
6 17 1,218 4,268
86 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON STaUCTU'IlES

.& Shot 18
m shot 10
e Shot 9
Shot 4

Instantaneous
shot No.2
4 9 msec shot 19
o 17 msec shot 3
o 34 msec shot 6

.04~--~--~_.~~~~----~--~~~~ . .~----~_.~~_.~~
100 200 400 600 1000 200 400 600 1000 200 400 600 1000
DISTANCE, feet

Figure 4.5.-Particle velocity venus distance for I and 3-hole blasts.


Instantaneous
shot No.8
A 9 msec shot 20
c 17 msec shot 5
o 34 msec shot 7

15-hole blasts
Radial com~nent

'

Instantaneous
shot No. 12 15-hole blasts
A 9msec shot 21 Vertical component
c 17 msec shot II
o 34 msec shot 13

200 400 600 1000 200 400 600 1000 200 400 600 1000
DISTANCE. feet

Figure 4.6.-Particle velocity versus distance lor 7 and 15-bole blasts.


.!18 BLASTING VIB'RATJONS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON ST.RUCIUIU!'.S

lhole blasts
Vertical component

~ Shot 14, 1 hole, A


100 lb.
c Shot 27, 4 holes per
17 msec delay
0 Shot 32, 6 hOles per
17 msec delay

I
Multiple hole blasts
Radial component
Multiple hole blasts
Vertical component
Multiple hole blasts
Transverse component
I
200 400 600 1,000 200 400 600 1,000
DISTANCE. feet

Figure 4.7.-Particle velocity venus distance for a lhole and 2--riultiple-row blaa11.

-.....- ..
GENER.AnON AND PROPAGAnON OF GROUND VIBRAnONS FROM BLASTING 89

Table .f.!.-Average n and Jtandard deviatl.0111 The substitution of equations 4.7 to 4.9 into
Standard Average equations 4.8 to 4.5 provides equations difficult to
deviation standard handle, because charge weight and distance
Component Average n about error of would then have different exponents. If charge
regression, intercepts,
percent percent weight, raised to some power is considered to be
Radial -- -1.6280.043 27 30 a scaling factor, the substitution of equations
Vertical ...- .... -1.741 .049 32 27 4.7, 4.8, and 4.9 into equations 4.8, 4.4. and 4.5
Transverse .... -1.279 .063 35 40 and simplification of terms gives:

100~~~~~----~~--~~-rrrr-----.--,--,

80 Radial component
60 o Instantaneous
Millisecond delayed
40 Vertical component
o A Instantaneous
A Millisecond delayed
.5 Transverse component
en 0 lnstanta11eous
t:
LIJ
t Millisecond delayed
(J
0: 10
~
z 8
~ 6
(J
0
...J
LIJ 4
>
LIJ
...J
(J

~ 2
~
~ = o.o35 w067
1
.8
.6
40 60 80100 200 400 600 1,000 2,000 4,000
CHARGE WEIGHT PER DELAY, lb
Figure 4.8.-Compa:rison of effect of charge weight on level of vibration &om instantaneo1U and
millisecond-delayed blasts.
--1
~

40 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THElll EFP'ECI'S ON STR.UCTlllt.ES

Table U-Partide Ytlodty interc:~tpts at 100 fm 4.2.5-Comparison of Millisecond-Delayed


Particle velocity Blasts with Instantaneous Blasts
intercepts The level of vibration from instantaneous
Test
Radial Vertical Transverse blasts depends upon the number of holes in the
in/sec in/sec in/sec round or the total charge weight (see equations
144 -- 2.15 4.10 to 4.12) .If the level of vibration from milli-
....................... 4.03 2.88 0.94 second-delayed blasts is independent of the num-
9 ........................ 3.62 3.70 .98
18 ........................ 5.24 3.48 2.39 ber of delays or the length of delay interval (as
10 -- 4.24 3.44 1.02 shown in section 4.2.4), then the vibration level
2 ........................ 10.8 7.76 2.28
8 ........................ 23.9 17.9 3.74 from these blasts must depend mainly upon the
12 ........................ 88.6 22.1 8.99 charge size per delay or the number of holes per
19 ........................ 6.66 3.72 1.93 delay. Therefore, the vibration levels from in-
20 ........................ 4.58 4.35 2.35
21 ........................ 8.24 6.38 3.60 stantaneous and millisecond-delayed blasts
3 ........................ 2.99 3.16 2.65 should correspond closely providing the same
5 ,,...................... 8.10 7.04 2.42
11 ........................ 4.88 4.61 2.14 nu&ber of holes are used in the instantaneous
6 ........................ 5.81 3.90 1.45 blast as are used in each delay.
7 ........................ 4.14 3.06 1.30 The results (intercepts, k, and standard devia-
13 ........................ 6.41 4.71 1.61
27 ........................ 14.4 12.8 3.79 tion, a) from Shots 4, 9, 10, and 18, one-hole
32 ........................ 18.2 12.7 4.83 instantaneous blasts are compared with the milli-
second-delayed blasts using one hole per delay in
table 4.5. Subscript i stands for instantaneous,
D and subscript d stands for delayed. Millisecond-
vr = 0.052 (W0_1112 ) -PIS, . (4.10) delayed blasts with one hole per delay produce,
on the average, a vibration level 42 percent
V
1'
= 0071

(~)
wo.f21
-l.Tf
. ,
(4.11) greater with 2.5 times. the data spread than single
hole blasts. However, these differences are not
D
Vt = 0.035 ( - - ) -1.28.
wo.1121
(4.12) statistically significant at the 95 percent con-
fidence level. The trend does show some construc-
Although the exponent of W varies only from tive interference for single hole per delay blasts.
0.421 to 0.521 ini:licatin~ the square root of W Quarry blasts 27 and 32 were millisecond-
may be the proper scalmg factor, there are in delayed blasts with a maximum of four and six
sufficient data from this one site to statistically holes per delay, respectively. The particle
support such a conclusion. velocity intercepts at 100 feet from these blasts
were plotted as a function of charge size per delay
4.2.4-Effect of Delay Interval and Number on the same graph as the instantaneous blasts
of Holes (figure 4.8) Examination of these data shows
that the vibration levels from millisecond-delayed
The nine quarry blasts employrng delays of 9, blasts (multiple hole per delay) are about the ~
I 7, and S4 milliseconds and three, seven, and same as those from instantaneous blasts. Ap-
15 holes were used to study the effect of delay parently millisecond-delayed blasts with multiple 1
interval and number of holes on the vibration
level. Ins~ction of figures 4.5 and 4.6 indicates holes per delay produce a more uniform vibra
that the vibration levels from millisecond-delayed tion level than similar blasts with one hole per
blasts are generally lower than those from in
stantaneous blasts employing the same number
delay.
Therefore, it can be concluded that no sig- 1
~
of holes. Data from these figures also shows that
the relative vibration levels appear to be ran-
nificant error is introduced if comparisons of J
vibration levels among blasts are made on the J
domly distributed with respect to delay interval
or number of holes. Analyses of variance tests on basis of equivalent charge weights per delay or l
the particle velocity intercepts (table 4.4) for total charge for the case of instantaneous blasts.
these blasts showed no significant differences due Any scaling or normalizing must be accomplished
to delay interval or number of holes. Therefore, by using the charge weight per delay because this
it can be concluded that the level of vibrations is the effective charge weight. Furthermore, if
from millisecond-delay blasts employing only one the charge weight per delay varies for a given
hole per delay is not controlled significantly
either by the delay interval or the number of blast due to unequal loading per hole or unequal
delay periods. number of holes per delay, then it is the maxi-
GENERATION AND PROPAGATION OF GROUND VIBRATIONS FROM BLASTING 41

Table 4..5.-Avcrage partic:k nlodty intercepts for lingle hole and_ miJ.lillecond-delayed blluts
Single hole Millisecond- Ratios
blasts delayed blasts
IS Component
.e k, .,, k.t - .,.
IS Radial --------------- 4.28 0.688 5.74 1.786 . 1.34 2.596
Vertical -------;---------- 3.38 .349 4.54 1.366 1.34 3.883
Transverse -------------- 1.36 .691 2.16 .709 1.59 1.026
Average '------------- 1.42 2.502

mum charge weight initiated at any particular weights per delay, including the instantaneous
delay interval which must be considered. blasts, ranged from 25 to 4,620 pounds.
4.~W 11 AS A SCALING FACTOR 4.8.1-Experimental Procedure
Three basic conclusions were made from an Plan views of the test sites are shown in Ap-
analysis of the data _from millisecond-delayed and pendix A, figures A-1, -7, -10, -11, and -16. As
instantaneous blasts. First, the three components shown, the gage~array was oriented towards the
of peak particle velocity of ground vibration at a blast area and direcdy behind it where feasible.
site can be represented by equations of the form: At the Strasburg site, the data from lines I and 2
D could not be combined. Therefore, the data from
Vt =HI(-) II, (4.18)
. W" the two lines are treated as if from two separate
where sites and are denoted as Strasburg-1 and Stra.s-
... v =particle velocity,
H =particle velocity intercept,
burg-2.
The blasting pattern and method of blut
t
e D = shot-to-gage distance, initiation varied considerably from quarry to
t W = charge weight, quarry. Among patterns used were single-hole
a = exponent, shots, single-hole per delay shots, multiple-holes
p = slope or decay exponent, per delay shots with all holes in a delay group
.and i = denotes component, radial, vertical, or connected with detonating fuse, and instantane-
transverse. ous multiple-hole shots with all holes connected
Second, W is the charge per delay or the total with detonating fuse. Often each site used more
charge for an instantaneous blast, and third, that than one of these procedures. Table 4.6 sum-
c may be about 0.5 or that square root scaling marizes the pertinent blast data.
exists for these data. For the millisecond-delayed blasts, the delay
Equation 4.18 for any one component im- interval ranged from 5 to 26 milliseconds. Sec-
plies that H and pare constants that have to be tion 4.2.4 shows that the vibration level was in
determined for each quarry site and possibly for dependent of delay interval for intervals ranging
each shooting procedure. To determine the ap- from 9 to 84 milliseconds. The vibration levels
plicability of this equation to particle velocity- from blasts using 5 millisecond delays did not
distance data required a large amount of da\a differ appreciably with those from shots with
from different sites with different propagation longer delays and were included in the analysis.
parameters, H and p. Statistical methods could As the result of conclusions in section 4.2.5, the
then be used to determine the appropriateness of maximum charge weight per delay was con
W as a scaling factor and the value of a. sidered as the charge weight for each shot.
Data used in this study were frOm five quarries The peak particle velocities, associated fre-
or construction sites near Alden, Iowa: in Wash- quencies, and shot-to-gage distances are .given in
ington, D.C.: near Poughkeepsie, N.Y.; near Flat Appendix C, tables C.l, -7, -:10, -11, and -16.
Rock, Ohio; and near Strasburg, Va. A descrip-
4.S.2-Data Analysis
~on of each site is given in Appendix D. Vibra-
tions from 89 blasts were recorded. Among the Plots of peak particle velocity .venus shot-to-
blasts were 12 instantaneous; 5 single hole per gage distance were made for each site, test, and
delay, using miJiisecond-delayed caps; and 22 component. Good linear grouping of the data
multiple hole per delay, using millisecond-delay indicated that straight lines could be fitted to the
detonating fuse connectors. Charge weights per data by a general propagation equation of the
hole ranged from 7.8 to 1.522 pounds, and charge form:
/
t

BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON S'IllUC'I'tl1tES

Teat Spacing,
ft
Weaver
2 3 36 30 600 600 200 0 0 10 15
4
8
1
1
36
36
30
30
200
1,400
200
1,400
200
200
0
0
0
0
10
10 15
-
--
9, 1 36 30 200 200 200 0 0 10
10 , 1 36 30 200 200 200 0 0 10 i
12 15 36 30 3,000 3,000 200 0 0 10 15
18
27
32
1
13
21
36
36
36
30

fo
200
2,600
4 263
200
800
1 218
D C
200
200
203
0
3
3
0
17
17
10
10
IO
-
15
14
l
'

45 3 20 20 110 37 37 2 25(cap) 4 6
46 13 20 20 403 31 31 12 25(cap) 4 6.5
so
51
9
13
20
20
- 20
70
403
10
31
7.8
31
0
l2
0
25(cap)
-4 2.5
6
52 13 20 20 325 25 25 12 25(p) 4 6
54 13 18 20 308 25 24 aw 12 25(cap) 4 6
Pouahk.eePsie
55
56
35
13
-. 28- 54
83-104
21,578
18,471
920
1,522
920
1,100-1,522
J4
12
17,26
26
22
22
20
20
63! 18 . 67- 13 19,933 1,249 11 26 23 20
63SE. . . . . - 1'0391' 249
- - - - -
64N
64!
6
- .- -- 1,200
- -
200
-
200
-5 26
-26
1015
-21
20'
-
65N 28 55-60 50- 55 28,810 1,405 700-1,405 27 20
65!
67
.
12
-
76-82
-
70 76
-
14 576 I -
1 355
-
1 100-1 355
-
ll
-
26
-22 22
-

75 10
78 . 11
79
Strasburll-1
96 ... 84 20 18 1,120 40 avg 2 s
99
101.
49
78
20
20
18
18
3,350
1,950
3,200
968
1,600
40
40
avg
avg
1
1
. 5
5
5
8
8
8
5
5
103 59 20 18 2,150 589 35 avg 3 5 8 5
104 60 15-20 15- 20 2,425 1,330 40 BVII 1 9 8 6
106, 61 20 18 2,350 1,380 40 ""II 1 9 8 5
108 ... 60 20 18 1,950 1,600 20-35 1 5 10 6
109 ... 51 20 12- 14 1,700 865 33 avg 1 5 8 5-7
110 ... 51 20 18 1, 750 360 32 avg 4 5 8 6
111.. 48 20 18 1 600 367 JJ 8Vll 4 5 8 6
Strasbuu- 2
98 31 20 18 1,250 605 40.3 avg l 8 5 5
100 ... 16 2212 20 10 475 475 2535 0 8 0 5
102 ... 16
42
10-20
4-20
8- 18 450 343 2535 5 1 8 5
s
Jg;::: 42 620
4
6-
20
20
1,325
1 250
1,325
1 250
25-35
25-35
0
0
0
0
10
8 5
1 The length of the delay 1a cona1dere4 to lHt uro if the ahot c0111Uted of a dngle hole, of one bole per delay, or of
multiple holea per delay tied together vit:b detonating fuae,

~
v = K~,~Dil~,~, (4.14) test is treated separately at this point. there is no 1
where v = :Peak particle velocity, charge weight term needed.
D = travel distance, The method of least squares was used to
flu = exponent of D or the slope of the determine the slope, intercept, and standard
straight line through the jth set of deviation of the data about the straight line rep-
data at the ith site, resenting the data. Because of the large amount ~
of data, only the least-squared lines are shown in ~
and K~,~ = velocity
intercept at unit travel dis- figures 4.9 to 4.11 with the standard deviation 1
tance for the jth set of data at the ith shown as a vertical line through the midpoint of ~
site. the data. i
The subscript i denotes the site and varies from An analysis of variance was performed on the l
1 to 6, whereas the subscript j denotes a test at a data to determine if sets of data, either by com-
ponent at each site or among sites, could be 1
1
specific site and varies from 1 to kt. where k1
is the total number of tests at a site. Since each pooled. The results showed that significant dif i
j
1
GENERATION AND PROPAGATION OF GROUND VIBRATIONS FROM BLASTING 43

8.0
Symbol Test
6.0 FLAT ROCK STRASBURG-I o 96
4.0 c 99
101
A 103
2.0 104
... 106
108
109
1.0
.8
.6 A
0
0
u .4

Ill
v
'c
.2 ...
>
!::
(,)
...
(J
0
-1
.I
LLJ
> 4.0
w POUGHKEEPSIE Symbol Test STRASBURG-2
-1
(,)
2.0 o.::. i:l 56
i= ... 63
a:: <C 63SE
~ o 64N
1.0 64
X I> 65N
<( .8
w .6 <l 65
Q. 67
.4

.2

. I Symbol Test Symbol Test


.08
.06
...
45 0 98
c 46 0 100
.04
A
0
50
51

A
102
105
52
107
.02 ....__...._54
_ ......._..
_,__..--~.

I 2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10 20 40 2 4 6 8 10 20
DISTANCE, hundreds of fee1

Figure 4.9.-Peak particle velocity versus distance, radial component.


44 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND TllEIR EFFECTS ON STII.UCTUllES

Symbol Tnt
FLAT ROCK 96
99
101
103
104
.A. 106
.. 108
v 109
110
Ill

.4

(,)
Q)
.2 0
II)
.....
.: " Symbol Test
75

[]
.I
>-
!::
(.)
g
.08
.06 .
.A.
!::;.
0
78
79

w .04
>
w 3.0
_J Symbol Test
(.) 2.0 D.C. POUGHKEEPSIE ~ 55
1-
cr.
<( ..
c 56
63E
a..
:::.::
1.0
.8
0
63SE
64N
<(
w
a..
.6 I> 64E
.S5N
.4 <3 65E
67

.2

.I
.08
.06 Symbol Test
.A. 45 Symbol Test
.04 c 46 0 98
~ 50 13 100
.02
0


51
52

~
102
105
54 107

.01 ~--~--~--~~
I 2 4 6 810 2 4 6 810 20 40.2 4 6 8 10 20

01 STANCE. hundreds of feet

Figure 4.10.-Peak particle velocity venus distance, vertical component.


CENEltATION AND PROPAGATION OF GROUND VIBRATIONS FROM BLASTING 45

8.0
6.0 Symbol Test
6 2 FLAT ROCK
4.0 D 4
0 8
v 9
2.0 10

1.0
.8
.6
.4
u
4D
c
..... .2 Symbol Test
Test ... 106
>
.. 0 75 108
.I v 109
t:: .08
6 78
0 0 79 110
g .06 Ill
ILl .05
> I 2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10 20 2 4 6 810 20
ILl
..J
0
1-
0:
ct
0..
1.0
::IIi::
ct .8
IJ.J
0.. .6
.4

.2

.I
.08
.06
.04

.02 ....__ _.__--.~._..__......._.

I 2 4 6 8 10 3 4 6 8 10 20

DISTANCE, hundreds of feet


Figure 4.)1.-Peak. particle velocity venus distance, traDJVene componeuL
46 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFF~ ON STRUCI'UilES

ferences existed and no pooling could be done. The relationship of equation 4.17 indicates
The results also showed that there were no that a Jog-log plot of the Ku intercept values
significant differences in the slopes for different versus Wu, charge weight per delay, should give a 1-_
tests at each site for each component. Thus an linear grouping of the data by site and com-
average slope, p1, was used for each component at ponent. Plots of these data, Ku versus W IJ from
each site. These average slopes are given in table 4.8, are shown in figures 4.12A, 4.l~A. and
table 4.7. 4.14A. Linear grouping of the data is obtained, Il
and furthermore, the data from each site group .
independently indicating that the slope, af31, and ;_
the intercept, H., are functions of site and com- ~
Component . ponent. The values of af31 and H 1 as determined ~
Site
Radial Vertical Transverse by the method of least squares are given in s
Weaver --1.576 -1.766 -1.189 table 4.8. iI
D.C ..................... -1.384 -1.548 -1.286 4
Poughkeepsie .... -1.431 -1.475
-1.497 -1.083 ~
Flat Rock - -1.255 l
Strasburg-! ...... -1.086 -1.548 -1.389
Strasburg-2 ...... -2.148 -2.346

An analysis of variance test was performed on


data from all sites grouped together by com-
-2.046

A l i;
ponent to determine if significant differences in
slope existed because of site effects. There was a
:
:5
10
!
significant difference in slope with site for radial
and vertical components but not for the trans-
verse component. Examination of the standard
deviations on figures 4.9 to 4.11 indicates a 1.0
greater spread in the data for the transverse Q
component. .4
No attempt was made to combine these data 0.1 10 100 !
beyond an average slope, p1 The intercepts, Ku, CHARGE (EIGHT PER DELAY, 100 lb ~
i
for each test were calculated using the average
20
slope, p1, for each component at each site. Dis-
tances were determined in units of 100 feet to 10.
reduce the variance in the intercept and to re-
duce extrapolation. Therefore, the values of Ku ".5
.
~
B
represent the particle velocity at 100 feet and
are summarized in table 4.8. This table and :::'
figures 4.9 to 4.11 show that .the level of vibra- ~

tion generally increases as cha~ weight per 1.0


Q
jelay increases. Equation 4.14 can now be writ- .5
ten as 0.1 10 100
v = KuDII, (4.15) CHARGE WEIGHT PER DELAY, 100 lb

where Dis now in units of 100 feet and p1 is the 8.0


average slope of the j sets of data at the ith site.
Generalizing equation 4.15 gives c
v = H 1 (DfWu) " (4.16) ~- o Weover
l'
;.
where D =distance in units of 100ft, ~ a D.C. II
~ 4. Pouohkeepsie [;
W 1J = maximum charge weight per delay -= 1.0
for each test in units of I 00 pounds,
Flat Rock
Strasburv-1
"~
..
'~
and H 1 =velocity intercept at DfW 1 for = .3
D
Strosburv-2
1
all the tests at the ith site. 0.1 10 100
CHARGE WEIGHT PER DELAY, 100 lb
A comparison of equation 4.15 and 4.16 shows
that the following relationship must exist: Figure 4.12.-Particle velocity intercepts versus
Ku = H 1Wu-ll,, i4.17) charge weight per delay, radial component.


---
8i ....
-----~-- ------~
GENERATION AND PROPAGATION OF GROUND VIBRATIONS FJlOM BLA..STING 47

Table 4.8. - Summary of !!., ! I aa. I and H, data by 9!!!IT}'

Maxi.a Radial

I aa, I
Vertical Transverse
charge

I I XsJ'
I o:e, I
r ..t KtJ B, KaJ H,
per delay, in/sec allt H,
id/sec in/sec
1b
Weaver
i ... 600 9.88 0.830 2.24 7.61 0. 753 2.13 1.~9 0,710 0.675

,....... -- -- --- -- --- ---


4 200 3.72 3.12 .817
1,400 22,1
200 3.34 -- -
18.4
3. 77 -
3.35
.874
--
-- -- -- ---
10 ... 200 3,95 3.51 .992
u ... 3,000 35.2 -- 23.3 7.94
18 ... 200 4.88 -
-- 3.60 - .- 2.07
-- .-
-
--
27 ... 800 13.3 12.9 4.27
32 ... 1 218 16.9 - 13.2
D C
- 4 19 -
45 ... 37 1.38 0.774 2.52 1.92 o. 741 2.96 1,16 0.525 1.22
46 31 .947 -- ---
.997 -- -- .603 -- -
--
50 ... 70 1.81 2.17 .875
n ... 31 1,08 -- 1.10 - -- .624
--- --
- --
26 .586 .897 .461
~: 25 1 15 - - 1.37 - 637
PouEhkeepsie
55 ... ~20 - o. 724 1.09 6.59 0.802
--
0.861 -- --- ---
" ---
-
---
1,522 6. 73 6,94
631!
6351!.
1,249
-
9.80
7.64
-- 11.4
8. 76 -- -- -- --
6-\!1, I 200
-
2.3~
--
- -
--
2.00 -- --- -
--- -
6-\1! .. 1.31 1.00
-- --- ---
6511 1,405 5.01 3.60
651!
67.
-
1 355
8.9~
6.58
-- --
6.81
6,04 - - --
75 ... 1,04
71
79, I

Strasbun-1
96 1,120 6,37 0,696 0.906 10.4 0.742 1.45 9.37 0,762 1.54
99 ...
101
~68
1,600
5.8~
7.58 --- -- 12.1
12.7
-- -
--
11,2
13.1
-- ---
103 589 3.23 - 6.13 -- 7.90 -- .
--- -- --- --
104 1,330 4.06 8.08 11.9
106 1,380 5.46 9.48 -- 12.6 -- --
---
108 ... 1,600 4.91 8. 71 2.23
109
uo ...
865
360
3.54
1.99
-- 5.89
3.18
-- -- 1.90
1.26
-- --
111 367 2.28 - - 3,75 - - 1.35 -
s trasburg .. 2
98 605 31,8 1.21 4.04 36.3 1,49 2.30 29.2 1,05 3.82
100 475 34.7 -- -
-
29,4 - -- 24.6 -- --
-- u.o
102 ... 343 15.7 11.8
105 ...
107
1,325
1 250
106
71.7
-- --
120
JU,9 - -- 58.1
48.8 -- --
..
The value of a can be determined empirically the slopes, a 1, were determined by the method of
&om the data if equation 4.17 is rewritten as: least squares and are given in table 4.9. An
(KIJ) -1/131 = (H1) - 11fJ1WIJ 4 (4.18) analysis of variance test performed on these data
lfWtl. is a scaling factor, then a plot of (R.t,) -1/llt showed that all the data for each component can-
versus WIJ on log-log coordinates should result in not be pooled as a single set, but that an average
the data grouping about a series of straight lines a for each component can be used for all sites.
having a slope of a. If a can be shown to have These average values of a. one for each com
a single unique value, then these lines would be ponent, are given in table 4.9. Statistical t tests
~llel, but a separate line would exist for each showed that there was no significant difference
ate and component. The average values of p1 for between each of these average slopes and a theo-
each site and component, from table 4.7, were retical value of 0.5. Therefore, using standard
used to cakulate the values of (KIJ) -11111 These statistical procedures and a slope of 0.5, straight
values are shown plotted as a function of W IJ in lines were fitted to the data given in figures
figures 4.12B, 4.UB, and 4.14B. The values of 4.12B, 4.13B, and 4.14B. These straight lines hav-
48 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR. EFFECI'S ON STRUC'l'l.1RE.S

100

A
A

.u
....
..5
10

10
..,;;-

1.0

1.0
.8 .4

l
0.1 10 100 0.1 10 100
CHARGE WEIGHT PER DELAY, 100 lb CHARGE WEIGHT PER DELAY, 100 lb

20 20

10 10

---~#
:
....
u
: 8
.!:

~'
'
.!:

~-:.:
/
... ~..
...-:: .....
.
...... ,. 0

"' 1.0
0
~.,/"6
....

.5
10 100 I 10 100
0.1
CHARGE WEIGHT PER DELAY, 100 lb CHARGE WEIGHT PER DELAY, 100 lb

c
6
o weaver
o D.C.
6 PouQhkeepsie
t:. Pou!jhkeepsie
1.0 Flo! Rock
Flat Rock
StrosburQI
Slrosburo-2
.3L-~~~~~_.~~~~~~~~w
0.1 I 10 100 10 100
CHARGE WEIGHT PER OELJ.Y, 100 lb CHARGE WEIGHT PER DELAY, 100 lb

Figure 4.13.-Pardcle velocity intercepts versus Figure 4.14.-Particle velocity intercepts versus
charge weight per delay, vertical component. charge weight per delay, transverse component.

ing a slope of 0.5 are par11llel, and their separa- 4.12C, 4.13C, and 4.14C show log-log plots of t~e
tion is a function of test site. (Ku) -111ft/ (H 1) -111ft values versus W 0 , charge
If the site effect can be removed by normal weight per delay. These data were treated by
izing the data, then a value of a c,an be calculated component, and the results of analysis of vari
using the data for all sites for each component. ance tests indicated that one line could be used
Dividing each side of equation 4.18 by (HJ -111'1 to represent all the data for one component. The
gives: statistically determined slopes and intercepts are
(4.19) given in table 4.10. The slopes in table 4.JO are
The variation in intercepts associated with a site closer to the theoretical value 0.5 than the aver
effect no longer exists because of the normalizing age slopes given in table 4.9. A more accurate
procedure as all intercepts now are unity. Figures slope is obtained by using all the data than by
BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECI'S ON STRUCTUitES 49

grouping the data by site. Additionally, the in- The peak particle velocity of each component
tercepts (table 4.1 0) of the straight lines in figures of ground motion can be related to distance and
U2C, 4.13C, and 4.14C are dose .to the theo- charge weight per delay interval by an equation
retica~ value of 1.0 predicted by equation 4.19. of the form:

(4.20)
Tabl~ 4.9.-Valua of a Thus, when particle velocity is plotted on log-log
coordinates as a function. of scaled distance,
Component D fW"", straight lines with a slope of fl1 can be
Site placed through the data from each site and
Radial Vertical Transverse
component.
Weaver .....~--- 0.527 0.427 0.598 The method of scaling distance by the square
D.C................................558 .474 .412 root of the charge weight per delay as determined
Poughkeepsie .............. .506 .546
Flat Rock .................... .568 .523 .566 empirically is a satisfactory procedure for re-
Strasburg-! ................ .637 .479 .550 moving the effect of charge weight on the ampli-
Strasburg-2 ................ .567 .637 .516 tude of peak particle velocity. Other investigators
Average cz .....................545 .491 .569
have suggested that cube root scaling be used, be-
cause it can be supported by dimensional ana-
lysis. Cube root scaliqg can be derived from
Tabk 4.10.-Slopes and intercepts from combined data dimensional analysis if a spherical charge is as-
sumed or if a cylindrical charge is assumed whose
Component Slope, a Intercept height changes in a specified manner with a
Radial ........................................ 0.513 0.998 change in radius. Taking the case of a sphere,
Vertical .................................... .497 1.01 a change in radius results in a volume increase
Transverse .............................. .516 .976 proportional to the change in radius cubed.
Weight is usually substituted for volume. The
relationships result in cube root scaling. Blasting,
as generally conducted, does not provide a scaled
Statistical analysis of the unsealed particle experiment. Charges are usually cylindrical. The
velocity-distance data as presented in figures 4.9 height of the face or depth of lift are usually
to 4.1 I showed that none of the data could be fixed. Therefore, the charge length is constant.
grouped by site or component. Moreover, the Charge size is varied by changing hole diameter
standard deviations of these data about the re or the number of holes. The fixed length.of the
gression line, assuming they could be grouped by charge presents problems in dimensional analysis
site, varied from 42 to 136 percent. I these data and prevents a complete solution. However, a
are scaled by W"" which is the square root of change in radius, while holding the Jength con-
the charge per delay and similar analyses are stant results in a volume increase proportional to
performed, a significant reduction in the spread the radius squared. This indicates that scaling
of the data is achieved. The same basic data should be done by the square root of the volume
plotted in figures 4.9 to 4.11 as particle velocity, or weight as customarily used. It is the geometry
v, versus distance, D, have been replotted in involved, cylindrical charges, and the manner in
figures 4.15, to 4.17 as particle velocity, v, versus tvhich charge size is changed by changing the
scaled distance, D fW'>~~. Comparing these figures diameter or number of holes which results in
shows that the total spread in the data has been square root scaling being more applicable than
reduced considerably. Analysis of variance tests cube root scaling to most blasting operations.
after scaling shows that of the 17 possible group- The Bureau data, if analyzed using cube root
ings of data by site and component, no significant scaling, does not show a reduction in the spread
differences existed in eight of the groups. The of the data which would occur if cube root scaling
standard deviations now varied from 28 to 5~ were more appropriate. In summary, the em-
percent, a significant reduction in the spread of pirical results and a consideration of the geometry,
the data. The fact that one line cannot be used including the procedure used to change charge
to represent all the data from one component is size, and dimensional analysis indicate that data
probably a result of such variables as burden, of the .type from most blasting should be scaled
spacing, charge geometry, and soil and rock by the square root of the charge weight per
properties. delay. -
50 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR. EFFECTS ON STJlUCl'UR.ES

7.0
6.0
4.0 FLAT ROCK


A
2.0


1.0
.8 ~
.6 ii
.,u
.4 t
j
II>
......
.5
>-
1
!:::
0
g
.I
.08
..'~
j
w .06 ....
> J
w 3.0 ~
...J 'J
0 ~
2.0
i=
a:: :
j
<{
a. ~
1.0
~
<{ .8 1

w .6 ~
a.
.4 '
1 f
'
.2
4
Symbol Test
.I Symbol Test 0 98
.08 0 100
a 56 Symbol Test 102


.06 63E 45 A 105
63SE 0 46 107
.04 0 64N A 50
64E 0 51
I>
<I
65N
65E 52
.02
67 54

.01 ~~~--~--~~~~~
56 8 10 20 40 60 I00 200 6 8 10 20 40 60 100 200 6 8 10 20

SCALED DISTANCE, ft/1~7.


Figure 4.15.-Pea.k particle velocity versus scaled distance, radial component. ..

4.4-EFFECT OF METHOD OF INITIATION with Primacord delay connectors with initiation


A previous Bureau report (8) discussed the originating at the center row. The difference be-
effect on particle velocity amplitude of delay tween methods 1 and 2 was that in method 2
shooting initiated by three methods. Method 1 pairs of rows were parallel connected with Pri
consisted of connecting all holes in one delay macord delay connectors. Method S consisted of
period in series with Primacord. The groups of priming the charge in each hole with an electric ,. .
holes for each delay period were connected in millisecond-delay cap. Figure 4.18 illustrates the .
series with Primacord delay connectors. Method three methods of initiation.
2 consisted o holes in a row connected in series It was concluded from the analysis o these
with Primacord. Rows were connected in series data that method I produced a higher and more

~
'"'j
GENERATION AND PROPAGATION OF GROUND VIBiitATIONS FlitOM BLASTING 51

10.0 r-r-...-r-T---r---.-,.....,r-r--.......
8.0 Symbol Tnt
WEAVER FLAT ROCK STRASBURG-I
6.0 0 96
D 99
101
1':. 103
104
106
, 108
v 109
110
1.0
.8 "' Ill
.6
Symbol Test
1':. 2
tl 4
0 0 8
: v 9
'
.5
.I
10
12 tl
.,: , 18 1':.
!:: 27 0
u
g 30
1.1.1 .04
>
2.0
~
,...~ D.C.
a:
c
Q.

~
c
1.1.1
Q.

1':.

C>
Symbol Tnl
Symbol Test 1':. 55
0
1':.
45
46
50
...
D 56
63 E
63SE
Symbol Tnt
0 98
51 0 64N 0 100

0
52 C> 64E
1':.
102
105
54
<I
6!1N
65E 107
67
. 01~--~~--~----~~~--~
3 4 6 8 10 20 40 60 100 200 6 8 10 20 40 60 100 200 6 8 10 20 40 60 100
SCALED DISTANCE, ft/lb"z

Figure 4.16.-Peak particle velocity versus scaled distance, vertical componenL


'
consistent vibration level at a given scaled dis- Primacord connecting holes in a row. For initia
tance than either method 2 or S. The burden tion methods 2 and S, the scatter in delay in-
and spacing in these tests were generally less than terval connectors did not appear to result in
10 feet. The high detonation rate of Primacord appreciable addition of vibrations radiating from
permitted the vibrations radiating from each hole each hole. The vibration levels from methods 2
in a row in methods I and 2 to add together and S were approximately the same.
at a distance from the blast. The vibrations ap- As an adjunct to these results, data were ob-
parently resulted from the simultaneous detona- tained to directly compare the vibration levels
tion of the total charge for all the holes of the from instantaneous blasts, Primacord connector
row. The scatter in the firing time of Primacord delayed blasts, andfor electric cap delayed blasts
connectors or electric delay caps used to connect in selected quarries. Data were obtained from
rows is greater than the detonation time of the five quarries: Weaver, Flat Rock, Bloomville.
52 BLASTING VIBilATIONS AND THEIR EFFEcrs ON S'IllUCTUJlES

WEAVER STRASBURG-I
2.0
0
fo

'il
Symbol Test
tl. 2

u
.2 -
0
0
4
8

tl.
.,
CD 'il 9 Symbol Test
......
r::::

10 0 75
>-
1-
- .I
.08
12
18
27
tl.
0
78
79 'il
Cl
.06
u 32 .&
g .04
~ 3 4 6 8 10 20 40 706 810 20 40 60 100 6 8 10 20 40 60
w
...J
u 2.0
~ Symbol Test
0::
~
a.. 1.0 D.C.
0-
45
46
:::.:: .8 tl. 50
~ 0 51
w .6
a..
.4

0
52
54
J

.2

.I
Symbol Test
Il
.08
.06
0 - 98 !
j
0 100
. 04
tl.
102
105
107
.02 1
20 40 60 100 200 10 20 40 60 100

SCALED DISTANCE, ft/1~~


Flgure 4.17.-Peak particle velocity venus scaled distance, transverse component.

Shawnee, and Jack. A description of each site is pendix A, figures A-1, -5, -7, -9, and -21.
1
~
given in Appendix D. Data from 32 blasts are Additional vibration data were recorded in these i...
included. The number of delays varied from 0 to quarries, but only those data directly applicable
14, and charge weight per delay ranged from 80 to this study were included. Only data recorded
to 4,620 pounds. over a similar or parallel propagation path were
used to insure exclusion of directional effects.
4.4.1-Experimental Procedure
Data are not compared among quarries, only
Plan views of the test sites are shown in Ap- within quarries, so that geologic effects could be l

- --~"'- -------
j
. -
- . .. . -- . ~
r

GENERATION AND PROPAGATION OF GROUND VIBRATIONS FROM BLASTING 53

v = H (D JW*') "= (4.21)


Analysis of variance indicated that the data from
the several shots at a given quarry could not be
grouped, but an average slope p.,. {Jy, or Pt was
HoiH series connecllld wilt! Prlmacord acceptable for each component (radial, vertical,
Rows series connected wi Ill Prim a cord
delay connecn:.r. or transverse) at each quarry. These average
slopes are given in table 4.11. The appropriate
average slope was then used to calculate the
value of v at a scaled distance of 10.0 for each
__...,___.______.,___ .,_,~I millisecond
component, for each blast at a given quarry.
This results in a value, H 10r> H 1o-r. or H 10v
within the range of the observed field data,
while H would have been an extrapolated value.
These values are tabulated in table 4.11.
~-~--~.__-~--~--+---o Inspection of these H 101 values indicated that
vibration levels from Primacord delayed blasts
were generally higher than the levels ;from in-
stantaneous bias~, while the vibration levels
from electric cap delayed blasts were generally
} 2 less than the levels from instantaneous blasts.
Holes series connected with Prlmacord
Polrs of rows parallel connected wllh Therefore, the vibration levels from Primacord
Prlmocord delay connectors delayed blasts were higher than those from elec-
tric cap delayed blasts. Apparently the inherent
scatter in time of Primacord delay connectors was
less than the inherent scatter in the time delay of
electric delay caps. Primacord delay connectors

/IIIII
appear to result in constructive interference or
addition of the seismic waves, and electric caps
with greater scatter result in destructive inter-
ference or a decrease in vibration levels. The
12!1 100 75 50
Millisecond
25 0 data from the Weaver quarry where all three
J methods were observed appears to bear out this
Millisecond cap In each hole conclusion.
Rows of holes have some delay period
The results were not obtained from a rigorous
analysis but do indicate a trend whereby some
Figure 4.18.-Three methods of initiating bluts.
reduction in vibration level can be attained if
necessary. There are unexplained differences,
such as the high level from test 18 at Weaver or
ignored. The Weaver quarry offered a compari- test S6 from Bloomville. These may reflect the
son among instantaneous, Primacord delay, and normal variation to be expected in such data.
electric cap delay initiated blasts. At the othe~ The trend is believed to be both valid and sig-
quarries, Primacord or electric cap delay initi- nificant.
ated blasts are compared with instantaneous
blasts. Table 4.11 summarizes the blast data. The 4.5-EFFECT OF GEOLOGY, INCLUDING
tquare root of the maximum charge weight per DIRECTION OF PROPAGATION
delay was used to scale the data. The peak AND OVERBURDEN
particle velocities, associated frequencies, and The data presented in section 4.!J is indicative
shot-to-gage distances are given in Appendix C, of geologic effects which give rise to differences in
tables C-1, -5, -7, -9, and -21. propagation which are apparently due to direc-
tion of propagation. If a site is horizontally
4.4.2-Data Analysis stratified or of massive rock with horizontal
Plots of peak particle velocity versus scaled isotropy and uniform overburden, little differ-
shot-to-gage distance were made for each shot. ence in wave propagation would be expected
Straight lines were fitted to the data using a with direction. Conversely, if there is structural
propagation equation of the form: dip, geologic complexity, anisotropy, or any type
54 . BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON STRUCTUilES

Table 4.11. - Summary - method of initiation tests by quarry

Particle velocity Average


!lo. !lo. Type Delay Hu:.chg/ Total slopes
Test of intercepts in/sec
of of interval, delay, charge,
holes delays delay 1 msec lb lb '\or I 1\o I 1\o
Weav er
15 291 6 EDC 25 1,100 6,400 ---- o. 733 ---- -
16 147 6 EDC 25 484 3,234 1.75 --
17
19
60
3
6
2
EDC
PDC
25
9
420
200
1,680
600
--
3.97
.463
1.86
--
0.961 -
20 7 6 PDC 9 200 1,400 2.66 2.18 1.45 -
5
11
7
15
6
14
PDC
PDC
17
17
200
200
1,400
3,000
4.85
2.92
3.53
2.27
1.52
1.31
--
6, 3 2 PDC 34 200 600 3.00 2.05 .914 j. -1.66
7 7 6 PDC 34 200 1,400 2.48 1.57 .819 J,. -1.66
13 15 14 PDC 34 200 3,000 2.78 2.32 .990 ~ -1.24
27 13 3 PDC 17 BOO 2,600 3.63 1.92 1.09 -
9.
10
1
- 1
0
0
IHST
IHST
0
0
200
200
200
200
2.10
2.48
1.86
1.75
.613
.698
--
18 1 0 IHST 0 200
~g
3.13 1.73 1.46 -
2
8 ...
12
3
7
15
0
0
0
IHST
IHST
IHST
0
0
0
600
1,400
3000
1,400
3 000
2.56
2.83
2.41
1.46
1.70
1.16
.712
.698
1.04
---
75 - -1.32
78, - -1.45
79 - .99

36 ... - -1.17
76 - -1.46
77. - -1.29

81 ... - -1.37
82, - -1.65
83 .... - -1.40

165 122 7 EDC 25 3,003 16,650 .970 ,923 .835


166 125 7 EDC 25 2,565 16,950 .923 .811 .771
j. - -1.34
J,. -1.17
167 ... 128 25 3,124 18,200 1.36 1.17 1.00
168, 1
7
0
EDC
I!IST 0 150 150 1.52 1.75 .861 s, -1.14
1
EDC Electric delay cap, PDC Primacord delay connector, I!IST Instantaneous.

of lineation, such as gneissic, schistose, or joint whether or not similar effects were present in
system, propagation may differ with direction. In particle velocity recordings.
several quarries, gage lines were laid,put to study In this section, no attempt has been made to
this effect. present a rigorous analysis of the data. For
Investigations were similarly conducted in the example, no correlation has been attempted
same rock type over a large region to determine between rock properties and amplitude of vibra-
if amplitudes and attenuation rates were com- tions. The results presented are intended to
parable. Investigations were conducted in sev- illustrate in a gross manner what correlations,
eral rock types to determine what correlations, if or lack thereof, and what range of vibrations
any, exist among rock types. Appendix D de should and can be expected under certain condi:
scribes briefly the geology at each site. tions and to summarize the propagation char-
An earlier Bureau bulletin (16) indicated acteristics of the. quarries visited.
that thickness of overburden had a direct effect
on the amplitude and frequency of displacement 4.5.1-Geology and Direction
recordings. For equal explosive charges and dis- As stated previously, little difference in propa-
tances, gages on rock outcrops gave lower ampli- gation characteristics due to direction should be
tudes and higher frequencies than gages on expected for those quarries with simple geology
overburden. Because overburden thickness varies whether bedded or massive. At the Jack quarry
from quarry to quarry and within some quarries, (geology as noted in Appendix D) , two in
brief, simple tests were conducted to determine strumentation arrays, as shown in figure 4.19,
GENERATION AND PllOPAGATION OF GROUND VIBRATIONS FltOM BLASTING 55

Jock Quarry
Radial Vertical Transverse

Array I _.

~2:
.I
.OB4!--!---!~~-~~--4~0 4!-~~~=---~--..J
40

Figure 4.19.-EJiect of direction, Jack Quarry. peak particle velocity venus scaled distance.

were located 50 apart. In the inset. vertically up ponents in the diabase. Directional effects in a
is north. Regression lines through the data for diabase mass are probably due to anisotropy
arrays I and 2 are shown. The heavy line indi- andfor jointing. In the diabase at the Manassas
cates a pooled regression line representing all the and West Nyack quarries, data from three direc-
data. The vertical lines represent the standard tions show little variation. Therefore, variation
deviation of the data about the line. The varia with direction is not necessarily expected in
tion in amplitude and attenuation (slope) be- diabase quarries. However, a fourth lirre at West
tween arrays 1 and 2 is small and can be ignored. Nyack, intermediate in direction with the other
Similar results would be expected in the data three lines. was of considerably lower amplitude,
from the limestone and dolomite quarries in possibly being separated from the blast by major
Iowa and Ohio. At Bellevue and at Ferguson, no . faulting or joints.
appreciable difference in the data from gage Variation with direction due to geology may be
arrays in two or more orientations was noted. large or small. Such variation is not predictable;
At Culpeper and at Webster City, there was a West Nyack, with little, and Centreville, with
distinct difference in amplitude but not in at large variations, are both diabases. Ferguson, in a
tenuation with direction. The data from Cui- ftatlying limestone showed relatively large varia
peper are shown in figure 4.20. Although the tion. The primary conclusion that can be drawn
geology is less complex at Webster City, data is that generalizations cannot be made with
obtained in two directions there resemble those reference to the effect of geology in the grossest
at Culpeper. sense on propagation variations with direction
Data from the Strasburg and Centreville quar either within or among quarries.
ries displayed the most variation with direction.
Strasburg data, treated separately in section 4.5, 4.5.2-Effect of Rock Type on Vibration Levels
represent differences which are probably at Investigations were conducted in the following
tributable to orientation with respect to strike rock types: limestone, dolomite, diabase, granite-
and dip of dipping beds. In a diabase at Centre- type, sandstone, and a quartz-sericite schist. Data
ville, variation in the radial component (figure from similar rock types have been combined.
4.21) was as great as at Strasburg. Less variation The limestones and dolomites have been grouped
was noted in the vertical and transverse com together. The granite-type rocks included
56 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR. EFFECTS ON STKUCI'URE.S

"
023!-J4L-~,-~.o~--:-_to:--~40~-f.60::--":'!I00:-:--200~ :s 4 6 10 20 40 60 100 200 :s 4 s 10 20 40 60 100 200
SCALED DISTANCE, lt/lb'ft

Figure 4.20.-Effect of direction. Culpeper Quarry. peak particle v.:1ocity versus scaled distance.

4. Centreville Quarry
Radial

SCALED

Figure 4.21.-Effect of direction. Centreville Quarry. peak particle velocity versus scaled distance.

granite-gneisses, a granite-diorite, and a gneissic The data collectively show a scatter of almost a
diorite. The data from the quartz-sericite schist factor of 5. In figures 4.22 to 4.25 the dash
were grouped with the data from the granite-type lines represent the envelope of data points fro
rocks. all quarries instrumented. Both lowest and high
The data from tests in 12 limestone or dolo- est amplitudes were observed in limestone an
mite quarries are shown combined in figure 4.22. dolomites.
GENERATION AND PROPAGATION OF GROUND VIBllATIONS FROM BLASTING 57

L l - ltiHI Dclclt
Ro~lol

Quarry
Wtovtr
Flo! Rot*
Forvusoa
Pall
0. BtlltYYt
t> Wtbt!tr
0 810i>lllvlllt
o SIIGonn
0 Unl101 Fu,_
0 Hamilton
1 Pouvhttopslt
~ ~g:t;::~
.1)14 6 10 20 10 20 40 60 100 200 400


Figure 4.22.-Combined data, limestone and dolomite quarries, peak particle velocity versus scaled
distance.

6,

Diabase
Radial

\
~ \
\
\
\
\
\
\
Querry
ChontiUy
\
a Monouos
G CentreHit
\
W. Nyock \
.()44
6 10 20 40 60 100
SCALED i'STANCE, lt/lb\fr

Figure 4.23.-Combined data, diabase quarries, peak particle velocity versus scaled distance.

Figure 4.2S gives the data from 4 quarries in types. These data are also of lower amplitude
diabase where there was a greater variation in than the composite of all rock types shown with
slope than for the limestones, but this greater dashed lines.
variation may be fortuitous due to the limited Figure 4.25 shows the data from sandstone at
number of quarries investigated in diabase. It the Culpeper quarry. Data from one quarry are
should be noted that the diabase data span the not representative of the range from a rock type.
limits of all rock types. It can only be stated that again the data fall
The data from the granite-type rocks are com- within the dashed lines representing all rock
bined in figure 4.24. From quarry to quarry, types.
these data show less spread than the other rock Two facts need stressing. Fint, the data from
58 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEill EFFECI'S ON STRUCTl!RES

Quarry
Buchanan
.a HICont
a Jock
~ !l<lowtll
b. Washington, 0. C.
0 Littleillt Oom Site

40
SCALED OISTAIICE, ftllbl;

Figure 4.24-Combined data, granite-type quarries, peak particle velocity venus scaled distance..

Ouarrr
Culpper

200

Figure 4.25.-Sandstone quarry data, peak particle velocity Tenus scaled distance.

each quarry for each component has been repre- will lie within plus or minus 1 standard devia
sented by a single line, with the exception of tion (vertical lines) of the regression line; 95
Strasburg. This may or may not be the best percent will fall within plus or minus 2 standard
method (see figures 4.19 to 4.21). However, us- deviations. On this basis, the presentation of the
ing statistical methods, 67 percent of the data data is believed valid. Second, the composite lines

- ~--- -- -- -- -----
- . . - ' ..
GENERATION AND PJlOPA.GATION OF GllOUND VlBilATIONS FllOM BLASTING 59

for all rock types as shown by the dashed lines in However, other effects are observed. Tbe
figures 4.22 to 4.25 represent more than 99 per- initial particle velocity pulse arrives proportion
cent of the data obtained. This does not mean ately earlier at stat~ons on little or no bedrock
that all data from all quarries would fall be by an amount attributable to the missing over-
tween these lines, but most data wouldbe ex- burden. The frequency of vibration with less
pected to lie within these limits. overburden is two or three times that recorded
on thicker overburden. Displacements obtained
4.5.!--0verburden by integration of particle velocity are one-half to
Several tests were conducted to determine the one-third the level expected if the overburden
effect of overburden on particle velocity ampli thickness had been uniform. These results are in
tude. The results in all cases showed no effect on general agreement with the conclusions of
amplitude. Figure .4.26 is typical of the results. Thoenen and Windes (16). Displacements are
The filled-in symbols represent gage stations on higher and frequencies are lower on thick over-
bedrock or with less overburden. The open sym burden. These changes are such that the result-
bois represent gage stations on overburden. At ing particle velocity is not appreciably affected.

I
I
t
the Webster City quarry, stations 5 and 6 were
placed at the bottom of a valley and had M feet
Jess overburden. At the Bellevue quarry, stations
4.6-APPUCATION OF FOURIER
ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES TO
f l, 2, and !I were on bedrock, and the balance VIBRATION DATA
t of the stations were on 10 feet of overburden. In The development and utilization of high-speed
: both cases, regression lines were fitted to the data electronic digital computers has brought about
, omitting the stations with less or no overburden. the widespread application of Fourier techniques
I It is concluded for the tests shown that no to all types of seismicdata. The Fourier integral
1 amplification of particle velocity amplitude oc- representation of a function, f (t) , may be simply
t curs due to presence or absence of overburden. given by:
I f (t) .,:t F () (4.22)
t where f (t) is the function in the time domain.
I and F (ro) is the transform off (t) and represents
the function in the frequency domain. Tbe
process is reversible, so that if either f (t) or
I F (111) is known, the other function may be de-
termined (2, J).

r
f
!~ The authors feel that there is a hidden fallacy
in the use of Fourier techniques; that is. if the
end product of the process is to determine the
frequency content of the signal, nothing is

~
gained. Familiarity with seismic-type records and
their transforms leads one to conclude that there
l is little if anything (perhaps phase information)
~ ~ contained in the transform that cannot be dis-
I ! cemed from the original records. However, if the
l lot:
<( purpose is to determine ground response spectra.
rf' ~ to filter, to determine energies. to integrate or
Webster Cityl Normal
Bellevue J overburden differentiate, or to study absorption or many
other phenomena, then Fourier analysis provides
Webster Cltyl Thin or no a. strong and useful tool
Bellevue J overburden The primary use of Fourier techniques was to
determine displacements and accelerations from
.OIII:-0--2.L0---40"--60"'--,..L00---200"--....1400 particle velocity records and to examine the rela-
SCALED DISTANCE, ft/lblt
tionship of instantaneous and delayed-type
blasts. While the details of the mathematics are
~. Figure 4.26.-Effect of overburden, peak particle available (2, J) and are not presented here. the
~ velocity venw ICaled distance. general procedures are described.

~
"
~
60 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIIt EFFEctS ON STRUC'I'UIES

velocity

UJO Particle velocity


0
::::::>
1-
:J
Q..
UJ
0
::::E ::::::>
<t 1-
:JO
>-
0:::
Q..
::::E
<t <t
0:::
1-
m >-
0::: . 0:::
<t
<o 0:::
!:::
I.D
0:::
<t
Displacement Displacement

0 0 80 120 160
TIME milliseconds FREQUENCY, cps
TIME. DOMAIN FREQUENCY DOMAIN

Figure 4.27.-comparison of particle velocity and displacement in the time and frequency domains.

4.6.1-Displacement and Acceleration from propriate corrections, the inverse transform of


Particle Velocities the displacement or acceleration spectrum is
Many analyses, including integration and dif- taken, th~ result is the synthesized displacement- .~
ferentiation, are performed more easily in the or acceleration-time record. Figure 4.27 shows
frequency domain than on the original time tracings of a typical particle velocity-time record,
series data. The bulk of the data recorded in the the velocity spectrum, the displacement spectrum
field program were particle velOcity-time records. integrated from the velocity spectrum, and the
Using standard procedures, the pArticle velocity displacement-time record synthesized from the
records were converted to digital form with one displacement spectrum. This procedure was used
three-digit number representing each sample at in section 5.6 to evaluate the reliability of cal
approximately 1 millisecond intervals. These culating particle velocity from displacement or
data with a computer program were input to a acceleration.
computer. The coefficients, phase, and amplitude
were calculated for selected frequencies. This 4.6.2-Comparison of Instantaneous and Delay-
output is the amplitude spectrum or transform of Type Blasting Through Fourier Techniques
the original time function. By taking the inverse During the study of millisecond-delayed blasts,
transform of the spectrum, we synthesize or re- it was noted that the effect of delays was not only
generate the original time function. present in the amplitude but also in the wave
Jf the velocity spectrum obtained from the shape. Figures 4.1 and 4.2 from one- and seven-
velocity record is integrated or differentiated, the hole instantaneous blasts, respectively, are gen-
resultant is the displacement or acceleration erally smooth low-frequency records. Figure 4.5
spectrum, respectively. Base line shifts or digi- is from a seven-hole blast with a 9-millisecond
tizing errors may be corrected more easily and delay between holes. The traces in this figure
more adequately in the frequency domain than show a high frequency wave train of about 8 to
in the time domain. If after application of ap- 9-millisecond period. This is most noticeable on
GENERATION AND P:ROPAGATION OF G:ROUND VIBRATIONS ROM BLASTING 61

Vertica I corn.,onent

(/)
1.1..1
0
::J
1-
:J
Q.
2
<[

0
1.1..1
N
~
2
0::
0
z

so 0 80 160
FREQUENCY, cps FREQUENCY, cps

Figure 4.28.-Spectral amplitudes, radial and verticah:omponents, from a .5-hole, 9-m.illisecond-delayed


blast.

the vertical components. Figure 4.4 shows a simi- spectra for radial and vertical components at
lar phenomenon from a 7-hole, 34-millisecond various distances from a .5-hole, 9-millisecond de-
delayed blast. A longer duration as expected is lay blast. The spectral amplitudes have been nor
apparent from the longer delayed blast. malized to about 1.0 at the peak frequency. In
The higher frequencies generated by the de- these and ensuing plots, the spectra have been
~yed blast are a function of the interval delay truncated at a point where all higher frequencies
~me. If a number of identical amplitude-time have amplitudes less than 5 percent of the peak
Signals, each delayed from the previous by a de- amplitude. The spectra from an instantaneoUJ
Jay time, are summed, it can be shown mathe- shot are not shown, since the radial, vertical, and
matically that a periodicity comparable to the transverse spectra would all resemble the radial
delay time results (IJ) . Figure 4.28 shows the spectra of figure 4.28. Similarly. transverse spectra
62 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEilt EFFECTS ON SlllUC'I'Uil.ES

Radial component Vertical component I


j

0 160 200
FREQUENCY, cps FREQUENCY, cps

Figure 4.29.-Spectral amplitudes. radial and vertical components. from a 7-hole. 9-m.illiSecond-d.elayed
blast.

are not given in figure 4.28, becat'lse they would obtained for each velocity-time record. If the
resemble the radial spectra. In figure 4.28, there displacement at common successive times is
is little evidence of the delay interval on the plotted by pairs (radial-vertical. vertical-trans-
. radial spectra. while there is a general increase in verse, or radial-transverse), the trajectory of the
amplitude on the vertical spectra in the 100- particle is mapped out in a plane. Figure 4.80
120 Hz range as expected from 9-millisecond de- shows the R-V and R-T particle motion trajecto-
lays. The radial and vertical spectra from a 7 ries for one station from an instantaneous blast.
hole 9-millisecond delay blast are shown in figure The arrows denote a 10-millisecond sampling in
4.29. As the number of delays increases. there terval. For an instantaneous blast, these curves
should be a proportionately greater amplitude in are generally smooth. Figure 4.31 shows R.-V
the spectra for the frequency related to the delay particle motion trajectories for a ~hole, 9-milli
interval. This is shown in figure 4.29 as the radial second blast and a 7-hole. 9-millisecond blast.
spectra has some high frequency content, and the Although it is difficult to pick the instant of
vertical spectra contains much high frequency arrival of the energy from successive holes, the
energy. Figure 4.~ which is the velocity-time trajectory becomes more erratic as the number of
record for the same blast shows the same fre- delays increases.
quency content. The apparent lack of high-frequency signal in
By integrating the velocity spectra and syn the spectra and the velocity-time records for
thesizing, the displacement-time record may be radial and transverse motion (aa compared to
GENEJlATION AND PllOPAGATION OJ' GROUND VIBRATIONS ROM BLASTING 6!

,.
/
I ' ---. Rodioi-Tronsv- trojectoty
c
,;;
9 , r .. ,
""#::_
., - - - . . . . . __
-........
..:
z
w
2
w
(.)
<1:
..J
a.
Vl
\
\
",
,
I '-.
',
' '
~
........
....... ......

',\
.,
............

'
i5
,, "'-=---...... \
-........:.~--
w

- """'
(/)
....... .......... ..,
a::
~-2
z
<1:
a:
.......
.......... .......
................... __ ___
.,
.............. .:;;.
_......... --~----
t-

Figure 4.30.-Particle motion trajectories, 300 feet from an instantaneous blut.

- ,, - ---.........
---
------------- RodlaiVoriicGI tn>jocto<y
_..,.. - -- 3Holo, 9-mllll- -

'-
~--
~ ,.,./.,_.. -.......
...........-,

--.... ..........

------------- .......................___ ~ '\


-- ~-----"
- -----------. .......,
............... ' .......

Figure 4.31.-RadiaJ..VerticaJ particle motion trajectories, 300 feet from S..hole, and 7hole,
9-millisecond-delayed blaau. .
64 BLASTING VIBRA110NS AND THEDl EFFECl'S ON STRUCTUIU!:S

vertical motion) may be a consequence of the 6.. Devine,J F., ll. H. Bed., A. V. C. Meyer, and W. I.
Duva . Effect of Charge Weight on Vibration
free halfspace in the vertical dii:ection. The Levels From Quarry Blasting. BuMincs llepL of
earth is more free to vibrate in the vertical direc- Inv. 6774, 1966, 57 pp.
tion and may carry higher frequency vibrations. 7. Duvall, W. I . C. F. Johnson, A. V. C. Meyer, and
However, the presence of higher frequencies J, F. Devine. Vibrations From Instantaneons and
MillisecondDelayed Quarry Blasts. BuMines llept.
should cause greater attenuation with distance of Inv. 6I5I, I963, M pp.
for the vertical component. This was true for al- 8. Duvall, W. I., J. F. Devine, C. F. Johnson, and
most every quarry blast recorded. A, V. C. Meyer. Vibrations From Blasting at Iowa
Limestone Quarries. BuMines llept. of lnv. 6270,
A similar and perhaps corresponding phe I963. 28 pp.
nomenon was apparent in the velocity-time rec- 9. Habberjam, G. M., and J. T. Wbetton. On Lue llela
ords (figures 4.1 to 4.4). The radial and trans- tionship Between Seismic Amplitude and Cba~ of
Expi0!11Ve Fired in R.outine Blasting Operauons.
verse component traces tend to oscillate for a Geophysics, v. I7, No. I, January 1952, pp. 116-
much longer time than the vertical traces. This 128.
may be the consequence of some type of trapped 10. Hudson, D. E., J. L. Alford, and W. D. Iwau. Ground
wave in the horizontal plane or the result of the AcceleratiOns Caused by Large Quarry Blasts. Bull.
of the Seis. Soc. of America, v. 51, No. 2. April
generation of Love waves at the surface. These J961, pp. 191-202.
lower frequency oscillations often being sustained 11. Ito, lcbiro. On the llelatiOllship Between Seismic
tend to mask higher frequency energies on the Ground Amplitude and the Quantity of Explosives
in Blasting. lleprint from Memoirs of the Faculty
radial and transverse components in both the of Eng., Kyoto Univ., v. IS, No. 11, April 1955, pp.
time and frequency domains. 5'19-587.
4.7-REU:RENCES I2. Morris, C. The lleduction of Ground Vibrations
From Blasting Operations. Engineering. Apr. 21,
I. Adams. W. M., R.. G. Preston, P. L. Flanders, D. C. 1950; pp. 4!10-433.
Sach~. and W. R.. Perrett. Summary R.eport of U. Pollack, H. N. Effect of Delay Time and Number of
Strong Motion Measurements, Underground Deto- Delays on the Spectra of ll1pple-Fired Shots. Earth
nations. J. Geophys. R.es. v. 66, No. !1, March 196I. quake Notes, v. M. No. 1, Marcb 1965, pp. 1-12.
pp. 90!1-942. 14. llicker, N. The Form and Nature of Seismic Waves
2. Blackman, R.. B., and J. W. Tukey. The Measure- and the Structure of Seismograms. Geophysics, v.
ment of Power Spectra. Dover Publications, New 5, No. 4, October I!HO, pp. MS-!166.
York, 1958, I90 pp. .
5. Bracewell, R.. The Fourier Transform and Its Ap- J!S. Teichmann, G. A., and R.. Westwater. Blasting and
plications. McGrawHill. Inc., New York, I965, Associated Vibrations. Engineering. Apr. 12, 1957,
S8I pp. PP 460-465.
4. Carder, D. 5., and W. K. Cloud. Surface Motion 16. Thoenen, J. ll., and S. L. Windes. Seismic Effects of
From Large Underground ExeiO!Iions, J. Geophys. Quarry Blasting. BuMines Bull. 442. 1942, 83 pp.
R.es., v. 64, No. 10, October 1959, pp. 147I-J487. 17. Willis, D. E., and J. T. Wilson. Maximum Vertical
5. Crandell, F. J. Transm'.ssion Coefficient for Ground Ground Displacement of Seismic Waves Generated
Vibrations Due to Blasting. J. Boston Soc. Civil by Expl0!1ive Blasts. Bull. of the Seis. Soc. of
Eng., v. 47, No. 2. April 1960, pp. 152-168. America, v. 50, No. !, July 1960. pp. 455-459


CHAPTER 5.-GENERATION AND PROPAGATION OF
AIR VIBRATIONS FROM BLASTING
5.1-INTRODUCTION amplitude of air waves with distance ~d the
depth of burial of charges as a facto.r m the
Noise is an undesirable by-product of blasting. reduction of air vibrations from blasting. The
Air vibrations are generated by the blast and are Ballistic Research Laboratories at Aberdeen
propagated outward. through the air under the Proving Ground, Maryland, have publi~hed in
influence of the existing topographic and atmos- formation concerning the decay of amplitude of
pheric conditions. Three m.echanis~s are us~lly blast-generated air waves with distance, the ef-
responsible for the generation of arr blast vtbra fects of depth of burial of the charges, and the
tions: The venting of gasses to the atmosphere prediction of fodtsing of blast waves c;tue to
from blown-out unconfined explosive charges, re- meteorological effects (4-6) . Under certam con
lease of gasses to the atmosphere from exposed ditions local regions of high overpressure can
detonating fuse, and ground motions resulting develop as a result of changes in the propagation
from the blast. The detonation of unconfined ex velocity of blast waves. The propagation v~locity
plosives results in the rapid release of all the may increase with altitude due ~o the extste?ce
gasses, heat, and light generated t~ be dissipated of temperature inversion or mcreased wtnd
in the atmosphere. The expandmg gasses do velocity at higher altitude, causing the blast
little useful work. in this type of blast, and large waves to be refracted downward to focal areas
amplitude shock. waves are generated in the air. some distance from the blast.
Unstemmed explosive charges in open boreholes Grant and others (2) investigated blast wave
still allows venting of the gasses to the atmos- generation and propagation for a noise abate-
phere. However, the partial confinemen~ allows ment program and established that wind velocity
some useful work. to be done and results m some and direction, barometric pressure, ;md atmos-
reduction of the amplitude of the air blast. pheric temperature had the most profound effect
Further confinement of the blast in the boreholes on the propagation of bla.st waves. . .
by the addition of stemming reduces the air Previous air blast studies dealt wtth pomt
bJasr by allowing a more gradual release of the source generation and ammunition disposal and
gasses by pushing out the stemming and through did not include data from mining rounds de-
the broken burden. The air vibrations generated signed to break. and move rock. Consequently,
by ground motion resulting from the blast are Bureau of Mines personnel made additional ob-
small. The surface acts as a piston moving the servations of air blast overpressures from mining
air above the point of detonation. Thus, the rounds at eight different crushed stone quarries.
quantity of air displaced by the ground motion il The blasts were recorded without regard to
small compared to the volume of gas released season, weather, atmospheric temperature condi
during a blast. Because the greatest amount of tions, or wind in order to cover the range of
noise is generated by venting gasses, the use of conditions under which these blasts are normally
stemmed charges with buried detonating fuse is detonated. These overpressure data are presented
a logical procedure to follow to reduce blast for comparison with the published curves and
noise. A concise presentation of the theory of observed data from other investigators.
generation and propagation of shock waves in
air can be found in standard text and reference 5.2-PREVIOUSLY PUBUSHED DATA
books (3).
Early studies by the Bureau of Mines (7, 8) A program of research of air blast damage was
established that pressure attenuation with dis- started by the Bureau of Mines in the early
tance greater than the inverse square might be 1940's. These early studies were concerned with
observed from blasts set off in the air and that the decay of amplitude of air blast with distance
doubling the weight of the charge increased the and damage to structures from air blast (7, 8).
maximum pressure by about 50 percent. The decay of amplitude of air blast with
Other investigators have studied the decay of distance was studied by detonating explosive
65
66 BL\.STING VIBRATIONS AND THElll EFFEcrs ON SlllUCIVI.ES

charges in air and measuring the increase in air


USBM doto ofttf Windn
pressure due to the passage of the blast wave at USBM 41.1:0n, wibrotion dofo
A BRl urron blast t11rv {l-
various distances from the point of detonation. 8 BRL stoltd dtPitt 'tz -::-
The explosive charges were detonated far enough C BRL 1toltd dtpt :~ ' ~
D 8RL "oltd dtpl- I 1/z -:;
SC:Gitd to eubt root of tbartt
above the ground to minimize the effects of -~
wtltltl
ground reftection on the pressure envelope. The
distances and the ~arge sizes were varied in a
controlled test program. The damaging effects
of air blast were studied by placing a frame of
mounted glass window panes in the vicinity of ....."'....
..
~
the blasts detonated in the air. Thus. the dis- ....
tances from the charge to the frame were varied,
as well as the charge weight. The weight of the ~
z; .01
charge detonated in the air varied between 0.5
and 1,800 pounds, and the shot-to-gage distances
varied from 10 to 17, I 00 feet. The distance from
the window frame positions to the charges was
varied to determine how far from various size
blasts damage occurred.
Figure 5.1 is a combined data plot of overpres-
sure versus scaled distance, where scaled distance
00 ~~~.~-----,~no-------,~oo~-----,~~oo~----~~~oo
is defined here as distance in feet divided by
SCALED DISTAIICE, D/W 1
1
the cube root of the charge weight in pounds.
The air blast data from 60 tests conducted by Figure 5.1.-Combined data plot, overpressure
Windes (7, 8) are represented by 16 data points. versus acaled distance.
The scaled distance representative of these data
range from about 12.5 to 8,400 ft/lb"'. Average fined in wells or drill holes in blocks of rock.
overpressure values for these tests range from In general, this study cGneluded that damage
0.006 psi to 8.4 psi. No detailed meteorological from air blast from actual quarry blasts was in-
data were recorded during these tests. Thus, no significant.
corrections can be made for the effects of atmos- The decay of amplitude of air blast with dis-
pheric conditions. tance was measured by the Ballistic Research
The author did not deduce a propagation law Laboratori~s (BRL), and these results were com-
from these data, but noted only that, in general, pared to theoretical values for a large number of
pressure attenuation with distance was greater tests conducted over a period of years. These
than the inverse square and that doubJing the studies led to observations of damage generated
charge weight increased the over~ressure by by air blast (4-6). During the course of BRL's
about 50 percent. investigation, meteorological data were collected
It was noted that the main air blast wave concerning temperature as a function of altitude
consisted of a positive pressure pulse of a few and wind direction and velocity both at the
milliseconds duration which rose quickly to its surface and aloft. The velocity of sound increases
maximum value and dropped off more slowly. 2 feet per second for each I degree centigrade
The positive phase is followed by a negative temperature increase and is increased in the.
phase of longer duration but less pressure downwind direction. Thus, in the case of a
change. The failure of window glass due to air temperature inversion or an increase of wind
blast can, in most instances, be distinguished velocity with altitude, the blast waves are re-
from breakage due to missiles. Fragmentation fracted downward and may converge at some
due to air blast in most instances will be out focal point at a large distance from the blast.
ward from the building with some pieces left in Increases of blast overpressure in such cases can
the frame. However, this will not be true if the be as much as a hundredfold.
glass is close to the blast source. Thus. at a dis- The decay of amplitude with distance was i
tance from the blast the projection and penetra determined from a large number of tests that in
tion of glass fragments is of no great importance. eluded data from very large blasts. The solid
It was found that window glass failure from air sloping lines on figure 5.1 show the decay of
blast did not occur when the blasts were con- amplitude with distance for surface blasts and
GENERA.TION AND PROPAGATION OF AIJl VIBRATIONS FROllof BLA.STING 67

Tabl 5.1. ~ O!.uu .... Vft!'!UU,I.U dft tot' v. ' ere- ap4
eep-r.
lt.n.ttw gu..rry, tt.a:o..au V. '%Mh ' ' Cl!!!:!fU ad onnnnun Uta for Svp!rtor ko.a
hebanatl 9u&m Gt-1uboro. .c,

.....
J.20. ..

125 ...
Max. etc.
leJJ:t.
lb
.1.200

150
""&
/bole.
l>
1611;.0

9-5
Bole
d1..-tt<r~
io
.s
2.5
-!'t
6.0

).0
"""""""
bu.rdea,
rt/lb!
l.61o

..
<OJ.. .
diataaee,
t't/tb~
2).4
67.1

Jt:6
.,..,..
...
..,..._..,
<).(ll.35
00353
0.0120
.OCil.'fO

126... 9ll 186.5 "5 8.0 1.2) 20.5


10.3
O.OU7
.00198
TNt. ''w - !!:!!:~! &Cilld ll-C:OO. 9!!!!:!1:
!!S,!USM:d'e ILI.ta for !!!:!!01'
c,
I*!!! "'--"
1 Cr-JUbol'O
10-3 o00l(l4

"....
Ja1.etts..
1~.
lJ>
Cbe
/...,..,
lb
Bole
..__..
1A
.. , s.-...
n
.
160. .. 690 6.0 1.0] 1.1!.5
~
Tbl $.2:. - Ch.u,e aDd ovgnu:11n ~t for Cul"Pu Cnuh.ct ll50
Sto11 C..my Qunrr Cuhcrn. Y4. 1.2.5
91.3

'"'
MI.Jf..crc.
/dd&'/ 0
lb
""&
/bole,
lb
!!ole
die.&'t~:r.
io St-
n
=. ......
tt/lb!
d.1t.&l:llf!ll!,
t<llb!
.,...,.
...
"'""""
l..61. 641< lOJ.O 2.~ 6.0 1.o6 28.4
28.4
9!1"
O.a2J'
,(I!OJ
.00l98
m ... 961 T"o :u;;, ... ll57 112-0 M 6.o 1.26 g.)7 0.0321

129 l.2a; 15"


2.~

2.15
s.o
5.0
1.19
1.18
15-5
12.7
""'"
O.lll
70-0 .00!518
so.e .QI.98 163 .. 816 1:!60 2.5 6.o 1-17 8.24 O.li!loO
61o.1 o0U9 8.24 .00.55
1.)0. .. .... 69-3 2.15 ... o l.<b 299- o.~
"31 -a:!er

'112
~
2.5
0:~
l)2 113 1.s 16.7
SO.l
'f.Ul !.7, .. CLara :!!!Pill aunuak.re dft.t for ~thUft Kaurlds Corpor.UhM
133... 686 68.6 2.15 ).0 l.lq 16.4 o.o-&3 Jat:k StOM 9uurx. htnbvra. va.
50.9 -~
163.

.....
.(X21JJ

1)5... 6)0 70.8 ).0 3.0 1.69 u.6


176.
0.15"
.o:>m
......
164 ...
Ja1, Cbso
/~.
lb
2965
"""
I""""
lb
100.0
Uolo
dital!te:l".
l.n
6.0
St-.
n
12.0
Scaled
bu.nl....
!'t/lbt
1.58
Scaled
..Usuu:o.:e,

...
t</lbt

)5.9
)
...........
pU
O.CIUO
0075"
t'bh ~.3 .... O.nae .and ~grf:Un dua for 0\.antllh Cru:ahed 58. .caQ1
Stone C!M!..!'Y Ourry. 0\an[illy v.,,
165 ... 3003 1:!6-0 ).5 1.0 Vi6 21-1 O.a201o

..
,. , -'""
/d.elay,
lb
c.....
/boll/~
lb
Uo1
dillllt'tcr,
1.o
-
"
;;e.;;::, _5<.,..
nil!
di.ftNle~t,

!'t/lbi ...
Over-
pl"e'SS~,
166...

167...
~5

)124
w.s
1~.o
3.5

3-5
1-0

10
1.66

..,
.a.o
69-"

21"
o.a230
.a2oll
o.oJ36
1)6... 1641 1"9.2 ).5 s.o 1.5. 22.7 O.<XJ56o :!6.3 -00938
50-0 .001.1.2 69-5 -00512
168... 150 150.0 3-5 6.o 1.88 ..e.g O.()()Q9l.O
109. .000450
161. .~10

T.abh $,4, - 01ual!' Bid O'nl9l't.un Ut.a for JlrN Yo:r\ TTH,
~ock CornrUoon Q!any. Wut HJsdt. Mfl.

.....
l.J!I ...
Mluc;.""b@i
/dd&T
lb
335
""&
/lv>J.e,
lb
335
,.,.
d.i_,':.~r.
io
6.)
St.~.
n
1.6.0
=
rt/lb!
Vs
~=~.
t't/1b~
82.8
98.6
...
over
pnsurt!'~

o.cnso
.oom
o.OOlo6o
Tblc !.8~ - O.uae aDd qvcnrutun d.at.a for lO<:k1irllle CNA.,
Stma 1 hu::., ()u!rry lockYllie Md, ,.

1!.0... 400 400 6.5 16.5 2.17 101.


6).6
us. 00530 J.69... 163 0.0051 ..
.00516
1~1 . )OJ 303 6.5 16.0 2.23 86.9 o.oo392 00297
105. .00313 .00300
.00303
102 325 325 ).) 19.0 2.18 82.) o.oo<o1s .003l7
l)l. .00)"9
50 8.0 Q.1 O.ooll35
70 ... .00520
8).0 .00]40
8).0 .OC94
lll.
..,._
.00.52

113

for scaled depths of burial of I, and 1


lb/ftl/8 , respectively. Both the depth of burial and
* * importance were wind velocity and direction,
barometric pressure, and temperature, respec
the distance have been scaled to the cube root of tively. The sound intensity and duration were
the charge weight. The overpressures are based found to be enhanced in the downwind direction.
upon standard sea level conditions and can be High barometric pressure and temperature were
corrected for barometric pressure by a multiplier found to relate to low intensity and duration.
that is the ratio of the pressures. The duration of the sound was found to increase
Studies of air blast in relation to noise abate- with increasing distance from the source under
ment were conducted by Grant, Murphy, and all conditions.
Bowser (2) . The objective of the study was to
determine the effect of weather variables on the 5.s-BUREAU OF MINES DATA
propagation of sound through the atmosphere. One of the objectives of the quarry vibration
The significant variables in the order of their study by the Bureau of Mines was to measure the
68 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR. EFFECTS ON STR.UCTUllES

amplitude of air-blast overpressures resulting taining a ratio of stemming height in feet to


from detonation of mining rounds in operating hole diameter in inches of 2.6 ftfin or greater.
quarries. Accordingly, measurements were made Under this condition, the burden, scaled to the
of the air blast amplitudes from 26 mining blasts cube root of the charge weight per hole, will
detonated in eight crushed stone quarries. The compare favorably with the scaled depth of
data were collected during the routine mining burial of the charge as used by the Ballistic Re-
operations without regard to atmospheric con- search Laboratories (5, 6). Also, the value of 2.6 J
ditions, time of day, rock type, or explosives used. ft/in for the stemming height to hole diameter 1
The burden and spacing were controlled by the ratio agrees with published data of Ash (1).
operators to achieve desired rock breakage, and It is interesting to note that only one point
the blasts were stemmed in accordance with the from the quarry blast data on figure 5.1 lies
blasting procedure practiced at each quarry. above a scaled depth of I. The maximum over-
Thus, the data obtained are representative of pressures measured did not exceed 0.16 psi, and
actual operating conditions. most of the overpressures are at least an order of
. The use of cube root scaling implies spherical magnitude lower. Thus, it is reasonable to as-
propagation from a point source. The configura- sume that a properly stemmed mining round de-
tion of a normal mining round does not conform signed u:f break and move rock efficiently will not
to a point source model, and burial of the generate air blast overpressures of a damaging
charges in long boreholes behind a shallow level under average operating conditions.
burden precludes either true spherical or hemis-
pherical propagation in the air over distances of 5.4-REFERENCES
a few thousands of feet. However, it has been I. Ash, Richard L The Mechanics of Rock Breakage.
common practice to scale air blast data to the Pit and Quany, v. 56, No. 5, September 1965, pp.
cube root of the charge weight. Therefore, the 118-125:..
2. Grant, R. L., J. N. Murphy, and M. L. Bowser.
Bureau of Mines air blast data (shot-to-gage Effect of Weather on Sound Transmission From
distances) have been scaled to the cube root of Explosive Shots. U. S. BuMines Rept. of Inv. 6921,
the maximum charge weight per delay. These 1967, Ill P.P
ll. Kenney, Gllbert F. Explosive Shocks in Air. The
data are presented in tables 5.1 through 5.8 and McMillan Company, New York, 1962, 198 pp.
are shown in figure 5.1 by 66 data points on the 4. Kingery, C. N., and B. F. Pannill. Peak Overpressure
Versus Scaled Distance for TNT Surface Bursts
overpressure versus scaled distance plot. (Hemispherical Charges). Ballistic Research Lab-
The confinement of an adequately stemmed orato.-ies Rept. No. 1518, Af.ril 1964, 22 pp.
5. Perkins, Beauregard, Jr., Pau H. Lorrain, and Wil
charge in a borehole in a mining round is the liam H. Townsend. Forecasting the Focus of Air
distance from the borehole to the free face, which Blasts Due to Met~-orolo~cal Conditions in the
is the burden. Thereore, the burden scaled to Lower Atmosphere. Ballistic Research Laboratories
Rept. No, 1118, October 1960. 77 PI?
the cube root of the charge weight per hole 6. Perkins, Beauregard, Jr., and Willu F. Jackson.
would be expected to correspond to the scaled Handbook for Prediction of Air Blast F"ocusing.
depth of burial of the charge as determined by Ballistic Research Laboratories Rept. No. 1240.
February 1964, 100 pp.
the Ballistic Research Laboratories (5, 6). 7. Windes. S. L Damage From Air Blast. Progress Re-
A careful study of the Bureau of Mines air port 1. BuMines Rept. of Inv. 5622. February l!H2.
blast data was made, and it was deter1n.ined that 18 pp.
8. _ _. Damage From Air Blast. Progress Report 2.
adequate stemming might be achieved by main- BuMines Rept. of lnv. 5708, June 1945, 50 pp.

. ..........-
~~.........._,. - .. ---- . ... --
.._ -
CHAPTER 6.-ESTIMATING SAFE AIR AND GROUND
VIBRATION LEVELS FOR BLASTING

6.1-INTRODUCTION variables cited will provide the greatest change


in vibration level at a given distance.
Blasting operators are often faced with the There are two approaches to the problem of
necessity of limiting vibration levels to minimize how to estimate charge size so that safe vibration
or eliminate the possibility of damage to nearby level limits will not be exceeded at a given dis-
residential structures or to reduce complaints tance. The first and best is to use instrumenta
from neighbors. As discussed in Chapter 5, the tion on blasts to determine within a quarry what
Bureau recommends a safe blasting limit of 2.0 the specific constants are in equation 4.21 for the
infsec peak particle velocity that should not be actual blasting conditions. The second approach
exceeded if damage is- to be precluded. If com is to use general dam taken under varying condi-
plaints are a major problem, the operator may tions (such as the data in figures 4.22 through
wish to further limit the particle velocity level to 4.25) to determine empirical rules of thumb
reduce the number of complaints which he feels which must inherently have larger safety (acton
are attributable to vibration level. Again, as than those where a specific quarry moniton its
discussed in Chapter 3, from the case history of own blasts.
tbe Salmon event, a particle velocity limit of 0.4 Although air blast is rarely a problem in nor-
infsec could, be established by the operator if mal blasting operations, a discussion of estimat
complaints are to be kept below 8 percent of the ing procedures for the control of overpressures
potential number of complainants. In a densely is included in section 6.5. As pointed out in
populated area, or where the history of com- section 5.5, this repon continues the general
plaints has been a serious problem, an operator practice of scaling air blast data to the cube root
may find it desirable to still further limit the of the charge weight per delay.
vibration level to minimize complaints. It should
be clearly understood that the authors are not 6.2-ESTIMATING VIBRATION UMITS
advocating a limit below the 2.0 infsec criterion WITH INSTRUMENTATION
which will preclude damage but are suggesting
tbat an operator may, by choice, find it desirable Ohviously, the best way to control vibration
to impose a more restrictive limit to minimize levels is to determine and know these levels.
complaints. Many blasting operations record the particle
The two variables which appear to affect vibra- velocity from each blast on a routine basis either
tion level the most at a given distance are the with owned or leased equipment or through
charge weight per delay and, to a lesser extent, the consultant services. Data from one station may be
method of initiation. The same total charge used to accumulate sufficient data to make plots
weight which would result in damage can often 'similar to those shown in figures 4.15 through
be shot in a series of delays with no damage. 4.17. This can be done in either of two ways: by
~ Electric delay caps can often be used with a net recording at a fixed gage location from several
'I decrease in vibration level as opposed to the shots at different scaled distances; or by locating
levels from Primacord delay connectors or in- the gage station at successively further scaled
. stantaneous blasts. The operator has a design distances from successive shots at the working
face. The second method is recommended, be-
problem to obtain the proper procedure for
cause it only requires a gage station at pre-
best breakage, proper throw from the working selected scaled distances from several routine
face, the best economy, and other considerations. blasts.
Conversion to delay shooting, increasing the As an illustration, one data point was selected
number of delays, or electric delay caps may not from each of the tests at the Weaver quarry
provide the best solution or even any solution to shown in figure 4.15. Eight data points were
many blasting problems. However, where the chosen at random but at various scaled distances.
vibration problem is urgent, changes in the two A ninth point. from Weaver test 9, was chosen to
69
70 BLASTING VJBJtAnONS AND THEIR. EFFECTS ON STJtUcnJJli'.S

provide the largest scatter possible within the A single three-component gage station would
data of figure 4.15. These nine data points. be the minimum used in determining propaga-
shown in figure 6.1, represent a single data point tion data for a blasting operation. Data should
from each of nine blasts and illustrate the use be taken in more than one direction to insure
of a single gage station for several blasts at a that directional effects, such as those discussed in
quarry. The single point selected to have the section 4.5 are determined if present. Establish-
largest deviation is shown with a different sym ment of a propagation law, such as shown in
bol. Three regression lines have been placed figure 6.1 removes all questions and permits de-
through the data. Line A represents all the data sign of blasts and maintenance of controls on
from the Weaver quarry in figure 4.15. Line B blasting limits which will preclude exceeding
represents the 8 data points selected at random safe blasting criteria.
but at various scaled distances. Line C represents
those 8 data points plus the data point from 6.5-ESTIMATING VIBRATION LIMITS
figure 4.15 with the most deviation. It is obvious WITHOUT INSTRUMENTATION
that these 8 or 9 points are representative of the
For" many quarries or blasting operations, it is
approximately 60 points used in figure 4.15.
not possible to obtain data as suggested in section
From these data, shown in figure 6.1, an operator
6.2. In such cases, it is advisable to use empirical
might select a scaled distance of 15.0 to insure
data derived from investigations in various quar-
that 2.0 infsec peak particle velocity is not ex-
ries. Figure 6.2 represents the combined particle
ceeded at a particular distance or a scaled
velocity versus scaled distance data from Bureau
distance of 20.0 to be more conservative. While
tests in many quarries. The heavy line i 1 the
the illustration is only for the radial component
upper limit envelope of all the data points col-
data from Weaver, similar results could have
been obtained for the vertical and transverse lected. If it is assumed that these data repre-
sent a sufficiently random sample of all possible
component data.
blasting sites, then these data can be used to esti
mate a safe scaled distance for any blasting site.
At a scaled distance of 50 ft/lb" the probability
is small of finding a site that produces a vibration
level that exceeds the safe blasting limit of 2.0
(,)
Q)
4. infsec. Therefore, it is concluded that a scaled
1/)
........ distance of 50 ftJlb" can be used as a control
.E limit with a reasonable margin of safety where
r-
1-
instrumentaJion is not used or is not available.
For cases where a scaled distance of 50 ftflb~
(..)
appears to be too restrictive, a controlled ex-
:t' _,
0
periment with instrumentation should be con
IJJ
> ducted to determine what scaled distances can be

_,
IJJ used to insure that vibration levels do not exceed
2.0 infsec particle velocity.
(..)
i= 6.4-USE OF SCALED DISTANCE AS A
a:: BLASTING CONTROL
<(
a..
The significance of scaled distance and its
~
<( proper use has raised many questions and is often
IJJ misunderstood. As discussed in section 4.S, the
a.. peak particle velocity of each component of
ground motion can be expressed as a function of
distance from the blast and the maximum charge
.26 60 weight per delay by the equation:
D
v = H (W") II (6.1)
SCALED DISTANCE, ft/lby2
=
where v particle velocity,
Figure 6.1.-Com~n of ,particle velocity data H =intercept at D/W" = 1.0,
from different shots within a quarry. D = distance,
'f
I
:.
ESTIMATING SAFE Alit AND GROUND VIBRATION LEVELS FOR BLAmNG 71

TRANSVERSE

u
... 1.0
.
.!:

...,.
~w
::>
Ill
..J
u

I 0.1

10 100
11
SCALED DISTANCE, ft lib r

Figure 6.2.--<:ombined velocity data from aU quarries in Bureau of .M!rt~es studieL

=
W maximum charge weight per delay, proper scaled distance limit. Since D /W"' is the
D fW"' = scaled distance, scaled distance, one may determine the proper
and p =regreSsion exponent or slope. charge weight per delay from the equation:
The values of both H and p will vary with site W = n:z1(S.D.) a. (6.2)
and component. The quantity, S.D., in equation 6.2 i' the selected
After plotting values of peak. particle velocity scaled distance to preclude damage. For the ex~
versus scaled distance, D fW"' on log-log co- amples, S.D. has the value of 20 ft/lb.,. and
ordinate paper from instrumented shots (as 50 ft/lb .... Assuming the potential damage point
shown in figure 6.1), the scaled distance at which is 500 feet from the blast and solving equation
2.0 in/S. particle velocity is not exceeded, can 6.2 for the charge weight per delay, 625 and 100
readily be picked from the graph. For illustra~ pounds of explosives could be detonated per d~
tive purposes, a scaled distance of 20 ftflb.,. lay without exceeding the safe vibration criterion
has been chosen. Similarly, in the absence of data if the control limit was a scaled distance of 20
from instrumented blasts, the data of figure 6.1 ft/lb"' or 50 ft/lb"', respectively. If the distance to
can be used empirically. A scaled distance of 50 the potential damage point is 1,000 feet, the
ft/lb"' has been chosen from these data and ia maximum charge per delay that could be deto-
recommended for use where instrumentation has nated safely would be 2,500 or 400 pounds f
not been used. This will insure that vibration scaled distances of 20 or 50 ft/lb"', respectively.
levels will not exceed 2.0 in/sec particle velocity. Figure 6.5 is useful to quickly determine the
Two examples have thus been set up: one, where maximum charge per delay for scaled distances
instrumented data has been available and a sec- of 20 or 50 Itflb"'. The line for a scaled distance
ond, where no data was available. The two of 50 ft/lb"' can be used where no data are avail~
hypothesized scaled distances for the two situa~ able. The line for a scaled distance of 20 ft/lb"'
tions are 20 and 50 ft/lb.,., respectively. is used only to illustrate what might be done if
Normally, the distance from, the blast to a previous shots had been instrumented and data
potential damage point will be fixed. The charge plotted as shown in figure 6.1. Two of the four
per delay must then be .varied to provide the previous numerical examples are shown oo
72 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND TilElR EFFECTS ON STli.UCI'UJlES

IO,OOOr--r---,.....,.-.,...,.--...,.----r--r...,...,.-....---rT'T"....., 6.5-ESTIMATING AIR. BLAST LIMITS


e,ooo
6,000
4,000
The control of blasting procedures to maintain
vibration levels below the safe blasting limits of
.
~0
l,OOO 2.0 in/sec particle velocity generally results in air
blast overpressures being much less than re-
1.000
A
,:
800 quired to produce damage from air blast to
600
<I
.... residential structures. Curve C of figure 5.1 can
400
c"' I
be used to predict overpressures empirically. This
scatd dtstonee,20footllb I
a:
"'D. too I curve represents an equation of the type:
...
;;t
I D
"
w
100
80 I p = K.( W"')f$ {6.2)
"' 60 I I
I
10<1 di'-:!Ofool/11)
I where P = peak overpressure.
I I = 1.0.
K.= intercept at D fW"'
I I D = distance,
I I W =maximum charge weight per delay.
I I
I I D fW"' = scaled distance for air blast con
I I siderations,
I I
and {l = slope.
I
I
I
Using similar logic and a numerical example
from section 6.4 and curve C as an appropriate
estimating curve, overpressures may be estimated.
Figure 6.lJ.-Nomogram. for estimating safe Assuming the potential damage point is 500 feet
charge and distance limits for scaled diStances from the blast, we had previously determined
of 20 and 50 ft/lb~. that 625 and 100 pounds of explosives could be
detonated at scaled distances (D fW"') of 20
figure 6.3 through the use of dashed lines. At a ft/lb"' and 50 ft/lb"', the hfi>Othetical limits to
distance of 1,000 feet, a vertical line is con- limit particle velocity to 2.0 infsec. Using 500
structed to intersect the scaled distance equal to feet and 625 and 100 pounds for predicting over-
20 ft/lb"' line. A horizontal line is drawn through pressure, these values represent scaled distances
the intersection to the charge weight axis indi- (D/W"') of 58.3 and 108 ft/lb\lt, respectively.
cating a permissible charge weight per delay of From curve C, figure 5.1, the overpressures are
2,500 pounds. As an additional exercise, if the 0.027 and O.OU5 psi for these conditions. These
distance is 500 feet and a limiting scaled distance values are considerably below the 0.5 psi recom-
of 50 ft/lb"' is used, a vertical line is drawn at mended safe air blast limit. Using an alternate
500 feet to intersect the scaled distat\ce equal approach, 0.5 psi from curve C occurs at a scaled
to 50 ftflb"' line. A horizontal line is drawn distance (D fW"') of 4.4 ftjlb"'. This represents
through the intersection indicating that 100 an explosive charge of 7!J4 tons at 500 feet com-
pounds of explosives could be used per delay. pared to the 625 or I 00 pounds permissible under
These results determined graphically are, as ex the safe vibration limit. This comparison illus-
pected, identical with those obtained numeri- trates the estimation of charge size for safe air
cally. After construction, such a nomograph, per- blast limits and also that under normal blasting
mits the determination o( the permissible charge conditions air blast is not a significant problem
weight using only a straight edge. If data are in causing damage. Except in very extreme cases
available from instrumented shots, and a more where it is necessary to detonate relatively un-
appropriate scaled distance is selected, a new confined charges, the control of blasting proc:;e..
nomograph can be constructed using equation dures to limit vibration levels below 2.0 infsu
6.2. automatically limits overpressures to safe levels.
CHAPTER 7.-SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

7.1-SUMMARY than 5 percent). Complaints can be further re-


duced if a lower. vibration limit is imposed. As
This study is based on the 10-year Bureau pro- an example, a peak velocity level of 0.4 infsec
gram to reexamine the problem of vibrations should be imposed if complaints and claims are
from blasting. Included in the program were an
to be kept below 8 percent of the potential
extensive field study of ground vibrations from number of complainants. In the absence of in-
blasting; an evaluation of instrumentation to
strumentation, a scaled distance of 50 ftflb"
measure vibrations; establishment of damage may be used as a safe blasting limit for vibra-
aiteria for residential structures; a consideration
tions.
of human response; a determination of param
eters of blasting which grossly affected vibrations; Air blast does not contribute to the damage
and empirical safe blasting limits which could be problem in most blasting operations. A safe
used with or without instrumentation for the de- blasting limit of 0.5 psi air blast overpressure is
sign of safe blasts. recommended. Except in extreme cases (lack of
In all sections of this report, the authors have standard stemming procedures), the control of
drawn heavily on the published work of others. blasting procedures to limit ground vibration
This is particularly true in Chapters S and 5. levels below 2.0 infsec automatically limits over-
In addition to the many publications referenced, pressures to safe levels.
all known, available, and pertinent articles pub- Human response levels to ground vibrations,
lished through August 1969 were critically re- air blast, a11d noise are considerably below those
viewed. Obviously, many articles have been left levels necessary to induce damage to residential
out of the discussion either because of duplica- structures. The human response level is a major
tion or because they did not present significant factor contributing to complaints. The ground
contributions to other discussed data. and air vibrations observed in this study at
The Bureau study included data from 171 reasonable distances from routine blasts are sig-
blasts at 26 sites. The sites included many rock nificantly lower than the vibrations necessary to
types, such as limestone and dolomite, granite- damage residential structures. Howevet, many of
type, diabase, schist, and sandstone and covered the observed vibration levels were at values that
simple and complex geology with and without would cause people discomfort and, therefore,
overburden. result in their filing complaints.
The tests covered the detonation of explosive Millisecond-delay blasting can be used to de-
charges ranging from 25 to 19,625 pounds per crease the vibration level from blasting, because
delay at scaled distances ranging from .5.39 to it is the maximum charge weight per delay in
369 ftflb~. Recorded amplitudes of particle terval rather than the total charge which de-
velocity ranged from 0.000808 to 20.9 infsec. , termines the resultant amplitude. To relate the
Frequencies of the seismic waves at peak ampli ground vibration effects of different blasts, peak
tudes ranged from 7 to 200 cycles per second. amplitudes at common scaled distances should be
compared. The distance is scaled by dividing it
7.2-CONCLUSIONS by the square root of the charge weight per delay
interval. Blasts initiated with electric millisec
Damage to residential structures from ground
ond-delay caps generally produce a lower vibra
borne vibrations from blasting correlates more
tion level than blasts initiated with Primacord
~osely with particle velocity than with accelera-
tion or displacement. The safe blasting limit of delay connectors.
2.0 infsec peak particle velocity as measured Geology andfor direction can have a major
~om a_ny of three mutually perpendicular direc- effect on both amplitude level and decay of am-
tions m the ground adjacent to a structure plitude with distance. If a site is instrumented to
should not be exceeded if the probability of dam- provide blasting limits, these effects should be
age to the structure is to be small (probably less examined, particularly in directions where strut
75
74 BLASTING VIBJI.ATIONS AND THEDl EFFECTS ON STilUCl"UUtES

tures might be subjected to damage. In an ove:rall The presence or absence of overburden does not
sense, from quarry to quarry, effects of geology give rise to differences in particle velocity ampli
including rock type, could not be determined tude but does alter the wave frequency giving
from the data. Amplitudes at comparable scaled rise to changes in displacement and acceleration
distances were similar irrespc:ctive of rock type. amplitudes.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to express their appreciation operators and the quarry industry for their co-
to the original sponsors whose interest and finan- operation and assistance. Support from indi-
cial assistance supported the program: the Na viduals and companies in all phases of the
tional Crushed Stone Association, the National blasting indrutry was generously given. These
Board of Fire Underwriters, the National Asso- included: vibration consultants, equipment
ciation of Mutual Casualty Companies, and the manufacturers, other government agencies. ex-
Association of Casualty and Surety P,mpanies.
plosive companies, and construction companies.
This investigation could not have been con-
ducted without the cooperation of the manage- The authors wish to again thank these individ-
ment and personnel of many quarry companies. uals and groups for their support. The authors
Most of these companies have been acknowledged also wish to thank a large number of Bureau
in previous reports covering the various phases employees. past and present. who assisted in the
of the program. The authors again thank these field and laboratory phases of this project.

'

75
EXPLANATION OF APPENDICES
The appendices present the pertinent data because of the limited data obtained there. Only
concerning the field studies. Appendix A presents pressure measurements were obtained at the
plan views of the various sites. Appendix B gives Rockville quarry. A plan view of the tests is
the shot and hading data for the ground vibra- given in figure A-25, and the pertinent blast and
tion tests. Appendix C gives the particle velocity loading data are given in table 5.8. The Rock-
and frequency data. Appendix D gives a brief ville quarry does not appear elsewhere in the
geologic site description. The order o sites is appendices. Site 26, the location of the Bureau-
uniform throughout the appendices. For ex- ASCE ~age study tests, does not appear in the
ample, the Chantilly quarry is represented as appendices. These two sites do not represent the
figure A-17, tables B- and C-17, or site 17. same type tests as sites 1 through 24 and have
Two sites have been treated slightly different therefore been excluded from the appendices.

Appendix A.-Plan Views of Test Sites


The gag! station arrays and blast areas, is shown to represent the gage stations along the
mapped by a stadia survey at each site, are line. Gage arrays are identified with blasts by the
shown in figures A-I through -25. The location o corresponding test number as necessary to indi-
each blast is identified by test number. The gage cate which blast was recorded along which gage
station locations are shown by a series o circles
along a line and are indicated as station I, 2, 8, line. Gaps between blast areas on the maps
etc. At the Weaver quarry where gage arrays represent rock quarried during periods when
were numerous and close together, only a line vibration studies were not conducted.


PLAN VIEWS OF TEST srn:s 77

- c::.--
LE&EIID

S.,.liM

Figure A-I.-Weaver Quarry.

'

1234 6 7 8 9
10 II

LEGEND
o Goge otationo
,.....,...., Quorrr rim
= Bloot oru LEGENO
o Gate 1tollon1
........, o-rr,,.,
r=::1 &loll arM
0 200 400 600 0 200 400 soo
Scolt,fut

Figure A-2.-Webater City Quarry. Figure A-3.-P &: M Quarry.


78 BLASTING VIB1t.A110NS AND THEIR E.FFEC1'S ON STI.UCI'URES

7
6
~
i
:.
!:
!' 4
3 l
2

~T~at29 0
LGEJC)
Gogo otatloos L[!lf:IIO
IGa.. IIIOiioH
7

0 200 400 600 r-T""'1


lanett rim
Quorry riM
,....,....,
~ ....,..."
Quorry n
Scolo,f. .t
= &loot aroo 0 200 '100 1500
~fMt

Figure A-4.-Ferguson Quarry. Figure A-5.-Shawnee Quarry.

'

~t33 o

..........,
LEGEND
Ga91 llations
Bnch rim
Quarry rim
_
-
--
. ..,.,,,......
- ..........
~ Bloat oro

0
I
2QO 4QO
Scale, feet
600
I 0 ---... ,..
Figure A-6.-Hamilton Quarry. Figure A-7.-Flat llock Quarry.
PI..AN VIEWS OF TEST SlT.IS 79

LEGEND
GOIJtm-
a.-..ct. rim
~ Quony rim
c::::i) Blatt orM

200 400
S::.tut

Figure A-8.-Bellevue QuarrY

.....
--
0--
..c..-., .....
---
---
-
Figure A-9.-Bloomville Quarry.
0

Figure A-10.-Waab.ington. D.C. Site.


--100 .100
80 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND 'I'HEIR. EFFECT'S ON S'n.UCTUR:f.S

6 4 3

,_-
QUARRY
,,..
,,
~Ell Nil
0 Goo-,.. ,... 57,!111,!1!1, .... 12

\ a

6
Gov atotioftt for lelta !~ Oftd M
~
Goti
...,... , ,.. ""' 413
IIOtiCNII fw '-ts 64 illlllfd: 8
o ~ototioftokll'tntftr
Ott.lllftCe~tpoi:M
0 200 400 ~ Blosl IH'M

Scole.fNf ____,.,...., .....


,..,......, Ouorr, , ..

_,.. lAdietiOtl ,_.,

Figure A-11.-Poughkeepsie ~

'
UIUNO
ca Mettoreo

0 toO
.........
400 -

Figure A-12.-West Nyack Quarry.


PLAN VIEWS OF TEST SITES 81

j
_,...__ _
. --
F'JgUre A-U.-LittleVille Dam Site.

- s


/
/ . --
r:=--
1TT"'~, ...

___
-...,-
--
... __
--
---
LU[IItO

N: HU
IJ tit

.
tl !II
tl7 ,
HI )14
!lot
,.,
JIG
lit
IZS
:S
J
IH 4
IH 4

l'igure A-14.-Centreville Quarry. Figure A-l!S.-Manassas Quarry.


82 BLASTING VIBRAnONS AND THEIR EFFECI'S ON STilUCTURES

' .
D
LEGEND
Gove ttottons. tiM 1
&9 otolionl, liM 2

I
Go91 stations, Jint 3
Dota- - - potfll
lftihotion pOint
3 Pri-d
lltftcllri"'
Ovtrbufden _,. I
4
.,.,........... Quaffy rint lt
=Blot!-

II

0 100 200 300


1 I I
Sc:ait,IMt


J'igure A-16.-Sttasburg Quarry.
PLAJI VIEWS OF TJIST SITU 85

LEGEND
P.8. ,,..........
&ott-
Bnc:tt ti
r'TTT1 0\lortf rt.
~ lklstor"
200 400 000
w..... I

Figure A-17.-Chantilly Quarry.

g

------
.:
u

a

-.;;
\~


1'(,....1--.

-=- .......
LEGEND
Gota .... -

HH.. r

Figure A-lB.-Culpeper Quarry.


84 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR. EFFEGrS ON STR.UcrtJR.ES

....
!;iJ G:lo:J
t~ '" t$1
t

LEGEND
Te11 164
Tnt IMM4118
Tnt 166
Tnt Ill'

-.:::::::.
$ ..... ,....
B~ttara
i ,
DrttoM ~....w..
P,G, Pt.aw 9091

~154
Figure A-21.-Jack Quarry.

LEGEND
Gogt tatlona
c::!:ZI Bklat Otto

lA
0 200 400 600
Scolt,ftt1

Figure A-19.-Doswell Quarry

)
1~9
1

156

LEGEND 0 200 400 1100 o Goto ototioot1


P.G. ....._.. .....
o Gao 1totlon TrTT Ovori'J rho
= : l 81nt ar.a
- Bllllt oro

Figure A-20.-Riverton Quarry. .Figure A-22.-Buchanan Quarry.


PLAN VIEWS OF TEST SJTES 85

~ ~~..

--- . --
161 I
. 2~-6
"'-67
6~7-8
7
--
..... ...

'
LEGEND LA
o Goge sloliono

1!6. "
TTTT ' -rim
Quorry --
- BIHia....,
112 Figure A-24.-Un!on Furnace Quarry.
0 200 400 600
Scolt,IMI

Figure A-2lt-Hi-Cone Quarry.

o 200 oo 600 Gote tlctioftl , , _ , . ,


Scol .. lnt TTTT O..orry rl
- a~a~-

Figure A-25.-R.ockv:ille Quarry.


Appendix. B.-Shot and Loading Data
A summary of the shot and loading data is pattern, and the loading information including
given by site in Appendix B. Included are the charge per hole and delay, type of initiation and
number of holes, dimensions of holes and blast delay interval.

t
1
"
t
J'
~!
:i
~:.
'~
~--

~.r
~
~
!"
,,~
if'
{'
~

I,..
,;
l

\'

86
SHOT AND LOADING DATA 87
Tabl ... 1 ... !ynr 9urry. 4ldea. love

Teet

2
3
'l'otalllo.
ot holes
3
3
Bole lite,
in
6
6
=
ft
36
36
'"""
hel.eht.
ft
30
30
St-ug,
ft
l.5
15
~ 10
10
l.5
15
Ch&l1!-
h<ll<l,
l.b
200
200
llo. of
del.q
interval.
0
2
=~
l.b
6oo
200
....
Leogtb dd.ll,y.

0
l.7
'rJpe or
.tn1tiat1on
Prilueont
Do.
4 1 6 36 30 15 10 0 200 0 200 0 Do.
5 1 6 36 30 15 10 l.5 200 6 200 17 llo.
6 3 6 36 30 15 10 15 200 2 200 ~ llo.

-
1 ... 7 6 36 30 15 10 15 200 6 200 ~ I'Jo,
a... 1 6 36 30 15 10 15 200 0 1,lo0o 0 llo.
9 ... 1 6 36 30 15 10 0 200 0 200 0 I'Jo.
lO 1 6 36 30 15 10 0 200 0 200 0
11 15 6 36 30 15 10 15 200 11> 200 17 Do.
12... 15 6 36 30 15 10 15 200 0 3,000 0 I'Jo.
13 ... 15 6 36 30 15 10 15 200 1' 3,000 ~ I'Jo,
14 1 6 10 30 14-1.6 lO 0 1oo 0 100 0 llo.
u ... 291 3 lO 9 2 6 l.2 22 ,..,.. abot 1,100 2'5 Cap
16 147 3 10 9 2 5 10 22 To. abet lt8l< 2'5 llo.
17 ... 6o 3 14 l.2 2 5 lO 26 To. bot io;!O 2'5 llo.
18 1 6 36 30 1.6 lO 0 200 0 200 0 Pr:tu.cwd.
19 ... 3 6 36 30 l6 lO l5 200 2 200 9 llo.
lO ... 1 6 36 30 1.6 lO 15 200 6 200 9 I'Jo.
u ... 15 6 36 30 1.6 10 15 200 1' 200 9 I'Jo.
21 13 6 36 30 1.6 10 l5 200 3 8oO 17 DO.
31 ... 2l 6 36 30 1.6 10 14 203 3 l,2l.8 17 llo.

-tr
l!oJ.e Ch&rge pel" No. or
Teat TotjjJ,
ot holes
Ho~ Hole a1ze,
1.0
depth,
ft
~.
ft
Jmden,
ft
Sp&oillg,
ft
bolo,
1b
delq
interval.J =~=:
1b .....
Longtb dd.ll,y' 'rJpe of
1nitiation
22 ... 490 3 l2 2 5 9 25 3 1,100 17 Priaeoor.t
25 ... 1.60 3 l2 2 5 9 25 4 4oo l7 Do.
26 ... 75 3 ].4 2 5 9 30 l8 l.20 17 llo.

fable a.. J ... P ' M Qu.am, !radute, I ova

'I'eJt

23 ...
24 ...
Total No.
of holes
28
78
Hole site,
1.0
3
3
~~...
ft
28
20
Face
height,
ft
24
l8
st-ug,
ft
4

"
-ft
B
B
I
Sp&oillg,
ft
6
9
C"":'S~

l.b
40
25
per
bol.e,
No. ot
dela;y
intervale
1
2
Max.charg:e
per del..oy,
1b
560
625
....
Length dela,y.

50
50
TJpe or
1D.1tiat1on
Cap
llo.

Face ~~per -.x.cb&rge


":;~
tlOJ.O
'l'et Total No. Hole size, depth. hol.eht, Steaaiog -=. Spacing, bole. per dd.ll,y, Loogtb del..oy, TJpe or
of' bol.ea 1n ft ft ft ft ft 1b interval 1b ec 1n1t1atioa
28 ... 44 3 17 l8 3 15 15 50 3 700 25 Cap
29 55 3 l2 ll 37-5 75 15 15 3 270 25 llo.

'
'l'AILE .... , ... K.u'bl Cliff Ou.a.niu. Shft'nee Cillo

Test

30
Jl ...
1otal ""
or holes
ll
ll
Bole size.
in
6
6
::-~b,
ft
26
26
-
bei&ht,
ft
25
25
St-.og.
ft
10ol.2
10ol.2
l!urdeo.
ft
10
l,O
S]l&oin&.
ft
l.2
l2
~per
bo.l.e,
lb
ll2
l2'5
.... 0
del..oy
1Atervll.s

'
3
,_:~
per delaJ'1
1b
lolo8
500
l.el>ctb del.q,
...c
25
25
'rJpe of
1n1t1t1=
c.,
Do.
81 ... l.2 5-875 25 25 10oll 10 10 102 3 6l.2 25 Do.
82 J.3 5.875 30 )0 l.2 10 10 132 3 66o 25 Do.
8J ... 1 5875 31 30 ll 10 0 132 0 132 0 llo.
88 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THErR EFFECTS ON STRUCI"URES

Teat Total llo. Bole a1z.e,


oru.e
depth be~ St~. BurdeD, Spooi.og,
""":6~ per
hole,
Bo, Ol
delay
Max.c.barge
per dela;r,
Lengt.!.:del.a;T I Type or

33 -
of boles
126
ill
2.5
rt
20
ft
20
rt
5-6
ft
5
ft
7
1b
35
i.a.tervala
7
1b
910 25
I
initiation
Cop

Teat Total &c.


of boles
Bol.e 1ze,
ill
=h.
rt
race
be13ht.
ft
St~,
rt
Burden,
rt
Spooi.og,
ft
c~per
bole,
1b
no. or
del.q
l.ntern.l..o
:::~:
1b
_..
Length del.q, Type or
initiation
34
42
l2
37
6
6
56-58
52
53-55
51
--9 ll
l2
1~
1.6
~50
:l92
8
7
888
2,71>11
17
17
Priaacord.
Qo.
75 36 6.25 2~ 23 6 l2 10 1.82 9 1,072 9 Oo.
78 36 6.25 56 ~ 7 1.. ll o59 l2 ~.62o 9 Do.
79 L 6.25 56 ~ 4 10 0 468 0 468 0 Cop

Face L;.aa_rge per no. or Ma.x-:~rse


Test Total !lo. Bol.e a1ze, =h. height, St~, Burdeu, Spooi.og, hole, del.q per del~Q'o Length de~, Type or
ot bolea 1D rt rt rt ft rt 1b intervals 1b c 1n1tiat.ioo
35 l2 4 15 14 -- 10 ll 42 5 80 25 Cop
37 ..
)8
7
7
5.625
5.625
l8
l8
l8
l8
---- l2
l2
10
10
735
735
6
6
735
735
25
25
Qo.
Do.
39 .
40 ~
5.625
5.625
l8
l8
l8
l8
---- l2
l2
10
10
78.5
78.5
6
6
78.5
78.5
25
25
Qo.
Oo.
41 ... L' 5.625 l8 l8 -- l2 10 51 5 1C2 25 Oo.

ta.bh ~ IJ. - Prance Scone Coarp.my Quam. Jloc.vilh Claio

oo. or
=~=:
Ho~e Face """:6~ per
Teat Toto.lllo. Bol.e size, depth height St~. Burden. Spooi.og, bole, del.q Length del.q Type or
or boles ill rt rt rt rt rt 1b intervals 1b a sec initiation
]6 .. l2 6 32 32 -- 9 14 140 2 BOo 25 Cap
43 ...
76 ...
41
3l
4.75
... 75
l8
l8
l8
17
--6.5 10
10
ll
ll
77
81.2
2
2
1,540
1,218
25
25
Oo.
Qo.
77 ... 1 4.75 l8 6.5 ll 0 8o 0 80 0 Do.
80 ... II) 4.75 l8 iA 6.5-7.0 10 ll 798 3 2,714 25 Do.

t'able a-10. - Theodore loouwlt lrid&e Con.eructioa. Site. Waah1.natoa. D.C.

!IOJ.e nee """:"~ per llo. or Mall-C:~rge


Teat Toto.lllo. Bol.e aize, depth, height, St~. Burden, Spooi.og. hole, del.q per delay. Length del" Type or
or bole!! ill rt rt rt rt ft 1b interval& 1b ec in1t1&!.10D
44 ... 13 2.625 20 1.6 ---- 4 4 10 6 3l 25 Cop

-.....
45 ... 3 2.625 20 1.6 ~ 6 37 2 37 25 Do.
46 ...
47 ...
13
9
2.625
2.625
20
20
l6
Ro race .,...,-- 4
0
6.5
2.5
3l
115
l2
0
3l
70
25
25
Do.
Do.
48 ... 9 2.625 20 'Ia fac 0 2.5 e 0 72 25 Oo.
49 ... 9 2.625 20 'Ia fan 0 2.5 e 0 72 25 Oo.
!() ... 9 2.625 20 . . foe. 0 2.5 78 0 70 0 Prtaacord.
51. ..
52 ...
13
13
2.625
2.625
20
20
20
20
---- 4
4
6
6
3l
26
l2
l2
3l
26
25
25
Cop
Oo.

----
53 ... 13 2.625 20 20 ~ 6 2l e 42 25 Oo.
S4 ... L3 2.625 l8 l8 4 6 25 l2 25 25 Do.
PARnCU. VELOCITY AND FREQUENcY DATA 89

Test

55 ...
56 ...
Total. llo.
or boles
35
13
28
BOJ.e dt~
in
9
9
=h.
ft
30-56
85-106
-
be16!><.
fi

28-54
83-10'1
St..w>g,
t't
19-23
20-22
20
-.fi
22
22
~i.lla.
1't
20
20
"""';"&~ per
bole,
lb
920
l.zl00-1.,500
"'.;~
tnterval.s
34
12
*':~
per~.
lb
920
1,522
~dell
ec
17-'!6
26
Type ot:
in.iti&tiOil
Pr!Joac<ml
Do.
Do.
57 ... 9 85 8o-tl5 17 23 1,570 21 1,570 17-'!6
58 ...
...
30
48
9
9
5572
17-44
53-70
15..42
20
12.21
20
20
lb-20
9-21
l,ll.6
700
29
'7
1,116
700
17
17
""
Do.
Do.
62 ... 20 9 61-89 59-91 12-23 23 25 1,620 19 1,620 26
..-- ""
63 l.S 9 69-75 67-73 23 20 1,050-1,2"9 17 1,2"9 26
64 ...
65 ... 28
6 9
9
--
55-60 53:58 --..
10-15
21
20
20
200
700..l,flOO
5
21
200
1,'+0,;
26
26
""
Do.
Do.
67 12 9 76..&2 70-76 22 22 1,150-1,350 11 1,355 26 Do.

*"cl:I&J1!
Tt!'&t TotalliO.
ot boles
Bol~dz~ :~~b,
fi
ho'::t.
rt
St-ing,
rt
l!u1'deu,
rt
SJ!OCi.ac,
fi
~per
bole1
lh
""W.:
i.ntert'&l.a
per 4dq,
lb
~h del!~
ec:
Type or
1ll.itiatiOD
60 ... 10 6.5 63.$ 69-7~ 22-29 20 15 558 9 558 26 Pr!Joacor4
139 ... 23 6.5 ~ 39 16-18 16-19 15 335 22 335 17-25 PTt:.aeoM -
140 ... 19 6.5 52-54 '-1 16.5-18 16-18 15-18 360 18 400 17-25 Do.
lU ... 31 6.5 29-51 22-44 16-18 15-16 16-18 92300 30 j. 303 17-25 Do.
142 16 5-5 48-50 41-43 19-22 15-16 16-18 300-325 15 325 17-25 Do.
143 ... 23 6.5 45 38 15-19 15 16-18 3cil 22 3o6 25 Do,
144 ... 22 6.5 "6 40 ~7-18 16-19 15 303-393 21 393 25 Do.
145 6 6.5 51 45 19 15-18 16 303-353 1 353 25 Cap
6.5 14
146 ...
147 ...
15
100 -- 50
Toe 6bot ..43 17-5 l.S
--
16 328-350
1.2 0
350
120
25
0
Priaacord ...
Cap
i6
148 ...
149 ...
150 ...
27
35
60
--..6.5 52
'l'<.'le shot
Toe that
..45
..
18
----
15
..
.. -
..
303-356-5
2-72
.6
25
0
0
606
95
100
9-25
0
0
Prt:.acord ..
Cop
Do.

Table 1 .. 13. - Llttleville o.. Conatructlot\ Stse. H.untinston, M.au.

H<Ue ..,. c"":S: 110. or


::~=:
per
Test Totallio. liole s1ze d.epth, hejpt, Stetll:l.1ng* llul'<lm, Spaciog, bole, delq Leagth del'. Type or
or holes in rt rt rt rt rt 1b intervals lb c i.nitiaticm
68 ... 10 2 50 0 0 0 21.4 979 0 919 0 Prt-..c:oM
69 ... 10 2 50-52 0 0 0 21.4 10.6 0 lei! 0 Do.
70 ... 21 2 50 0 0 0 22.8 9-79 0 206 0 no.
11 . 14 2 50 0 0 0 20.3 5-4 0 75 0 Do.
72 ... 52 2 10 0 0 0 IrregulAr 10 5 130 6oo..Svo Do.
43 2 10 0 0 0 Irngular 11 6 66 600..500 Do,
"
73
74 ... "9 2 10 0 0 0 Irregular 11 6 100 600..500 Do.

or
'"" =~~~
HoLe "~.per llo.
Test Total flo. Bole ixe, dl!"pth, h!!igbt. St~. !Urdeo. ~i.oc. bole, del' Leogtb del', Type or
ot holes 1n rt rt rt ft rt 1b intervale lb ate.c Wtiatton
16 8 10 113 10 1,364 25
.....
at; ... 50 3-5 56 50 Cop
87 45 3-5 36 30 12 a 10 100.5 10 103-5 25 Do.
28 3-5 46-50 42.46 12 a 1. ll0-16o 10 605 25 Do.
119 ... 45 3-5 50-56 "6-52 12 8 10 16o-165 10 1,220 2'; Do.
90 ... 30 3-5 "6-50 42-46 10 8 10 155 10 620 25 Do.
91 ... 42 3-5 56 50 12 8 8 113.8 9 869 "25 Do.
94 ... 24 4.5 56 50 12 10 ll 28o 9 1,120 25 Do.
90 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON STRUC'IlJR.'ES

table a-n ... w. E. Gr.-h- a Socla. Manaau 9uarrt. Kanatn:. va.

r..at
llo.
92
Total.llo.
or boles
Oo
Bole a1u.
1n
3-5
=h1't
30
be~.
tt
30
lh~
6
lltaden
n
a
l!J*:i.DC
tt
l.O
"~!'per
hol.e
l.l>
70
~-ox
dolq
iutet'V'al.G

5
=~=:
l.b
700
Length dole.r ]
n:c
25-500
~ or
tietion
cap
93 3S 3.5 30 30 6 9 ll 68.6 5 loBo 25-500 Do.
u ... 48 3.5 30 28 5 9 ll 86.5 1 693 25500 Do.
ll7 ...
us ...
120
2.\.
36
.\.6
4.5
3.5.J..s
3.5.J..5
.,
Oo
~5
22
loo-l>6
.\.5
a.5
3-5-9-5
6-a
l.O
9-10
910
l.2
ll-l.2
l.l-l.2
.1.85
l.50
w.
6
8
5 l,llO
1,500
1,200
25-170
25...205
25...28o
Do.
Do.
Do.
121 ... 36 2.5 16 a 35 4 15 10 6o 255, 300 Do.
122 ...
123...
124...
l.2
20
61
2.5
3-5
.,"
16 Dit<:b -
111tcll -
.\.5
ll
12 10
3-5
10 16.7
220
4
7
66.a
1,100
8oo-4,500
25-500
8-150
Do.
llo.
Do.
2-75 l<5 5 1 5 ll0.9 7 905
125 ... 16 2.5 42-50 45 3 0 2 95 0 150 0 llo.
126 ... 26 3.5.J..5 40.J.8 37 8-10 7-10 9-l.2 186.5 7 933 25...2/oo llo,

table .... 16~ - Cb-..tODt eonoratioo. Qu.!m. su.bun v...

or Max. charge
Test
llo.
Total.llo.
or bole-a
-~uu,
in
=:11
1't
be~t.
tt
St.~.
tt
lllml.en,
t't
Speei.DC.
tt
~~per
bole,
lb
110.
dela7
1llterval.a
per dolq,
1b
Length delAy,
asec
T;y'po
initiation
or

96 ~ 2.5 20 18 8-l.O 8 5 Oo 2 l,l6o 5 Priut::ord


97 ... 63 3-5 20 18 8-10 a 5 30.2 2 633 5 llo.
98 ... 3l 3-5 20 18 8-9 a 5 1>0.3 l. 61>5 5 Do.
99 ... 1.9 3.5 20 18 10 a 5 39~ l 982 5 llo.
100 ... 16 3.5 12...22 10...20 8 a 5 30 0 ~75 0 Do.
101 ... 78 3.5 20 18 10 a 5 ~l l 1,600 5 llo.
102 16 3-5 l.0-.20 a-18 8-10 a 5 28 1 M 5 Do.
103 ... 59 3-5 20 18 8 8 5 36 3 589 5 Do.
104... 60 3-5 15...20 15...20 9 8 6 40 1 1,330 9 llo.
105 ... 42 3'5 4...20 4...20 3-6 10 5 2535 0 1,325 0 llo.
106 ... 61 3-5 20 18 o.J. a 5 35-45 l 1,360 9 n...
107 ... 42 3-5 6-20 8-18 o.J. 8 5 30 0 1,250 0 n...
108 60 3.5 20 18 12-16 10 6 33 1 1,600 5 Do.
109
110 ...
51
51
48
3-5
3-5
20
20
20
l.2-1"
18
1.8
16
8-10
8-10
5
6
8
7
6
6
33
32" ..
1
4
865
360
5
5
5
Do.
Do.
Do.
111 . 3-5 33-3 367

Test
llo.
Total.llo.
ot boles
Bol.e dze.
in
:a~b.
t't
Face
bel,&ht,
tt
St~,
tt
a..run,
tt
Spe.ci.DC,
tt
Charg~
bole,
1b
per No.
del-.y
ioterva.ls
0 HU:.charge
per dti&)'o
1b ..
Leogtb del.o.Y,
r:
l T;y'po or
1nit1:at10il
114 ... 56 3-5 36 31< 7-10 8 13 ll6 7 2,C90 25-24C C.p
115 ... 42 3-5 48 06 6 8 l3 157 8 1,570 25-2~0 Do.
116... 87 3-5 ".;.a 42.J.5 7 8 13 151 5 2,26o 25-170 Do.
119 ... 66 3-5 06
" 6.5 8 13 166.5 8 1,665 25-275 i l>o.

Tet
110.
124 ...
127 ...
Total. No.
or bolee
61
67
Bol.e 11ze,
in
2.75
2.75
lloJ.e
deptb,
tt
45
30.32
-
bel;lht,
n
.\.5
30-32
st-u:,
tt
5
5
:so.nien,
tt
7
5
Speeiog,
tt
5
9
Cbar6< per
bobJ
lb
11'<.9
74
llo. 0
delo.Y
1nterval.s
7
6
Max.ch.e.r&e
~r dda.y~
1b
905
961
Length delay'
ec
8-150
8-150
T;y'po
initiation
C.p
Do.
or

e 75 1,2o6 8-1.25
129
130 ...
77
57
2.75
2.75
30.32
33
30-32
33 .
5 5
6 9 69-3
5
8
8
62~ 8-115
25-200
llo.
llo.
132 ... 58 2.75 30.32 30-32 2.5 6 8 71-3 712 Do.
133 70 2.75 30.32 30.32 3-4 6 e 68.6 10 686 25-300 n...
135
138 ...
87
59
3
2.75
10.32
~5
30-32
45
3-6
3 t 9
9
10.5-70.8
937
9
6
630
937
6...250
8-150
Do.
Do.
PARnCU: VELOCITY AND FREQUENCY DATA 91

Teat

152 ...
1H ...
1,. .. ,
Total Jlo,
or holes
JJl
20
14
BOle tize.
in
6
6
6
,_.,.,..
deptll.
l't
53
45
54
be'::t.
tt
50
42
51
~.
tt
10
11
11-lS
--
tt
13
13
13
!lpooe1.og.
tt
16
16
16
~per
bell<!.
1b
:!9-~
354-500.
5~
~
del.q
0

interval
6
6
5
Mifl,x.c:hara:e
per del.q.

2,<&
lb

1,616
1,837
Lenstb del.q.
NK

25-205
25-205
25170
~ot
1.Git1&t1on
Cap

""
""

.....
Teot

117 ...
Total lfo,
of bo~a
88
Sole eia,
in
3.5
=b.
tt
l8
hoi&ht,
l't
!lotte.-
St.-JJ>g,
l't
8
-tt .
9
!lpooe11>8,
tt
9
'"":": per
boLe,
1b
25.6
"".W:
internl.a
4
~-=~
lb
666
.....
Lenstb del.q,

25
~ot
1n.1t1ati<m
Cap

_ Tabl ... u ... So.,stben Katertda Corpont1os 1 .Jack Stoc.t Q\!!m. Petersll!rJ. V.

,_.,.,..
Test 'h>tlll.!lo. lklle $1&e, depth. be~t. St~. -..,, S-11>8
o~~ per
bell<!,
"" or
de~ ~-~::: LenstJ> de~. ~or
ot boles in tt tt tt tt tt 1b illtervale lb ee illitiatioo
164 ... 26 6 ao ao l2 14 16 700 9 2,965 25 Cap
165 ... 122 35 45 42 1 8 8 136 1 3,003 25 Do.
166 ... 152 3-5 t.J, 40 7 8 8 lll.5 7 2,565 25 Do.
167... J.28 3-5 45 42 1 8 8 142 1 3,124 25 Do.
16& ... 1 3.5 45 50 6 10 0 150 0 150 0 Do.

Table B-22 .. - Sueerior Ste-ne Ceany, kchlll!n Qu!m. Creenaboro, H. C.

Test Total llo. Hole si:z.~.


Bole
depth. ~~
height, St-. Burdeo, S-11>8.
~l>"r
boLe,
w:
delay
0'
;;~~~ Lee,gtb d.Uay, ~ot
or holes ill ft tt tt tt tt 1b 1nteri'ala 1b c 1.nit1.ation
us ... 49 3.5 30 27 8-10 7 7 6o-68 8 520 17 Cap
156 ... t.J, 3.5 30 27 8 7 7 80 9 565 17 Do.
157 ... as
1511
1,9 ...
34
11
54
3-5
35
3-5
30
30
33
33
27
30
10
8-10
8-10
7
7
1
7
1
1
86
73
6
5
7
510
173
658
17
17
17
. Do.
Do.
Do.

IJ))J.O
'""~ -~per "'; or -:~
Test 'l'otlll Mo. llal.e size, depth. beigbt, St-, :Bul"den 1 S-ill&. bo1e, de~ per delay. Lenstb do~, 'r,rpe ot
or boles in ft tt tt tt tt 1b int~rvala lb a1ec initiation
160... 42 2.75 55 59 6 5 5 115 1 690 2~ Cap
161 45 2-75 55 59 6 105 644 25 Do.
162
163 ...
33
43
35
2.5
~5
58..63
59
60
6
6
1
6
~
i'6 172
136
7
7
7
857
816
25
25
Do.
Do.

,. .. 'll>tlll. lfo.
or b.oleiJ
Bole si:e.
in
IWn
depth.
tt tt
-= St-u.a.
tt
Burden,
tt
SpaciJla,
tt
"""':'~per
bole,
lb
"" or
dela~
Ulterv&la
=-~~:
lb .....,
Lenstb ... ~. 7)J!O'
1..D.itiat1oa
or
151.,. 39 1375 200-215 lSS-200 12 30 2~ 3,910 26 7,820 17 C&j>
171... 46 7-375 200-215 lSS-200 l2 30 23 3,925 22 19,625 17 Do.
Appendix C.-Particle Velocity and Frequency Data
A summary of the peak particle velocity and distance is given for each gage station for each
associated frequency data is given by component tesL This is the distance from blast-to-gage
and site in Appendix C. The peak particle ve- divided by the square root of the maximum
locity given is the maximum value recorded, charge weight per. delay or the total charge
regardless of where it occurred during the re- weight for instantaneous blasts. The shot-to-
cording. The frequency given is the frequency gage distances. from which the scaled distance
associated with the peak particle velocity. When
was calculated, were determined by measuring
the peak particle velocity is associated with two
frequencies, one superimposed on the other, both the distance from each gage to the center of the
frequencies are listed in the tables. with the pre- blast holes having the maximum charge weight
dominant frequency appearing first. The scaled per delay.

92
BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEllt EFFECI'S ON SD.UC'rult.ES 9S

.....
~=e, ,.,..,_

- ~- ~He
Verti~M_
di~::e,

- """1:>-
'l'..t Particle ~1c rre- l'Ort1c.Ut rro- Teot
,..,. I "":'4:7" -""'-~
ttfr) v:;.~y#
~:C'"' v~!!7 1 qu=c,., 1!/.!!y, "::"7' tttai ~~7, ~1, QUe.DC7 1 v~it.y, quene;r
2 8.70 - . ~-74 50 0.789 50 14 ~-0 . -. O.OJ"Q 62 ""'.-""" ~--
~-7
--
l2.8 25 ~-~7 25 699 50 57-0 .100 30
.- -- --
~6.9 923 20 .680 ~ .380 30 61.5 .c620 50
20-9
25.0
29-~
.680
.694
.5ll
~
20
30
.363
-32"
.2..,
~00
4o
50
-~99
.2Ql
.228
25
20
~
68-0
76-5
ee.s
..- -- .~
.o49<)
.01130
50
71
62
-- -.
; ... 10.6 1.71 40 ~-76 ~ 1.25 100.200
~05
126 .- -
..
.0370
,(200
20
39
--
. .-
16.3 .12]. 45 ~-c6 35 1.51 35 ~~3
--- -0340 l.T -
-- -- --
22.6 .455 50 -338 100 575 15 1.87 .Ql20 11
28.3
38-9
53.0
290
.236
.122
50
4o
.2Ql
-~~
100
200 .
.:;6.1. 16
- 230
29J. - . .0l.60
009'14
1.8
17 - -.
67.2 .c6ar
18
50
.(1)66
-CJT73
8o
26
.232
-ll9
2"
17 ~5 ... 1.8-9 . ..- 287 63 --
20.7 -- .1.83 22 -
" -- .-
~5-6 1.45
21.9 -597
24
26
1.til
.41.8
167
8o
.456
.192
36
42
22-9
25.6 - . .OJ8o
.~..a
29
36
- -- ---
27-5 .403 29 .28o 200 .185 14 29-0 .CJT98 25
38.0 -325 21 .104 l25 - 33.2 -
--- -~42 33
52.2 .150 21 .1;$8 25 .c68o 71 38-7
.-- .120 17
.-
-- --
65-9 -CJT92 56 .0500 66 .044o 20 45.5 .048o 36

-.-
~-0 -0896 28
5... ll.3
15.2 2.63 25
- 3.42
2.l2
28
33
~-70
1.03
50
42
64.4
77-6
-- .QI.OO
.0500
26
~7 .-
20.4
27.2
~-5
-95~
27
33
1.(2
.640
30
30
.6c6
.
-303
~
25
...
96.6 . =~ .ooeo 13
.
- -
..
36.4 .6J1 ~ .4CJT ~ - ~ 2LO -. ---
._!50 22
48.8
65.2
-397
.l.61o
22
22
.328
-~05
48
48
-~
.147
38
23
23.0
25.5 - -500
-275
23
23 .- --
6 . l2.5 2.76 ~ 2.54 82 .683 38
28.4
32.0 .- .- .)96
.254
33
30 ..- --
16.2 1-03 26 .ear 100 .458 39 36.8 - -- -1~ 50

--- .- .-
24,1 .632 28 .J15 100 .)00 19 42.0 -132 30
33 ... -529 ~7 -289 l25 .20J ~9 "9.0 -- .l2o 21
..
.~64
.-
46.3 ,249 25 OJ59 ~9 1.8 89-5 .r;;.70 ~
= - .
1--
64.3
13.~
-~CJT

1-7"
29
27 1.2..
22
18
-CJT55
.m
19
33
91<-3
99-5 - . ,0530
.0370
19
~5 - .
~6-7 1.~6 28 .467 26 -~3 33 17 ... 34 ... -- - (!J6o 50 . --
2... 7 -566 1.8 -363 28 -269 20 36-6
. - .r;;.7o 1.8
-- -
-~
--
33-9 1.8 -~96 50 .197 22 )9.9 .a<!Bo 36
46.7 .192 20 .1c6 42 -~30 23 43-5 - -- .oJ8o 31
.- ..
---
65.5 .Q899 23 .OJ20 23 .c68o 23 46.7 ,o42o 3l
. 51-7 .Ql8o 1.8 -- ..-
--
e.. 3.88 8.76 ~5 1.65 25 57-8 .0340 20
5-35
7-32
6.92
4.65
15
1 ..
5-45
2.27
14
50
-900
-932
50
20
65.0 - .0350 n -
9-89 1.94 50 2.ll 50 -859 30 1.8 ... 15.6 1.66 ~9 -998 25 0.778 32
13.4 2.00 50 1.20 50 .614 50 1.8.9 -713 21 .8jo 56 -696 26
18.0 L45 50 .780 30 .:;81 50 22.9 780 20 -347 63 .621 27
2o.2 -694 28 20
~
.)04 1.8 .634 25 16
:~
350 29-0 .)02
33-7 .630 23 .205 38 16
9 ... ll.5 1.88 rr 1.79 7l ... 50 17 40.9 .266 24 .105 42 .2)9 1.8
~5.6 1.10 31 .m 83 .245 83 49.8 .m 17 .126 23 .243 16
22.8 .475 42 .448 71 .269 7l 60.3 .131 ~7 -o965 25 -~46 15
32.2 .J"o 30 .238 l25 .1.82 20
45-5 -169 36 .157 125 .103 20 19 ... 15.6 1.20 12 ~-10 19 -361 14
63-9 .dll.l 23 ,CJTlO 83 -0589 31 18.9 .99<) ~7 ~-30 62 .)91 24
22.9 ~-10 19 .J70 55 -368 ~
10. ll-5 2.34 50 1.64 7l -757 50 29-0 .88o 14 -230 33 .;n 22
15.6 1.30 38 -892 lll .45o 36 337 .no 2l .200 63 .49<) 19
22.8 -567 31 .448 7l .223 56 40.9 .400 15 .150 62 -~99 1.8
32-2 .386 30 -219 ~ .182 26 "9.8 -330 16 .l.Bo 7l .266 17
"5-5
63.9
-195
-OJ57
<5
2l
.137
.c676
105
83
-~OJ.
.0500
22
25
60.3 .170 19 .aroo 55 = ~T

20 ... 14.4 1.69 ll ~-ar 82 98" 15


ll ... ~-7 ~-17 100 1.86 62 1.54 52 17-7 .676
.no
10 -746 83 .m 1T
21.1 .833 29 .623 7l -723 29 21.6 23 -685 100 .669 16
26.7
37-3
51-5
65.6
-693
.448
.179
.OJJ9
155<
71
50
u16
-398
-269
.138
.oeor
140
200

""
100
.]72
.238
.ll7
CJT93
38
100
13+~7
50
26.4
32.2
)9.3
48.2
-527
.4dl
-217
-297
17
~7
~9
~
-5c6
.261
.210
.192
100
1~+100
100
-515
.368
.209
.2dl
16
13
16
~4
59-0 -151 12 .124 13100 .l.loJ. 13
12 4.75
5-59
-
5.10 u; 4.72
2-73
25
25
2.41
~-57
25
20 21 ... ~7.6 1.1H ~0 .Sio<) 82 1.22 21
6.65 4.15 12 2.00 25 1.24 25 21.1 1.CJT 28 .no 50 .6dl 19
796 3-77 20 2.64 25 1.0l. 30 25.2 -537 50 393 ~00 .785 16
9-46 3-64 20 1.6; 29 1.07 25 30.2 -924 20 .645 62 759 20
11.3 2.19 22 .866 25 l.OJ 22 36-2 .648 21 o531 71 329 16
13 1-"9 20 -548 20 1.25 25 43-3 .829 19 .386 ~120 .lo53 1.8

13 ...
16.2
20,2
903 15
24
.420
881<
30
2..
-
.42 ..
- 51.8
62.1
"51
.m
13
20
.241
-~57 14
-252
.2J1
~4
e
23.8
28.0
1-35
-963
.663
26
24
.586
397
28
35
.448
.310
35
24
24
27 ... 7S7
9.30
lo.lo8
l..til
8
19
-
2.39 67
~-13
3-til
22
02
33.0 .486 23 354 60 .28o 20 ll-3 1.8o 22-"2 l.J6 19+26 -1159 36
38-9 .475 22 .260 62 -~5 21 13-8 l..9l 30 1-25 76 1.c6 ~7
45.8 -314 22 -~rr 23 ,100 22 ~.a l..52 20 1"' 21o -788 ~
;.o
6".3
.236
.125
24
24
-131
.1til
23
24
.1)0
.til38
22
26
20.3
21o.6
29-7
l.~
.m
-367
22
1.8
19
.786
.5011
.228
25
~7
ll
.J"5
.2J7
e8
94 BLt\STING VIBRA.nONS AND THEDt. EFFECTS oN STRUCTliR.ES

'rwot hot :.=e, !'VtlCJ.O n-o-


....... ln
,.,...,CJ.. .......':7" .......
t"ft..1.&veree

tt/l.~t ~;:r,
~!!"'
queney,
~;:1 ~
queJIC)',
epo ep
32 7-31
8.74
~-32
1.80 l.l
..,
1..1.5
0.83S
2lo 30.0
33.6 .. .
--
o.J.28
.o679
36
14
-
.-
-..
10.5
12.6
1.58
1.79
66+12
u;.so
1.15
~,
l..J.5
O.l!lo9
376
.- . -0131
.0)90
18
.- -
15.2
18.2
1.28
1.al
1.olo
19
19
1.37
0.71!2
-~
25
21
-988
."8
...38
43.3
50.3
61.3 -- -- .o)6o
.a.100
13
82
17 - -.
21.9
26.5 0-533
15
15+14
.loQ(i
.)26
62
62 .161o ~- 18.6 . - 0.4ll 56
26 -
0..2l.l
-31
19.2
21.4
23.0
0.529
.
.
30
--
.J.95
.156
.114
30
23 -- ..
25.0
21" -- - .l.llo
.381o
15
28 .-
.
-
..,....... ,..,_ . e
,..,_ ver-ae
30.8
)4.8
39.2
0.252

..
-
i6
--..
.296
-3.35
..103
18
25
16
0..1.91

---
l.3
-
--
-
'rwot d.bt.uce, l'llrtle.lO ~5.2 .Q1'12 24
l'llrtle.le "'!"''':7. n'e
-- .
y:!1.!:'' .-
52.2
~_!!7 ~_!!7 o6'19
Q;ueDC;r,
t't/rJ ~ ~ 6].2 . .o6l7
25
21 -
.
-- -.
---
22 138 1-36 28
9Bil
l).2 -. .- o.6Jo
.)90
28
55 --
179
23.9 . --- 5o6
.310
32
28 -- ..
-- --
31.8 .220 26
'<l..6
- .- .219 26 -- -
22
51.9
l.6-3 -.- -
-~
0.629
32
28 -- .
!eot ~=e,
t:tjr)
Part1CJ.e
v~!!y, -
quency, v~isit,Y,
FartiCU'
ert e

I~=:1. , v~~y,
f1U1Sverse
l'art1CJ.e .......
'lU.,..
<m<1,
20.1
..- .l!l.o 28
.-
eps in see
..
24.1
29-5 -- 327
.223
11
17
.. . 28 ... 5-67
6.95
.. ... 329
2.64
39
45 ..-
37-6
. -. .120 28 - ... 8.62 .
. . 0.829 45 .
--- .- -.
38-5 .10'( 21 10.6 1.05 56
50.8
60.4 -- -
.00.73
o498
10
l4 -
13.0
15.5 ... .-
.
0.120
.280
62
45
.- .
24.9
. .226 31
. --
25 ... 15.0
17-5 .- .- 0.524
.320
33
28 -. ---
31.0
38.2
-.
.
.1o6
-0596
36
33 -- ..
- -- .- -
21.0 -345 33 48.1 -0574 20
26.5
.- 33 --
...
253
.- . -.
33.0 .19]. 2lo
.- .-
28 ... 6.27 1.14 55
.-
--- -.
41.5 .154 31 8.32 0.636 35
.
-- .- -
52.3 -o643 36 u.o .546 62
64.0 .0367 33 . J.4.6 .. - .234 36
..-
.
.
25 23.8 .- . O.J.64 28 -- .
.
24.1
218
.-
. .23)
.119
33
30
. .
27.5
32.0
-- -. .(:962
.ue
22
20 .. -. ~:~ -
.
-
.0'(68
.o6ll
31
22 .
.
-
378 - . .r:JT91 22
.. . .
-- -
46.0 . .o36o 38 . 29 ... 18.0 - 0.4]9 4l
.. . - .- .- ..-
47.5
6l.o --
.0)90
.aloo
72
20 .. . 19-7
21.4
..-
.]68
.]42
40
32
'f.l,8 - -0255 21 - 24.2
. .- .l.23 33 -. .
. 211
.. ...
321 32
.-.
--. -- - -
26 ... 315 o.w 30 35-3 .167 26

..
-- -.-
3).3 .312 18 42.4 -o896 23
36.1 ,25) 19 . 49.5
.-
.o850 40
1!2.0 - .249 62
-- -. 593
-- ..- .o625 13
-. -.
--- .-
51.1 .300 42 'f.l,2 .o672 23
64.4 .200 24 -. .. 87.3 -0530 17 .
82.6 .. .135 26
. .
103 .
.. .
dl99 62 . 29- .. 20.6
237
.. ... o.l!:!o
.]26
21
31
.
..- .-
.
26 ... 62.1
69.4
. ...
o.l6o
.o857
29
31 .. .. 21-7
33-3
.. .. 290
.18J.
28
34
.
.
-
78.5
895
105 .. -
.uo
.o487
.o465
17
l.6
26 -.- -
--
48.4
54.2
6o.7
.
.
.
.-
.l37
.17J.
.11o0
38
26
3l
-
.-
...
10'(
132
-. --- .00.58
.al20
2~
25 --- ..- 70.2 ll9 42
152 - .CI!66 l.6

Table. c-3 ... P Ia M guam lnMau. lOIWIII

'rwt
5eal.e<1
diatanee, ,,.,.,:>CJ.e rre-

l'&rtl<:J.O
e
,.,.._ ""'lCJ.O
verse
.....
rt/ll>! ~;:1 quuc)"J
~!:''
que=.cy, :!j_!!1, q'Ue::D~:"J',
30... 6.66 l.al 53 1,29 li5 1.61>
u
77
epa epo epa
s.u
2] ... 20.8 -. ... o.l61o 62
... . 11.6 0.892 3lo
0.973
.,oe 0.806 42
.. .1~ - 15.0
.-
21.5 83 207 53
22.4 .172 62 19.6 0.509 '!'( 272 59 o.119 "-'
2).5
... .13 83 .. 25.8 -303 50
25.1
27.0 .- =
.166
T.l
36 . .- 33-9 0.1<2 38 .0540 48 0.0569 50
PAII.TICLE VELOCITY AND FREQUENCY DATA 95
TU1 C..t. - rl..t.t !osk ().&am. !IOrthent fl!o $tOM Co!p!!l1
Plat lock. l.bio - CoottDuecl

:.:=e e
..... .......
..... Scaled
,..,_ Vert c ,..,_ .....
verse

-
,..,.
'hot

30-.
f:t./1J
10.5
=~ ...
;:;;:;; y,

-- --
que.oe;r,
l'eri<:J.e
~.!!1
1.10
":'1'
loll
...
I'O:rt1<Ue
~it7,

-
-1.
.,..
..
'hot

02 ...
d1ot.....
tt./1J

"87
Part1<Ue
~.!!1
"="''
.
Partiolo
. .~_;::r,
5-7~
~
2l
fol'tiel.o
~_!!1
5.10
=;r
J.l
12.6
1~.9 - .- 1-32
0.527
loll
50
-- -.
6.oa
6.30
5-63
;.:;e
15
15
5-14
3-67
22
20
2.20
1.65
12
26
.
..- .- 36
17-2 .41] 30 10.9 1.94 10 1.02
20.5
24.2 --- 375
-232
2..
33 -- -- ].0 ...
18.6
2.57
1.66
16
18
9<17
930
53
26
1.Cll.
1.21
53
25
26.8 . -31~ "5 - ~.6
32.3
1.20
.lo2;
16
26
-563
.672
2..
9
l-13
,7J.O
l3
26
31 ... 7-51 2.05 Oo 1-62 67 1.22 02
9"" 1.o6 56 75-- 7-09 2.17 25 1.'19 37 2..1.9 36
12-5 0.783 ~ -552 50 -736 38 8.95 2.34 21 l-49 Oo 1.4l. 33
16.3
26
.236 63 - ;1.1. ... 2.19 02 1.1~ loll 1.66 4~
29
20-9
27-3
]0.0
.262
-
.175
.
20
-177
.].)0
02
~
.1911
-
30
. 14.7
19.2
2 ...7
0.909
76"
02
34
loa
1.31
0.896
45
59
0-967
.;6o
1.C2
33
63
.0):19 -127 19 '194 -950 77
24
Oo .lolB
31 ... 19-7 -.- ..- .238 "J6 . .-
327
02.6
"'-'~'
.)09
50
14
.loQl
.dl67 l.l. .)48 14
2l-5
23.7
.2dl
.120
50
].0 ..- .. 78-- 6-77 2.o6 22 2.65 22 2.32 23
259
29-1
-. .. .182
-135
50
40 .- -- 7-96
9'-2
2-19
2.(11.
26
24
1.86
1.31
~
32
1.67
1.18
26
l.l

--- ---
.llll 23 ~ o.e6l.
32.6
37.0
'-2.0
.10l
.126
31
~
22 -
. -- ll-5
14.2
17-5
22.1
1.72
1 ...7
1.09
0.59Q
34
43
9
0.912
-786
.674
-373
30
17
10
"3
.6)4
-'168
-936
"5
50
20
63
81... 91,6 1.29 '-2 -733 loll .386 71 27-9 .)07 23 .278 20 .263 2l
11.1 1-09 40 ,751J 40 .680 45
13.9 .lollll 21 .360 38 .)Ol 19 '19 .. 22.9 O.loOl 31 o.6ll 26 o.m 18
17.4 .)24 26 .226 30 .176 29 26.7 .384 30 -278 25 -334 2l.
.265 31-2 .)41 .134 40 .25]. 2l.
~
22.5 -334 2l 30 .147 29
-1~7 .206 2l.
-287
~
29-1 .263 20 .ll6 50 .].)0 32 37-9
37-6 .212 2l .o62o Oo -0912 22 1,6.1 .235 23 .10l .261 24
49.6 .o66<) 15 -0545 24 -0597 l6 56-7 .152 20 .dlo6 32 .182 25
7J..O .].20 l6 .051,6 2l ..1.56 18
62 ... 6.89 1.60 46 990 50 -678 loll 89.2 o669 24 .01+22 17 .o47lo 24
6.80 1.41 30 1.03 53 .867 30
ll.4 -743 33 -954 50 .666 33
14.9 .635 20 .374 31 -560 2l.
19.6 .661 20 .244 26 .249 2l.
26.2 .265 14 .llQ 22 .116 19 'f.tble c-.a .... huu:t Stooe C.uy. a.Uawe. Cillo
34.5 .201+ 45 .o66l 53 -0733 9l
45.5 .ll2 16 .0466 38 -0609 50
83 ... 18.9 .478 10 .)ll l3 .448 21 'hot :.=e, Pa.rtiole he Pa.rtl.c.le
rte

=;r,
ffio Pa.rtiel.e
verse
Fro-
~3-1
29-0
36.6
47.4
61.4
-560
-379
.2].0
.257
-110
32
32
26
24
19
.1,61
.253
.223
.126
-07l!6
33
21
50
2l.
36
-292
.285
.2!1)
.2o6
.10l
33
40
23
l9
15
35 ...
tt./lbt
].9.6
27-3
37-1
v~!;1'
1.18
.636
.385
="'
20
33
26
~.!!1
o.66o
-765
.2J~
63
loll
56
~!~7,
0.666
.
.215
11.ueDC7,
e~e

71
.
53

-- --
8o.2 .ll6 14 .01+71 18 .o88o 13 ,J.85 02
105 .o617 16 .0303 16 .01+46 ].2 50-7 -~ 25
69.8 .190 32 .0620 50
37-- 145 -- .- O.L'J92 02 -- --
l62
l.8l. . . .<26;
.02loll
33
33 . --
2o6
... .-
.Ollolo ..5
.-
:.~e, ..... Ve:rt c .... 234
270
314 .
.
-
.-
=
-00705
.oo634
25
4~
36
..
.
--.-
...
Tnt Particle Par1 ic.le Fr<o- I'O:rtic.le Fr<o- .Oo672 33
366
tt/1bi v~~~~y,
queney,
v:J:!!>-' que:nc,., ~!!7, quener,
. ..
00
'"" 37... 90-1
-. ... 0.0977 3l -.
33... 14.1
16.4
o.631
. 23
. 0.359
.J4o
30
56
0.~5

..-
14
.
-
9"-7
102
.- -
.0703
.042!
.0317
39
29 -
- --
...
19.1 .J.89 lll 31
22.2
550
-
2l.
- .164
71
16
l.22
10o . ..- .0387
.0313
31
33
--
-.
25-9 -257 23 .2U 16 .245 1 ..
- . - .- .
30.1
35.2 -217 25
.164
.llO
16
17 .l.61 ll
l.6l
l86
..
- .aiBl.
.Q1B6
23
4~

.
]8... 14l..o .
-- 0.0)09 "3
-- --
.-
159 .023" 56
.
178
..- -
-0132 77
-.
-.-.
203 .m.Ol 53
.-
di~=e,
. e
..,.._
. erae
233
2!1)
314
369
..
.odllB
-Oo656
.OQ526
.OOOJ2
"5
37
02
--- --
T..t
tt./1J ...
""": i':-'-0
Y~itJ',
ro-
.....
queney,
.-rtlCJ.o

:!J<.!!1 ~:cy,
"""'..,_
~.!!1
he

~ 38 ... Bl>.o ..
-.- 0.0799
59
37
.-
.
--
.-
.0462 02
34 ... 7-55 -
. . 3-25 56
.
1.53
--
34
88.6
.- .ou~
9-70 3-47 02
96.6
-.. 7l

-.--
-..
1o6.o .0370 33
1.2 ... 2.19 19 4,26 02 ll7 .0366 56 -
.-.
20.7 2.dl 17 .637 2l
26.6 . -736
-760
30
36
134
.. .0223 loll
34.o
lo4,4
-651
- .
23 -827
.26o
31
31 .
-699
.
45
1~5
183 -
.a2o6
.0315
02
38 -
96 BLASTING VIBRATIONS AND THEIR EFFECI'S ON STRUCTURES

Tabla C-1 ... hanc:e Stone ec.&ny Qu!!TT lel lnou.e. Obto CocUJNed

Teat d1~=e l'artlCJ.~I ~, l'articu ....


ft/~ ~a!!1 :r, y:~:~y, quenc;:y,
y:i.!~ quent'J',
7~.5
79.0
1!5.8
0.15J.
.115
26
42
o.uo
05"1
0.1]5
129 ..... 27-5
37-2
.
-- .. o.;22
.)8o
eps
50
42 ..
cos
.
--
94.8 .Q588 7l .120 42 51.0
.- .2ot. 50 --
106 .lao 29 .061 ~5 077 29 70.8
.- -136 63
.. .-
.-
I22 0606 29 .o321l 48 .Q150 16 96-4 -0715 83
142 .Ci!J2:7 25 .0328 )6 .0636 19 125 . .ot.42 63 .
170 .oral lit .0241 42 .OW) 17 151 . . .0319 50 - .
t.o ll7 o.06oo 26 0.01169 48 o.06al ..... 45 26.3 o.625 56 o.m 45 o.6;9 7l
123 .01198 29 .ar45 63 -0746 63 ~7- 7 .~15 50 .~tot. 36 ..2?.1 56
litO -05116 50 .0571 56 .ot.JS )6 89-8 .ua ~5 .133 31 .<. 56
w. .0517 42 0273 53 .ot.44 42 ll6 .114 )6 .al57 42 .Q9"<l 42
248 .0210 33 .OJ.I!5 26 1lt5 -0531 29 .0690 '*5 .0339 26
Jl"' .0102 50 .oc.b72 ~ -0157 ItO
lo6 ... 217 o.426 7l 0.517 3l 0.)98 50
u ... 18.3 o.aaa loS 372 291 50 -347 .J8 .249 36
24.8 910 45 5o.e .29Q 63 .207 31 .litO 63
32-0! a.~ )6 -539 67 a.~ 42 70.6 .1it8 3l .114 29 .al34 63
38.1 .50!1 29 .sao lo2 -353 ItO 96 .110 )6 .o68; 1l -o857 33
53.0 .415 .203 62
~ 59 .l7l 125 -0935 .J8 .0425 45 0583 36
93-1
150.0
236.0
.141
0171
.Q296
56
50
.107
0583
.0262
53
67
63
.(ll99
-~
.OJSl
50
48
43 47 ...
157
16.7
-0294
a.5ot.
56
45
.0)96
0.269
45
50
.0301
O.l4t.
31
45
257
38.8
-375
-101
63
36
.237
-139
38
125
=
.0657
1l
1ao
56.1 0190 29 0705 33 .03'*5 63
7"9 .ot.64 38 .03l9 36 .0382 36
Table C-9 ... hc:tee ~an;x 9!:!!r.X 1 l!ili)()II'Vitlta Obto 96.1 0190 28 .0180! 25 .01oo .J8
48 23.0 1.25 "5 0.922 56 0.379 42
ert c 35.8 .13 .J8 45 .1;8
di~:!:e, 33
l!ad1al ~m.Sverse 59'
T..t nrt1CLe l're Particle Fr<
"":"': 53.0 -355 29 .257 31 .130 29
t</1~; velocit71 quency 1
v:!is!~y, queacy.
cpa
v~~y, quency, n.8 .153 23
26
.123 .J8 .14t. 31
cpa cps 925 .~10 -0158 24 .0679 a
36 ... 6.ot. 4.92 0!2 2.58 24 2.}4 20
8.97 . . 1.68 0!2 .810 29
49 ... a.8
3t..8
o.su
.181
50
s
0.342
.167
.J8
1ao
0.10!2
.0657
63
125
13.1 2.15 19 1.~ 24 .864 28
19.] 1.59 28 .613 25 -519 36
51.9 .103 33 .Q936 45 .om 63
28.3 .au 23 .323 29 .2al l8 70-7 .0551 36 .0382 29 .0404 31
41.4 .426 29 .2ao 31 . . 91.3 .0260 25 .0253 26 .Ql.24 38
4J 25-5 .
.
. 0.186 16 . . 50 u.o l.O!J 50 1.01t 42 O .J89 38
30.9 -- .206 16
..- -. 34.2 .405 .J8 .465 45 .184 36
.-
51.4 .26t. 31 .261 38 .159 38
.JB-5 .149
48.0
.. . .105
17
16 .. 70-5 .155 u .116 36 .137 33
59-7 .. -0532 20 .. 91.4 .C689 26 -0785 29 .ot.n 29
13-5
. .0361 0!7
. ..
91.6 - .0268 23 51 ... 27.8 o.34t. 50
s
0-373 28 0.291
.278
36
:~;~
37-5 .348 26 .J8
76 7.6; 1.98 20 1.89 1.01 51.4 373 42 38 -110 38
32 27 .186 .136 42
9-68 1-97 21t 1.25 33 .651 42 n.1 36 -~ 56
12.2 1.73 30 .618 42 97-0 .128 33 .o8o4 33 .0761 29
24
896 53 126 .101 33 .()517 50 .0613 42
15.3 1.29 5"9 25 .236 40
19.3 -90!2 33 533 50 .m 53
158 .0366 50 .Oitl7 s .0335 26
24.4 926 26 .J0!7 26 259 a
31.1 .657 .}03 52 . 34.3 0.186 50 0.418 31 0.189 29
32 32 .269 38 .212 45 .242 .179
33 25
42.7 .342 32 .143 27 .146 33 ""9
6o.o . .156 28 .ow.; 42
TI ... 28.7 0.732 30 o.493 45 0.243 4; 81.6 .al78 36 .o8o3 125 .0658 50
36.7 48 llO -0581 28 .0126 31 .0649 23
738 36 335 .J8 .420 141 .ot.n 33 .o38o 29 .ot.TI 31
46.6 534 36 .256 63
56.5 .298 176 .0253 33 .0335 42 .0219 15
29 .lO!J 45 .<it[ 56
74.2 .224 45 .107 53 .117 53
94.2 .199 .0672 25 .0196 42 53 ... 28.9 0.252 83 0-361 45 0.331 26
29 40.4 .242 63 .0!13 33 .zoo 45
120.0 .153 3S .()514 33 .Oit2~ 45
166 .o856 43 28 576 -U3 33 -<:995 100 .~38 28
-0291 .0194 ItO 79-6 .ar46 :!5 .0621 31 .119 33
8o ... 3.16 23 3.40 104 .0551 29 .0)32 )6 .0106 33
5-55 67 3.61 50 131 .0269 .0286 25 .0306 22
9-25 1.23 20 1.55 15 2.01 10 25
10.6 896 29 539 24 1.34 14
12.0 24 1.02 ao 1.23 oa 54 ... 352 o.t.46 3l 0.471 56 0.0!12 42
768 38 .m
12.9 .m 21t 794 14 1.06 23 50.0
n.8
.466
.18)
56
.J8
,))4
.ao 45 .128
28
71
13.3 113 0!2 753 19 .830 25 1ao 26 63
21.4 .26; ll+ 17 .JS2 16 .126 .128 0739 50
-299 132 .OSl~ 2.. .ar4; 3l .o839 38
JC.6 .232 16 .0790 20 .2ot. 17 167 .()560 25 .ot.89 42 .Ol09 25

l
i
PARTICLE VELOCITY AND FREQUENCY DATA 97
T&bl c-u .. - lkv York TJtp loc.lr. omutiop.. CHntop !oint guam. Tabl C..U. - hw Torts Ira Rod~ Corporatl9!J. Clh!tOD PoiAt Oua.rn
!9\l&hke.epth. M.Y. fOulbkeepab 1f 1 Y, .. Coet l.!b.!ec!

, .. . :.=-e, . ........
..,..,_ .,.,.... .......
--
c
d1~:!:e, ..,..,_
verH
..,...
Part1e:Le m
"''"'~ _,., ..t!i-!1
I'Ol"t1eU
-7. "*:"1CU lllrUcu l'IU11Ue
rt/lbt ~a!!;Y, 1\U:eDC:ft
<PI
v~.!! 7
~po ope
rt/u> -:!is!" -7
ope
~;:r,
~ -:!i-!7
. . .
55 15.~
16.7 --- ..-
O.TJ'/
.~'18
2~
~
." -.
(q ... 8.01
g.611
1./o9
1.86
.m
30
9
1.63
1.33
37
J6
1.46
1.16
25
20
22.1
26.5 . .263
.2~5
~3
33
..- ..
l2.0
14.7 .456
ll .676
.516
33
43
.56o l3

.-
9 ll
37-5
56.>
-- .1611
.203
~
~ -
16.3
22.7
.387
.311
~
29
.311
.211
37
J6
517
.368
-269
Tl
loll
56 ... 27-~
/o9.3
.
0.17~ 16
0.~1
.om
27
ill 0.148
.13 28.0
~.8
.146
-
)6
- .158
.128
36
45
.141
.124
58
50
52.0 .<J7l6 loll .Q56o 56 .101 ~
:;l>.6 -0537 53 .QI.57 56 .10l ~
58.2 .0768 23 .0746 36 .~1 33
62.2 .()582 37 .0631 67 .0699 loll
67.3 .0571 32 <:>499 )6 0153 J6
731 .()1.39 ~ .()1.611 33 0567 29
81.3 0909 ~ .Cil6l ~ .c.e62 28
. . :.:e, ....
57 ... 27-1
41.6
"9
loll.o
515
.
0.25~
.l:;a
.ill
-
loll
"<!
16
0-270
. -139
.1.3
.125
189
~5
43
56
67
-
0.130
.120
.207
.270
-
27
50
loll
19
'liNt

6o...
tt.Jlbf
13.3
Part~..

~:7
4.87
~
45
~icu
~!!:r,
J.86
c

=7,
...... n:<1~
~.!!>'
3.16
......
""'
_,.,
"""
55.0 .176 28 .123
"3
51 30 16.9 ~ .1 33
.
68.1 .152 32 .128 ~ .
193
. 22.0
327
1.65 28 .8<;>6 45 1.26 29
,e... 28.7 o.616 "5 0.637 1> o.lo60
..20,
19
36.8
>9.1
1.07
. 50
. -
'95
-
Tl
.
- .-
32-6 .562 21 269 45 .523
37-0 1.12 16 ...10 ~ .676 lJ9... 10.6 1.>7 63 3-59 36 1.73 50
11<!.2 5"7 20 .4ll8 -746 16 13.2 2.69 33 3-45 33 1.99 25
>7.1 .l!:u .610
"3

--
13 - - 14.5 2.27 33 339 36 2.59 29
.-
"3
.
.-
5).6 36 16.1 1.64 ~ .686 36 .637 20
6<).5 . 225
.)28 "<! 16.6 4.42
..,
33 2.76 50 1.46 50
26.> .786 1.05 50 1.64 45
59... 22.7
35-0
.
0.>52 -
29
0.680
296
50
o5 0.358
-
50
31.9
"0.5
972
.631
50
50 ....'-29,
-737 ~
63
.624
.558
50
50
39.7
... 2
.270
-338
50
32
.228
.215
50
53
39
.2"0
50
53
52.8
775
.619
551 ..,
50
372
50
Tl
-363
339
63
56
>9-3 -219 53 -913 16 .)48 17
56.5 ,J"l 1.. .230 48 .302 "0 1"0... 13.1 2.57 31 2.31 31 107 28
63.5
72-8
82.0
.265
.182
-l23
53
>2
36
327
.226
.176
.,
16
>2
.215
.175
-
53
>9
-
16.0
22.0
25 ...
2.(1.)
1.01
1.'18
29
23
31
1.96
1.52
1.63
3l
42
45
.8611
.7>2
1.(1.)
28
36
36
. . 28.6 - - -
62 ... 38-0
38.0 .- -- 0.120
121
36
'3
)4.6
l>g.)
1.27
.632
45
7l
-788
.)51
25
Tl
.49Q
.413
56
63
:;a. 0.120 .118 >2 26 .21
55-5
65-7
73.3
.102
.102
.l28
56
38
32
.0028
-0911
56
56
o.ll6
.116
.l26
32
48
1 ..1
60.3
82.9
15.6
-351
.556
83
56
239
"Tl
2.14
"'
63 .400
.
Tl
63
29 .139 >2 176 37 1.18 33 58 1.27 29
'18.0 .153 28 .l24 33 .l25 38 19.4 2.07 33 3.09 42 2.29 28
63 ... 8.>9 1.24 16 1.~ >2 . . 23.0
30.2
.985
1.09
50
56
'11"
1.17
50
38
527
.m
50
42

--- ---
l2.0 1.16 23 1.46 30 31-9 1.38 50 936 63 765 63
17.0 .880 21 .835 3" 37-7 1.03 45 .(Qr 2l .380 50
24.1 -588 23 .620 22 46.8 .467 56 .)01 26 63
J",O .281 34 .)44
. >2
.. . 596 -339 42 .31. 45
279
.212 63
48.1 -194 50 - . 85.5 .l l 56 213 Tl 301 63
63 ... 16.1 0.5>9 29 0.581 56
.. .. 1>2 ... 139 2.71 >2 1.67 45 2.56 Tl
21.8 -732 29 .616 23 19.0 1.5.. 36 1.ll 45 1.07 3l
30.8 .228 23 .207 31 -
.
.. 23.6 1.20 31 1.61 50 .69f;,
.e:;a
ll9
38.3 .166 25 .2lo5 33 21" 2.19 31 1.~ 63 28
31.0 .82 .. 33 .m 25 .~ 50
611 ... 21.2 0.627 50 o.>38 40 . . 31.4 - - - -
28.3
46.0
.m
.10l
18
50
.303
.137
3"
63 .. .- 37-7
... 3
1 ... 3
- .
7l .m 45
. .837
. 63
-
55-2 .156 50 .dllB 36 - -. ""9 1.01 50 .6117
- 50 "21
.50
771
106
.106
.0322
>2
56
.o:;ao
.0357
20
15 .- -
>9.9
538
-
.519 56 253 J6 .261) 45
66.1 363 50 .160 Tl 38
64 ... 27-6 0.172
. .30 O.l27
.37
29
.
. .
. 911 .677 63 .419 58
21"
.453 Tl
35- .(1.)17
48.8 -005" 21 ,(1.)(1.) - .- 1.. 3... 13.1 1.51 ~ 2.19 63 1.611 J6
6o.1
83 ...
.114
.0332
16
. 0737
.0351
26
. .- .-
15.7
16.7
2.67
2.07
50
50
1.70
1.62
56
50
1.87
~-~1
45
66
102 .Ql91o 9 .01.83 19 - 22.4
26.7
1.11
.1'}4
42
50
909
.680
Tl
50
121
101
~
66
65 8.oo 0.657 >a 0.7(1.) 33 .
. -- 32.1 1.]6
.,
45 1.61 56 .g62 ~

...
10.7 .6:;8 17 .63" >a 373 .882 .806 83 .519 63
17.J
20.8
.258
258
29
16
.202
.l21
30
26 ..
.
46.0
54.6
1.28
1.03
J6
56
1.~
.9/o9
83
56
.863
11"
J6
50
.766
29-1
~.o
.220
.177
25
36
.l2..
.0676
24
53 . . 691 1.06 ~ 901. 26 50

65 ...
..- .-
8.00 2,(jl 50 1.80 36
16.0 .966 50 -76o 38
20 718 26 -358 ~
-
.-
29.1 .207 22 l25 27 .
)6.3 -133 28 105 30 .
98 BLASTING VIBilA110NS AND THEill EFFECfS ON STII.UCTURES

Table C-12. lw Yori: TTap Ioek CorporatiOQ 9wtrt'Ja


Wut Myuk. Jll. Y. "' Coatiaued Table c.. lJ .... LlttleTUle 0.. Cotu:tnctlOG Site: lluntiytoa, .......

:root di~=. nrticJ.e ..,.._


...
nrtio~e
0

-- 1 Port.io:J.e
......
P'H ..
.,_.,
!Sealed
d.ist&Dce, nrtic~e Fre-

PIU'iele
c ..,._ Part:l.o1e
,.,..._
ver1e

quooq,
v~!!)'' ~1t7,
~!!7 ~~ ~!!7 ":!h~7J ~ ~!!Y
que:ner~ ~7J
rt/lbi cpo
I{Ut:OCJ',
0 ...
rt/u.! 01!0

11+4 ... 20.4 0.891 56 0.!)24 42 0-5'19 42 68 ... .18.6 1.01< 63 o.m 56 0-571 40
2.17 56 1 .18 28.5 .6CIJ' 36 .513 48
:;1:2 32
~:~
25-3 50 50
.380 26
21-9
213
2.CIJ'
1.89
56
42
1.45
2.21
56
50 1.20
56
56
36.8
51.4 .472
59
28
-575
.475
30
22 -
31.2
)4.8
-650
-974
-914
42
45
50
.526
-746
7l
42
-363
.761
42
56
74.1
1o6
.lCli!
- .
l3 .176
. -
67 .dl<E
-0547
15
28
39-5 -950 56 .622 -5
1+4.0 -593 50 .467 63 352 83 69 ... 13.5 1.61 39 l-37 )4 1.26 32
6) .4)4
:~
51.6 .Boo 38
-576
~
50 -983 56 50 20.3 -790
59-3 38 1.CIJ' 56 -994 42 29-3 .4211 .40) '5 .456 33
72-0 905 56 -558 100 -493 ~ 37-2 .310 63 ,42, 33 ,1+4.\, 26
51.0 329 30 .261 loll 391 20
145 ... 22.0 67 .o687 14
26.8
3o.8
35.2
0.5.18
.517
.455
1.52
38
50
42
0.455
.Sa;
-557
33
63
42
o.62o
-538
309
.821
56
56
50
121
103
.d\22
-
0.915
-
12 .139
.o62l 59
l.O
.01133
o.67J
17
lO
38 797 56 38 70... 13.7 53 0-849
36-9 -579 38 .386 100 .376 42 20.4 -695 42 .56Q 45 .543 32
40.5 -303 38 -537 36 .437 ~ 26.2 -360 37 -740 30 -577 26
47.6 .J06 83 -490 125 .463 6) )6.2 .481 26 -570 42 .590 17
55-7 .403 31 -351 63 -358 56 51.9 ,1J.2 12 .2l.9 63 .W(O 16
67.1 .503 6) .426 63 .415 45 73-9 ~ .101< 20 .d!35 10 -0590 22

146 ... 16.8 1-37 56 1.58 63 1.00 '5 11 .. 22.7 0.589 50 0.589 7l 0.1+49 42
19-5 .868 56 -659 56 .455 83 33-4 .463 45 .)41 loJ .455 34
23.6 .933 45 2.00 50 1.38 42 43.1 293 59 -469 30 .432 26
27.6 1.31 56 1.18 33 1.33 63 597 -353 33 .)69 40 493 19
1.01 56 1.26 65.7 -<1149 l3 .124 67 .0566 15
33-7
40.5 -986
36
56
1-29
.642 50 .869
33
45 l22 . - .o6ll )4 .0464 22
48.4 129 56 .5011 63 .419 50
579 .760 63 -869 63 -827 45 72 ... 18.1 0.501 53 0.368 59 o.4l.2 48
76.3 .J84 63 317 100 -117 63 26.6 .446 43 .268 50 .)69 43
82.8 - - .d\52 100 o64JI 83 )4.1
473
.2dl
.232
53
37
.265
.228
4o
48
.28)
.184
30
19
147 1,4.0 0.16o 6) 0.163 56 0.243 63 67.8 .CI<61 11 Cil'72 63 -0094 33
61.7 .o631