1974 Figure 129 – Projection Analysis on BlastVision™ Figure 130 – Measured Fragment Projection (A3N) Operationally, three lessons proved most valuable. First, early calibration in a surrogate area accelerated rollout and reduced uncertainty at A3N. Second, zoning by stand‑off distance simplified decision rules and helped maintain consistency under changing geometries. Third, a disciplined digital QA/QC workflow—linking planning, execution, and measurement—made it possible to optimize parameters without compromising safety or compliance. 4.2 Optimization of Drilling and Blasting with High-Energy Explosives To ensure a rigorous evaluation of the high-energy explosive implementation, a comprehensive monitoring campaign was conducted over the first six months of the project (from Oct-24 to Mar-25). This included systematic measurement of powder factor (g/t), fragmentation (P80, mm), and EX1200 loading times (minutes), along with direct cost tracking for drilling and blasting. During this period, ore domains sustained average pattern increases in the range of 13–18%, while waste domains were limited to 8–10%, a deliberate constraint that reflected their already low baseline powder factor. The results demonstrate a consistent improvement across the value chain. As shown in Figure 131, powder factor decreased by approximately 17% in ore (from 301 g/t to 249 g/t) and about 9% in waste (from 220 g/t to 201 g/t). Fragmentation also improved substantially, with P80 reductions of roughly 12% in ore (447 mm to 393 mm) and 10% in waste (485 mm to 437 mm). Productivity gains aligned with these fragmentation outcomes: as illustrated in Figure 132, the EX1200’s average loading time Distance (m) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Sector II Sector III
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2