within the limits of good to fair (see Figure 7), ensuring an adequate geometry of the cut and maintaining consistency with the design mesh. Figure 7 – Dispersion of the drilled holes in Figure 8 – Dispersion of drilled holes in the redesign the redesign of the cut – Test N°4. of the cut – Test N°4. iii. Redesigned Cut results Based on the adjustments made to the cut scheme, including increasing the available empty volume, simulating the energy halos, and applying validated sequencing between holes, cut test No. 4 was executed, obtaining optimal results. In this test, an effective advance of 8.0 meters was achieved, which represents an efficiency of 100% with respect to the drilling length, validating the effectiveness of the proposed design and its performance in real operating conditions. Table 4 – Redesigned cut Efficiency Results Testing Deviation Time Hole – Hole Time Cut Progress Efficiency Cut No. 4 3.24% 150ms 600ms 8.0m 100% Results More than 100 blasts have been carried out on faces with a section of 4.0 m × 4.0, obtaining consistently optimal results in terms of linear advance, degree of fragmentation and control of perimeter overbreak. The application of hybrid synchronization, which combines electronic detonators in the cut zone and non-electric detonators in the rest of the mesh, has made it possible to optimize the efficiency of the advance per shot, reaching an average value of 96.0% in blasts carried out with a long bore of 28 feet. R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Variation Y (m) Variation X (m) 9 5 1 82% 45% 9% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.0 - 0.25m. 0.25 - 0.5m. 0.5 - 1m. Percentage N°Holes Number of deviated drill holes
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2