ArticleScientific reports2025
Optimizing blast design and bench geometry for stability and productivity in open pit limestone mines using experimental and numerical approaches.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pre-blast prediction of ground vibration in surface mining using rock acoustic impedance and wave attenuation calibrated with in-situ measurements.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Comprehensive enhancement of blasting performance and dust suppression in open-pit mines using a modified mudstone-fly ash geopolymer stemming material.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Method and application of stability prediction model for rock slope.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optimizing blast design and bench geometry is crucial for enhancing the safety, efficiency, and sustainability of open-pit mining operations. This study examines the effects of blast design and bench geometry adjustments on bench slope stability through numerical modelling under static and dynamic loading conditions. Extensive data on rock mass, blast design parameters, and geomechanical properties were analyzed to assess these optimizations. Results indicate that reducing the bench height from 12 to 5 m improves the shear reduction factor (SRF) by 43.78%, while decreasing the bench face angle (BFA) from 90° to 60° enhances the SRF by 17.12%, demonstrating increased stability. Conversely, increasing the overall slope angle from 27.5° to 36.5° improves productivity by 57.14% but reduces the SRF by 17.12%, highlighting the trade-off between stability and extraction efficiency. Optimal conditions balancing stability and productivity were identified with a bench height of 7.5 m, a BFA of 75°, and a bench width of 14 m, yielding an SRF of 1.31 under static conditions and 1.16 under dynamic conditions. Simulations of blast dynamics revealed that the bench blast velocity decreased from 63.18 cm/s at a radial distance of 13 m to 23.99 cm/s at 18.5 m, indicating significant attenuation in particle motion over distance. Blast-induced ground vibrations (BIGV) were also evaluated, with notable peak particle acceleration near the blast zone. The study recommends a powder factor range of 0.31-0.51 kg/m
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.