Improved Signature Hole Technique What is a Signature Waveform?

Jhon Silva, University of Kentucky

Abstract
Signature Hole and Waveform Superposition techniques used to predict and control mine blast ground
vibrations require a clearly defined information collection configuration. The collection of this
information determines the scope and success of the ground vibration prediction. Application of the
Improved Signature Hole technique using the Silva-Lusk equation requires the collection of at least two
informational elements from any specific production shot. The first required element is a signature
waveform, and the second element is the overall production blast waveform. The signature waveform
depends on detonated charge variables such as the amount of explosive in use, use of decking, the
possible detonation of several holes at the same delay, and many others. The production blast waveform
is beneficial to the Improved Signature Hole methodology when used to calibrate the model, and to
obtain accurate vibration predictions for different timing configurations.
This paper discusses four independent case studies in which the signature waveform differs according to
each mining sites specific blasting application. Case Study No.1 represents a traditional application
with a full column blast hole generating the signature waveform, while Case Study No. 2 derives its
signature waveform from a blast hole detonated with four decks. In Case Study No. 3 four holes were
detonated on the same delay to create the signature, and in Case Study No. 4 a single deck charge was
isolated to collect the signature. Reverse calculation of the production blast waveform using the
collected signature waveform in each of the case studies contributes to answering the question, What is
a signature waveform?

Introduction
Signature hole analysis is based on signal and system theory. In general, a system can be defined as any
process that produces an output signal in response to an input signal (Chi 2004). The system can be
modeled as a black box, with at least one input terminal and one output terminal. For the study of
ground vibrations due to blasting, it is assumed that if an excitation or input signal is applied to the input
terminal, a unique response or output signal will be measurable or observable at the output terminal. In
theory, there is no need to know the internal structure of the system (represented by what is contained in
the black box) if the response to a single input is measurable, such as the vibration produced by a single
detonating charge.
The problem of blast vibrations can be modeled numerically using a mathematical operation called
convolution. Convolution is a mathematical method of combining two signals to produce a third one.
The convolution equation for discrete signals is presented in Eq. 1.

Equation 1

In the application of Eq.1, there are three signals to consider: the input and output signals, and the
impulse response. The input signal is given by the time function or the timing sequence used in
the production shot, the output signal is the production waveform under assessment, and the
impulse response is the signature waveform.

Copyright 2017 International Society of Explosives Engineers

2017G - Improved Signature Hole Technique What is a Signature Waveform 1 of 10
This paper focuses on the analysis of the impulse response signal (the signature waveform), how to
collect this information using different methods, and its interpretation in four different situations where
signature hole analysis was performed to control and predict ground vibrations from blasting.

Signature Waveform - Impulse response

As the name suggests, the impulse response (the signature waveform) is the output signal of the system
when a delta function (unit impulse single explosion) is the input of the system. Figure 1 shows this
concept.

Figure 1. Delta function and impulse response for blasting

Figure 1 illustrates that under some assumptions regarding the system (homogeneity, time invariance,
etc.), by knowing the system's impulse response, it is possible to predict how the system will react to any
other impulse function.

It is important to notice that if two systems are different in any way, for the same unitary impulse, they
will have different impulse responses. In the same way, if the unitary impulse scale changes, the impulse
response will be scaled by the same amount as the unitary impulse on the input. Those basic concepts
are important for blast vibration prediction and control using signature hole techniques.

Signature Waveform Collection

When using the improved signature technique proposed by Silva (Silva, 2012), the basic concepts of the
signature waveform and the system behavior are considered. This technique recommends to always
collect the signature waveform information from a production shot. In the traditional signature analysis,
the signature information is usually collected from a single hole located in a different place, at a certain
distance (d) from the active blasting zone. Additionally, in most traditional collection cases the signature
blast hole has a different configuration, diameter, depth, amount of explosives, etc. than the blast holes
used for production. Figure 2 shows the two possible ways to collect signature waveform information.

Copyright 2017 International Society of Explosives Engineers

2017G - Improved Signature Hole Technique What is a Signature Waveform 2 of 10
 (a) (b)

Figure 2. Signature Collection, plan view. (a) Common traditional signature analysis. (b) Silva-
Lusk methodology

In Figure 2, despite the potential for dramatic change in site-to-site geology, collecting the signature as
indicated in Figure 2b will guarantee that the signal is most likely representative of the active blasting
zone composed of areas 1 to 4. From a mathematical point of view, the collection of the signature using
the setup in Figure 2b will ensure at some level that the system is the same for the production shots in
areas 1 to 4.

Signature Waveform Calibration

Through the collection of signature wave information in several projects at various mines, it has been
observed that the amplitude of the signature waveform is dependent on the confinement conditions of
the signature blast hole, among other variables. Thus, higher vibration levels are expected for confined
conditions as compared to less confined conditions. Figure 3 shows two possible alternatives to collect
signature information.

(a) (b)
Figure 3. (a) Unconfined signature, (b) Confined signature

Although both options are commonly used, blasters who prefer the option in Figure 3b often argue the
possibility of fly rock problems if the shot is detonated using a configuration like that shown in Figure
3a. In any case, the advantage of collecting the signature using the setup in Figure 3 is the possibility of

Copyright 2017 International Society of Explosives Engineers

2017G - Improved Signature Hole Technique What is a Signature Waveform 3 of 10
calibrating the signature using the production waveform. Figure 4 shows the vibration record for both
scenarios illustrated in Figure 3.

(a)

(b)
Figure 4. (a) Waveform for unconfined condition, (b) Waveform for confined condition

In Figure 4a it is evident that collecting the signature in unconfined conditions will produce lower
amplitudes in the signature compared to the production shot waveform amplitude. Conversely, if the
conditions are confined, signatures will have similar and in some cases higher amplitudes than the
production waveform (Figure 4b). Using the Silva-Lusk methodology, it is possible to calibrate the
signature by scaling up or down the amplitude of the signature to match the amplitude of the production
waveform.

Copyright 2017 International Society of Explosives Engineers

2017G - Improved Signature Hole Technique What is a Signature Waveform 4 of 10
Next, four case studies are presented illustrating the manner in which the signature collection
information for each was acquired, and the primary goal when collecting the information in such a way.

Signature Waveform Collection for Vibration Level Control

In the following four case studies, the main objective was to achieve a reduction in the vibration levels
generated by the production shots. In all cases, the most critical vibration component from the radial,
transverse, and vertical directions was selected to perform the signature hole analysis.

Single column configuration

The most basic situation for ground vibration control is the single column configuration. In this case, the
main objective when performing a signature hole analysis is to find the optimum delay between holes to
reduce or control the ground vibration levels. Figure 5 shows a condition in which the collection of the
signature occurs after the production shot (confined circumstances). The numbers at each hole in Figure
5a represent the timing for the shot. An electronic detonation system was used for this blast. After
calibration, it was necessary to scale the signature waveform amplitude (Figure 5b) by a factor of 0.51 to
match the production waveform. The timing analysis results indicate that by using a minimum delay
between holes of 25 ms, the radial particle velocity reduction was about 20% of the initial values at that
particular site.

(a) (b)
Figure 5. (a) Blast layout plan view, (b) Waveform radial component including signature

Four decks signature

Decking is necessary for many blasting situations, including when the blast hole depth is a consideration,
or if it is required to control the amount of explosive per delay. Signature hole analysis for blast holes
deeper than 100 ft yielded the following information.

Copyright 2017 International Society of Explosives Engineers

2017G - Improved Signature Hole Technique What is a Signature Waveform 5 of 10
 (a) Four deck shot plan view

(b) Four deck shot waveform, vertical component

Figure 6. (a) Shot plan view, (b) Waveform vertical component including signature

For this particular case, the in-hole delay used between decks was 12 ms. Each hole has a total of five
explosive charges and uses electronic detonators for initiation. A detailed analysis of the signature
waveform indicates that it is not possible using a direct approach to isolate the contribution of each
individual charge. Figure 7 shows the detailed signature waveform.

Copyright 2017 International Society of Explosives Engineers

2017G - Improved Signature Hole Technique What is a Signature Waveform 6 of 10
 Figure 7. Four deck signature waveform in detail

Because the contribution of each charge to the signature waveform cannot be directly ascertained, the
only blast timing aspect which may be optimized is the delay between blast holes. Thus, the timing
between decks must be held constant at 12 ms. After calibration, it was necessary to scale the signature
waveform amplitude (Figure 7) by a factor of 0.7 to match the production waveform. The timing
analysis results indicate that by using a minimum delay between blast holes of 20 ms and 12 ms between
decks, the vertical particle velocity reduction was about 10% of the initial values at that particular site.

Four hole signature

A considerable amount of signature waveform information was collected during the original research
project which yielded the improved signature methodology. From this information, a production shot
utilizing four holes to generate a signature waveform was selected. Figure 8 shows the original plan
view diagram from the blast report of the shot.

Figure 8. Four blast hole original plan view

Copyright 2017 International Society of Explosives Engineers

2017G - Improved Signature Hole Technique What is a Signature Waveform 7 of 10
Figure 9 shows the recorded radial component of this particular shot.

Figure 9. Four blast hole signature waveform, followed by production shot waveform

In this case, every four blast holes are delayed by 4 ms. There are a total of 68 blast holes in this shot,
yielding 17 separate detonations (17 groups of 4 holes). When performing the signature analysis, the
timing aspect to optimize is the time between sets of four holes. As seen in Figure 9 the signature was
fired before the production shot in unconfined conditions. After calibration, it was necessary to scale the
signature waveform amplitude (Fig. 9) by a factor of 1.2 to match the production waveform. The timing
analysis results indicate that by using a minimum delay between every four blast holes of 15 ms, the
radial particle velocity reduction was about 15% of the initial values at that particular site.

Deck Signature
As explained in a previous case study, the use of multiple charges in a single blast hole makes it
impossible to determine the individual contribution of each charge to the signature waveform. Thus, the
timing optimization for the blast is limited to the timing delay between holes. When the objective is to
optimize not only the time between holes but also the time between in-hole charges, it is necessary to
collect the information from just one of the explosives charges (one deck signature). Figure 10 shows
two signatures from the same shot. The first signature is a two deck signature (three charges), and the
second is the deck signature.

Shot

(a) Plan view deck signature

Copyright 2017 International Society of Explosives Engineers

2017G - Improved Signature Hole Technique What is a Signature Waveform 8 of 10
 (b) Waveform signature deck

Figure 10. Signature deck. (a) Plan View, (b) Waveform

In this case, the deck signature was used to find the optimum time delay between inner charges and
between holes. The calibration procedure shows that it was necessary to scale the signature deck
waveform amplitude (Fig. 10b) by a factor of 0.4 to match the production waveform. The timing
analysis results indicate that using a minimum delay between charges of 17 ms the transverse particle
velocity reduction was about 15% of the current values at that particular site.

Conclusions
The main conclusions of this paper are summarized as follows:
It is necessary to periodically collect signature wave information to confirm two of the most
basic assumptions of signature wave theories: the invariance of the system, and the changes in
the impulse response if the unitary impulse changes. Traditional methodologies used to collect
signature data when there is no relationship between the blast hole used for signature generation
and the blast holes used for production will result in significant inaccuracies in the prediction.

The amplitude of the signature waveform is a function of the confinement conditions of the
signature charge/blast hole. Collecting the signature waveform with a production shot as
proposed by Silva and Lusk allows for the calibration of the signature, avoiding over or under
estimation of predicted blast vibration levels when the improved signature hole analysis is used.

Prior to collection of signature wave information, it is necessary to define which delay timing
aspect to optimize according to the conditions of future production shots. The most basic
scenario is the time delay optimization for single holes. In such scenario, the characteristics of
the production blast holes should be kept the same as the signature blast hole. If there are
changes in the geometry of the production blast holes, new signature waveform information is
required.

Copyright 2017 International Society of Explosives Engineers

2017G - Improved Signature Hole Technique What is a Signature Waveform 9 of 10
 In a scenario where decking is used, there are at least two possibilities for timing optimization:
hole-to-hole time optimization and charge-to-charge time optimization. When desiring to
optimize the delay time from hole-to-hole, the in-hole delays between charges must be held
constant. If the goal is to optimize the delay between charges, a collection of signature deck
information is required.

Finally, a signature is the waveform information required to optimize a delay time between
unitary explosions (a blast hole, a blast hole with decks, a deck, etc.) to reduce or control ground
vibrations from blasting in mining.

Acknowledgments
Special thanks to Dr. Braden Lusk, Ken Eltschlager, Rick Townsend and others for their support
collecting the information included in this document. Also to Nelson Brothers and the mine operations
providing the opportunity to install seismographs for research proposes. Thanks to Russ Lamont and
Kyle Perry for his proofreading assistance.

References
Chi-Tsong Chen, 2004. Signals and Systems, 3th edition. Oxford University Press.

Silva-Castro, J.J., 2012. Blast Vibration Modeling Using Improved Signature Hole Technique for
Bench Blast. University of Kentucky.

Copyright 2017 International Society of Explosives Engineers

2017G - Improved Signature Hole Technique What is a Signature Waveform 10 of 10