Removing Booster Influences From Toxic Fumes
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields



Publication Date Range:


Document Data


Document Type:






Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page


Removing Booster Influences From Toxic Fumes

  • 1999

  • Source: Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference on Explosives and Blasting Technique, Nashville, Tennessee, February 7-10, 1999. Cleveland, OH: International Society of Explosives Engineers, 1999; 2:11-28
Filetype[PDF-2.97 MB]

  • English

  • Details:

    • Personal Author:
    • Description:
      This report investigates whether it is tractable and thereupon reasonable to remove the booster influences when ranking the toxic fumes of non-cap-sensitive mining explosives. The hazard potential is represented by relative fume toxicity RFT, the resultant influence computed from a formulated rule with a restricted set (tally) of fume components and multiplying constants. The RFT result is compared to the rule criterion that represents the worst case tolerable toxicity stipulated by regulations or otherwise. The typical nonstoichiometric booster composition can render notable unwanted influence on the RFT ranking results. Historically, the remedy was to shoot the booster separately and reduce the trial concentrations by the relevant subtractions. Unreal negative concentration results were noted on rare occasions, revealing the faulty nature of the reduction procedure. With thermodynamic reaction chemistry codes TDRC, on the other hand, the booster ingredients can be retained in or removed from the reactant tabulation, yielding reduction factors taken as the concentration ratios for the two circumstances. The underlying presumption regarding reduction factors is that the ratios of component concentrations with and without the booster ingredients when resolved theoretically ought to equal those rendered experimentally, when tractable. Upon rearranging the presumed relationship, the unadjusted fume concentrations divided by theoretical reduction factors yield the wanted readjusted fume concentrations, thereby removing the booster influence without generating unreal negative concentrations. The work principle from thermodynamics restricted by the constraint of zero-net interaction loss is utilized in conjunction with the TDRC to resolve the wanted (Z-state) fume spectrum. This circumvents the recognized difficulty with traditional hydrodynamic detonation theory that is related to the nonideal reaction characteristics of typical mining explosives. The tacit characteristic of the Z-state resolved from the non-trajectory work principle is that it can not be remedied or tampered with, unlike the traditional trajectory techniques where the reaction products can be readjusted by changing formula representations, nullifying specific reactions or otherwise manipulating the thermodynamic trajectory process. Though the work principle theory is an unfinished formulation, the Z-state results prove worthy enough for rendering trends and comparisons and reaching otherwise useful conclusions. Further refinements should yield more reliable fume spectra and indicate explosive composition readjustments that would reduce toxic effects within underground mines and the wider world environment.
    • Subjects:
    • Document Type:
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    • No Additional Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at