APPLICATION OF THE MULTICRITERIA DECISION-MAKING METHOD TO SELECT THE MOST OPTIMAL BLASTING GEOMETRY: PT INDOCEMENT TUNGGAL PRAKARSA, CITEUREUP, BOGOR REGENCY, INDONESIA
Blasting is one of the critical activities in mining activity. Improper blasting geometry can lead to undesirable results, such as poor fragmentation, fly rock, the value of ground vibration, and air blast that exceeds the quality standard. The selection of the optimal blasting geometry needs to...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Theses |
| Language: | Indonesia |
| Online Access: | https://digilib.itb.ac.id/gdl/view/69927 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Institut Teknologi Bandung |
| Language: | Indonesia |
| Summary: | Blasting is one of the critical activities in mining activity. Improper blasting
geometry can lead to undesirable results, such as poor fragmentation, fly rock,
the value of ground vibration, and air blast that exceeds the quality standard. The
selection of the optimal blasting geometry needs to consider various aspects, such
as technical, environmental, security, and economic aspects. Consideration of
various aspects in determining the optimal blasting geometry using conventional
methods yields inaccurate results. Method use Multi-Criteria Decision
Making (MCDM) makes it possible to determine the blasting geometry by
considering various aspects. Three MCDM methods were used in this
paper, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Technique for Order Preference by
Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), and Weighted Aggregated Sum Product
Assessment (WASPAS). The aspects considered are technical (fragmentation),
economical (use of explosives), and security (fly rock, ground vibration, and air
blast). AHP pairwise comparison uses determining the weight of the
fragmentation parameter, powder factor, fly rock, ground vibration, and air blast.
The TOPSIS and WASPAS methods were used in the second step to rank the
various alternative blasting geometries and determine the most optimal blasting
geometry. In the third step, a sensitivity analysis will be performed to see what
changes occur when the relative importance can be changed. The results of this
study obtained the fourth blasting geometry with a hole diameter of 4 inches, a
burden of 3.5 m, spacing of 5 m, stemming of 3,14 m, subdrill of 1 m, and 9 m
hole depth as the best blasting geometry for blasting operations at PT Indocement
Tunggal Prakarsa. |
|---|