Stemming and best practice in the mining industry: A literature review

• Published in: Journal of the South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy 2021-08, Vol.121 (8), p.415-425
• Main Authors: Oates, T.E., Spiteri, W.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aerial explosions; Best practice; Blasting (explosive); Explosives; Literature reviews; Mining industry; Regulations
• ISSN: 2225-6253; 0038-223X; 2411-9717
• DOI: 10.17159/2411-9717/1606/2021

In 2015, after amendments to the explosives regulations, stemming became a mandatory activity for all South African mining operations. There are, however, circumstances in which it is thought stemming has an adverse impact on the blasting outcome. Some of these circumstances include blasting in hot holes, in reactive ground, or when blasting a pre-split. In order to determine when stemming is necessary, its role in the control of adverse blasting phenomena and impact on explosive performance were reviewed. Stemming was found to play a significant role in the fragmentation process and burden movement. Additionally, stemming significantly influences the control of flyrock, air-blast, and toxic fume generation. The review of the literature indicates some motivation for not using stemming for pre-split, trim, hot hole, and reactive ground blasting, provided the benefits associated with not stemming the holes outweigh the risks of stemming them. Best practice for stemming from the literature indicates a stemming length of 0.7 x burden is best for larger hole diameters, and 20 to 30 x 0 for smaller hole diameters. Crushed aggregate appears to be the most effective stemming material. The South African explosives regulations pertaining to stemming were found to be consistent with those of Australia and the USA.