Search Documents

Segregation roasting tests were carried out on Zaire cobalt oxide ores assaying about 2% Co and 3.5 to 6.5% Cu. The major parameters tested during the laboratory investigations were temperature, dosage and type of reducing agent, dosage and type of chloridizing agent, and particle size. Results showed that standard conditions suited to the segregation of copper ores, i.e. low temperature and low dosages of reducing and chloridizing agents, resulted in the segregation of copper only, while conditions suited to the segregation of lateritic nickel, i.e. higher temperature and increased dosages of reducing and chloridizing agents, led to a successful segregation of both copper and cobalt. Under the best conditions, 88% of the cobalt and 98% of the copper could be recovered in a concentrate assaying 32.5% Cu and 8.5% Co. Alternatives to process such a concentrate are briefly reviewed.

Jan 1, 1993

By Svensson J

The nickel segregation process is one of the methods for treating nickel oxide ores. In this process nickel oxide ores are heated together with a small amount of the carbonaceous reductants and halides to about 800-950¦C. The reduced nickel segregates onto the surface of the carbonaceous reductants in the form of metallic particles which are recovered by magnetic separation or flotation. Pilot plant tests for the extraction of nickel from nickel oxide ores have been made using nickel segregation process by means of a new roasting installation which is called the "Mechanical Kiln" (2.5m~ x 3m,') with autogenous heating. Nickel oxide ores containing about 2.5%Ni were mixed with 2.5%CaC12 and 2.7%coal, and continuously charged into this installation at the rate of 60kg/h in continuous operation for 30 days per trial.

Jan 1, 1980

By Carlos Castañeda Reaño

La presente investigación señala la etapa de creación de las organizaciones de seguridad y de SOGESA, funcionamiento, orientación inicial y el programa mínimo de ejecución inmediata y progresiva. El programa de seguridad se inició en 1980. La técnica impuesta para este programa surge de un compendio de la experiencia desarrollado en programas anteriores. La aplicación se dio en la industria metalúrgica de Cerro de Pasco, y luego en la industria azucarera con la Grace Co. de la hacienda Cartavio, no lográndose definir el programa por completo. En este sentido, se perfila el planeamiento de un programa mínimo a través de un estudio a corto plazo de la situación real en SOGESA y se precisa el lugar que ocupa la seguridad e higiene industrial dentro de una organización. Asimismo se describe las necesidades mínimas del equipo de seguridad y protección, como la difusión de la creación de un conciencia de seguridad en cada trabajador a través de charlas, exhibiciones y reuniones con jefes de servicio y supervisores. También se desarrollan otros elementos estructurales de seguridad como las inspecciones, brigadas de voluntarios de seguridad, estadísticas, campaña contra incendios e higiene industrial para la comunidad, respectivamente.

Aug 20, 1963

By Bernardo J. Jiménez Vega, Edy L. T. Montalvan

During the last phase of the Circunvalacion Norte project in San Jose, Costa Rica, preliminary designs for an underpass structure of over 16 km (10 miles) considered drilled shafts as an earth retaining system. Since the project’s execution was delayed and close to the deadline, it was necessary to optimize this structure, with the drilled shafts being the most critical aspect. The key element in order to obtain an improved design was characterizing the job site with a specific site study for seismic demand, and the use of advanced numerical modelling, considering soil-structure interaction. The site investigation comprised the CPT, PMT, MASW geophysical tests, deep exploration drilling, and triaxial compression tests. The terrain was modeled using an advanced constitutive model with hardening plasticity calibrated from the triaxial tests. Plaxis software was used to calibrate the seismic model for the terrain and for the dynamic analysis. Two conditions were considered for the retaining structure: free-head and fixed head. A parametric study with drilled shafts of 1.0 m (3.3 ft) and 1.2 m (3.9 ft) in diameter, and center-to-center spacing of 1.3 m (4.3 ft) and 3.0 m (9.8 ft) was conducted in order to obtain an optimized structure. For each condition of the drilled shaft wall, the computed deformations were compared for two spectrum designs: site-specific spectrum and seismic code generic spectrum. Finally, a dynamic analysis was performed to check the performance of the drilled shafts with optimized spacing using a control earthquake. Based upon seismic performance curves, the analysis showed the possibility of greater spacing for the drilled shafts compared to the original design, obtaining a 32% reduction in the total length of the drilled shafts in the project.

Oct 1, 2022

By Shazad Hosein, William Birch, Douglas A. Anderson

This paper will present the results of tests of a new method for assessing explosive performance using wavelet transform analysis of standard blast seismograms. The theoretical background of the method was presented at an earlier ISEE conference.

Jan 1, 2015

By Don Deardorff, Ke Yang, Yingcai Han, Ken Sorensen, Robert Kruger, Mark Petersen, Diane Fiorelli, Larry Goldfarb, Kathryn Petek, Kwabena Ofori-Awuah

Design of deep foundations for lateral loads requires an understanding of soil-foundation-structure response during loading. Lateral loads on a deep foundation (piles) could be due to earthquakes, winds, waves, and/or machine vibrations. Over the years, analysis of response of piles due to lateral loads evolved from closed-form solutions to p-y methods to strain wedge to finite element/finite difference modeling. Although analysis of lateral response of piles and shafts is routinely performed, there is no single guidance document and/or standard for design and testing. Several different analytical methods are available for the analysis, and the resulting design can result in significantly different responses which can create confusion. This is especially true for analyzing and designing piles in potentially liquefiable soils with lateral spread issues under seismic conditions.This guidance document is intended to assist geotechnical engineers, pile designers, and contractors in analysis, design, and testing of piles and drilled shafts for lateral loads. This document discusses the background of different analytical and testing procedures and presents the recommended methods for analysis, design and testing of piles for lateral loads.Chapter 1 defines the different kinds of lateral loads to which a single pile or pile group may be subjected. This first chapter also presents different types of piles used to resist lateral loads.Chapter 2 discusses geotechnical issues related to lateral pile design such as liquefaction and lateral spreading and other non-seismic issues. Also addressed in Chapter 2 is geotechnical site characterization (as related to lateral loads) in terms of site investigation, in-situ testing, geophysical testing, laboratory testing, and estimation of soil/rock properties.Chapter 3 discusses the background and available analytical methods and tools for the analysis and design of single piles and drilled shafts. Several methods of analyses from closed-form elastic solutions to the finite element/finite difference solutions and their applicability are discussed. Available commercial computer software packages for analyzing single piles and drilled shafts are also presented.Chapter 4 expands the discussion of single piles and drilled shafts into the analysis and design of pile groups. In addition, group effects, resistance of pile caps, results of previous experimental and analytical studies, and available analysis tools and software for pile groups are discussed.Chapter 5 presents the issue of lateral resistance of piles and drilled shafts as discussed in different national and international building and non-building codes. A summary of extensive research on several codes are presented to facilitate the compliance with different codes.Chapter 6 discusses structural design issues of individual piles and drilled shafts such as depth of fixity.Chapter 7 discusses soil structure interaction issues related to kinematic and inertial effects due to seismic loading and available methods of analyses.Chapter 8 discusses and presents the typical procedures for the lateral load testing of piles. This guideline was developed as an aid to the practicing engineer in providing information, direction and commentary on the lateral design of deep foundations. Although all reasonable effort has been made to accurately compile the material and information contained herein, no warranty is made with regard to any such material or information and the Deep Foundation Institute assumes no responsibility for any possible errors or any direct or indirect result of the use of any such material or information. It is not intended that this document address every factor affecting lateral design for every situation. Therefore it is the responsibility of the person utilizing information from this document to confirm that it is appropriate and correct for their situation as well as to understand and properly apply

Jan 1, 2012

By Bradley J. Fleming

Although soil improvement and its application to deep foundations is gaining popularity in the engineering community, this technique is not widely used in high seismic regions due to lack of fundamental understanding of both the behavior of improved soils under high-strain cyclic loading and the interactions between the pile, improved soil, and unimproved soil. This paper describes part of an ongoing Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) project, where two identical full-scale steel pipe piles were driven at a soft clay site in Oklahoma. The soil surrounding one of these piles was improved using the cement deep soil mixing technique in order to enhance its lateral load behavior. Both piles were tested for seismic resistance using dynamic and quasi-static loading. The pile in unimproved soil provided larger displacements with limited lateral force resistance. This pile was subjected to lateral displacements of up to 400 mm, but experienced minimum inelastic actions. On the other hand, the pile in improved soil reached its lateral capacity at a displacement of 100 mm, at which point the critical region at the base of the pile just above the improved ground experienced buckling and fractured due to low cycle fatigue. Compared to the pile in unimproved soil, the improved ground increased the system strength by 42%. Although the soil was improved over 2900 mm, the effective improvement depth was approximately 1300 mm below the ground surface. In this paper, it is demonstrated that the effects of block type soil improvement of limited horizontal and vertical dimensions can be described using a simplified theoretical approach involving a modification to the well-known p-y representation of soil response. An example using this method is presented and shown to give adequate support to a standard 12-inch diameter steel pipe pile embedded in soft soil.

By Jin-Wei Huang, Bradley J. Fleming, Sri Sritharan

"Although soil improvement and its application to deep foundations is gaining popularity in the engineering community, this technique is not widely used in high seismic regions due to lack of fundamental understanding of both the behavior of improved soils under high-strain cyclic loading and the interactions between the pile, improved soil, and unimproved soil. This paper describes part of an ongoing Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) project, where two identical full-scale steel pipe piles were driven at a soft clay site in Oklahoma. The soil surrounding one of these piles was improved using the cement deep soil mixing technique in order to enhance its lateral load behavior. Both piles were tested for seismic resistance using dynamic and quasi-static loading.The pile in unimproved soil provided larger displacements with limited lateral force resistance. This pile was subjected to lateral displacements of up to 400 mm, but experienced minimum inelastic actions. On the other hand, the pile in improved soil reached its lateral capacity at a displacement of 100 mm, at which point the critical region at the base of the pile just above the improved ground experienced buckling and fractured due to low cycle fatigue. Compared to the pile in unimproved soil, the improved ground increased the system strength by 42%. Although the soil was improved over 2900 mm, the effective improvement depth was approximately 1300 mm below the ground surface.In this paper, it is demonstrated that the effects of block type soil improvement of limited horizontal and vertical dimensions can be described using a simplified theoretical approach involving a modification to the well-known p-y representation of soil response. An example using this method is presented and shown to give adequate support to a standard 12-inch diameter steel pipe pile embedded in soft soil,IntroductionPilings are the preferred foundation support for many civil engineering structures including highway bridges, railroad bridges, and port wharves. These structures and their foundations are subjected to forces created by earthquakes, wind, waves, water current, vessel impact, ice, and gravity. All loads applied to the superstructure must be transmitted to the foundation where they are resisted by the surrounding soil. With significant lateral loads, use of pile foundations may be the only solution to transmit large structural loads to competent soils. Piles supported by competent soils are relatively easy to design and costs are often attainable. However, thick layers of weak soils such as soft clays are widespread in high seismic areas (e.g., San Francisco, southern Nevada, Washington, Eastern Missouri, and Arkansas), exacerbating design challenges. Soft clays reduce the lateral resistance of the pile-soil system, making the pile foundation less cost effective. In this case, the current design practice is to use an increased number of larger diameter piles, which is a costly alternative (see SDC, Caltrans 2010). An innovative and more cost-efficient solution to this problem is to improve the soil within a short depth surrounding the foundation, thereby increasing its lateral stiffness. Some well-known methods for improving soil include deep soil mixing, stone columns, and simple soft soil replacement with select granular material."

Jan 1, 2017

By Lloyd Litwin

The ARTA 2008 Project (Alpha Ridge Test of Appurtenance) was a Canadian Government sponsored deep water seismic survey carried out on the high arctic permanent polar ice cap. This Geological Survey of Canada operation was the second seismic research project in the high Arctic and was monitored by the Danish Government. Utilizing 100% air support from Eureka and then helicopters from an ice based tent camp north of Ellesmere Island, the five week study was accomplished in the early spring just after the sun returned to the far north.

Jan 1, 2011

By David S. Graham, Benjamin Turner, Paul J. Axtell

Seismic challenges were at the forefront of design for two parallel replacement bridge structures over the Arkansas River as part of the I-30 Crossing Project in Little Rock, Arkansas. Although not an area of the country typically associated with high seismicity, proximity to the New Madrid Fault Zone resulted in design ground motions sufficient to trigger liquefaction in alluvial channel and point bar deposits. A detailed post-award subsurface investigation program utilized CPT with complimentary borings to obtain samples for laboratory testing to assess the continuity of potentially liquefiable layers, from which we concluded that continuous zones of liquefaction across the extent of the north approach could lead to lateral spreading towards the river. An overview of the foundation and superstructure design to resist lateral spreading forces in accordance with the latest published design guidelines and research is presented. Other seismic aspects of the design are covered including timber pile ground improvement to mitigate liquefaction at the north approach embankment and foundation input motions that differ from code-based ground surface motions due to foundation stiffness, strength, and geometry. The project showcases an example of successful collaboration between geotechnical and structural designers with contractor input to address seismic challenges in the South Central US. Furthermore, the importance of considering kinematic demands on columns and other superstructure components – not just foundations – is highlighted.

Sep 8, 2021

By Leo Panian

Over the last decade, drilled and post-grouted micropile foundations have come to be increasingly relied upon for resisting seismic loads in building foundations on the West Coast. Micropiles have been successfully deployed in a range of soil conditions, in vertical as well as battered configurations, to support a variety of structural systems difficult soils. Their high load capacity in tension as well as in compression, their ability to be installed in confined spaces with minimal overhead clearance, and their ability to be directly tested in an installation have made them indispensable for seismic strengthening of existing structures. More recently, growing industry experience along with improvements in design guidelines have led to wider acceptance of micropiles among engineers and building officials. The increasing availability of the specialized materials, coupled with growing familiarity with drilling technologies among design-build contractors has made micropiles more cost-effective and competitive. For the first time, micropiles are finding applications in the construction of new buildings, where they are combined with shallow footings in hybrid foundations to efficiently resist seismic loads. These new applications rely on more intensive engineering analyses to evaluate the performance of micropile foundation systems and develop detailed requirements for design and construction. This paper describes the design approaches and the analytical methods for the seismic design of hybrid micropile foundations, and provides examples of recent construction projects that demonstrate the application.

Jan 1, 2010

By D A. Williams, P J. Chapman

Constructing upstream raises with tailings is an accepted and cost-effective practice in Western Australia, where the climatic conditions are favourable, desiccation (and hence overconsolidation) occurs rapidly due to air drying and there is a perceived low seismic risk. This is in contrast to many other settings, where there is either a positive water balance, high seismicity or a combination of both. In recent times, there has been an increased focus on seismicity in areas of Australia that have historically been considered to be of low seismic risk. The increased focus is driven by two recently published documents used by tailings practitioners and increased awareness from corporate entities, particularly those with mines in high-seismicity regions such as South-East Asia and South America (particularly Chile).The increased awareness has resulted in increased rigour being applied to seismic design of tailings storage facilities (TSFs) in general, and particularly upstream-raised TSFs. This paper compares the results of a seismic stability assessment for an upstream-raised TSF located in the Goldfields region of Western Australia, which has historically been considered a low seismic area, with a seismic stability assessment carried out for a crossvalley TSF containing similar tailings but located in a high-rainfall, high-seismic setting in South-East Asia. The influence of the adopted design earthquake values on the results of the assessments and the potential impact of the maximum design earthquake (MDE) on the design approach is presented for both cases. The results indicate that although the Western Australian site is located in an area thought to have low seismic risk, the screening level analyses suggest that the MDE could result in liquefaction of the tailings materials. Not surprisingly, liquefaction was also indicated for the South-East Asian site. The outcomes of the assessment are also presented.CITATION:Chapman, P J and Williams, D A, 2015. Seismic design of upstream-raised tailings storage facilities in a semi-arid, low-seismicity setting, in Proceedings Tailings and Mine Waste Management for the 21st Century, pp 157–162 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Jul 27, 2015

By M. Hardy

"The structural design of mine headframes is challenging due to the significant differences in the geometry, rigidity, and behaviour of these structures compared to conventional buildings. The differences are related to the main purpose of these structures, which is not human occupancy, but rather the support of hoisting equipment. The main objective of this paper is to present the seismic elastic behaviour of headframe structures in comparison with conventional buildings, which is the base case for the definition of seismic loads. This paper highlights the impact of backlegs on the dynamic behaviour of mine headframes, more specifically the resulting torsional sensitivity. INTRODUCTION The design of industrial structures is often governed by industrial processes rather than by architectural constraints. In ground-mounted hoisting plants, the structural configuration of headframes must allow clearances around conveyances and ropes while resisting the lateral loads associated with the hoisting equipment. Typically, these structures use backlegs to withstand the lateral loads, which leads to highly irregular structures with unconventional dynamic behaviour. The codes and standards applicable to the structural design of mine headframes in Canada are often incomplete or not adapted to the reality of practising engineers. This situation creates confusion, and engineers must look at various guidelines and international standards to support the engineering calculations required for the design of these structures. The loads resulting from the support of hoisting equipment, such as ropes and conveyances, are usually simple to calculate and are determined based on the information from manufacturer and industry related guidelines. Moreover, the loads associated with snow accumulation and wind are calculated applying the same methodology used for conventional buildings, without any major issues. On the other hand, the seismic loads are often difficult to calculate based on the methodology from the National Building Code of Canada due to the significant differences in the dynamic behaviour of the structures. The resulting structures may be either over-designed or worse, under-designed. Hence, there is a lack of uniformity in engineers’ designs. The latest edition of CSA S16-14 “Design of steel structures” includes Annex M (Informative) “Seismic design of industrial steel structures” to help designers close the gap between the requirements of traditional regulations and actual engineering practice."

Jan 1, 2019

By Caroline Gerwig, Joseph R. Wickline, Zach Agioutantis

In longwall mining, the progressive caving of the roof allows stored energy to dissipate over an extended time. However, in some cases, the roof strata above the longwall panel are unusually strong and do not break with the movement of the working face. Instead, the roof material bridges over the expanse of the longwall, forming an unstable beam. Later, when this beam breaks, the stored energy can release suddenly, causing a seismic event to propagate to surrounding mine workings. The focus of this paper is to estimate the size of beams that form over longwall panels to the seismic energy recorded by the mine. Analytical calculations are used to verify two-dimensional models of longwall roof beams to determine the strain energy and gravitational energy developed, which is then released upon strata failure to surrounding mine workings. Models are developed using RS2 to model the stress, strain, and deflection along the bottom of the longwall roof beam to calculate gravitational and strain energies. Gravitational energy is shown to be the main driving factor in energy release, except for the beams with low heights. Analyses allow the determination of beam characteristics based on seismic data. The analysis is refined using swelling factor to compare various beam drop heights. The models show an increase in seismic magnitude for higher drop heights. However, the actual data provided by the Buchanan mine displays a decrease in seismic magnitude with increasing drop height, indicating that energy is dissipated into the broken gob material as drop height increases.

Jul 1, 2023

By Preusse. Axel

Underground coal mining can cause seismic events. There is currently no way to predict such phenomena reliably, in particular stronger events. That is why, according to the current state of the art, empirical methods are employed in this field. Some assessment criteria, which relate to the geological and mining situation and either stimulate or rather help to avoid seismic events, are presented in this paper. These criteria are examined for a practical mining situation in Germany, with a view to estimate possible seismic events.

Jan 1, 2009

By Axel Preusse

Underground coal mining can cause seismic events. There is currently no way to predict such phenomena reliably, in particular stronger events. That is why, according to the current state of the art, empirical methods are employed in this field. Some assessment criteria, which relate to the geological and mining situation and either stimulate or rather help to avoid seismic events, are presented in this paper. These criteria are examined for a practical mining situation in Germany, with a view to estimate possible seismic events.

Jan 1, 2009

By Matthew Price, Laura Brown, Atulya Verma, Samantha Espley

Burst-prone conditions are a significant hazard in deep hardrock mines, elevating the risk to excavation stability and, more importantly, to worker safety. As mining progresses deeper, induced stress changes may trigger the initiation of rock failure processes which can be detected and recorded as mine seismicity. The implementation of seismic monitoring and routine seismic data analyses enables mine seismicity to be quantified spatially, temporally and on scale. The ability to quantify and characterize mine seismicity offers the opportunity to gauge seismic hazard, identifying high risk zones for mitigation against burst-prone excavation failure. Over the last decade, the Mines Technical Services (MTS) group at Vale Canada Limited’s Garson Mine assessed seismic hazard with the objective of assigning practical mitigating controls to zones identified as having a high rockburst potential. Initially, seismic hazard was computed using the Seismic Excavation Hazard Mapping (SEHM) software developed by the Mining Innovation Rehabilitation and Applied Research Corporation (MIRARCO) at Laurentian University, Canada. More recently, Vale Sudbury Operations partnered with the Australian Centre for Geomechanics and the University of Western Australia’s mXrap consortium. Through the consortium partnership, MTS at Garson Mine implemented the mXrap seismic data analyses platform, including the grid-based seismic hazard assessment tool. Building on 10 years of seismic hazard assessment experience at Vale Garson Mine, this paper summarizes a comprehensive case study, comparing the two tools (SHEM and mXrap) used at Garson Mine to assess, quantify, and represent seismic hazard. Subsequently, results of the Garson Mine comparative seismic hazard study will be discussed, emphasizing the need for an all-inclusive hazard assessment tool, focused on delivering practical mitigating controls that further enhance the overall safety of seismically active underground mines.

Apr 26, 2022

By M Henderson, M Hudyma

Mining-induced seismicity at Junction Gold Mine became a serious operational problem in the late-1990s. Assessing the local seismic hazard is an important step in assessing the risk associated with potential rockbursting. This paper discusses the qualitative and quantitative means of assessing seismic hazard used at Junction. In qualitative hazard assessment, the role of the primary factors contributing to mining-induced seismicity and rockbursting are identified. These factors include: rock mass properties, geological structures, mine development, and stoping. A qualitative seismic hazard map has been developed considering these factors. In quantitative hazard assessment, seismic source parameters from an Integrated Seismic System are used to assess seismic hazard. The seismic source parameters found to be relevant to seismic hazard assessment at Junction are discussed.

Jan 1, 2002

By T. Marolt, J. Likar, E. Grøv, J. Žarn

"Underground structures are an integral part of the infrastructure of modern society and are used for a wide range of applications, including subways and railways, highways, not at least nuclear facilities. When the wider area is subject to earthquake activity, underground constructions should be analyzed on seismic and static loading. Observations showed that the underground structures have significantly less seismic risk than surface structures. Available methods allowed analyzing the magnitude of risk for different input parameters of seismic loads in different ground environment. Simulation of earthquake loading on underground structures, in the present paper is given the various aspects of analyzing the potential damage and instability of underground facilities. INTRODUCTIONThe development of methods and computing resources used for para-seismic engineering has finetuned the evaluation of the seismic strength of buildings and equipment. Reinforcements may therefore be decided, not simply on the basis of a reassessment of the hazard, which constitutes input data for the calculation of structures and equipment, but also on the basis of developments in para-seismic engineering. Underground facilities are an integral part of the infrastructure of modern society and are used for a wide range of applications, including subways and railways, highways, material storage, and sewage and water transport and not at least nuclear facilities. Although in the past showed that the underground structures are significantly less seismic risk than on the surface, the professional researches and their results are accessible. Seismic resistance of underground structures is analyzed from several aspects. The currently available methods allowed analyzing the magnitude of risk for different input parameters of seismic loads in different ground environment. For better interpretation of earthquake loading on underground structures, are given below the various aspects of analyzing the potential damage and instability of underground facilities in rock. One of the early studies which covered this are of investigation were prepared by Dowding and Rozen (1978). They grouped damages due to earthquakes in underground structures into three main categories:- damage from ground shaking- damage from fault dislocation- damage by earthquake-induced ground failures (e.g. liquefaction and landslides)."

Jan 1, 2015

By J. W. Cooksley

Seismic methods provide an efficient and comprehensive approach to overburden studies pertinent to mining exploration and development, and to other mining and civil engineering problems such as rock mechanics, slope stability, and foundation engineering. For the purpose of defining geologic units and structural features, these methods are generally regarded as the most accurate, but most expensive, of the commonly-used geophysical exploration methods. Although the accuracy and cost of seismic work are generally affected adversely by rugged topography and complicated geologic conditions, it is in rough terrain and complex geology that seismic methods offer important advantages in overburden investigations. For example, to find the surface of rock underlying unconsolidated overburden at depths of approximately 200 feet, a 50-foot spacing of drill holes along the profile line would be required to yield a degree of resolution and accuracy similar to that obtained from a 50-foot spacing between seismic detectors along the same line. See Figure 1. In cases similar to that shown in Figure 1, a twelve-channel recording seismic system would be used. The main components of such a system would be: 1. detectors (commonly referred to as geophones) which convert the ground movement resulting from seismic waves into an electrical signal. 2. a multi-conductor cable which connects the seismic detectors to the amplifiers. 3. ampliiiers, amplify and filter the electrical signals . 4. oscillograph, records the amplified signal. 5. the blaster and firing line. A typical layout of the seismic spread and the components of the system Is shown in Figure 2.

Jan 1, 1968