Talk:Drilling and blasting

Merger proposal
I propose that Rock Blasting be merged into Drilling and Blasting. I think that the content in the Rock Blasting article can easily be explained in the context of Drilling and Blasting, and the Drilling and Blasting article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Rock Blasting will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. Zath42 (talk) 15:30, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Is there an article on Jumbo drills?
That was the only name I heard, so I see no way to search for it. It would be several rock drills mounted on a truck chassis. Each drill would be on a arm. The one I saw on TV had 3 arms, but only 2 drills. So I was trying to figure out what the 3rd arm was for. Most jumbo drills appear to be used as part of underground drill and blast operations.--Will 05:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Drilling and Blasting or Drill and Blast?
Drilling and Blasting is more commonly known as Drill and Blast in the industry so I was wondering whether the title of the page should be changed to Drill and Blast rather than Drilling and Blasting. --Splash6 08:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Splash6 (talk • contribs)


 * That must be a geographical thing, working for a Drilling and Blasting company, as far as we are concerned "in the industry" its known as Drilling and Blasting, and not Drill and Blast. Zath42 (talk) 04:15, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

This have to be wrong
I refuse to believe that Australia used that much explosives compared to USA...

"== History == ........

In 1990, 2.1 million tonnes (2.32 million short tons) of commercial explosives were consumed in the United States, representing an estimated expenditure of 3.5 to 4 billion 1993 dollars on blasting. Australia had the highest explosives consumption that year at 500 million tonnes (551 million short tons), with Scandinavian countries another leader in rock blasting (Persson et al. 1994:1)."

Did Australia use 200 times more explosives? And 550 million tons? That sound ridiculous. --Mathblaster707 (talk) 21:00, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

This seems really unlikely. Not sure how reliable this sight is, but it would indicate the current australian market for explosives manufacturing is around $4billion. Which compared to the claim of tons to market size in the US, would not put it anywhere near 500 million tons, currently. I have a copy of the book listed as a source and I'm trying to find where it says that. Zath42 (talk) 19:39, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

"In 1990, the total consumption of commercial explosives in the USA was 2.1 billion kg, equivalent to a volume of solid rock broken of about 12 m^# oer capita.   "In 1990, the commercial explosives consumption in Australia was more than 500 million kg, giving the word record for the largest volume of solid rock broken per inhabitant to that vast, sparsely populated continent, for an estimated 45 m^3 per capita."    "The scandinavian countries have a long tradition of large-scale rock blasting operations in the hard bedrock prevalent there, blasting is the normal first step in the construction of underground hydroelectric power plants, harbors, roads, airfields, and in metal and mineral mining. In 1990, the commercial explosives consumption in Sweden was 35 million kg, equivalent to a rock blasting volume of almost 6 m3 per capita. We estimate corresponding values for the rock blasting volume in the Western part of Europe to be less than 2 m3 per capita." "In 1990, 2.1 billion kg of commercial explosives were consumed in the United States (12 m3 per capita), representing an estimated expenditure of 3.5 to 4 billion 1993 dollars on blasting. In this year the Soviet union was the leader in total volume with 2.7 billion kg of explosives consumed (13 m3 per capita), and Australia had the highest per capita explosives consumption that year with 45 m3 per capita."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zath42 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Found it in the source material, on page 1 it says about the USA:
 * on page 2 it says this about Australia:
 * on page 2 it says this about Australia:
 * on page 2 it says this about scandinavian countries:
 * on page 2 it says this about scandinavian countries:
 * I'm going to edit the page to say this:
 * I'm going to edit the page to say this:

"Blast hole" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Blast hole. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 21 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 23:34, 21 August 2020 (UTC)