Method for testing reliability of wireless electronic detonator

Abstract

The invention belongs to the technical field of detonator testing, and relates to a wireless electronic detonator reliability testing method, which comprises the following steps: when an out-hole air blasting test is carried out, a communication connection test is firstly carried out, if the communication connection is normal, a detonator is put into an explosion-proof device, and then the detonator is connected with a signal receiving device for detonating; s1-1 to S1-2 are repeated according to the preset out-hole test times to carry out the out-hole air explosion test, and if all the tests are successful, the in-hole air explosion test is carried out; when the in-hole air explosion test is carried out, the communication connection test is carried out firstly, and the detonator is put into the explosion-proof device to be connected with the signal receiving device; putting the connected test device into a test hole, and putting the test device at a test point in the hole for detonation; in-hole air explosion tests are carried out according to the preset number of tests, and if all the tests are successful, the test of the next in-hole test point is carried out until all the in-hole test points are tested; and S3, recording and analyzing a test result. And the safety of the reliability test of the detonator is effectively improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention belongs to the technical field of detonator testing, and in particular relates to a reliability testing method for wireless electronic detonators. Background Art

[0002] In mine blasting operations, detonators are key components for detonating explosives. Their reliable detonation is directly related to the efficiency, safety, and operating costs of mining. If the detonator fails to detonate properly, it will not only lead to the failure of the blasting operation and delay the mining progress, but may also cause safety hazards such as explosion refusal and blind shot, posing a serious threat to the safety of workers and mine equipment and facilities. In addition, with the continuous development of mine blasting technology and the increasing scale of blasting, higher requirements are placed on the detonation performance of detonators. Therefore, in order to ensure the smooth progress of mine blasting operations, newly developed detonators must undergo rigorous detonation performance testing to verify whether they meet actual operational requirements. Currently, detonator performance testing typically involves setting the detonator's detonation location and connecting it to the initiator via a wire. During the test, a command signal is transmitted via the wire to the detonator, triggering the detonation and completing the detonation test. This testing method relies entirely on manual wiring to complete the signal transmission link. Manual wiring is difficult and inefficient, and can also damage the wires or directly cause premature detonations due to operator errors. This not only damages the test equipment but also seriously threatens the safety of the operator. This testing method is both dangerous and unreliable. Summary of the Invention

[0003] The invention provides a reliability testing method for wireless electronic detonators, which solves the problem of high testing risk.

[0004] The present invention provides a basic solution: a method for testing the reliability of wireless electronic detonators. The test device used for testing includes a signal sending device, a detonator, a signal receiving device, and an explosion-proof device. The testing method includes the following steps: S1: Air blast test outside the hole; S1-1: At the test point outside the hole, first test the communication connection between the signal sending device and the signal receiving device. If the communication connection is normal, place the detonator in the explosion-proof device and then connect the detonator to the signal receiving device; S1-2: Away from the test point outside the hole, send a command through the signal transmitter to detonate; S1-3: Repeat S1-1 to S1-2 according to the preset number of out-hole tests to perform out-hole airburst tests. If all the tests are successful, proceed to the next step; S2: In-hole airburst test; S2-1: Determine a test point in the hole and the number of tests corresponding to each test point, wherein the test point in the hole is a plurality of test points with different hole depths; S2-2: Outside the test hole, test the communication connection between the signal sending device and the signal receiving device. If the communication connection is normal, place the detonator in the explosion-proof device and then connect the detonator to the signal receiving device. S2-3: Place the device connected in S2-2 into the test hole and place it at the test point inside the hole. After the personnel leave the site, send a command through the signal transmitter to detonate; S2-4: Perform the in-hole airburst test according to the number of tests corresponding to the current test point. If all the tests are successful, proceed to the next in-hole test point until the tests of all in-hole test points are completed; S3: Record and analyze test results.

[0005] The principles and advantages of the present invention are: 1. The present invention comprehensively covers application scenarios through layered progressive testing. From simple to complex test logic, first, an out-of-hole air blast test is carried out in an open environment to verify basic communication and initiation functions to ensure that the system is fault-free. Then, the in-hole air blast test is carried out to simulate the actual blasting operation scenario, and the signal penetration ability and anti-interference performance are evaluated through multiple tests at different hole depths. This phased approach not only reduces the test risk and has high test safety, but also improves the efficiency of problem investigation and ensures the reliability of each link.

[0006] 2. Before connecting the detonator to the signal receiving device, place the detonator in an explosion-proof device first. Use its high-strength shell and energy-absorbing layer to control the explosion shock wave and fragments, avoid accidents caused by the instant connection between the detonator and the signal receiving device, and avoid threatening the safety of the operator, thereby effectively protecting personnel and equipment.

[0007] 3. Both the out-of-hole air burst test and the in-hole air burst test are repeated several times. The preset number of repeated tests can reduce accidental errors and improve the credibility of the results. The detailed records of the test results provide solid data support for subsequent analysis and optimization, which is conducive to the continuous improvement of detonator performance.

[0008] Preferably, the explosion-proof device includes a tank body and a fixed cover, the tank body and the fixed cover are detachably connected, and the fixed cover is provided with a plurality of through holes.

[0009] Beneficial effects: It is easy to install and remove the detonator. The test personnel can quickly complete the connection and placement of the detonator and the signal receiving device, thereby improving the test efficiency. Before the test, the fixed cover can be quickly opened to place the detonator, and the sealing can be ensured after closing. The fixed cover is provided with a through hole, and the shock wave and high-temperature gas generated by the explosion can be released in a direction through the through hole on the fixed cover, thereby avoiding a sudden increase in pressure in the tank body causing structural rupture and reducing the risk of secondary explosion.

[0010] Further preferably, when connecting the detonator to the signal receiving device, the explosion-proof device is placed vertically with the through hole on the fixed cover facing upward, and the signal receiving device is placed horizontally, and then the detonator and the signal receiving device are connected.

[0011] Beneficial effect: Accidents may occur when the detonator is connected to a signal receiving device with a power supply. When placed vertically, the side wall of the tank forms a physical barrier, and the upward-facing through-hole design can effectively prevent the horizontal spread of fragments and avoid personal injury to the operator.

[0012] Preferably, the signal receiving device includes a shell, a signal receiving board, and a connecting socket. The shell is a tubular structure. The signal receiving board is sealed in the shell. A connecting socket is provided at one end of the shell, and the connecting socket is electrically connected to the signal receiving board.

[0013] Beneficial effects: The tubular sealed shell can shield electromagnetic interference, is waterproof and dustproof, ensures stable signal reception, adapts to the complex environment inside the hole, has strong anti-interference ability and good stability; through the integrated socket design, it can achieve quick plugging and unplugging, reduce wiring errors, improve operational efficiency, and at the same time enhance mechanical protection and resist collisions inside the hole.

[0014] Further preferably, the test device further comprises a casing, which is used to protect the signal receiving device. In the in-hole air explosion test, the signal receiving device is installed in the casing, and both ends of the casing are sealed, wherein a socket connection hole is provided at one end of the sealed end.

[0015] Beneficial effects: The signal receiving device is protected by the casing, and the sealing at both ends of the casing effectively blocks the invasion of mud, water and dust. It is especially suitable for humid or high-dust drilling environments, reducing the risk of damage to the signal receiving device; the signal receiving device under the protection of the casing can participate in the in-hole test multiple times, reducing equipment loss and reducing test costs.

[0016] Further preferably, in the in-hole air explosion test, the casing is first connected to the explosion-proof device through a rope, and then the explosion-proof device and the casing are placed into the test hole.

[0017] Beneficial effects: The rope connection can make the casing and the explosion-proof device form a whole, keep the relative position fixed during the lowering process, avoid collision or displacement of the device due to shaking in the hole, and ensure that the test device accurately reaches the specified hole depth; it is convenient to recover the device after the test.

[0018] Preferably, the number of out-of-hole tests is 2 to 5 times.

[0019] Beneficial Effects: As a preliminary step, out-of-hole testing, through an appropriate number of tests, lays a safe foundation for subsequent in-hole deep-hole testing. It can preliminarily verify the initiation stability of wireless electronic detonators under conventional conditions, eliminate failures caused by accidental factors, and ensure basic functional reliability. Setting a reasonable number of tests not only meets the requirements for basic performance verification, but also avoids excessive detonator wear and test time, achieving a balance between reliability and cost-effectiveness.

[0020] Preferably, the in-hole test point includes a first in-hole test point and a second in-hole test point. The hole depth at the first in-hole test point is smaller than the hole depth at the second in-hole test point. The position of the first in-hole test point is where the test hole depth is 5 to 15 meters, and the position of the second in-hole test point is where the test hole depth is 15 to 25 meters.

[0021] Beneficial effects: By setting test points at different hole depths, the first in-hole test point and the second in-hole test point, the performance of the detonator and the device under different formation pressures and environmental complexities can be gradiently verified, covering application scenarios from shallow holes to medium-deep holes; the shallow hole (first test point) test is carried out first. If problems such as signal attenuation and device failure are found, timely adjustments can be made to avoid directly entering the deep hole (second test point) and causing high-cost trial and error, thereby reducing the risks and losses of deep hole tests.

[0022] Preferably, when the sent instruction fails to detonate, the instruction is resent. If the resent instruction also fails to detonate, a preset safety time is left, and then the connection between the receiving device and the detonator is disconnected, the explosion-proof device is opened, the detonator is removed and destroyed, and a fault analysis is performed on the receiving device.

[0023] Beneficial effects: Resending the command when the first detonation fails can eliminate occasional faults such as instantaneous signal interference and avoid misjudgment; a safe time interval after the second failure to detonate ensures that the detonator completely loses the possibility of triggering and prevents safety accidents caused by delayed detonation; disconnecting and destroying the detonator eliminates the explosion risk at the source and ensures the safety of personnel and equipment. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0024] Figure 1 is a flow chart of the present invention; Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the cooperation between the detonator and the connecting plug of the present invention; Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the state of the out-hole air explosion communication connection of the present invention; Figure 4 It is a schematic diagram of the state of the in-hole air explosion communication connection of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0025] The following is further described in detail through specific implementation methods: The specific implementation process is as follows: Figures 1 to 4A reliability test method for wireless electronic detonators is disclosed. The test device includes a signal sending device, a detonator 1, a signal receiving device 5, and an explosion-proof device.

[0026] Preferably, the explosion-proof device includes a tank body 41 and a fixed cover 42. The tank body and the fixed cover are detachably connected, and the connection method is threaded connection or clamping. In this embodiment, threaded connection is preferred. Specifically, the outer circumference of the upper end of the tank body is provided with an external thread, and the inner wall of the fixed cover is provided with an internal thread. They are connected by threaded fitting. The fixed cover 42 is provided with a plurality of through holes, and the diameter of the through holes is adapted to the wire 3 connected to the detonator 1. The through holes are used to discharge gas and allow the wire to pass through.

[0027] Preferably, the signal receiving device 5 includes a housing, a signal receiving board, and a connection socket. The housing is tubular in structure, and the signal receiving board is sealed within the housing. A connection socket is provided at one end of the housing, and the connection socket is electrically connected to the signal receiving board. The signal receiving device 5 also includes a battery for powering the signal receiving board, which is provided within the housing and electrically connected to the signal receiving board.

[0028] Preferably, the detonator is connected to a connecting plug 2 via a wire 3, and the connecting plug 2 cooperates with a connecting socket.

[0029] The test device also includes a sleeve 7, which is used to protect the signal receiving device. The signal receiving device 5 is arranged in the sleeve 7, and both ends of the sleeve 7 are sealed, and one end is provided with a socket connection hole.

[0030] Preferably, the sleeve 7 is connected to the explosion-proof device via a rope 6 .

[0031] The signal transmitting device includes a transmitting antenna, a signal source, a tuning box, a power amplifier, and an operating terminal.

[0032] The test method includes the following steps: S1: Air blast test outside the hole; S1-1: At the test point outside the hole, first test the communication connection between the signal sending device and the signal receiving device. If the communication connection is normal, place the detonator in the explosion-proof device and then connect the detonator to the signal receiving device; Preferably, when connecting the detonator to the signal receiving device, the explosion-proof device is placed vertically with the through hole on the fixed cover facing upward, and the signal receiving device is placed horizontally, and then the detonator and the signal receiving device are connected; S1-2: Away from the test point outside the hole, send a command through the signal transmitter to detonate; S1-3: Repeat S1-1 to S1-2 for a preset number of out-of-hole tests to perform an out-of-hole airburst test. If all tests are successful, proceed to the next step. The number of out-of-hole tests is 2 to 5, and in this embodiment, the number of out-of-hole tests is three. If the in-hole airburst test fails, the test is terminated.

[0033] S2: In-hole airburst test; S2-1: Determine a test point in the hole and the number of tests corresponding to each test point, wherein the test point in the hole is a plurality of test points with different hole depths; S2-2: Outside the test hole, test the communication connection between the signal sending device and the signal receiving device. If the communication connection is normal, place the detonator in the explosion-proof device and then connect the detonator to the signal receiving device. In the in-hole air explosion test, a casing is provided outside the signal receiving device, with both ends of the casing sealed and one end sealed with a socket connection hole; The connecting plug connected to the detonator passes through the socket connection hole and is connected to the signal receiving device in the sleeve; when making the connection, the explosion-proof device is also placed vertically with the through hole on the fixed cover facing upward, and the sleeve and the signal receiving device are placed horizontally before making the connection.

[0034] Preferably, in the in-hole air burst test, the casing is connected to the explosion-proof device by a rope before being placed into the test hole; S2-3: Place the devices connected in S2-2, i.e., the explosion-proof device and the signal receiving device, into the test hole and place them at the test point inside the hole. After the personnel leave the site, send a command via the signal transmitting device to initiate the detonation. S2-4: Perform the in-hole airburst test according to the number of tests corresponding to the current test point. If all the tests are successful, proceed to the next in-hole test point until the tests of all in-hole test points are completed; The in-hole test points include a first in-hole test point and a second in-hole test point. The hole depth at the first in-hole test point is less than the hole depth at the second in-hole test point. The first in-hole test point is located at a test hole depth of 5 to 15 meters, and the second in-hole test point is located at a test hole depth of 15 to 25 meters. The number of tests for the first in-hole test point is 3 to 6 times, and the number of tests for the second in-hole test point is 3 to 6 times. In this embodiment, the first in-hole test point is located at a hole depth of 10 meters, and the number of tests there is three times. The second in-hole test point is located at a hole depth of 20 meters, and the number of tests there is three times.

[0035] Specifically, the explosion-proof device with detonators and the casing equipped with signal receiving devices are connected by ropes and placed at a depth of 10 meters in the test hole for an air-blast test. After the detonators explode in the air, the explosion-proof device and casing in the test hole are taken out, and the communication test is carried out again. New detonators are replaced and connected to the signal receiving device, and placed at a depth of 20 meters in the test hole for an air-blast test until the number of tests at the test point meets the requirements.

[0036] S3: Record and analyze test results.

[0037] The recorded data include the test point location of the air burst test outside the hole (i.e., the distance between the signal receiving device and the signal sending device), test time, number of tests, communication test results, time of sending the detonation command, actual detonation time of the detonator, and detonation conditions; the test time of the air burst test outside the hole, the test point location inside the hole, number of tests, communication connection test results, time of sending the detonation command, actual detonation time of the detonator, and detonation conditions.

[0038] Strategies for analyzing trial results include: Out-of-hole air burst test phase: If all three out-of-hole air burst tests are successful (communication connection is normal and detonation is successful), the out-of-hole test is considered to have passed and the in-hole test phase can be entered; if any test fails, the cause must be found and resolved before the out-of-hole test is repeated until the requirements are met.

[0039] In-hole airburst test phase: For each in-hole test point, if all tests at that point are successful (communication connection is normal, detonation is successful, and there is no obvious damage to the explosion-proof device or casing), the test point is considered to have passed. If a test point fails, the cause must be analyzed (such as whether the hole depth causes signal attenuation, whether the explosion-proof device is subjected to abnormal pressure in the hole, etc.), and the test point must be retested after the problem is resolved. Only when all in-hole test points (such as the 10-meter and 20-meter points) are tested successfully can the in-hole test phase be considered passed.

[0040] Preferably, if the command fails to detonate after being sent, the command is resent. If the resent command also fails to detonate, a preset safety time is passed, and then the connection between the receiving device and the detonator is disconnected. The explosion-proof device is opened, the detonator is removed and destroyed, and the receiving device is analyzed for faults. The preset safety time is set based on the detonator type, production data, and other experience, or the time it takes for the battery in the signal receiving device to run out. In this embodiment, the preset safety time is set based on the time it takes for the battery in the receiving device to run out, and the preset safety time is 3.5 hours.

[0041] The above are only embodiments of the present invention. Common knowledge such as the known specific structures and characteristics in the scheme are not described in detail here. Ordinary technicians in the field are aware of all common technical knowledge in the technical field of the invention before the application date or priority date, can obtain all existing technologies in the field, and have the ability to apply conventional experimental means before that date. Ordinary technicians in the field can improve and implement this scheme in combination with their own abilities under the inspiration given by this application. Some typical known structures or known methods should not become obstacles for ordinary technicians in the field to implement this application. It should be pointed out that for those skilled in the art, without departing from the structure of the present invention, several variations and improvements can be made, which should also be regarded as the scope of protection of the present invention. These will not affect the effect of the implementation of the present invention and the practicality of the patent. The scope of protection required by this application shall be based on the content of its claims, and the specific implementation methods and other records in the specification can be used to interpret the content of the claims.

Claims

1. A method for testing the reliability of wireless electronic detonators, characterized in that: The test device used for the test includes a signal sending device, a detonator, a signal receiving device, and an explosion-proof device. The test method includes the following steps: S1: Air blast test outside the hole; S1-1: At the test point outside the hole, first test the communication connection between the signal sending device and the signal receiving device. If the communication connection is normal, place the detonator in the explosion-proof device and then connect the detonator to the signal receiving device; S1-2: Away from the test point outside the hole, send a command through the signal transmitter to detonate; S1-3: Repeat S1-1 to S1-2 according to the preset number of out-hole tests to perform out-hole airburst tests. If all the tests are successful, proceed to the next step; S2: In-hole airburst test; S2-1: Determine a test point in the hole and the number of tests corresponding to each test point, wherein the test point in the hole is a plurality of test points with different hole depths; S2-2: Outside the test hole, test the communication connection between the signal sending device and the signal receiving device. If the communication connection is normal, place the detonator in the explosion-proof device and then connect the detonator to the signal receiving device. S2-3: Place the device connected in S2-2 into the test hole and place it at the test point inside the hole. After the personnel leave the site, send a command through the signal transmitter to detonate; S2-4: Perform the in-hole airburst test according to the number of tests corresponding to the current test point. If all the tests are successful, proceed to the next in-hole test point until the tests of all in-hole test points are completed; S3: Record and analyze test results.

2. The wireless electronic detonator reliability testing method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The explosion-proof device comprises a tank body and a fixed cover. The tank body and the fixed cover are detachably connected, and the fixed cover is provided with a plurality of through holes.

3. The wireless electronic detonator reliability testing method according to claim 2, characterized in that: When connecting the detonator to the signal receiving device, place the explosion-proof device vertically with the through hole on the fixed cover facing upward, place the signal receiving device horizontally, and then connect the detonator to the signal receiving device.

4. The wireless electronic detonator reliability testing method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The signal receiving device includes a shell, a signal receiving board, and a connection socket. The shell is a tubular structure. The signal receiving board is sealed in the shell. A connection socket is provided at one end of the shell. The connection socket is electrically connected to the signal receiving board.

5. The wireless electronic detonator reliability testing method according to claim 4, characterized in that: The detonator is connected to a connecting plug via a wire, and the connecting plug is matched with a connecting socket.

6. The wireless electronic detonator reliability testing method according to claim 4, characterized in that: The test device also includes a casing, which is used to protect the signal receiving device. In the in-hole air explosion test, the signal receiving device is installed in the casing, and both ends of the casing are sealed, with a socket connection hole set at one end.

7. The wireless electronic detonator reliability testing method according to claim 6, characterized in that: In the in-hole air explosion test, the casing is first connected to the explosion-proof device through a rope, and then the explosion-proof device and casing are placed in the test hole.

8. The wireless electronic detonator reliability testing method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The number of out-of-hole tests is 2 to 5 times.

9. The wireless electronic detonator reliability testing method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The in-hole test points include a first in-hole test point and a second in-hole test point. The hole depth at the first in-hole test point is smaller than the hole depth at the second in-hole test point. The position of the first in-hole test point is where the test hole depth is 5 to 15 meters, and the position of the second in-hole test point is where the test hole depth is 15 to 25 meters.

10. The wireless electronic detonator reliability testing method according to claim 1, characterized in that: When the command fails to detonate, the command is resent. If the command fails to detonate, a preset safety time is maintained, and then the connection between the receiving device and the detonator is disconnected. The explosion-proof device is opened, the detonator is removed and destroyed, and a fault analysis is performed on the receiving device.

Images