## 1 Introduction  
Bench blasting is widely utilized in open-pit mining due to its high production efficiency and low operational costs [1, 2, 3]. However, large-scale blasting operations, which employ substantial amounts of explosives to dislodge ore and rock masses, often induce intense blast vibrations. This persistent issue of vibration control has long been a challenging problem for researchers [4, 5, 6]. Especially after a certain distance, Rayleigh waves become the main component of the vibration wave and are thus focused on control [7]. To mitigate the adverse effects of blast vibrations on mine slopes and surrounding structures, various methods have been implemented in bench blasting vibration control [8; 9; 10; 11]. Among these methods, adjusting the initiation sequence of blast holes has garnered significant attention, as it achieves vibration control without altering other blasting parameters [12; 13; 14]. To achieve blast vibration control through the adjustment of initiation delays, it is essential to first establish a correlation between the initiation sequence and blast-induced vibrations, enabling the accurate prediction of blast vibrations [15; 16]. Subsequently, various delay schemes are formulated, and the predicted vibration velocities under different delay conditions are computed. Finally, through comparative analysis of the predicted vibration velocities, the optimal delay time that meets the vibration control requirements is selected [17; 18; 19]. However, in large-scale bench blasting, significant variations in blast-induced vibrations are observed at different monitoring points under the same initiation sequence [5; 20]. This discrepancy arises from two primary factors: firstly, the attenuation of blast vibration waves varies as they propagate to different monitoring points [21]. Secondly, the propagation times of vibration waves generated by individual blast holes to the same monitoring point differ, resulting in a superposition of waves that does not strictly follow the initiation sequence [22; 23]. In other words, due to the large scale of the blasting area and the consequent large spacing between blast holes, the holes cannot be treated as a single point vibration source. Instead, the vibration waves generated by each hole propagate from different locations within the blasting area over varying distances to the same monitoring point, leading to differing propagation times. Particularly when multiple monitoring points are considered, the actual superposition times of the vibration waves from each hole dynamically vary accordingly. To investigate the distribution of blast-induced vibrations in different directions, [PERSON] et al. [24] monitored vibrations in four directions around the blasting area and plotted contour maps of peak particle velocity (PPV) values using multiple monitoring datasets. They controlled ground vibrations by altering the initiation positions and sequences. However, [PERSON] [24] has argued that vibration control based solely on data from four monitoring points lacks sufficient data support, and proposed the idea of uniformly distributing a large number of monitoring points across the blasting area. To date, there has been no reported literature on all-around vibration data collection and research around the blasting area via the deployment of a large number of monitoring points in complex blasting sites. Although researchers have extensively discussed the installation methods of vibration monitors [25; 26; 27], they have not specified methods for determining the optimal installation locations. Typically, monitoring points are set at locations requiring protection, and the adjusted delay time for vibration control at these points is considered the optimal solution for all-around vibration control around the blasting area [28; 29]. For instance, [PERSON] et al. [30] installed vibration monitors at residential buildings and analyzed vibration data from 39 blasts in a quarry, providing data support for vibration control. [PERSON] et al.