DOCSLIB.ORG

Stabilization Selection Guide for Aggregate & Native-Surfaced Low

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Stabilization Selection Guide for Aggregate & Native-Surfaced Low U.S. Department of Agriculture Stabilization Selection Forest Service National Technology & Guide for Aggregate- Development Program 7700—Transportation Mgmt and Native-Surfaced 0877 1805—SDTDC March 2009 Low Volume Roads OF TRAN NT S E PO T SER M R ES VI T T OR CE R A F A T P I O E N D D E E U A R P N C U I I A R T T R TMENT OF AGRICU L ED E S AM TATES OF Cover photo: Alan Anderson, Black Hills National Forest Stabilization Selection Guide for Aggregate- and Native-Surfaced Low-Volume Roads Maureen A. Kestler, Civil Engineer, Forest Service, San Dimas Technology & Development Center March 2009 Information contained in this document has been developed for the guidance of employees of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service, its contractors, and cooperating Federal and State agencies. The USDA Forest Service assumes no responsibility for the interpretation or use of this information by other than its own employees. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official evaluation, conclusion, recommendation, endorsement, or approval of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1—OVERVIEW Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 Purpose ...................................................................................................... 2 Scope of Guide .......................................................................................... 2 General Information and Background ........................................................ 5 How To Use This Guide ............................................................................. 6 CHAPTER 2—CHEMICAL STABILIZATION Selecting A Traditional Chemical Additive .................................................. 7 Selecting A Nontraditional Chemical Additive .......................................... 13 CHAPTER 3—MECHANICAL STABILIZATION Introduction .............................................................................................. 19 Selecting a Mechanical Stabilization Technique ...................................... 19 Background and Design Theory .............................................................. 24 CHAPTER 4—CONSTRUCTION HINTS ................................................................ 33 REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 37 APPENDIX A—Definitions APPENDIX B—Traditional Chemical Stabilizers: Simplified method of selecting and determining quantities (including FWHA 2005) APPENDIX C—Traditional Chemical Stabilizers: UASCE method of selecting and determining quantities APPENDIX D—ASTM Soil Tests APPENDIX E—pH and Sulfate Tests APPENDIX F—Evaluation of Stabilizers APPENDIX G—Nontraditional Stabilizers (FHWA 2005) APPENDIX H—Mechanical Stabilization Techniques (FHWA 2005) APPENDIX I—Geosynthetics ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This publication is the result of a partnership between the National Technology and Development Program of the Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway administration (FHWA) Coordinated Federal Lands Highway Technology Improvement Program. We would like to acknowledge Pete Bolander and Douglas Scholen for providing the foundation from which this guide was developed, Gordon Keller for his recommendation of updating former selection guides to include recent developments and new information on stabilizers that has come about during the past few years, Alan Yamada and Mike Mitchell for their guidance, and Charles Aldrich for providing helpful information. The author also thanks Jeb Tingle at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Research and Development Center, Mike Voth and his colleagues at the Central Federal Lands, Minnesota Local Road Research Board, the Transportation Research Board, and also reviewers Bill Vischer, Pete Bolander, and Gordon Keller, those who provided photographs, the editors, and ever-so-many other Forest Service representatives who contributed toward the development of this updated stabilization guide. Overview INTRODUCTION Soil stabilizers can be used to treat the upper several inches of soil or aggregate surfaces of low-volume roads (LVRs) when the strength or other properties of the in-place soil do not meet the desired or required levels for anticipated traffic. Soil can be either modified or stabilized by many methods, including chemical, mechanical, thermal, and electrical (Danyluk 1986; Martel et al. unpublished). Modification is generally short term and includes benefits such as improvement in workability (expediting construction and saving time and money). Stabilization generally results in a longer term strength gain. q Chemical stabilization is achieved by mixing chemicals, such as cement, lime, fly ash, bitumen, or combinations of these materials, with soil to form a stronger composite material. Selection of the type and percentage of additive is a function of the soil classification and the degree of improvement desired. Chemicals and/or emulsions can be used as: m Compaction aids to soils. m Binders and water repellents. m A means of modifying the behavior of clay to form a stronger composite material. Chemical stabilization can aid in: m Dust control. m Water-erosion control. m Fixation and leaching control of both waste and recycled materials (Das 2000). q Mechanical modification/stabilization involves mixing (two or more soils to obtain a material of desired specification), draining, and/or compacting soil. Alternately, fibrous or other nonbiodegradable reinforcing materials, such as geosynthetics/geocomposites/fibers, can be mixed in or physically placed with the geomaterial to improve strength. CHAPTER ONE q Thermal stabilization involves heating or freezing soil. m Heating the soil to 600 °C can irreversibly dehydrate or fuse soil particles. m Freezing can strengthen the soil by solidifying water content. q Electrical stabilization involves applying a direct electrical current to the soil. This causes water to migrate out of the soil to an electrode. Overview 1 CHAPTER ONE This guide focuses on chemical and mechanical methods. Definitions used in conjunction with stabilization are provided in appendix A. PURPOSE The purpose of this guide is to facilitate the selection of modification/stabilization agents and techniques for aggregate- surfaced and native/unsurfaced LVRs. The objective is to provide low-cost alternatives that reduce aggregate wear and loss, reduce road-surface maintenance (i.e., blading out ruts), and reduce the time period between major rehabilitation (i.e., between adding new aggregate or the total reconditioning of the road pavement). This guide provides information on available stabilizing agents, appropriate conditions for use, selection procedures, quantity determination, and contact information for manufacturers/suppliers. Emphasis is on the modification/stabilization of existing in-place road surface materials, but many of the methods can be used in the construction of new roads. Construction procedures for application are also presented. The intended audience includes road managers, engineers, and technicians involved in road maintenance, construction, and reconstruction. Those involved in trail maintenance and construction also may find the guide beneficial, as stabilizers used on trails, particularly accessible trails, help provide a smooth, durable surface. Information on the use of synthetics for trails can be found in the Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, publication “Geosynthetics for Trails in Wet Areas” by Groenier (2008). Information on accessible trails is provided in another Forest Service publication, “Soil Stabilizers on Universally Accessible Trails” (Bergmann 2000). SCOPE OF GUIDE This guide focuses primarily on chemical and mechanical methods. It serves as an updated sequel to two reports prepared in the 1990s, “Non-Standard Stabilizers” (Scholen 1992) and “Stabilization with Standard and Nonstandard Stabilizers” (Bolander 1995), and incorporates applicable tables from the “Surfacing Selection Guide” recently developed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Central Lands Federal Highway Division (FHWA 2005), and tables from the Transportation Research Board (TRB) (Petry and Sobhan 2005). The guide also incorporates procedures from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and reflects discussions with engineers and contractors,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Division 2 Earthwork
    Division 2 Earthwork 2-01 Clearing, Grubbing, and Roadside Cleanup 2-01.1 Description The Contractor shall clear, grub, and clean up those areas staked or described in the Special Provisions. This Work includes protecting from harm all trees, bushes, shrubs, or other objects selected to remain. “Clearing” means removing and disposing of all unwanted material from the surface, such as trees, brush, down timber, or other natural material. “Grubbing” means removing and disposing of all unwanted vegetative matter from underground, such as sod, stumps, roots, buried logs, or other debris. “Roadside cleanup”, whether inside or outside the staked area, means Work done to give the roadside an attractive, finished appearance. “Debris” means all unusable natural material produced by clearing, grubbing, or roadside cleanup. 2-01.2 Disposal of Usable Material and Debris The Contractor shall meet all requirements of state, county, and municipal regulations regarding health, safety, and public welfare in the disposal of all usable material and debris. The Contractor shall dispose of all debris by one or more of the disposal methods described below. 2-01.2(1) Disposal Method No. 1 – Open Burning The open burning of residue resulting from land clearing is restricted by Chapter 173-425 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). No commercial open burning shall be conducted without authorization from the Washington State Department of Ecology or the appropriate local air pollution control authority. All burning operations shall be strictly in accordance with these authorizations. 2-01.2(2) Disposal Method No. 2 – Waste Site Debris shall be hauled to a waste site obtained and provided by the Contractor in accordance with Section 2-03.3(7)C.
    [Show full text]
  • Ims List Sanitation Compliance and Enforcement Ratings of Interstate Milk Shippers April 2017
    IMS LIST SANITATION COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT RATINGS OF INTERSTATE MILK SHIPPERS APRIL 2017 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration Rules For Inclusion In The IMS List Interstate milk shippers who have been certified by State Milk sanitation authorities as having attained the milk sanitation compliance ratings are indicated in the following list. These ratings are based on compliance with the requirements of the USPHS/FDA Grade A Pasteurized Milk Ordinance and Grade A Condensed and Dry Milk Products and Condensed and Dry Whey and were made in accordance with the procedures set forth in Methods of Making Sanitation Rating of Milk Supplies. *Proposal 301 that was passed at 2001 NCIMS conference held May 5-10, 2001, in Wichita, Kansas and concurred with by FDA states: "Transfer Stations, Receiving Stations and Dairy Plants must achieve a sanitation compliance rating of 90 or better in order to be eligible for a listing in the IMS List. Sanitation compliance rating scores for Transfer and Receiving Stations and Dairy Plants will not be printed in the IMS List". Therefore, the publication of a sanitation compliance rating score for Transfer and Receiving Stations and Dairy Plants will not be printed in this edition of the IMS List. THIS LIST SUPERSEDES ALL LISTS WHICH HAVE BEEN ISSUED HERETOFORE ALL PRECEDING LISTS AND SUPPLEMENTS THERETO ARE VOID. The rules for inclusion in the list were formulated by the official representatives of those State milk sanitation agencies who have participated in the meetings of the National Conference of Interstate Milk Shipments.
    [Show full text]
  • Division 300 Bases Section 304 Aggregate Base Course Description
    304.07 DIVISION 300 BASES SECTION 304 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE DESCRIPTION 304.01 This work consists of furnishing and placing one or more courses of aggregate and additives, if required, on a prepared subgrade. MATERIALS 304.02 Aggregate. The aggregates shall meet the requirements of subsection 703.03. Acceptance will be based on random samples taken from each lift. 304.03 Commercial Mineral Fillers. Portland cement shall conform to subsection 701.01. Hydrated lime shall conform to subsection 712.03. CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 304.04 Placing. If the required compacted depth of the aggregate base course exceeds 6 inches, it shall be constructed in two or more layers of approximately equal thickness. The maximum compacted thickness of any one layer shall not exceed 6 inches. When vibratory or other approved types of special compacting equipment are used, the compacted depth of a single layer may be increased to 8 inches upon request, provided that specified density is achieved and written approval is given. 304.05 Mixing. The Contractor shall mix the aggregate by methods that insure a thorough and homogenous mixture. 304.06 Shaping and Compaction. Compaction of each layer shall continue until a density of at least 95 percent of the maximum density has been achieved as determined in accordance with AASHTO T 180 as modified by CP 23. The moisture content shall be at ± 2 percent of optimum moisture content. The surface of each layer shall be maintained during the compaction operations so that a uniform texture is produced and the aggregates are firmly keyed. Moisture conditioning shall be performed uniformly during compaction.
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Land Classification of the Powerhouse Aggregate Project Site
    SPECIAL REPORT 218 MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION OF THE POWER HOUSE AGGREGATE PROJECT SITE, BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA – FOR CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE 2010 CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER GOVERNOR THE RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION LESTER A. SNOW DEREK CHERNOW SECRETARY FOR RESOURCES ACTING DIRECTOR CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY JOHN G. PARRISH, Ph.D., STATE GEOLOGIST Copyright © 2010 by the California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent of the California Geological Survey. “The Department of Conservation makes no warranties as to the suitability of this product for any particular purpose.” SPECIAL REPORT 218 MINERAL LAND CLASSIFICATION OF THE POWER HOUSE AGGREGATE PROJECT SITE, BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA - FOR CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE By Joshua D. Smith & John P. Clinkenbeard (PG #4731) 2010 CALIFORNIA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY’S PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICES: Southern California Regional Office Library and Headquarters Office Bay Area Regional Office 888 Figueroa Street, Suite 475 801 K Street, MS 14-31 345 Middlefield Road, MS 520 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Sacramento, CA 95814-3531 Menlo Park, CA 94025 (213) 239-0878 (916) 445-5716 (650) 688-6327 ii Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................ v INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Stabilization | Lime Treated Soils Save Time & Money
    QUALITY LIME & STONE PRODUCTS THAT IMPROVE YOUR WORLD QUALITY LIME & STONE PRODUCTS About Graymont THAT IMPROVE YOUR WORLD Graymont is a family owned company whose management team and employees are dedicated to meeting or exceeding customer needs. The company is focused on high calcium and dolomitic lime, value added lime based products such as specialty hydrates and precipitated calcium carbonates, and the aggre- gate and pulverized stone business. Graymont takes a long term view of its business and the lime industry. Graymont has been in the lime business for over 50 years and operates facilities on sites that have been in operation for up to 200 years. Graymont is among the leaders in the industry in adding new efficient plants and equipment and operates some of the most modern facilities on the continent. Since 1989 Graymont has built close to 2 million tons of new state of the art capacity and will continue to add new capacity to meet market demand. Graymont is the third largest producer of lime in North America. In Canada, Graymont subsidiaries have operations from New Brunswick to British Columbia. In the United States, subsidiary companies operate in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Washington, Oregon, Montana, Utah and Nevada while serving markets in a much wider geographic area. In addition to Graymont's lime interests, Graymont Materials, located in upstate New York and the province of Quebec, provides construction stone, sand and gravel, asphalt products and ready mix concrete for the infrastructure and general construction needs of the area. In 2003, Graymont became a part owner of Grupo Calidra.
    [Show full text]
  • A Qljarter Century of Geotechnical Researcll
    A QlJarter Century of Geotechnical Researcll PUBLICATION NO. FHWA-RD-98-139 FEBRUARY 1999 1111111111111111111111111111111 PB99-147365 \c-c.J/t).:.. L~.i' . u.s. D~~~~~~~Co~~~~~erce~ Natronal_Tec~nical Information Service u.s. DepartillCi"li of Transportation Spnngfleld, Virginia 22161 Research, Development & Technology Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, VA 22101-2296 FOREWORD This report summarizes Federal Highway Administration (FHW!\) geotechnical research and development activities during the past 25 years. The report incl!Jde~: significant accomplishments in the areas of bridge foundations, ground improvenl::::nt, and soil and rock behavior. A fourth category included important miscellaneous efrorts tl'12t did not fit the areas mentioned. The report vlill be useful to re~earchers and praGtitior,c:;rs in geotechnology. --------:"--; /~ /1 I~t(./l- /-~~:r\ .. T. Paul Teng (j Director, Office of Infrastructure Research, Development. and Technologv NOTiCE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States G~)\fernm8nt assumes no liahillty for its contt?!nts or use thereof. Thir. report dor~s not constiil)tl":: a standard, specification, or regu!p,tion. The; United States Government does not endorse products or n18;1ufaGturers, Traderrlc,rks or nianufacturers' narl1es appear in thi;-, report only bec:8'I)Se they arc considered essential to tile object of the document. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA-RD-98-139 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date A Quarter Century of Geotechnical Research February 1999 6. Performing Organization Code ).
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for the Stabilization of Subgrade Soils in California Authors: David Jones, Ashraf Rahim, Shadi Saadeh, and John T
    July 2010 Guideline: UCPRC-GL-2010-01 GGGuuuiiidddeeellliiinnneeesss fffooorrr ttthhheee SSStttaaabbbiiillliiizzzaaatttiiiooonnn ooofff SSSuuubbbgggrrraaadddeee SSSoooiiilllsss IIInnn CCCaaallliiifffooorrrnnniiiaaa Authors: D. Jones, A. Rahim, S. Saadeh, and J.T. Harvey Partnered Pavement Research Center (PPRC) Contract Strategic Plan Element 3.14: Subgrade Soil Stabilization Guide PREPARED FOR: PREPARED BY: California Department of Transportation University of California Division of Research and Innovation Pavement Research Center Office of Roadway Research UC Davis, UC Berkeley DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL PAGE Guideline: UCPRC-GL-2010-01 Title: Guidelines for the Stabilization of Subgrade Soils in California Authors: David Jones, Ashraf Rahim, Shadi Saadeh, and John T. Harvey Prepared for: FHWA No: Work submitted: Date: Caltrans CA122201A 05/23/2011 July 2011 Strategic Plan Element No.: Status: Version No.: 3.14 Stage 6, Final 1 Abstract: This document provides guidelines on subgrade soil stabilization and covers mechanical, cementitious, and asphalt methods. The following aspects are discussed: An overview of subgrade stabilization methods Project investigation Mechanical stabilization Cementitious stabilization Asphalt stabilization Construction considerations A list of further reading is provided. Keywords: Subgrade soil stabilization Proposals for implementation: Related documents: None Signatures: D. Jones J.T. Harvey D. Spinner J.T. Harvey T.J. Holland 1st Author Technical Review Editor Principal Investigator Caltrans Contract Manager UCPRC-GL-2010-01 i DISCLAIMER The contents of this guideline reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of California or the Federal Highway Administration. This guideline does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
    [Show full text]
  • Influence of Peripheral Velocity on Measurements of Undrained Shear Strength for an Artificial Soil
    Estimated Time to Failure, t (minutes) f 104 1000 100 10 1 0.1 2.0 u0 /s Rate Effect Model u β = 0.10 β s /s = (v /v ) u u0 p p0 1.5 0.05 1.0 Typical 0.5 Typical Range of Range of Interest for Wave Interest for Reference Rate & Storm Loading Earthquake ~ 3.4 mm/min Loading Norm. Undrained Shear Strength, s Strength, Shear Undrained Norm. 0.0 0.0100 0.100 1.00 10.0 100 103 Peripheral Velocity, v (mm/min) p Symbol Reference Soil This Work Bentonite-Kaolinite Mix Perlow & Richards, 1977 San Diego Clay Wiesel, 1973 Ska Edeby Tortensson, 1977 Backebol Tortensson, 1977 Askim Schapery & Dunlap, 1978 Gulf Mexico INFLUENCE OF PERIPHERAL VELOCITY ON UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH AND DEFORMABILITY CHARACTERISTICS OF A BENTONITE- KAOLINITE MIXTURE by Giovanna Biscontin and Juan M. Pestana Geotechnical Engineering Report No UCB/GT/99-19 November 1999 Revised in December 2000 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of California, Berkeley ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................................................................................II LIST OF FIGURES....................................................................................................................................................II INFLUENCE OF PERIPHERAL VELOCITY ON MEASUREMENTS OF UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH FOR AN ARTIFICIAL SOIL..............................................................................................................1 ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Green Terramesh Rock Fall Protection Bund
    Double Twist Mesh Project: 112 Bridle Path Road Date: May 2016 Client: Private Residence, Heathcote Valley Designer: Engeo Consulting Ltd Contractor: Higgins Contractors Location: Christchurch Green Terramesh Rock Fall Protection Bund The 22 February 2010 Christchurch earthquake triggered numerous rock falls causing damage to homes built close to cliffs. Many of those that survived were red zoned by the Government due of the risk of further rock fall or cliff collapse. The area around Heathcote Valley and in particular Bridle Path road was identified as an area of high risk requiring some form of rock fall protection structure to be constructed in order to protect dwellings from rock fall in the event of any further earthquakes. Geofabrics offers a range of solutions that includes certified catch fences and Green Terramesh rockfall embankments. A rockfall embankment was the preferred solution for this site which has the potential to experience multiple rock fall events. The use of Green Site Preparation Terramesh allows the embankment slopes to be steepened and the footprint reduced to form a stable and robust bund having high energy absorption characteristics. The structure is typically filled with compacted granular material or engineered soil fill with horizontal soil reinforcement (geogrid or DT mesh) inclusions. The front face can either be vegetated or finished with a rock veneer. Rockfall embankments have undergone extensive full scale testing in Europe. Actual rock impacts in excess of 5000kJ into Green Terramesh rockfall embankments located in Northern Italy have been back-analysed and the design methodology verified using numerical modelling (FEM) techniques. This research has resulted in the development of design charts to provide designers with a Bund Design simplified design method based on rock penetration depth.
    [Show full text]
  • Aggregate and the Environment Was Prepared Under the Sponsorship of the AGI Environmental Geoscience Advisory Committee with Support from the U.S
    ooperative planning by developers, government, and citizens is the key to successful protection and utilization of aggregate resources. AGI gratefully acknowledges the AGI Foundation and the U.S. Geological Survey for their support of this book and of the Environmental Awareness Series. For more information about this Series please see the inside back cover. AGI ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS SERIES,8 William H. Langer Lawrence J. Drew Janet S. Sachs With a Foreword by Travis L. Hudson and Philip E. LaMoreaux American Geological Institute in cooperation with U.S. Geological Survey About the Authors William H. Langer has been a research geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) since 1971, and has been the USGS Resource Geologist for Aggregate since 1976. He is a member of the Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration (SME), the American Society for Testing and Materials committees for Concrete Aggregate and Road and Paving Materials, and the International Association of Engineering Geologists Commission No. 17 on Aggregates. He has conducted geologic mapping and field studies of aggregate resources throughout much of the United States. He has published over 100 reports, maps, and articles relating to crushed stone and gravel resources including monthly columns about geology and aggregate resources Foreword 4 It Helps To Know 7 in Aggregates Manager and Quarry. Preface 5 Why Aggregate Is Important 9 Lawrence J. Drew has nearly 40 years of experience working on mineral and petroleum What the Environmental assessment and environmental problems in private Concerns Are 12 industry and with the federal government. Since joining the U.S. Geological Survey in 1972, he has How Science Can Help 12 worked on the development of assessment techniques for undiscovered mineral and petroleum resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Aggregate Properties Section 1
    Basic Aggregate Properties Section 1: Introduction 1 Aggregate Types Aggregates are divided into 3 categories based on particle size: • Coarse Aggregate Gravel or crushed stone Particle sizes larger than No. 4 sieve (4.75mm) • Fine Aggregate Sand or washed screenings Particle sizes between No. 4 and No. 200 sieve (4.75mm-75µm) •Fines Silt or clay Particle sizes smaller than No. 200 sieve (75µm) Coarse Aggregate Coarse Aggregate can come from several sources. Each of these sources can produce satisfactory aggregates depending on the intended use. Each parent material has advantages and disadvantages associated with it. 2 Coarse Aggregate Natural gravel Crushed stone Lightweight aggregate Recycled and waste products •slag • rubble •mine waste • asphalt and concrete pavement Important Properties of Aggregate All of these properties can have an affect on how the aggregate performs the tasks that are expected of it. •Shape • Surface texture •Gradation • Specific gravity • Absorption •Hardness • Soundness •Strength • Deleterious materials 3 The ideal aggregate is… Strong and hard to resist loads applied Chemically inert so it is not broken down by reactions with substances it comes in contact with Has a stable volume so that it does not shrink or swell Bonds tightly with asphalt and portland cement paste The ideal aggregate… Contains no impurities or weak particles Would be the perfect size and gradation for the application intended Would be locally available and economical 4 Aggregate in Practice There is a wide range in strength and hardness even among aggregates produced from the same type of parent material. Particles have pores that affect their absorption properties and how well they bond with asphalt and Portland cement.
    [Show full text]
  • Etir Code Lists
    eTIR Code Lists Code lists CL01 Equipment size and type description code (UN/EDIFACT 8155) Code specifying the size and type of equipment. 1 Dime coated tank A tank coated with dime. 2 Epoxy coated tank A tank coated with epoxy. 6 Pressurized tank A tank capable of holding pressurized goods. 7 Refrigerated tank A tank capable of keeping goods refrigerated. 9 Stainless steel tank A tank made of stainless steel. 10 Nonworking reefer container 40 ft A 40 foot refrigerated container that is not actively controlling temperature of the product. 12 Europallet 80 x 120 cm. 13 Scandinavian pallet 100 x 120 cm. 14 Trailer Non self-propelled vehicle designed for the carriage of cargo so that it can be towed by a motor vehicle. 15 Nonworking reefer container 20 ft A 20 foot refrigerated container that is not actively controlling temperature of the product. 16 Exchangeable pallet Standard pallet exchangeable following international convention. 17 Semi-trailer Non self propelled vehicle without front wheels designed for the carriage of cargo and provided with a kingpin. 18 Tank container 20 feet A tank container with a length of 20 feet. 19 Tank container 30 feet A tank container with a length of 30 feet. 20 Tank container 40 feet A tank container with a length of 40 feet. 21 Container IC 20 feet A container owned by InterContainer, a European railway subsidiary, with a length of 20 feet. 22 Container IC 30 feet A container owned by InterContainer, a European railway subsidiary, with a length of 30 feet. 23 Container IC 40 feet A container owned by InterContainer, a European railway subsidiary, with a length of 40 feet.
    [Show full text]