the basics of the bailey method l.
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
The Basics Of The Bailey Method

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 22

The Basics Of The Bailey Method - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 354 Views
  • Uploaded on

The Basics Of The Bailey Method. William J. Pine Emulsicoat, Inc. / Heritage Research Group Urbana, IL / Indianapolis, IN. Chris Holman, PE Holman Consulting Engineers & PJ Shea, MDT. Aggregate Blending The Bailey Method. Originally developed by Robert D. Bailey

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'The Basics Of The Bailey Method' - livvy


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
the basics of the bailey method

The Basics Of The Bailey Method

William J. Pine

Emulsicoat, Inc. / Heritage Research Group

Urbana, IL / Indianapolis, IN

Chris Holman, PE

Holman Consulting Engineers

&

PJ Shea, MDT

aggregate blending the bailey method
Aggregate BlendingThe Bailey Method
  • Originally developed by Robert D. Bailey
  • Evaluate aggregate packing characteristics
  • Determine what is “Coarse” and “Fine”
  • Evaluate individual aggregates and the combined blend by VOLUME as well as by weight
aggregate packing what influences the results
Aggregate PackingWhat Influences the Results?
  • Gradation- continuously-graded, gap-graded, etc.
  • Type & Amount of Compactive Effort- static pressure, impact or shearing
  • Shape- flat & elongated, cubical, round
  • Surface Texture (micro-texture)- smooth, rough
  • Strength
    • Weak vs. Strong, Influence of particle shape?
defining coarse and fine
Defining “Coarse” and “Fine”
  • “Coarse” fraction
    • Larger particles that createvoids
  • “Fine” fraction
    • Smaller particles that fillvoids
  • Estimate void size
    • Using Nominal Maximum Aggregate Size (NMAS)
  • Break between “Coarse” and “Fine”
    • Primary Control Sieve (PCS)
slide5

Diameter = NMAS

Average Void Size = 0.22 x NMAS

Primary Control Sieve ≈ 0.22 x NMAS

p rimary c ontrol s ieve
Primary Control Sieve

PCSdetermines the break betweenCoarseandFinein thecombinedblend andif a given aggregate is a CA or FA

evaluating aggregates by volume
Evaluating Aggregates by Volume
  • Why?
    • Better understand aggregatepacking
    • Control VOLUME of Coarse and Fine for Mix “Type”
  • How?
    • Test the individualCoarse and Fine aggregates

Fine-graded

Coarse-graded

SMA

l oose u nit w eight ca
Loose Unit Weight - CA
  • NOcompactive effort applied
  • Start of particle-to-particle contact
  • Use shoveling procedure
  • Strike off ~ level
    • Careful not to compact
  • Determine LUW
    • Kg/m3 or lbs./ft3
  • Determine volume of voids

AASHTO T19

r odded u nit w eight ca
Rodded Unit Weight - CA
  • Withcompactive effort applied
  • Increased particle-to-particle contact
  • Three equal lifts using shoveling procedure
  • Rod 25 times per lift
  • Strike off ~ level
    • Careful not to compact
  • Determine RUW
    • Kg/m3 or lbs./ft3
  • Determine volume of voids

AASHTO T19

c hosen u nit w eight ca s
ChosenUnit Weight - CA(s)

< LUW

LUW

RUW

Fine-Graded

Coarse-Graded

SMA

60-85%

95-105%

110-125%

INCREASING CACUW

combined blend evaluation
Combined Blend Evaluation
  • Evaluation method depends on which fraction (Coarse or Fine) is in control:
    • Coarse-graded, SMA
    • Fine-graded
slide12

Combined Blend Gradation

Sieve % Passing

A 100 

B 97

C 76

D 63

E 39

F 25

G 17

H 11

I 7

J 5

K 4.2

100

2

90

Coarse-graded

80

70

1

60

% Passing

50

40

30

20

4

3

10

Fine

Coarse

0

K J I H G F E D C B A

Sieve Size (mm) Raised to 0.45 Power

combined blend evaluation coarse graded mixes
Combined Blend EvaluationCoarse-Graded Mixes

CA Ratio =

% Half Sieve - % PCS

100 - % Half Sieve

2

Coarse Fraction

Half Sieve = 0.5 x NMAS

1

CA CUW (% PCS)

PCS = 0.22 x NMAS

FAc Ratio =

% SCS

% PCS

Fine Fraction

3

SCS = 0.22 x PCS

TCS = 0.22 x SCS

FAf Ratio =

% TCS

% SCS

4

combined blend evaluation coarse graded mixes14
Combined Blend EvaluationCoarse-Graded Mixes
  • CACUWincrease = VMAincrease
    • 4% change in PCS1% change in VMA or Voids
    • Range 3 - 5%
  • CARatioincrease = VMAincrease
    • 0.20 change 1% change in VMA or Voids
    • Range 0.10 – 0.30
  • FAcRatioincrease = VMAdecrease
    • 0.05 change 1% change in VMA or Voids
    • Range 0.025 – 0.075
  • FAfRatioincrease = VMAdecrease
    • 0.05 change 1% change in VMA or Voids
    • Range 0.025 – 0.075

Has the most influence on VMA or Voids

slide15

Combined Blend Gradation

Sieve % Passing

A 100 

B 98

C 85

D 72

E 58

F 40

G 32

H 21

I 12

J 7

K 4.4

100

Fine-graded

90

1

80

70

60

2

% Passing

50

40

3

30

4

20

10

Fine

Coarse

0

K J I H G F E D C B A

Sieve Size (mm) Raised to 0.45 Power

combined blend evaluation fine graded mixes
Combined Blend EvaluationFine-Graded Mixes

Original Coarse Fraction

Original Half Sieve

1

Original PCS

% CA LUW

New Coarse Fraction

New Half Sieve

2

New CA Ratio

NewPCS

New Fine Fraction

3

New FAc Ratio

NewSCS

NewTCS

4

New FAf Ratio

combined blend evaluation fine graded mixes17
Combined Blend EvaluationFine-Graded Mixes
  • CACUWdecrease = VMAincrease
    • 6% change ORIGINALPCS1% change in VMA or Voids
    • Range 5 - 7%
  • NewCARatioincrease = VMAincrease
    • 0.35 change 1% change in VMA or Voids
    • Range 0.25 – 0.45
  • NewFAcRatioincrease = VMAdecrease
    • 0.05 change 1% change in VMA or Voids
    • Range 0.025 – 0.075
  • NewFAfRatioincrease = VMAdecrease
    • 0.05 change 1% change in VMA or Voids
    • Range 0.025 – 0.075
  • Old CARatiostillrelates to segregation susceptibility

Has the most influence on VMA or Voids

estimating vma or voids coarse graded mix example
Trial #1 (% Passing)

25.0mm 100.0

19.0mm 97.4

12.5mm 76.2

9.5mm 63.5

4.75mm 38.2

2.36mm 23.6

1.18mm 18.8

0.60mm 13.1

0.30mm 7.4

0.15mm 5.7

0.075mm 4.0

Trial #2 (% Passing)

25.0mm 100.0

19.0mm 98.0

12.5mm 76.5

9.5mm 63.6

4.75mm 37.2

2.36mm 22.1

1.18mm 16.5

0.60mm 11.8

0.30mm 6.8

0.15mm 5.2

0.075mm 3.5

Estimating VMA or VoidsCoarse-Graded Mix Example

NMAS

HALF

PCS

SCS

TCS

estimating vma or voids trial 2 vs trial 1
PCS

37.2 – 38.2 = - 1.0

CA ratio

0.725 – 0.693 = + 0.032

FAc ratio

0.444 – 0.492 = - 0.048

FAfratio

0.412 – 0.394 = + 0.018

IncreasesVMA or Voids

1.0/4.0 = + 0.25%

Increases VMA or Voids

0.032/0.2 = + 0.16%

Increases VMA or Voids

0.048/0.05 = + 0.96%

Decreases VMA or Voids

0.018/0.05 = - 0.36%

Total Estimated Change:

Plus~ 1.0% VMA

Estimating VMA or VoidsTrial #2 vs. Trial #1
the four main principles
The Four Main Principles
  • % PCS(Volume of CA)
    • Increase/decrease in VMA depends on mix type
  • CA ratio (Control with CAVolume blend)
    • Low values can be susceptible to segregation
    • High values can be difficult to compact
    • As it increases, VMA increases
  • FAc ratio (Control with FAVolume blend)
    • As it increases, VMA decreases
  • FAf ratio (Control with % minus 0.075mm)
    • As it increases, VMA decreases
so how does the method help
So How Does the Method Help?
  • In Developing New Blends:
    • Field Compactability
    • Segregation Susceptibility

It's a TOOL!

  • In Evaluating Existing Blends:
    • What’s worked and what hasn’t?
    • More clearly define principle ranges

Not a SPEC!

  • In Estimating VMA/Void changes:
    • Between Design trials
    • Between QC and/or QA samples
    • For PROPOSED blend changes
  • Saves Time and Reduces Risk!
no questions or comments good
No Questions or Comments? Good

Thank You!

Bill Pine

Emulsicoat, Inc. / Heritage Research Group

Cell: (217) 840-4173

E-mail: bill.pine@heritage-enviro.com

ad