Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 3
Table 2 Percent retained of round and non-round glass beads for each sample type
Sieve U.S. Type 1 (Y) Type 3 (P) Type 5 (C)
Opening Sieve
Size Round Non-Round Round Non-Round Round Non-Round
2000 #10
1700 #12 4.5% 0.5%
1400 #14 49.5% 5.5%
1180 #16 4.0% 1.0% 31.5% 3.5%
1000 #18 44.0% 11.0% 4.5% 0.5%
850 #20 28.0% 7.0%
710 #25 4.0% 1.0%
600 #30 3.5% 1.5%
500 #50 42.0% 18.0%
425 #100 24.5% 10.5%
gradation (percent passing) of the three blends and laboratories returned results using mechanical sieving,
Table 2 on their roundness, which includes percent eight laboratories returned results using COM-A, and
retained round and non-round beads in each size class. four laboratories returned results using COM-B.
Specimen sets were sent to 30 participating labo-
ratories for property measurements. Depending on ILS Instructions
the measurement capability of each laboratory or its
willingness to conduct both mechanical and comput- Instructions for performing the tests and collecting
erized methods, some laboratories received more than data were provided to each participant. The laborato-
one specimen set. ries conducting the mechanical measurements were
requested to follow the instructions prepared accord-
ing to ASTM D1214 and D1155 and report the mea-
Test Methods Evaluated in the ILS
sured retained weights and the corresponding percent-
Participating laboratories were asked to conduct ages of round and non-round glass beads in specified
traditional sieve and roundometer tests, computerized size classes. The laboratories using the computerized
optical methods, or both. The traditional methods optical method were requested to follow instructions
followed ASTM D1214, "Sieve Analysis of Glass prepared with the help of the COM-A and COM-B
Spheres" and ASTM D1155, "Roundness of Glass manufacturers. Participants using the computerized
Sphere" test methods. Two types of computerized optical method equipment measured percent retained
optical scanning instruments were used, denoted and percent round in each size class of each sam-
COM-A and COM-B. One set of Type 1 samples was ple type in terms of the specific parameters of the
also tested by a second type of COM-B device, which COM-A and COM-B instruments as presented in
operates exactly in the same way as the other COM-B Table 3 and Table 4. The ILS instructions are available
devices, so that their results in this report are both in Appendix A of the project final report.
referred to as COM-B and were combined in the pre-
cision and bias analysis for the Type 1 samples.
ILS TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Participating Laboratories Test Results
State department of transportation (DOT) lab- Of the 30 sets of glass beads that were distributed
oratories and glass bead and equipment manufactur- to the laboratories, 27 sets of results were received.
ers and distributors were invited to participate in the Fifteen laboratories submitted full sets of size distri-
ILS. Thirty laboratories responded to the invitation; 15 bution data using sieve analysis. Ten laboratories
3
