Table III.—Showing Measured Voids in Sand from Different Localities.

Locality.Authority.Percent Voids.Remarks.
Ohio RiverW. M. Hall31Washed
Sandusky, O.C. E. Sherman40Lake
Franklin Co., O.C. E. Sherman40Bank
Sandusky Bay, O.S. B. Newberry32.3......
St. Louis, Mo.H. H. Henby34.3Miss. River
Sault Ste. MarieH. von Schon41.7River
Chicago, Ill.H. P. Broadman34 to 40......
Philadelphia, Pa39Del. River
Mass. Coast31 to 34......
Boston, MassGeo. Kimball33Clean
Cow Bay, L. I.Myron S. Falk40½......
Little Falls, N. J.W. B. Fuller45.6......
Canton, Ill.G. W. Chandler30Clean

Voids in Broken Stone and Gravel.—The percentage of voids in broken stone varies with the nature of the stone: whether it is broken by hand or by crushers; with the kind of crusher used, and upon whether it is screened or crusher-run product. The voids in broken stone seldom exceed 52 per cent. even when the fragments are of uniform size and the stone is shoveled loose into the measuring box. The following records of actual determinations of voids in broken stone cover a sufficiently wide range of conditions to show about the limits of variation.

The following are results of tests made by Mr. A. N. Johnson, State Engineer of Illinois, to determine the variation in voids in crushed stone due to variation in size and to method of loading into the measuring box. The percentage of voids was determined by weighing the amount of water added to fill the box:

Size.Method of Loading.Per cent. of Voids.
3 in.20-ft. drop41.8
3 in.15-ft drop46.8
3 in.15-ft. drop47.2
3 in.Shovels48.7
1½ in.20-ft. drop42.5
1½ in.15-ft. drop46.8
1½ in.15-ft. drop46.8
1½ in.Shovels50.5
¾ in.20-ft. drop39.4
¾ in.15-ft. drop42.7
¾ in.15-ft. drop41.5
¾ in.15-ft. drop41.8
¾ in.Shovels45.2
¾ in.Shovels44.6
⅜ in.Shovels41.0
⅜ in.Shovels40.6
⅜ in.Shovels41.0

The table shows clearly the effect on voids of compacting the stone by dropping it; it also shows for the ¾-in. and the ⅜-in. stone loaded by shovels how uniformly the percentages of voids run for stone of one size only. Dropping the stone 20 ft. reduced the voids some 12 to 15 per cent. as compared with shoveling.

Table IV.—Showing Determined Percentages of Voids in Broken Stone from Various Common Rocks.

Authority.Percent Voids. Remarks.
Sabin 49.0 Limestone, crusher run after screening out ⅛-in. and under.
" 44.0 Limsetone (1 part screenings mixed with 6 parts broken stone).
Wm. M. Black 46.5 Screened and washed, 2-ins. and under.
J. J. R. Croes 47.5 Gneiss, after screening out ¼-in. and under.
S. B. Newberry 47.0 Chiefly about egg size.
H. P. Broadman39 to 42 Chicago limestone, crusher run.
" 48 to 52 " " screened into sizes.
Wm. M. Hall 48.0 Green River limestone, 2½-ins. and smaller dust screened out.
" 50.0 Hudson River trap, 2½-ins. and smaller, dust screened out.
Wm. B. Fuller 47.6 New Jersey trap, crusher run, 1/6 to 2.1 in.
Geo. A. Kimball 49.5 Roxbury conglomerate, ½ to 2½ ins.
Myron S. Falk 48.0 Limestone, ½ to 3 ins.
W. H. Henby 43.0 " 2-in size.
" 46.0 " 1½-in size
Feret 53.4 Stone, 1.6 to 2.4 ins.
" 51.7 " 0.8 to 1.6 in.
" 52.1 " 0.4 to 0.8 in.
A. W. Dow 45.3 Bluestone, 89% being 1½ to 2½ ins.
" 45.3 " 90% being 1/6 to 1½ in.
Taylor and Thompson 54.5 Trap, hard, 1 to 2½ ins.
" 54.5 " " ½ to 1 in.
" 45.0 " " 0 to 2½ in.
" 51.2 " soft, ¾ to 2 ins.
G. W. Chandler 40.0 Canton, Ill.
Emile Low 39.0 Buffalo limestone, crusher run, dust in.
C. M. Saville 46.0 Crushed cobblestone, screened into sizes.

Table V.—Showing Percentages of Voids in Gravel and Broken Stone of Different Granulometric Compositions.

———Per cent Voids in———
Passing a ring of2.4"1.6"0.8"RoundBroken
Held by a ring1.6"0.8"0.4"Pebbles.Stone.
Parts10040.053.4
"01038.851.7
"00141.752.1
"11035.850.5
"10135.647.1
"01137.940.5
"11135.547.8
"41134.549.2
"14136.649.4
"11438.148.6
"80234.1....