CBR % from Clegg Readings
CBR % from Clegg Readings
(OP)
I have a set of clegg impact values (CIV) which i have obtained and recorded and I need to convert them to %CBR Values.
I have used the following formula on each CIV that i have recorded and have the results from them.
% CBR = 0.07(IVxIV)
An example of a result I am getting are as follows:- 0.07(59 x 59) = 243.67
Does this mean that the CBR % is 243.67%? or am I wrong?
I have some Design Specifications that require CBR Value of 30% but all my results are throwing out HIGH readings after the equation so its throwing me alittle.
Can anyone help?
Thanks
I have used the following formula on each CIV that i have recorded and have the results from them.
% CBR = 0.07(IVxIV)
An example of a result I am getting are as follows:- 0.07(59 x 59) = 243.67
Does this mean that the CBR % is 243.67%? or am I wrong?
I have some Design Specifications that require CBR Value of 30% but all my results are throwing out HIGH readings after the equation so its throwing me alittle.
Can anyone help?
Thanks
RE: CBR % from Clegg Readings
Just wondering if you ever did a google search?
http://web1.cnre.vt.edu/forestry/cofe/documents/20... (see page 3)
http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/docs/source-management...
http://journals.hil.unb.ca/index.php/IJFE/article/...
http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/%28ASCE%290...
RE: CBR % from Clegg Readings
the ground is stone and compacted like concrete and so the readings which i have are high. these readings are correct as there are no decimal places in the readout screen. Clegg hammer used is : 4.5kg CIST/882 CLEGG IMPACT SOIL TESTER.
RE: CBR % from Clegg Readings
Anyway to prove that there are no "soft spots" in the "track" - I would presume that it wasn't an engineered pavement structure so you might get variations from place to place.
You might have better luck doing a Benkelman Beam study - it will tell you the deflections at the test locations along the track - which would tell you how much additional pavement structure is needed. (I chose the BB since it is likely more readily available than a falling weight deflectometer).