Page 1 of 1

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 12:06 pm
by Thehandmadegarden
What's the opinion on using site rubble in place of MOT base stone? recently saw a guy tweeting a pic of his base ready for laying with a load of roughly broken brick, stone etc and he passes himself of as a 'Paving Consultant' The only place for that crap is in the skip...the base stone that is....although... :-/

For me I would only use this if its been though a crusher, is a hard material and crushes with a good size range through to dust. The few times I've used crushers I could have done with crushing with a big opening, then screening and crush again to final size ...if I had a screen.
Crushing
Base stone
I find crushing to final size in one pass is slow and produces to much fines




Edited By Thehandmadegarden on 1353326860

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 4:48 pm
by lutonlagerlout
on certain sites crushing is great
TBH most patios are fine with broken bricks as long as they are well compacted
the most important thing IMHO is no voids
LLL

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 5:22 pm
by dig dug dan
did that company pass on the operators licence for a days use on that machine? if they didn't they have operated illegally!
The smaller crushers are exempt however.

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 7:41 pm
by local patios and driveway
I still like brick hardcore laid neartly and bashed up with the sledge, key as always is geotextile and a finer grade on top like crushed or mot. In my mind thats a hard to beat combination as a base. The same system has been used since roman times of larger grades down to smaller for best results

Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2012 12:14 pm
by Tony McC
If it's broken up and then mixed with a finer material to fill voids, it can be OK for lightweight pavements such as drives and patios.

I don't like full bricks laid side-by-side: no interlock of angular 'particles' and too prone to minor movement of a single piece resulting in suignificant distortion or displacement of overlying layers.