On Mar 18, 6:38*pm, Zz Yzx > wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 09:53:53 -0700 (PDT), tutall >
> wrote:
>
> >On Mar 17, 5:40*pm, Zz Yzx > wrote:
>
> >> grain size doesn't determine bulk density. *Size sorting does. *i.e.,
> >> if you fill a room with basketballs, there's a certain portion of
> >> voids between the balls. *Fill the same room with volley balls,
> >> softballs, baseballs, golf balls, marbles, or BBs, the void ratio
> >> stays the same, as long as the balls are of uniform size.
>
> >Forgive me, it's been a few decades since I've done this sort of math,
> >and only got through one year of calculus. But is this saying that a
> >10ft cube full of basketballs with have the same volume (not ratio) of
> >void space as the same space filled with BB's?
>
> That is correct. *Fill a cube with basketballs, softballs, BBs,
> whatever, the PERCENTAGE of void space

Which is another way of saying ratio, yes yes.


> (i.e., the total volume of the
> cube minus the volume of the sphere; *"porosity" in geologic jargon),
> is the same, as long as the "packing" stays the same.

But when the packing becomes "different", for instance, diameter?

Please reply to my post further down the thread, where I posit that as
the diameter of the packing becomes closer to zero, so does the unused
space.