(January 13, 2016 at 5:00 am)Alex K Wrote:

---

The 5256T Impact Crusher is a track-mounted crusher designed to crush quarry rock or recyclable materials such as concrete and asphalt. The 5256T Portable Impact Crusher is loaded with great features such as standard heavy-duty tracks and a Caterpillar® C-15 475 HP (354.2.2 kw) diesel engine, 52" (1.3m) x 56" (1.4m) horizontal impact crusher, 56" (1.4m) x 38" (.9m) feed inlet opening, fully remote controlled operation.

Other key features include a unique, patented wireless remote control lifting lid allowing over sized material to pass through the crusher without stoppage. Countless hours of production downtime can be saved with this single unique feature, standard only on Screen Machine Industries' Impact Crushers. The sophisticated design of the 5256T Impact Crusher generates high production with low maintenance costs.



The JHT Jaw Crusher being based on the JXT Jaw Crusher model, is a track-mounted crusher featuring remote control jaw adjustment. Operated by wireless remote control, the JHT can process your hardest and most difficult materials, greatly reducing the typical risk of stoppages, damages and high maintenance costs associated with most other jaw crushers. This powerful high capacity plant will crush your competition.
Features Overview:

Crusher
True 26" (66cm) x 45" (1.14m) Wide Inlet Opening
Remote Control Hydraulic Jaw Adjustment
Engine & Controls
C-9 Tier III Caterpillar® 300 HP (225 kw) Engine
Cattron® Wireless Remote Control Operation
Hopper / Feeder
40" x 13'-0" (1M x 4M) Wide Long Vibratory Grizzly Feeder
14'-0" (4.3M) Long Feed Hopper Opening
Conveyors
42" (1.07m) Main Belt
10'-9" (3.28m) Discharge Height
24" (.6m) Fines Side Conveyor
7'-0" (2.1m) Discharge Height
Unique Features
Fully Adjustable Cross-Belt Magnet With Stainless Steel Chutes
Structure / Undercarriage
Grade 80 Steel Construction
Heavy-Duty Tracked Undercarriage

---

(January 12, 2016 at 8:17 pm)vorlon13 Wrote:

---

ODOT spec for gravel road installation.  
It can be found online here:
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Constructi
onMgt/Specifications/2008CMS/300/304.htm#a_
304_04
ITEM 304 AGGREGATE BASE
304.01 Description
304.02 Materials
304.03 Prior to Spreading
304.04 Spreading
304.05 Compaction
304.06 Finished Surface
304.07 Method of Measurement
304.08 Basis of Payment
304.01 Description
.
This work consists of furnishing, placing,
and compacting one or more courses of
aggregate, including furnishing and incorporating all
water required for compacting, on a prepared surface.
304.02 Materials.
Furnish materials conforming to
703.17
.
304.03 Prior to Spreading.
The Engineer will sample the Contractor’s stockpile to determine the initial
moisture content to be used for compaction. The Engineer will develop a moisture-density curve according to
Supplement 1015.
Use material that is reasonably uniform with moisture
. Use a moisture content not less than -2 percent of
optimum moisture prior to spreading. Add water to the stockpiles to meet this moisture requirement. Handle the
material in a manner to minimize segregation. If segregation occurs, thoroughly mix or regrade the stockpile.
304.04 Spreading.
Spread the material on the prepared surface. Do not spread on frozen material. Do not
use graders or dozers without spreader boxes to spread the material except as outlined below.
Spread the material such that it minimizes segregation and requires minimal blading or manipulation. The
Department may perform in place gradation testing in areas that are visually segregated according to
Supplement
1090
.
The Contractor may use hand-placing methods, dozers or
graders when the total area of the material is 2000
square yards (1700 m2) or less or in small areas where
self propelled spreading machines are impractical. Small
areas include lane widths less than 12 feet (3.7 m)
or lengths less than 1000 feet (305 m). Do not exceed a
compacted lift thickness of 6 inches (200 mm) when using 10 to 12-ton (9 to 11 metric tons) vibratory rollers.
Do not exceed a maximum compacted lift thickness of 4 inches (100 mm) when these vibratory rollers are not
used.
The Contractor may elect to use a lighter roller if
the centrifugal force exceeds the minimum weight. In all
cases, submit documentation proving the minimum weight requirements are met.
Place the material in two or more approximately equal lifts when the specified compacted thickness exceeds 8
inches (200 mm).
Place the material with self-propelled spreading machines capable of placing the material true to line and
grade. Spreading machines such as spreader boxes or
pavers are allowed. The Contractor may use dozers
without spreader boxes or graders, but the Department will take in place gradation tests according to
Supplement
1090
.
The Contractor may use hand-placing methods when the total area of the material is 2000 square yards (1700
m
2
) or less, or in small areas where machine spreading is impractical. The Department will not take in place
gradation tests in these small areas.
The Department may test for in place gradation after spreading but before compaction testing according to
Supplement 1090.
304.05 Compaction.
The Department will measure the compaction according to
Supplement 1015
.
Add water to the material or dry the material to bring it
to within +/- 2 percent of optimum moisture prior to
the compaction operation. Maintain this moisture range during all compaction operations. The Engineer will
determine the percentage of moisture to apply or to be
dried from the material. Uniformly apply the water or dry
the material throughout the lift and in a manner that does not soften or disturb the lower courses. Reduce the
moisture content if the material becomes unstable during the compaction operations.
Compact each lift of material immediately after the spreading operations. Depending on the lift thickness
used, use vibratory rollers with a minimum weight or centr
ifugal force of 10 or 12 tons (9 to 11 metric tons).
The Contractor may use light rollers or vibratory equipment in small areas
as specified in
304.04

---

Coming around to my ways, huh, Alex?

Yes. Yes indeed. Horizontal crushing!

I don't appreciate that they are distracting, and that women are wearing yoga pants like they are jeans now adays but who the fuck cares about what I think, it's not up to me. I don't like to talk about this much because my opinions are not favorable by the majority in any means. However, why don't I blow off some steam and share what i've thought for a long time on the subject;


I have some minority opinions on the subject, but I know they are incorrect. I hate that it seems every girl now adays is feeling pressured in to wearing provocative and skimpy clothing because it's become a social norm, anyone who isn't dressing like this is seen as less attractive, people who don't want people to look at their body are wearing clothes specifically meant for people to look at their body. Again I know i'm wrong, but I don't like that most women wear yoga pants all the time currently. Yoga pants were never intended to be a fashion trend platforming the ability to flaunt one's body, which is the majority's intention by dressing this way now a-days, they were meant to give maximum flexibility, for, yoga. I don't think it's cute, or pretty to wear skimpy outfits, I think it's attention whoring labeled discreetly as a popular fashion trend. To some extent, yes, I wish women would dress more proper. Not because I think there's anything wrong with someone who wants to flaunt their body, but because people are misguidedly dressing as if they want to flaunt their body when it's the opposite of their intention and will valiantly defend their fashion choice against anyone wanting to question the motives in dressing provocatively when labeling this hypocritically as the opposite. There's this social pre-conceived notion that anyone who wants to criticize the fact that a woman is purposely dressing one way and then turning back around and claiming it's for the bullshit excuse of "comfort", is somehow by definition misogynist and is avocating against a woman's right to chose how to dress. In the reality, this is bullshit indoctrination from the feminist movement that stuck to society in general that any time a man is criticizing a girl's dress code it's for only one reason; that they want to restrict women's clothing from being provocative. As a result we have these arrogant, obnoxious, self-righteous teenage girls dressing with skin tight yoga pants two sizes too small, and a shirt with a mid drift 3 inches thick, that think anyone who comments on what they're wearing in a demeaning or questioning tone deserves to be castrated for even thinking she was dressing so provocatively. It's the lingering idea from before the Woman's Rights movement that women need to dress to appease men's desire for conserving one's beauty, that anyone who decides to ask a polite and respectful girl why she is dressing almost naked is to be immediately labeled as attempting to insult, when in reality they are ironically giving a compliment saying that someone with such a likeable personality doesn't need to dress like to exaggerate and for lack of better words, a slut, in order to feel accepted by her peers, that in reality a woman's personality is in most instances thrown out the window when society is filled with people purposely provoking men with no intention to do so because of a misled social norm acting as a unconscious subtle rule that provocative clothes being criticized is  to be immediately labeled as an unfair misogynistic bias disregarded as discrimination punishable by ostracization in accordance to the unwritten superficial make believe fanciful idea that because women now have rights, anything even remotely derogatory shot in her direction is wanting to infringe on those rights.

That's my two cents. Society doesn't, and will never agree with me, so I don't speak about it much. I'm not claiming women shouldn't wear what they chose, but the TLDR would be; If you are going to dress provocatively don't be surprised when called out for it, and don't hypocritically play victim as if it's his fault for even suggesting you were dressing for attention while proceeding to continue dressing solely for that purpose even if unconsciously so.

(January 16, 2016 at 2:52 am)Heat Wrote: I don't appreciate that they are distracting, and that women are wearing yoga pants like they are jeans now adays but who the fuck cares about what I think, it's not up to me. I don't like to talk about this much because my opinions are not favorable by the majority in any means. However, why don't I blow off some steam and share what i've thought for a long time on the subject;

My take on it is this.  You're female, you wear sexy camel-toe-revealing yoga pants, you're walking porn for me.  I don't much care if you think I should be looking or not.  And I'm perfectly fine with being distracted.

But I don't want to be facing a woman with a D-size boob job wearing C-cups telling me "Like oh my gawwwd.  I'm up heeerre."  No you're not.  Up there is only bubble gum and hot air.

(January 16, 2016 at 2:59 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(January 16, 2016 at 2:52 am)Heat Wrote: I don't appreciate that they are distracting, and that women are wearing yoga pants like they are jeans now adays but who the fuck cares about what I think, it's not up to me. I don't like to talk about this much because my opinions are not favorable by the majority in any means. However, why don't I blow off some steam and share what i've thought for a long time on the subject;

My take on it is this.  You're female, you wear sexy camel-toe-revealing yoga pants, you're walking porn for me.  I don't much care if you think I should be looking or not.  And I'm perfectly fine with being distracted.

But I don't want to be facing a woman with a D-size boob job wearing C-cups telling me "Like oh my gawwwd.  I'm up heeerre."  No you're not.  Up there is only bubble gum and hot air.

I don't want to be distracted. It might sound like i'm on my moral high horse, or some other shit, but I would rather just be able to treat, act, and interact with women equally without having to be distracted by revealing clothes. Ironically, this inequality accusing for anyone criticizing is the opposite of what would actually be equal. I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do ___, i'm saying don't think you're doing ___ while clearly doing ___.

In a perfect world I wouldn't have to worry about one-way attractions that are solely based on clothes which are unnecessarily revealing.

"If you don't like it don't look!"
Well then don't dress specifically for the purpose of getting the most people to look at you as possible.


I just can't stand seeing 90% of girls fitting this category because of this socially developed norm, that women should be allowed to dress as revealing as possible without being questioned on their motives. Unless i'm super bored, I don't have the time to be distracted by something that is completely out of my control, and then feel bad about awkwardly looking, or be silently or verbally blamed for it. Women need to fucking grow up and stop acting like children who steal their siblings toy and then claim it was the other person's fault for placing it there in the first place.

Sooner or later female's are going to start strutting around in next to nothing as already being done, free of judgement as society has built up slutty clothing to be respectable. I'm not calling the female slutty, i'm calling the clothes slutty. I'm not calling the female unworthy of respect, i'm calling the clothes not worthy of it. And then people claim it's just their personal fashion choice, and it's how they identify as. Really? I didn't know you were so proud to be identified as a slut, because there's no other fucking reason to dress in skin tight clothes that push it to the very edge of how little one can wear to be covered, and then turn around and claim your intention has nothing to fucking do with any of the connotations linked to having very little clothes on, that is fucking ludicrous, hypocrisy, and the epitome of rights being mistaken for entitlement.

Quote:claiming it's for the bullshit excuse of "comfort"

I am a 39 year old female and I almost exclusively wear yoga pants.

And yes, it is for comfort.

I'm a homebody with no social life at the moment,
and I'm wearing them around the house, 90% of the time
...or just to run quick errands, or to walk the dog.

If I leave the house while wearing yoga pants,
I tie a hoodie around my waist to cover my butt WITHOUT EXCEPTION,
...because I agree with you that it is very form-fitting,
and I don't WANT the guys at the grocery store checking out my butt.

When I was 19, yes, I dressed to get attention.

Not now.

Yet I wear yoga pants all the time.

(And both my sisters are the same as me, in this respect).

They really are comfortable:
They stay up, despite having no belt.
They stretch; they don't cut into you the way jeans do.

and another modesty feature I appreciate about yoga pants is the extra-high waist.

Most of the time, women fold it down, double, over the hips.

but I like to wear it all the way UP,

with an extra-long t-shirt pulled DOWN, OVER TOP OF IT
...so I don't show any butt-crack when I have to stoop or squat down for any reason;
plus the hoodie tied round my waist on top of THAT, for extra coverage, and keep everything in place.

I don't buy yoga pants that are semi-transparent.

I don't wear thongs underneath them;
I don't want my underwear to show.

I don't buy yoga pants two sizes too small...if anything, I buy them a size larger in case they shrink when i wash them.

If I am going to the mall, on a lengthier shopping-trip, or to work...I usually wear dress-pants, not yoga pants.

I'm in very good shape....but I cover it up.
I dress in layers, I wear a cami to ensure my cleavage is covered up.

And I don't vilify women who choose to flaunt their bodies;

But I don't.

When I say I wear yoga pants for comfort, you can take that to the bank.

I also don't wear midriff-baring tops,
or impractical shoes,
or makeup,
or false nails.

Not every woman who wears yoga pants is doing it to get attention.

EDIT:

Having said all that, I do resent any repressive control-freaks who try to tell women how to dress.

If you're going to do that, you may as well hand out Burqas.

And I also patronize the fetish scene (or at least I used to, and hope to again, before too long)

and would go to the clubs....not in yoga pants, but in something like this:



or like this:




...I just don't wear it to run to the convenience store.

I'm sold! Pick you up at 8?

(January 16, 2016 at 4:03 am)ignoramus Wrote: I'm sold!   Pick you up at 8?

lol, yes it's a high-impact look, I know.

EDIT: I am not the woman in either of those pictures, though!! lol

I don't think women shouldn't be restricted to wear what they find comfortable.
I however advocate strongly for pants for men that are extremely revealing of their penis. So that it makes it perfectly clear when a man has a boner, pants that are capable of outlining the exact shape and size of a man's penis, without actually revealing the penis. I also want campaigns for supporting this trend and I want society to applaud and praise men that follow this trend and shame whoever that are against this trend among men.

Is that too much to ask?

(January 16, 2016 at 6:44 am)pool the great Wrote: I don't think women shouldn't be restricted to wear what they find comfortable.
I however advocate strongly for pants for men that are extremely revealing of their penis. So that it makes it perfectly clear when a man has a boner, pants that are capable of outlining the exact shape and size of a man's penis, without actually revealing the penis. I also want campaigns for supporting this trend and I want society to applaud and praise men that follow this trend and shame whoever that are against this trend among men.

Is that too much to ask?

Lmfao it's funny because it's literally the exact same thing

(January 16, 2016 at 3:45 am)MTL Wrote: They really are comfortable:
They stay up, despite having no belt.
They stretch; they don't cut into you the way jeans do.

I'm not going to respond to all of what you said, because frankly I don't have the time.
However, if they are soooo comfortable and that's the only reason to wear them, why not just wear pajamas? Why not wear a nightgown? There is a slew of other things that are 10x more comfortable, there's no reason to claim these skin tight pants are only being worn for comfort and you don't care about any other factors besides it.
Also would you be fine with men who wear skin tight pants, specially designed to give the exact outline of their penis, yet then go claim it's specifically and solely for comfort?
It's the exact same thing.

I'm not saying you shouldn't wear yoga pants, that's perfectly fine, just don't claim it for something it's not. If you are in the comfort of your own home that's not what's being discussed. What's being discussed is that somehow anything worn in your a woman's home has become acceptable to wear in public, and anyone questioning that is labeled as being misogynist, discriminatory, or bigoted.


I could wear a speedo in public. Speedo's are pretty comfy right? However I don't because I care about how i'm seen, and to claim you don't wear things like yoga pants in public for at least to some degree the purpose of being seen, and don't care whatsoever about how you're seen and only wear them because they are comfortable, is simply a lie.