Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Problem with Deputy Inspector -- Follow-up

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
In re the following reply  to my earlier post:

>>>From: ParkerSCal <ParkerSCal(--nospam--at)aol.com>
To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
Subject: Re: Problem with Deputy Inspector -- Follow-up
If you are looking for the slump, try the concrete compression test report.
That is where we (a City of Los Angeles licensed laboratory) report it.<<<

This is what  the inspector said and, I must admit, standard practice.  I
think it's a bad answer and bad practice.  It is in no one's interest to
wait for the slump test result and other data the deputy records during his
placement inspection.  In general, all quality control data should be
reported as quickly as practical.

Even if a 7 day break is made and reported promptly, waiting for the
compression test report means I don't see the slump until more than a week
after the pour.  Perhaps two more pours have taken place in the meantime.
If there's no 7, and a slow report on the 28,  the job may be finished
before I ever see the excessive slump, find out  they're using the wrong mix
design, or etc.

IMHO, prompt review of the reports is of value to the project team.  If I
have a question about or a problem with the results, it is much better for
all concerned if I communicate it to the jobsite before an error is repeated
or questionable work made inaccessible for further testing, inspection or
repair by on-going construction.  Slump tests are only not the end all but
the tip of the iceberg.

I would be interested in knowing how many of my colleagues think this makes
sense and how many think I'm making a mountain out of a molehill.

Drew Norman, S.E.
Drew A. Norman and Associates