Certification Versus the "real" world 2

[mikeofBelAir]

I have been tasked with getting a soils lab ready for AMRL certification. The issue is, this Engineer--and he really is a good/ knowledgeable soils engineer--has carved out a market niche over the years that makes certification difficult. After making a short speech to the staff on the importance of getting certified, he immediately tells a tech to burn all moistures on the stove because he needs answers NOW. I am amazed that he thinks paying people to watch soil dry on the stove is more cost effective than putting 30 cans in the oven and letting them dry overnight.
How do you deal with the reality of a working lab and the short lead time on many samples/ jobs and the certification requirement to do everything according to the appropriate ASTM/AASHTO Standards. Some on the office staff claim that everyone just pays lip-service to the Standards, and does all their testing by short-cut methods. I counter that I have never seen that done--even if it is more costly, labs that I have been associated with did the testing correctly.
How do you deal with the pressure of costs versus profits--and serving the Client with rapid turn around? Am I being naive?

 

[Ron]

Mike...commercial labs often use shortcut methods; however, such methods have to be validated. Using your moisture content example, you can do a moisture density relationship using burner dried samples, provided you know the differences in moisture content that will result from the technique as compared to oven dried in accordance with the standard. Such validation should be done with all the different soil types you expect to encounter in your area and should be documented as a part of your internal quality assurance program. Develop a moisture correction curve (Ordinate=burned moisture,oven dried moisture, Abscissa=input water by weight). Start with soil at various moisture contents up to saturation. The curves will be slightly different, but at least you'll know how much to correct.

 

[BigH]

But beware on moisture content that certain types of soil will lose adhered water (and this might depend on the percentage of clay) rather than just free water. Agree with Ron that developed correlations with local soils would be advantageous - and not just for lab work . . .

 

[mikeofBelAir]

Ron, BigH,
Thanks for the replies. I understand the correction curve process, however, would the agency charged with inspecting our compliance with the Standards be satisfied with that? You are also making the assumption that all techs burn soil to the same degree. Each technician would require their curve.

M

 

[fattdad]

I have my own opinions on this topic. . .

When I am hiring a lab to return results to me, I expect all tests to be performed according to the rigorous standards of ASTM and in compliance with the AMRL certification.

When I (used) to manage an AMRL-certified laboratory, all results that went out in reports met this same standard.

That said, laboratory testing is not professional engineering. As a professional engineer, I am governed by generally-accepted practice. I am also governed by client expectations and a desire to serve. If I can take a laboratory shortcut that enables me to perfom professional engineering, I'm at peace with that. That may mean an oven burn-off, microwave or other such activity. Is it wrong? Not really, it's just not in conformance with the non-professional world of laboratory testing.

Now, I'm not a cowboy. Rather, I'm sort of the opposite. I can't let the non-professional world of lab testing govern my professional practice though, especially when the lab is in my building.

Now that I work for the state DOT, my world is different though. I'm just talking about my decades in consulting. . .

f-d

¡papá gordo ain’t no madre flaca!

 

[molerat2210]

I have also managed an AASHTO lab in years past. In the beginning there were 2 schools of thought:

1) do it the right way (i.e., following every letter of the standard),
2) do it the old way and put on a show for AASHTO.

In the end, you will find it is easier and more cost-effective to do it the right way. After you learn and do it the right way for many years, you (and your staff) will become more knowledgeable in the procedures and produce better(i.e., reproducible)results. This will translate to greater confidence in your work, which will be recognized by your clients and lead to more work.

Perhaps, Fattdad will be so impressed he will serve up some DOT work to you.

Even the AASHTO labs will burn moisture on the hot plate, when needed. I believe we have demonstrated that it's fine for most soils.

 

[darthsoilsguy2]

working at a few places with people who have worked in other places, what i've noticed is (and not judging. i don't know your circumstances)

if the lab manager is proactive in finding out what is coming in and ensuring that it gets in the system once it gets through the door (even going so far as sending someone to get a portion of the samples), there is almost always time to do it the right way. This includes staying late if necessary to get the tests set up for tomorrow.

if the lab manager is reactive and waits for "someone to log it in", "set it up", or waits for Joe Tech to come in since he hasn't been getting hours, you end up rushing once the PM finally figures out where it stands and when they promised the deliverable.

 

[molerat2210]

Mike,

Come to think of it there are more than a few lines in the standards that I am pretty sure most labs ignore.

There are minimum sample size requirements. We can't meet that requirement all the time for spoon samples. We can only get much material into a split spoon.

 

[GeoPaveTraffic]

I'm sorry, but in my opinion either do it right or don't do it.

If you need to do a microwave moisture or oven burnoff, ok. But report the result as such and do a follow up the right way.

There is no excuse for knowingly doing it wrong, period. Ignorance or missunderstanding the standard is one thing. Ignoring the standard and reporting the results as in conformance with the standard is just not right and should not be accepted.


Mike Lambert

 

[mikeofBelAir]

Thanks to all who have replied. This is becoming an interesting discussion with quite a range of answers. I see there is a place for stove-burning of moisture samples. My first step is to convince the Owner to allow techs to do parallel moistures in the oven as they stove-dry to meet the deadline. Once we have that information, we can demonstrate the correlation, and have documentation to that effect.

On a similar line---is there a preference between propane or electric power for stove drying in the lab?

 

[oldestguy]

There probably will be the question some day....The boss way or the right way, but he still is the boss and may regret his decisions when the lab is disqualified when a surprise inspection shows up. Not all jobs are perfect and so is the case there. Do your best to keep things from going astray.

 

[mikeofBelAir]

oldestguy,
Thanks. That is probably where i will live for the time i am here----doing the best I can to follow the Standards, and trying to train everyone else that way, but realizing that the Owner is ultimately responsible for his organization.