I got a compaction test for a 10k s

[oldinspector]

I got a compaction test for a 10k sq.ft. slab. Six tests. All OK (97 & 97 %) I ask for the location sketch of tests. Testing guy makes a sketch and tells me the test does not require locations. I check 3 other testing companies and one P.E. They each confirm location is not required by ASTM test. What's wrong with this picture? (Don't really want to know what reasonalble people would do.) Thanks. oldinspector

 

[cvg]

If you hired the testing company then you should agree that the scope of work requires a sketch. if this was an ASTM nuke test, than location (but not a sketch) is required as standard practice.

12.2 Final Report (minimum required information):
12.2.1 Test Number.
12.2.2 Gauge Serial number.
12.2.3 Location of test (for example, Station number or GPS or Coordinates or other identifiable information).
12.2.4 Lift number or elevation or depth.
12.2.5 Moisture (Water) content as a percent.
12.2.6 Maximum laboratory density value in kg/m3 or lbm/ft3.
12.2.7 Dry Density result in kg/m3 or lbm/ft3.
12.2.8 Percent Compaction.
12.2.9 Name of Operator(s).

 

[Ron]

The location of the test is required for sand cone, nuclear density gauge and drive sleeve methods under ASTM; however, a sketch is not required if the descriptive location is properly locatable.

 

[BigH]

Regardless of whether it is in ASTM or not, reference to test locations should be made - offsets to corner of building, etc. Should be standard practice as a matter of common sense. Secondly, were the tests run a "predetermined" spots? Spots that you thought there would be a problem? Or were they randomly selected by some method such as random numbers? For something this large, and with only 6 tests or so, I would prefer a random selection method which would show "no bias". We do this for highway work.