PTI certified plant?

[boffintech]

Inspecting 1st elevated slab on a 5 story tower yesterday. Slab is mild resteel and PT beams. The resteel/PT installation is 85% complete. Discovered that the PT tendons installed are not encapsulated as required by contract docs (structural drawings and specifications). Contractor insisted that encapsulated is not needed or required and that the "approved shop drawings" don't show encapsulated tendons. I dug out the "for approval" shop drawings and, of course, the non-encapsulated tendons were red-lined by the EOR during review and he even wrote "ENCAPSULATED REREQUIRED". Notified the EOR by phone so short story: material rejected.

The PT supplier is coming out Monday to cut off the anchors and press on encapsulated anchors. However, the contract docs also require PT material to come from a "PTI Certified Plant".

Can't find the name of this supplier on the PTI website listing of certified plants, can't find PTI info or certification marks on the supplier web site or any material delivered to the site or the shop drawings, and finally can't find a single submittal from the supplier to the contractor.

The contractor asked me to pretty please ignore this information. He characterized their inability to produce evidence that the PT supplier has PTI Certified Plant status "nitpicking".

The question is, to pick or not to pick. OK, so how important is this?

 

[JAE]

Is it your decision (legally) to ignore it? I doubt it. If the EOR asked for it, they are the ones who should be asked to "ignore" the requirement. Not you.

 

[Ron]

boffintech...my offer still stands. Good call.

The answer....pick.

The EOR wants PTI certification for a reason. He wrote it in there and he's the only one who should relieve that requirement. The PTI certification is at least some level of assurance that reasonable quality assurance procedures are being followed. The fact that they wanted to use potentially bonded tendons in an unbonded design is good evidence they don't care much about their work.

While ACI 318 does not specifically require PTI certification, it does recommend it.

 

[JAE]

Yes, I do believe that there is some significant design differences between bonded and unbonded. The contractor bid the job as it was specified. For him to alter from his "promise" (a bid is a promise to do X for $Y), should not be your burden to relieve him of.

 

[JAE]

Ron...working on a Saturday?

 

[Ron]

JAE...it's all the same! Since my commute these days is measured in feet, not miles, I get to work as much as I like, when I like!

..and you?..

 

[boffintech]

Sorry if I wasn't clear. It's not a matter of bonded vs unbonded. It's a matter of encapsulated anchors (water tight) vs standard anchors. Both systems have the sheathing with grease.

The PT company is supposed to come out Monday, cut off the standard anchors, and press on encapsulated anchors. I wonder if there is mil thickness difference of the sheathing between the two systems. At any rate I think these ol' boys are trying to sleaze one by us.

If they can't find that PTI Certified Plant certificate I believe the EOR will reject the material. Namely because that certificate, if it exist, would be with the required test results of the material. They have none of that stuff. I shot him a email giving him a heads-up so we'll see where the chips fall.

 

[Ron]

boffintech...thanks for the clarification...the answer's the same.

Good call and stick to your guns.

I'm not sure what area of the country you're in, but the protection of the anchors is critical, particularly in wet or salty environment.

 

[JAE]

Ron - just addicted to Eng-Tips (like every good engineer should be)