Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Mositure Testing Over Concrete Discussion
04-09-2011, 01:33 PM
Post: #11
RE: Mositure Testing Over Concrete Discussion
I have to disagree. I work (more or less) for one of those manufacturers.

In discussions with the Tech Dept. the only reason we still have ASTM F1869 testing in the spec next to ASTM 2170 testing is that ASTM F1869 is still used by so many contractors. And when you force the contractors to do the ASTM F2170 testing they really overcharge for it. I saw one bid recently where to do the Wagner probes the bid came in at over 300% the cost of the Wagner probes.

There are plenty of commercial flooring mfg's who focus on ASTM 2170. A good example is Nora. They have removed ASTM F1869 almost completely. We may do the same thing in coming years. The biggest issue for us is the reliability of ASTM F2170. The variations between Wagner products, Linomat products, GE Protimeter products are just too great. You can get the same sort of fuzzy test results with ASTM F2170 as you can with ASTM F1869. With ASTM F2170 you just have to switch products you are using. (believe me - anyone want to buy my extra Protimeter probes? please!) Also, with ASTM F1869 you can get different test results based on desiccate size & test kit mfg. However, the reason we push for the rh testing on jobs is that ASTM F2170 is stronger in relation to floor prep and time.

Most ASTM F1869 tests in California are placed in two visits (not the required three) they don't remove the top carbonation and (for me) are usually done by PE's, inspectors, and CalDSA who if you question ... you will have great heartache as they can get vindictive. With ASTM F2170 I can get reasonably reproducible results with the same equipemnt. Joe Nasvik is working with ASTM committee F-6 on revising the ASTM F2170 test to make it more reliable between products. Has called for people to provide their experiences here: http://www.concreteconstruction.net/blog...tId=102279

However, the existence of the ASTM F1869 in boilerplate specs still screws me. If ASTM F2170 comes in high, the GC will have the above inspectors do ASTM F1869 which will usually come in low, and then I inevitably have a fight with the GC and the Architect/Owner isn't qualified to make the decision between the two. And all that confrontation ... it hurts the brand name.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


[-]
Share/Bookmark (Show All)
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Technorati Digg MySpace Delicious

Messages In This Thread
RE: Mositure Testing Over Concrete Discussion - eaadams - 04-09-2011 01:33 PM