(04-30-2013, 09:15 AM)eaadams Wrote: And establishing that there is an effective subslab vapor membrane under the slab is NOT in the astm.
It should be. Apparently the way to do it is to core each slab.
That will drive up testing and set the whole rh testing process back.
To Evans first point, we all need to remember that every ASTM standard that deals with moisture testing of a slab, in relationship to flooring installation, is really a sub-standard, if you will, of the BIG standard, F710. In there they do reference E1745, under referenced documents, and in the appendix they speak specifically about moisture retarders.
The second point he made, many times I have heard Peter make the comment, "if I only had one test available and I had to pick, it would be a core test".
The third point about setting RH testing back, I'm not sure I agree with. Whether its RH or MVER testing, an intact vapor retarder is a critical piece for ensuring proper measurements, much like "service conditions". Obviously, RH is not impacted as much by ambient conditions and is a much more reliable test method for future predictability of flooring performance, in relationship to moisture.
As JD eluded to, all manufacturer's, maybe without being explicit, are implying the need for a vapor retarder, among other things, when they call out F710.
Obviously, this is all in my humble opinion and from the confines of my VERY orange world.