The materials testing laboratory of the Cement and Concrete Association

1963 ◽  
Vol 15 (43) ◽  
pp. 49-56
Author(s):  
J. D. McIntosh
Author(s):  
Roy J. Leonard

Instead Of Earning A Small Fee On A Building Project, A Materials Testing Laboratory Can Instead Become Involved In Litigation Which Could Cost It And Its Liability Insurers An Amount Many Times The Fee. But More Than This, There Could Also Be An Infinitely Greater Amount Of Time Spent Defending The Firm Than Was Ever Spent In Performing The Tests. In The Majority Of Cases The Tests Are Performed To Either Supply Design Information Or Monitor Compliance With Project Specifications And/Or Building Code Requirements. However, If Problems Develop And Litigation Begins, Then The Project File Information Becomes Evidence Of What Took Place On The Project. In Some Cases, However, The Laboratory Is Employed After Litigation Has Begun, Or The Probability Of A Lawsuit Is High, And The Testing Is Performed To Provide Evidence. In Any Event, The Results Of These Tests Are Taken As Essential Facts Which Will Be Reviewed By The Attorneys And Their Forensic Engineering Experts. Sometimes The Technicians Or Managers Of The Firm Providing These Field Or Laboratory Results Will Be Deposed, And Every Raw Data Sheet, Report And Log In The File May Be Examined In Great Detail By The Various Parties. If One Error Is Found, It May Be Contended That There May Be Other Errors Which Have Not Been Found Yet. If It Develops That Any Errors Or Suspected Errors Were Made, Then The Laboratory May Become Party To The Lawsuit.


2021 ◽  
pp. 113-121
Author(s):  
Rajesh Jha ◽  
Douglas Choi ◽  
Rebecca Traboulsi ◽  
Arun Srinivasa

2014 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisliane Nara Rossi LEANDRO ◽  
Rui Barbosa de BRITO JÚNIOR ◽  
Marcelo Lucchesi TEIXEIRA ◽  
Luiz Martins TURANO ◽  
Luciana Jardini da CUNHA

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the marginal misfit between intermediate and micro-unitmetal cylinder, by varying the angle of the implants, using two different types of material and different molding techniques. METHODS: A model was made with three implants (one perpendicular to the horizontal plane and two inclined) using micro-unit intermediates. A rod attached to the master model served as a control condition to evaluate the suitability of the twenty specimens, carried out with the help of an optical stereomicroscope (Pantec, Brazil; Materials Testing Laboratory, São Leopoldo Mandic, Campinas, São Paulo). RESULTS: Evaluator reliability was assessed using theIntraclass Correlation Coefficient, obtaining 99.6% (excellent). There were significant differences between groups, and the Mann-Whitney test compared groups in pairs for a more accurate result. CONCLUSION: The group which presented the best behavior was open tray and condensation silicone and the worst result, that needed to be cast several times, was closed tray and condensation silicone.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document