×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

FAA and Nuclear Density Gauges

FAA and Nuclear Density Gauges

FAA and Nuclear Density Gauges

(OP)
Does anyone know where I may find information or articles about the use of nuclear gauges for density testing on airports (United States FAA only).  It seems there may have been some discussions (debating?) at one point between the FAA and various parties on whether or not the gauges are appropriate for use with *subbase* during airport construction.

Thanks in advance.

RE: FAA and Nuclear Density Gauges

If by subbase you mean asphalt (as opposed to various crushed stone possibilities), then why would you use a nuke gauge?  Use a non-nuclear gauge instead...it's safer, it's easier, quicker and lighter, and at least equally reliable... there is no worry about any type of problems/accidents with a nuclear source which may cause the airport to shut down and cost the contractor on the order of $1,000/hour until the airport is able to open again!

RE: FAA and Nuclear Density Gauges

At present, the only allowed methods for in-place density determination are rubber balloon and sand cone methods as noted in FAA Advisory Circular AC150/5370-10.

RE: FAA and Nuclear Density Gauges

Ron:

Is this a result of 9/11/01 or is there some other reason?  I have seen nuclear testing used on many private and state/local government jobs.

RE: FAA and Nuclear Density Gauges

Regarding the FAA, they have never been allowed in the general specifications (to my knowledge).  This is just a long-standing requirement of FAA.  Has nothing to do with 9/11/01.

Many states and other federal agencies allow their use.

As for control of these devices as a result of increased threats of "dirty bombs", I have not seen memos or other correspondence from the regulatory agencies.  The controls on the devices are already reasonably stringent, though there have been lost ones and thefts over the years.  Fortunately, their radioisotope sources are rather weak and probably wouldn't be much good for anything other than their present use!

RE: FAA and Nuclear Density Gauges

(OP)
Randman:

I was talking about crushed stone subbase,  ITEM P-154: SUBBASE COURSE.  The FAA does, as far as I know, allow the gauges to be used within the airport.  I didn't know that the gauges would pose that much threat or inconvienence as you make them out to be.  I'm sure the FAA is in its own world though.


Ron:

I may be missing something, but I think you are wrong in saying that the gauges have never been allowed on FAA projects.  You did say that they have never been allowed under the "general specifications" (versus special provisions), which may be true--in that case you would be correct.  

If you were saying that the gauges are NEVER allowed (only the ballon or sand cone), then I think you are mistaken.  I'm not totally familar with the FAA specifications, so it got confusing for me really fast while reading through your referenced article. I couldn't find the original specifications that these modifications are supposed to be applied to.  I also couldn't find any where they state that only the ballon/sand cone are acceptable methods.  In fact, I found the opposite after reading some "notes to the engineer" which give additional stipulations if the guages are used.   If you follow the link below, you will see some modifications regarding crushed subbase (P154).  Scroll down to 3.8 in this link.

http://www.faa.gov/arp/ace/aipguide/ce1370_p154.htm

I may have misunderstood you, but it sounded like you were claiming the guages are not allowed, period.  Correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks.

RE: FAA and Nuclear Density Gauges

J.L.V....I was referring to general specifications, for which the rubber balloon and sand cone are the only referenced methods.  Special provisions are possible on many projects and often times, test methods can be approved on a project specific basis.

I have run into similar issues with US Army Corps of Engineers projects.  When correlation studies are presented, sometimes you can get other methods approved for use.

In the most current version of P-154, only the rubber balloon and sand cone are specified.

RE: FAA and Nuclear Density Gauges

I used a nuclear densiometer to test crushed surfacing base course for taxiways on the Skagit Regional Airport, three miles west of Burlington, WA.  Test standards were at minimum 100% of modified proctor ASTM D1557, set by the FAA.  The contractor was able to achieve after over a week of steady compactive effort.  I have also personally used and heard of it's use on crushed surfacing and structural fill on other airport runways, one of them being the Naval Air Station on Whidbey Island.      

RE: FAA and Nuclear Density Gauges

(OP)
dirtsqueezer,

You say it took over a week of compaction. What was the contractors method?  It sounds like they continously rolled the material for a week?  I would think that the subase would dry out (and drain) much of the moisture after a week, thus adding to their difficulty.  Did they continue to apply water.  Was the subase brought to the site at the correct moisture content, or was water only blended upon spreading and the start of the compaction?

Excessive rolling/vibrating can cause water to migrate upwards within subgrade.  Was their any subgrade problems?  *I would think* that excessive rolling/vibrating of dry material would also cause the material to start breaking up on the surface.  Did this happen at all?




 

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login


Resources

eBook - Integrating the Engineering Ecosystem
Aras Innovator provides multiple options for integrating data between systems, depending on the scenario. Utilizing the right approach to meet specific business requirements is vital. These needs range from authoring tools, federating data from various and dissimilar databases, and triggering processes and workflows. Download Now
White Paper - Industry 4.0 and the Future of Engineering Education
With industries becoming more automated, more tech-driven and more complex, engineers need to keep their skills and knowledge up to date in order to stay on top of this wave—and to be prepared for the Industry 4.0 future. The University of Cincinnati offers two online Master of Engineering degree programs designed specifically for practicing engineers. Download Now
White Paper - Comparing Multi-Patterning at 5nm: SADP, SAQP, and SALELE
Self-aligned multi-patterning techniques such as SADP, SAQP, and SALELE are increasingly popular at advanced nodes, but each process has its pros and cons. IMEC and Mentor, a Siemens business collaborated to identify potentially less-obvious process and design limitations and trade-offs between the three SAMP techniques. Learn more in this paper. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close