×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Contact US

*
*
*
*

Thanks. We have received your request and will respond promptly.

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!
*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

AS3610

thread744-499485

AS3610

AS3610

(OP)
Hi all,
Just looking for peoples thoughts/opinions on the following.

A project we are involved in calls up in the Spec.
"surface finishes shall be in accordance with AS3610....."

I take this as only been applicable to formed surfaces as that is within the scope of AS3610.
The builder however is having issues with the client, as the client is arguing that the top surface (unformed) of the ground slab should have a class 2B finish as called up in the spec.
In my opinion a class 2B finish in accordance with AS3610 is irrelevant to the top surface of a slab and such the spec. can't be called upon as the standard of finish.


Thanks in advance.

RE: AS3610



Well it's pretty cut and dry that the standard doesn't refer to the tops of slabs. The client may be well within their rights to complain if they explicitly required that the tops of slabs be constructed to the same tolerances as the standard specifies for other faces, but that would be something they'd need to have put into a contract imo.

RE: AS3610

(OP)
Thanks,
What year is that extracted from, my 2018 code is not so explicit (I wish it was in this case).

Cheers

RE: AS3610

Good catch on the year actually, that's from the AS3610-1995 code. Seems my company doesn't seem to have the 3610.1 / 3610.2 additions on file, but those two are stated to coexist alongside 3610-1995 (see below snapshot of 3610.1-2018). It would be hard to argue that the definition in 3610-1995 no longer applies, given it is still a current standard. Even in the most strict interpretation of phrasing, "in accordance with AS3610" would surely be including AS3610-1995

RE: AS3610

(OP)
Cheers!!

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

Low-Volume Rapid Injection Molding With 3D Printed Molds
Learn methods and guidelines for using stereolithography (SLA) 3D printed molds in the injection molding process to lower costs and lead time. Discover how this hybrid manufacturing process enables on-demand mold fabrication to quickly produce small batches of thermoplastic parts. Download Now
Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM)
Examine how the principles of DfAM upend many of the long-standing rules around manufacturability - allowing engineers and designers to place a part’s function at the center of their design considerations. Download Now
Taking Control of Engineering Documents
This ebook covers tips for creating and managing workflows, security best practices and protection of intellectual property, Cloud vs. on-premise software solutions, CAD file management, compliance, and more. 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