January 14, 2025 • 25 mins
Have you heard about the new AASHTO Accreditation Program policy on masonry unit and prism testing? Discover the historical context beginning with the 2019 updates to the ASTM C1716 standard for compression testing machines that left some labs wondering if their compression machines are compliant. This discussion reveals how labs are now categorized based on their capacity to test full-size versus reduced-size specimens. Our exploration unpacks how these distinctions simplify the process for clients and agencies seeking specific testing capabilities.
Our conversation also zeroes in on the prohibition against accrediting labs that only test masonry "coupons." Uncover the rationale behind this decision and why it's crucial for maintaining high-quality standards in the industry. Plus, learn how providing detailed documentation before your assessment can streamline the accreditation process, saving labs time and resources by cutting down on follow-up visits. This episode is a must-listen for anyone navigating the requirements of ASTM C140, C1314, and C1716.
Have questions, comments, or want to be a guest on an upcoming episode? Email podcast@aashtoresource.org.
Related information on this and other episodes can be found at aashtoresource.org.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Kim Swanson (00:03):
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
We're taking time to discussconstruction materials, testing
and inspection with people inthe know.
From exploring testing problemsand solutions to laboratory
best practices and qualitymanagement, we're covering
topics important to you.
Brian Johnson (00:18):
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
I'm Brian Johnson.
Kim Swanson (00:22):
And I'm Kim Swanson .
In today's episode we're goingto talk about a new policy and
guidance document that'savailable on our website, and
I'm not sure what the title is,Brian.
Which document is it?
Brian Johnson (00:33):
This is a new policy called the AASHTO,
accreditation Policy andGuidance on Masonry Unit and
Prism Testing.
Kim Swanson (00:42):
Well, that sounds very interesting to some people,
I'm sure, but I have no ideawhat those.
Those are just words to me, butI do know when we have a new
policy and guidance document,it's normally because we're
trying to solve a problem or addclarification.
So why have we created thisdocument?
Brian Johnson (01:03):
I am going to take you back to 2019 to explain
that.
Kim Swanson (01:07):
Okay.
Brian Johnson (01:07):
So in 2019, there was an update to a standard
C1716, which is the standardspecification for compression
testing machine requirements forconcrete masonry units, related
units and prisms.
I'm going to also explainexplain before you ask that
question.
(01:27):
What are those things?
Uh, so a masonry block or amasonry unit or concrete masonry
unit is what most peopletypically call a cinder block,
so that it is like a.
Uh, it is a constructedconcrete block that has usually
(01:52):
two open cells in the middle.
Uh, and it looks almost like ifyou, if you stood it on its uh
side or or its highest point, itwould look kind of like a
snowman.
Okay, so it would have like twoopenings.
Are you with me?
Kim Swanson (02:11):
Or figure eight yeah, no, I'm good.
When you said cinder block, Igot it.
Brian Johnson (02:15):
Yeah, cinder block.
Okay, all right, good, okay.
So there are all kinds ofdifferent blocks, masonry unit
blocks out there.
That is the most common onethat you will run into.
So there's all kinds ofdifferent designs that you could
have.
And then a prism that we'retalking about is as defined in
(02:36):
C1314, which basically, if youtook it's almost like
constructing a mini version of awall where you'd have, or, or
um, or whatever you'reconstructing with the concrete
masonry unit, where you've gotthe, the masonry unit, uh, along
with any mortar or grout that'sassociated with that in the
(03:01):
design, and usually what you dois you'll have it'll be like a
two block instruction, andsometimes it's cut, uh, cut down
to smaller sizes beforeconstructing it to be tested.
Kim Swanson (03:15):
So and that's called a prism it's called a
prism.
Brian Johnson (03:19):
Yes, so yeah.
Today I learned yeah, so yeah.
Kim Swanson (03:21):
Today I learned.
Brian Johnson (03:22):
Yeah, so basically, like what happened in
2019 was in this ASTM c17161716, there was some
clarification provided about thebearing blocks on the
compression machine, so thosewould be the parts of the
compression machine that are incontact with the specimen being
(03:44):
tested, and there are certaindimensional requirements and
ways you determine what thosedimensional requirements are,
and what happened is the waythey were defined created a
situation where machines thatused to be in conformance were
no longer in conformance.
Kim Swanson (04:04):
Oh OK.
Brian Johnson (04:06):
Yeah, so there's some explanation needed and
really the standard does provideplenty of explanation.
But the problem is somethinghappened called COVID-19.
And it led to a CCRLwas wherewas not visiting laboratories to
(04:27):
evaluate their compressionmachines for about about a tour
long, which is like two to threeyears, which is why we're now
dealing with that in 2025, andwe really started dealing with
this in earnest in 2024.
So that's when we starteddetermining if we needed a
(04:50):
policy on this and determiningwhat that would look like and
having it approved by theadministrative task group for
publishing.
So now, in 2025, we have apolicy out there and what it
does is it doesn't delve intowhat they need to do as far as
1716 conformance is concerned.
(05:13):
But one of the things we foundout is that some people are just
going to say well, we don'treally care that the machine
isn't in conformance forfull-size specimens because we
only test reduced size specimens.
So if they're going to say that, that's fine, they can do that,
but we want to make sure thatthey understand that we're going
(05:34):
to identify that on ourdirectory, which then creates
situation where those who have amachine that can test full-size
specimens get to be recognizedfor testing full-size specimens.
That way, if you have anyclients or agencies that want to
(05:55):
require only full-sizespecimens, they can go on our
directory and differentiatebetween those who can and those
who cannot test those specimens,between those who can and those
who cannot test those specimens.
Kim Swanson (06:05):
So on the directory will it list both full size and
reduced size, or will it onlyhave reduced size?
And if it doesn't have anything, then it means it's both or
something.
Brian Johnson (06:17):
Yeah that's a good question, because we have
done those things as youdescribed in the past where it
was ambiguous as to whether theyare.
You know, does the lack of extracertification mean that they're
good?
And so I think we've learned.
We do learn from our mistakesat times and we actually
(06:39):
explained this in the policywhere we're going to list for
C-140, which is the concretemasonry unit standard, we're
going to list for C140, which isthe concrete masonry unit
standard.
We're going to list bothfull-size concrete masonry units
and reduced-size concretemasonry units and those as far
as the practical procedures inplace for that.
(07:00):
Those are things that can bedone by the testing lab.
So if they get a full-sizespecimen and they have to reduce
it to test it in their machine,they can saw cut that in their
facility.
On the other hand, for C1314,which is the standard for
testing prisms, which is what Iwas talking about, those
(07:21):
constructed prisms, which iswhat I was talking about, those
constructed prisms that is goingto be clarified by saying C1314
prisms constructed of full sizeconcrete masonry units and
there will be a C1314 prismsconstructed of reduced size
concrete masonry units.
(07:42):
I know that's kind of amouthful, but it does provide
clarification, because people donot wet saw those in the
laboratory.
What they need to do is havethose constructed in the field,
(08:04):
typically by the masons that arebuilding the structure.
They have to.
The technician has to have thatprism constructed by you know
somebody who knows what they'redoing.
I don't think it says thatspecifically in the standard,
but I have asked around topeople I know in the industry
and said, hey, what happens?
(08:25):
Because it doesn't really sayin the standard who constructs
this?
And almost every person I askedsaid the mason constructs those
in the field for the technicianto take back to the laboratory
for testing.
Kim Swanson (08:38):
Okay Now is there any laboratory that would be
accredited for both the reducedand full size?
So they're listed.
That never is going to happen.
Brian Johnson (08:48):
That is never going to happen, because that is
a limiting factor.
So if you can test full size,you can test reduced size.
Kim Swanson (08:56):
You can Yep Okay.
Brian Johnson (08:59):
Yeah, so yeah, but you would.
The full size would be kind of a.
They have broader capabilitiesthan those testing the reduced
size ones.
So what we've done in thispolicy is just explained why
this exists and what kind ofevidence do we need to ensure
(09:23):
that their machine?
So, like, some of thelaboratories are going to modify
their machine to make itconform to the requirements so
that they can continue to testfull size specimens.
So we've explained in thepolicy what they need to send in
to us so that we can verifythat they have actually adhered
to the policy to us, so that wecan verify that they have
actually adhered to the policy.
(09:44):
Uh, and that includes thingsthat you'd expect, you know,
purchase, uh evidence of thepacking slip or uh showing that
they purchased the new umbearing surface, um pictures of
the setup, uh dimensions thatare required for us to confirm
(10:04):
17, 16 conformance, conformancemeasurements.
And it just gets into moredetail about all the nitty
gritty details that we need tosee so that we can confidently
state that that laboratory is inconformance with these
requirements.
Kim Swanson (10:20):
And so this would indicate that they don't need
another on-site inspection toverify this.
They can all do that throughthe quality analyst.
Brian Johnson (10:29):
That is correct.
Yeah, we don't need to sendsomebody back out there for this
.
We can rely on theirmeasurements, unless we have
concerns about what's beingpresented to us.
So yeah, and as much as we'dlike to say that we can rely on
everybody for providing usaccurate information, there are
(10:50):
times where people send usthings that we look at and we
say that it's not accurate.
You know, that is obviously notwhat they're really doing.
Kim Swanson (10:57):
Yeah.
Brian Johnson (10:58):
So that's not always the easiest thing to
ascertain, but we do our best todo that.
There is one other wrinkle inthis that I need to go over,
okay, because it is somethingthat we've never clarified
before, but Okay, let's ironthis wrinkle out.
Yeah, starting when this getspublished or when this is
(11:20):
published.
From now on, we will notaccredit any testing laboratory
for C140 or well, I guess itdidn't really happen with C-1314
, for laboratories that onlytest coupons.
Now what is a coupon right?
Kim Swanson (11:39):
Yeah, no, I'm just.
I'm learning that all thesewords have different meanings in
the in masonry things.
So, yes, please explain couponsto me.
I'm sure everybody listening isalready familiar with that, but
just for me, can you explainthat?
Brian Johnson (11:52):
Certainly, yeah.
So what that is is there aresome times when, if you are
testing in a regularly shapedmasonry unit, you may have to
cut.
Basically, it's like cutting anotch out of it like a little
side of the wall of the masonryunit for testing and, um, you
(12:16):
can test that in.
It's kind of like in a pinch youcan do this right like it's not
, it's not meant for likeeveryday, yeah, so we're not
going to credit anybody who onlytests coupons.
So the reason why somebodywould want to say that they only
test coupons is because youcould.
They're they're really small,so there's not a lot of
(12:39):
restrictions on the size of yourcompression machine for for
testing those.
So that would be a way, ifsomebody just didn't want to
conform but wanted to appear toconform, they might say oh well,
we just test coupons all thetime and it's like, well, you
probably don't, but that's whywe're not allowing that.
If somebody says they only testcoupons, we're not going to
(13:01):
allow them to be accreditedThrough our program For those
standards.
Kim Swanson (13:06):
Alright, that makes sense, and I'm just laughing to
myself every time you saycoupon, so I know.
Brian Johnson (13:14):
I know it's a.
It is kind of a strange term, Iagree, Like as far as you know,
if you just think of the way weuse that term normally.
Kim Swanson (13:22):
Yeah, yeah, so I mean, english is a very
confusing language for all thosedifferent things.
Brian Johnson (13:29):
It's like a discounted country, masonry.
Kim Swanson (13:34):
Yeah, I don't get it, but hey, this is what
industry standards, this is whatthey say.
That's what they say.
I'll roll with it on this oneto actually ask or clarify, I
guess, for when you go back alittle bit to saying that you
needed packing slip, like copiesof packing slips, to say that
they to show that they'vemodified it and I do want to
(13:55):
make sure that we differentiatethat and it is actually packing
slips and not an invoice youneed to prove that you have the
things in hand and not that youjust ordered them.
Brian Johnson (14:05):
Yeah that that is a common problem, that we run
into because, yeah, that's notfor modification, but that'd be
for purchase of a newcompression machine or new
bearing surface.
So that's what I meant yeah, ifsomebody did that, anybody can
order something.
I could order it.
I could order one for my houseand then cancel the order after
(14:26):
I send you the evidence thatI've ordered it right.
And and over the years we havefound that that had happened,
where we'd say how in the worlddid that you know we had?
How could this be a repeatfinding?
Yeah, you know how did thisperson resolve this?
Uh, oh, well, they, they sentus a packing slip, or sorry, not
a packing slip, but a purchaseorder, but I guess they never
(14:48):
got it.
You know, for one reason oranother, and we we could guess
about what might have happened.
Could have been a supply chainissue, or it could have been
they canceled it, or somethinghappened and then they just
forgot about it, or they couldhave done it on purpose.
Kim Swanson (15:04):
Yeah, it's not necessarily malicious, but it
does like.
But that is why you need actualevidence that you have it on
premises and have implemented it, and it's not just.
I think this goes back to I'msure we've said this in some of
the corrective action episodeswe've had but it's not what you
intend to do, it's what you'reactually doing.
Brian Johnson (15:23):
That's correct.
So that's correct, and we dohave issues where some
laboratories had multiplelocations and perhaps they
needed to buy it at one location.
Kim Swanson (15:36):
So we do look at things like OK, where did it get
shipped to?
Brian Johnson (15:37):
Is that the laboratory we're concerned about
?
There's?
There's all sorts of thingsthat go wrong that we try to
keep an eye out on and, yeah, wedo our best to catch them, but
I won't say that we catch itevery time.
Kim Swanson (15:53):
Well, yeah, but I will say the reason that the
quality analysts and theaccreditation program is so
specific about those things,because it's really saving the
laboratories money, becausewe're not sending somebody back
there.
Like, if you didn't have all ofthese like very specific things
needed to, you know, resolvethe corrective or, yeah, resolve
(16:14):
the nonconformity, then itwould mean that we'd have to
send somebody else back outthere to physically check.
So this is actually saving themmoney.
Um, even though it kind ofseems like some red tapes or
some unnecessary hoops, it isactually saving laboratories
money.
Brian Johnson (16:28):
It is, and I know people do get frustrated at
times with the amount of detailthat we present them with.
But what we really really tryto do is get all the information
they need in their hands sothat when they're figuring out
what to send us, they can get itright the first time, Because
one of the big complaints we getis the amount of back and forth
(16:49):
that happens with us.
So we say, okay, well, if youwant to avoid that, this is all
the stuff you need to send us,and if you can do that, then
there won't be any back andforth needed.
Kim Swanson (16:59):
Yeah.
So getting back to the actualpolicy on this, is there
anything else that is ahighlight or that you feel like
needs extra clarification, orjust to acknowledge that this is
an important part, read this ifyou're interested.
Brian Johnson (17:14):
Yeah, I think.
Read it if you're interested.
Most of our policies are reallythere when you need them.
You have a CCRL inspection andduring that inspection they've
determined that your machine isnot in conformance.
That inspector will be able totell you why.
So remember what happenedduring that and you can say well
(17:38):
, how did you measure that todetermine that it was not in
conformance?
And those are going to be thekind of things you're going to
have to send us at the end, andit's very detailed in 1716, how
you determine whether it's inconformance or not.
So I don't want to get into toomany details about that and
it's pretty lengthy and a littlecomplicated, frankly, but it's
(18:02):
if you can show us that it's inconformance, you'll be okay.
But this is mainly like if youget the finding, then this will
help you.
If you don't get the finding,you don't need to worry about it
.
You're already good to go, andif you didn't get the finding,
you're probably testing.
You're okay to test full-sizespecimens, and we'll be able to
list you that way.
I did want to clarify.
(18:23):
One other thing, though, isthis is one of those changes
that will take a tour for us toclarify throughout the entire
range of laboratories that areaccredited through our program,
because as CCRL goes through andthey evaluate these machines,
(18:44):
then we'll know what theircapabilities are and then we'll
be able to reflect the directory.
Once we go through thecorrective action process with
each laboratory, we'll try toidentify the ones that we can.
As we implement it.
There's a lot of things in flux.
Right, there are open files andthe quality analyst will ask me
hey, do I need to update thisone?
And I'll say, well, if you'remaking the decision once the
(19:06):
policy is issued, yes, we shoulddo that.
Uh, I'm not going to say thatit's going to be all of a sudden
.
You know, when this it getspublished, boom, everybody is in
conformance or out ofconformance and it's reflected
on the directory.
That's not going to be the case.
It's going to take a littlewhile for that to happen.
(19:27):
So, like I'm thinking likethree years for it to be
completely up to date.
Kim Swanson (19:32):
Yeah, I was going to ask what the interval is now
generally for CCRL inspections,but it's about three years-ish.
Brian Johnson (19:39):
Yeah, it's about three years.
You know, give or take.
Kim Swanson (19:42):
So for clarification on the AASHTO
accreditation directory, theremay be some laboratories or will
be some laboratories that havethe listing with no
clarification afterwards andthen some with the specific
clarification.
So if you're searching for anaccredited laboratory to work on
(20:03):
your project and you want to,you know if there's no
parentheses after the standard,that means we just haven't
assessed them or we haven't,they haven't gone through an
inspection yet.
Brian Johnson (20:15):
Right, yeah.
Kim Swanson (20:16):
Or like it hasn't been proven that that's one or
the other that they can form.
Brian Johnson (20:20):
Right, if you don't see the full-sized or
reduced-sized caveat after thoseC-140 and C-1314, you'll know
that it hasn't been checked yet.
Kim Swanson (20:30):
Okay, so just keep that in mind for all the
specifying agencies and projectowners that that will take some
time to do that, so there willbe some possible confusion.
So hopefully this document willhelp clarify that for both
laboratories and project owners.
Brian Johnson (20:48):
Right, and one thing I'm hoping is that we
don't have a lot of laboratoriesout there that are currently
accredited and are only testingcoupons, because I think those
laboratories will probably be abit frustrated if they go
through the process and thenfind out oh we can't be
accredited anyway, but reallythey shouldn't have been if that
was the case.
So if they really want to be inthe masonry unit testing
(21:13):
business, they're going to haveto upgrade their machines.
Kim Swanson (21:16):
So if you're listening to this and that is
you, or- get new ones.
Brian Johnson (21:19):
Yeah, if that's you start setting money aside
for that big purchase.
Kim Swanson (21:24):
Start saving for that.
Brian Johnson (21:26):
But really I mean I know from those testing
laboratories perspective thatmight be frustrating, but I mean
, if you think about it from theperspective of, if you're a
producer of masonry units, youwant the test results to be
accurately reflecting what yourproducts are.
If you're the agency that isspecifying those materials be
(21:49):
used or products be used, youwant to make sure that you're
getting accurate information sothat the design is right and
that you get what you want right.
You get what you're expecting.
So you know our accreditationand a lot of the services tied
to our industry serve more thanjust one customer.
You know we've got the testinglabs, got the producers, we've
(22:11):
got the agencies requiring it,we've got the public right.
So those are all things we haveto keep in mind requiring it.
Kim Swanson (22:18):
We've got the public right, so those are all
things we have to keep in mind.
I think this makes sense.
I've learned so much todayabout just terminology that I
didn't know you could use theword prism and coupon in those
manners.
So I mean, truthfully, that'sprobably all I'm taking away
from this episode, but itdoesn't have to be necessarily
so.
I hope our listeners that needthis information have absorbed
(22:39):
that and learned that today.
As we're wrapping up, I wantedto let our listeners know that
the 2025 AASHTO ResourceTechnical Exchange is just
around the corner.
It is March 17th through the20th in Bellevue, washington, so
registration is now open.
So go to ashtoresourceorg slashevents to learn all the
(23:00):
information you can about it andto register for the event, and
we hope to see you there.
Brian Johnson (23:05):
Yeah, and we still are accepting sponsors and
other panelists for some of themeeting discussions where, even
though we have an agenda postedon our website, we're still
kind of get working out some ofthe finer details, and so if
there's something you see onthere and you say, hey, I would
love to participate in that,reach out to us and let us know.
Kim Swanson (23:26):
Yep, and you can email podcast at
ashtoresourceorg for that, orjust info at ashtoresourceorg
would be OK for that too, if youwere like oh, I want to be a
part of the technical exchangein more than just an attendee.
Brian Johnson (23:40):
Yeah, and speaking of that email address,
I know it's been a while sinceI've lamented about the lack of
emails that come to podcasts atAshtoreSourceorg, but if you are
any listener, if you'relistening to this and you just
want to send us a message andsay, hey, I listened to that, I
like this, or I didn't like this, or I exist, I'm a human being
(24:01):
that listened to your podcast,we would love to hear from you.
We know you're out there.
We know you're out therebecause we see the data on
downloads and I've had anecdotalevidence of people listening to
different episodes.
But we'd love to hear from youand if there's something you
want to bring up that we mightbe able to talk about, that'd be
(24:22):
good too.
Kim Swanson (24:23):
Yeah, for sure, we always want feedback, because
we're all about continualimprovement, and that was what
this new policy and guidancedocument is all about is
continual improvement, makingsure it's clarifications of
things.
So we will take your feedbackon the podcast, on anything you
really want.
So thank you very much, brian,for shedding light on this very
(24:44):
confusing topic for me.
Brian Johnson (24:47):
Happy to do it and, yeah, I mean we try not to
have way too many of thesedocuments, but they're.
They're definitely useful andthey get us.
It is in line with transparency, it's in line with consistency
and, like you said, continualimprovement.
So check out our website formore information about other
(25:08):
policy and guidance documentsthat might be of interest to you
as well.
Kim Swanson (25:12):
Thanks for listening to AASHTO Resource Q&A
.
If you'd like to be a guest orjust submit a question, send us
an email at podcast atAASHTOResourceorg, or call Brian
at 240-436-4820.
For other news and relatedcontent, check out AASHTO
Resources social media accountsor go to AASHTOResourceorg.
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
We're taking time to discussconstruction materials, testing
and inspection with people inthe know.
From exploring testing problemsand solutions to laboratory
best practices and qualitymanagement, we're covering
topics important to you.
Brian Johnson (00:18):
Welcome to AASHTO Resource Q&A.
I'm Brian Johnson.
Kim Swanson (00:22):
And I'm Kim Swanson .
In today's episode we're goingto talk about a new policy and
guidance document that'savailable on our website, and
I'm not sure what the title is,Brian.
Which document is it?
Brian Johnson (00:33):
This is a new policy called the AASHTO,
accreditation Policy andGuidance on Masonry Unit and
Prism Testing.
Kim Swanson (00:42):
Well, that sounds very interesting to some people,
I'm sure, but I have no ideawhat those.
Those are just words to me, butI do know when we have a new
policy and guidance document,it's normally because we're
trying to solve a problem or addclarification.
So why have we created thisdocument?
Brian Johnson (01:03):
I am going to take you back to 2019 to explain
that.
Kim Swanson (01:07):
Okay.
Brian Johnson (01:07):
So in 2019, there was an update to a standard
C1716, which is the standardspecification for compression
testing machine requirements forconcrete masonry units, related
units and prisms.
I'm going to also explainexplain before you ask that
question.
(01:27):
What are those things?
Uh, so a masonry block or amasonry unit or concrete masonry
unit is what most peopletypically call a cinder block,
so that it is like a.
Uh, it is a constructedconcrete block that has usually
(01:52):
two open cells in the middle.
Uh, and it looks almost like ifyou, if you stood it on its uh
side or or its highest point, itwould look kind of like a
snowman.
Okay, so it would have like twoopenings.
Are you with me?
Kim Swanson (02:11):
Or figure eight yeah, no, I'm good.
When you said cinder block, Igot it.
Brian Johnson (02:15):
Yeah, cinder block.
Okay, all right, good, okay.
So there are all kinds ofdifferent blocks, masonry unit
blocks out there.
That is the most common onethat you will run into.
So there's all kinds ofdifferent designs that you could
have.
And then a prism that we'retalking about is as defined in
(02:36):
C1314, which basically, if youtook it's almost like
constructing a mini version of awall where you'd have, or, or
um, or whatever you'reconstructing with the concrete
masonry unit, where you've gotthe, the masonry unit, uh, along
with any mortar or grout that'sassociated with that in the
(03:01):
design, and usually what you dois you'll have it'll be like a
two block instruction, andsometimes it's cut, uh, cut down
to smaller sizes beforeconstructing it to be tested.
Kim Swanson (03:15):
So and that's called a prism it's called a
prism.
Brian Johnson (03:19):
Yes, so yeah.
Today I learned yeah, so yeah.
Kim Swanson (03:21):
Today I learned.
Brian Johnson (03:22):
Yeah, so basically, like what happened in
2019 was in this ASTM c17161716, there was some
clarification provided about thebearing blocks on the
compression machine, so thosewould be the parts of the
compression machine that are incontact with the specimen being
(03:44):
tested, and there are certaindimensional requirements and
ways you determine what thosedimensional requirements are,
and what happened is the waythey were defined created a
situation where machines thatused to be in conformance were
no longer in conformance.
Kim Swanson (04:04):
Oh OK.
Brian Johnson (04:06):
Yeah, so there's some explanation needed and
really the standard does provideplenty of explanation.
But the problem is somethinghappened called COVID-19.
And it led to a CCRLwas wherewas not visiting laboratories to
(04:27):
evaluate their compressionmachines for about about a tour
long, which is like two to threeyears, which is why we're now
dealing with that in 2025, andwe really started dealing with
this in earnest in 2024.
So that's when we starteddetermining if we needed a
(04:50):
policy on this and determiningwhat that would look like and
having it approved by theadministrative task group for
publishing.
So now, in 2025, we have apolicy out there and what it
does is it doesn't delve intowhat they need to do as far as
1716 conformance is concerned.
(05:13):
But one of the things we foundout is that some people are just
going to say well, we don'treally care that the machine
isn't in conformance forfull-size specimens because we
only test reduced size specimens.
So if they're going to say that, that's fine, they can do that,
but we want to make sure thatthey understand that we're going
(05:34):
to identify that on ourdirectory, which then creates
situation where those who have amachine that can test full-size
specimens get to be recognizedfor testing full-size specimens.
That way, if you have anyclients or agencies that want to
(05:55):
require only full-sizespecimens, they can go on our
directory and differentiatebetween those who can and those
who cannot test those specimens,between those who can and those
who cannot test those specimens.
Kim Swanson (06:05):
So on the directory will it list both full size and
reduced size, or will it onlyhave reduced size?
And if it doesn't have anything, then it means it's both or
something.
Brian Johnson (06:17):
Yeah that's a good question, because we have
done those things as youdescribed in the past where it
was ambiguous as to whether theyare.
You know, does the lack of extracertification mean that they're
good?
And so I think we've learned.
We do learn from our mistakesat times and we actually
(06:39):
explained this in the policywhere we're going to list for
C-140, which is the concretemasonry unit standard, we're
going to list for C140, which isthe concrete masonry unit
standard.
We're going to list bothfull-size concrete masonry units
and reduced-size concretemasonry units and those as far
as the practical procedures inplace for that.
(07:00):
Those are things that can bedone by the testing lab.
So if they get a full-sizespecimen and they have to reduce
it to test it in their machine,they can saw cut that in their
facility.
On the other hand, for C1314,which is the standard for
testing prisms, which is what Iwas talking about, those
(07:21):
constructed prisms, which iswhat I was talking about, those
constructed prisms that is goingto be clarified by saying C1314
prisms constructed of full sizeconcrete masonry units and
there will be a C1314 prismsconstructed of reduced size
concrete masonry units.
(07:42):
I know that's kind of amouthful, but it does provide
clarification, because people donot wet saw those in the
laboratory.
What they need to do is havethose constructed in the field,
(08:04):
typically by the masons that arebuilding the structure.
They have to.
The technician has to have thatprism constructed by you know
somebody who knows what they'redoing.
I don't think it says thatspecifically in the standard,
but I have asked around topeople I know in the industry
and said, hey, what happens?
(08:25):
Because it doesn't really sayin the standard who constructs
this?
And almost every person I askedsaid the mason constructs those
in the field for the technicianto take back to the laboratory
for testing.
Kim Swanson (08:38):
Okay Now is there any laboratory that would be
accredited for both the reducedand full size?
So they're listed.
That never is going to happen.
Brian Johnson (08:48):
That is never going to happen, because that is
a limiting factor.
So if you can test full size,you can test reduced size.
Kim Swanson (08:56):
You can Yep Okay.
Brian Johnson (08:59):
Yeah, so yeah, but you would.
The full size would be kind of a.
They have broader capabilitiesthan those testing the reduced
size ones.
So what we've done in thispolicy is just explained why
this exists and what kind ofevidence do we need to ensure
(09:23):
that their machine?
So, like, some of thelaboratories are going to modify
their machine to make itconform to the requirements so
that they can continue to testfull size specimens.
So we've explained in thepolicy what they need to send in
to us so that we can verifythat they have actually adhered
to the policy to us, so that wecan verify that they have
actually adhered to the policy.
(09:44):
Uh, and that includes thingsthat you'd expect, you know,
purchase, uh evidence of thepacking slip or uh showing that
they purchased the new umbearing surface, um pictures of
the setup, uh dimensions thatare required for us to confirm
(10:04):
17, 16 conformance, conformancemeasurements.
And it just gets into moredetail about all the nitty
gritty details that we need tosee so that we can confidently
state that that laboratory is inconformance with these
requirements.
Kim Swanson (10:20):
And so this would indicate that they don't need
another on-site inspection toverify this.
They can all do that throughthe quality analyst.
Brian Johnson (10:29):
That is correct.
Yeah, we don't need to sendsomebody back out there for this
.
We can rely on theirmeasurements, unless we have
concerns about what's beingpresented to us.
So yeah, and as much as we'dlike to say that we can rely on
everybody for providing usaccurate information, there are
(10:50):
times where people send usthings that we look at and we
say that it's not accurate.
You know, that is obviously notwhat they're really doing.
Kim Swanson (10:57):
Yeah.
Brian Johnson (10:58):
So that's not always the easiest thing to
ascertain, but we do our best todo that.
There is one other wrinkle inthis that I need to go over,
okay, because it is somethingthat we've never clarified
before, but Okay, let's ironthis wrinkle out.
Yeah, starting when this getspublished or when this is
(11:20):
published.
From now on, we will notaccredit any testing laboratory
for C140 or well, I guess itdidn't really happen with C-1314
, for laboratories that onlytest coupons.
Now what is a coupon right?
Kim Swanson (11:39):
Yeah, no, I'm just.
I'm learning that all thesewords have different meanings in
the in masonry things.
So, yes, please explain couponsto me.
I'm sure everybody listening isalready familiar with that, but
just for me, can you explainthat?
Brian Johnson (11:52):
Certainly, yeah.
So what that is is there aresome times when, if you are
testing in a regularly shapedmasonry unit, you may have to
cut.
Basically, it's like cutting anotch out of it like a little
side of the wall of the masonryunit for testing and, um, you
(12:16):
can test that in.
It's kind of like in a pinch youcan do this right like it's not
, it's not meant for likeeveryday, yeah, so we're not
going to credit anybody who onlytests coupons.
So the reason why somebodywould want to say that they only
test coupons is because youcould.
They're they're really small,so there's not a lot of
(12:39):
restrictions on the size of yourcompression machine for for
testing those.
So that would be a way, ifsomebody just didn't want to
conform but wanted to appear toconform, they might say oh well,
we just test coupons all thetime and it's like, well, you
probably don't, but that's whywe're not allowing that.
If somebody says they only testcoupons, we're not going to
(13:01):
allow them to be accreditedThrough our program For those
standards.
Kim Swanson (13:06):
Alright, that makes sense, and I'm just laughing to
myself every time you saycoupon, so I know.
Brian Johnson (13:14):
I know it's a.
It is kind of a strange term, Iagree, Like as far as you know,
if you just think of the way weuse that term normally.
Kim Swanson (13:22):
Yeah, yeah, so I mean, english is a very
confusing language for all thosedifferent things.
Brian Johnson (13:29):
It's like a discounted country, masonry.
Kim Swanson (13:34):
Yeah, I don't get it, but hey, this is what
industry standards, this is whatthey say.
That's what they say.
I'll roll with it on this oneto actually ask or clarify, I
guess, for when you go back alittle bit to saying that you
needed packing slip, like copiesof packing slips, to say that
they to show that they'vemodified it and I do want to
(13:55):
make sure that we differentiatethat and it is actually packing
slips and not an invoice youneed to prove that you have the
things in hand and not that youjust ordered them.
Brian Johnson (14:05):
Yeah that that is a common problem, that we run
into because, yeah, that's notfor modification, but that'd be
for purchase of a newcompression machine or new
bearing surface.
So that's what I meant yeah, ifsomebody did that, anybody can
order something.
I could order it.
I could order one for my houseand then cancel the order after
(14:26):
I send you the evidence thatI've ordered it right.
And and over the years we havefound that that had happened,
where we'd say how in the worlddid that you know we had?
How could this be a repeatfinding?
Yeah, you know how did thisperson resolve this?
Uh, oh, well, they, they sentus a packing slip, or sorry, not
a packing slip, but a purchaseorder, but I guess they never
(14:48):
got it.
You know, for one reason oranother, and we we could guess
about what might have happened.
Could have been a supply chainissue, or it could have been
they canceled it, or somethinghappened and then they just
forgot about it, or they couldhave done it on purpose.
Kim Swanson (15:04):
Yeah, it's not necessarily malicious, but it
does like.
But that is why you need actualevidence that you have it on
premises and have implemented it, and it's not just.
I think this goes back to I'msure we've said this in some of
the corrective action episodeswe've had but it's not what you
intend to do, it's what you'reactually doing.
Brian Johnson (15:23):
That's correct.
So that's correct, and we dohave issues where some
laboratories had multiplelocations and perhaps they
needed to buy it at one location.
Kim Swanson (15:36):
So we do look at things like OK, where did it get
shipped to?
Brian Johnson (15:37):
Is that the laboratory we're concerned about
?
There's?
There's all sorts of thingsthat go wrong that we try to
keep an eye out on and, yeah, wedo our best to catch them, but
I won't say that we catch itevery time.
Kim Swanson (15:53):
Well, yeah, but I will say the reason that the
quality analysts and theaccreditation program is so
specific about those things,because it's really saving the
laboratories money, becausewe're not sending somebody back
there.
Like, if you didn't have all ofthese like very specific things
needed to, you know, resolvethe corrective or, yeah, resolve
(16:14):
the nonconformity, then itwould mean that we'd have to
send somebody else back outthere to physically check.
So this is actually saving themmoney.
Um, even though it kind ofseems like some red tapes or
some unnecessary hoops, it isactually saving laboratories
money.
Brian Johnson (16:28):
It is, and I know people do get frustrated at
times with the amount of detailthat we present them with.
But what we really really tryto do is get all the information
they need in their hands sothat when they're figuring out
what to send us, they can get itright the first time, Because
one of the big complaints we getis the amount of back and forth
(16:49):
that happens with us.
So we say, okay, well, if youwant to avoid that, this is all
the stuff you need to send us,and if you can do that, then
there won't be any back andforth needed.
Kim Swanson (16:59):
Yeah.
So getting back to the actualpolicy on this, is there
anything else that is ahighlight or that you feel like
needs extra clarification, orjust to acknowledge that this is
an important part, read this ifyou're interested.
Brian Johnson (17:14):
Yeah, I think.
Read it if you're interested.
Most of our policies are reallythere when you need them.
You have a CCRL inspection andduring that inspection they've
determined that your machine isnot in conformance.
That inspector will be able totell you why.
So remember what happenedduring that and you can say well
(17:38):
, how did you measure that todetermine that it was not in
conformance?
And those are going to be thekind of things you're going to
have to send us at the end, andit's very detailed in 1716, how
you determine whether it's inconformance or not.
So I don't want to get into toomany details about that and
it's pretty lengthy and a littlecomplicated, frankly, but it's
(18:02):
if you can show us that it's inconformance, you'll be okay.
But this is mainly like if youget the finding, then this will
help you.
If you don't get the finding,you don't need to worry about it
.
You're already good to go, andif you didn't get the finding,
you're probably testing.
You're okay to test full-sizespecimens, and we'll be able to
list you that way.
I did want to clarify.
(18:23):
One other thing, though, isthis is one of those changes
that will take a tour for us toclarify throughout the entire
range of laboratories that areaccredited through our program,
because as CCRL goes through andthey evaluate these machines,
(18:44):
then we'll know what theircapabilities are and then we'll
be able to reflect the directory.
Once we go through thecorrective action process with
each laboratory, we'll try toidentify the ones that we can.
As we implement it.
There's a lot of things in flux.
Right, there are open files andthe quality analyst will ask me
hey, do I need to update thisone?
And I'll say, well, if you'remaking the decision once the
(19:06):
policy is issued, yes, we shoulddo that.
Uh, I'm not going to say thatit's going to be all of a sudden
.
You know, when this it getspublished, boom, everybody is in
conformance or out ofconformance and it's reflected
on the directory.
That's not going to be the case.
It's going to take a littlewhile for that to happen.
(19:27):
So, like I'm thinking likethree years for it to be
completely up to date.
Kim Swanson (19:32):
Yeah, I was going to ask what the interval is now
generally for CCRL inspections,but it's about three years-ish.
Brian Johnson (19:39):
Yeah, it's about three years.
You know, give or take.
Kim Swanson (19:42):
So for clarification on the AASHTO
accreditation directory, theremay be some laboratories or will
be some laboratories that havethe listing with no
clarification afterwards andthen some with the specific
clarification.
So if you're searching for anaccredited laboratory to work on
(20:03):
your project and you want to,you know if there's no
parentheses after the standard,that means we just haven't
assessed them or we haven't,they haven't gone through an
inspection yet.
Brian Johnson (20:15):
Right, yeah.
Kim Swanson (20:16):
Or like it hasn't been proven that that's one or
the other that they can form.
Brian Johnson (20:20):
Right, if you don't see the full-sized or
reduced-sized caveat after thoseC-140 and C-1314, you'll know
that it hasn't been checked yet.
Kim Swanson (20:30):
Okay, so just keep that in mind for all the
specifying agencies and projectowners that that will take some
time to do that, so there willbe some possible confusion.
So hopefully this document willhelp clarify that for both
laboratories and project owners.
Brian Johnson (20:48):
Right, and one thing I'm hoping is that we
don't have a lot of laboratoriesout there that are currently
accredited and are only testingcoupons, because I think those
laboratories will probably be abit frustrated if they go
through the process and thenfind out oh we can't be
accredited anyway, but reallythey shouldn't have been if that
was the case.
So if they really want to be inthe masonry unit testing
(21:13):
business, they're going to haveto upgrade their machines.
Kim Swanson (21:16):
So if you're listening to this and that is
you, or- get new ones.
Brian Johnson (21:19):
Yeah, if that's you start setting money aside
for that big purchase.
Kim Swanson (21:24):
Start saving for that.
Brian Johnson (21:26):
But really I mean I know from those testing
laboratories perspective thatmight be frustrating, but I mean
, if you think about it from theperspective of, if you're a
producer of masonry units, youwant the test results to be
accurately reflecting what yourproducts are.
If you're the agency that isspecifying those materials be
(21:49):
used or products be used, youwant to make sure that you're
getting accurate information sothat the design is right and
that you get what you want right.
You get what you're expecting.
So you know our accreditationand a lot of the services tied
to our industry serve more thanjust one customer.
You know we've got the testinglabs, got the producers, we've
(22:11):
got the agencies requiring it,we've got the public right.
So those are all things we haveto keep in mind requiring it.
Kim Swanson (22:18):
We've got the public right, so those are all
things we have to keep in mind.
I think this makes sense.
I've learned so much todayabout just terminology that I
didn't know you could use theword prism and coupon in those
manners.
So I mean, truthfully, that'sprobably all I'm taking away
from this episode, but itdoesn't have to be necessarily
so.
I hope our listeners that needthis information have absorbed
(22:39):
that and learned that today.
As we're wrapping up, I wantedto let our listeners know that
the 2025 AASHTO ResourceTechnical Exchange is just
around the corner.
It is March 17th through the20th in Bellevue, washington, so
registration is now open.
So go to ashtoresourceorg slashevents to learn all the
(23:00):
information you can about it andto register for the event, and
we hope to see you there.
Brian Johnson (23:05):
Yeah, and we still are accepting sponsors and
other panelists for some of themeeting discussions where, even
though we have an agenda postedon our website, we're still
kind of get working out some ofthe finer details, and so if
there's something you see onthere and you say, hey, I would
love to participate in that,reach out to us and let us know.
Kim Swanson (23:26):
Yep, and you can email podcast at
ashtoresourceorg for that, orjust info at ashtoresourceorg
would be OK for that too, if youwere like oh, I want to be a
part of the technical exchangein more than just an attendee.
Brian Johnson (23:40):
Yeah, and speaking of that email address,
I know it's been a while sinceI've lamented about the lack of
emails that come to podcasts atAshtoreSourceorg, but if you are
any listener, if you'relistening to this and you just
want to send us a message andsay, hey, I listened to that, I
like this, or I didn't like this, or I exist, I'm a human being
(24:01):
that listened to your podcast,we would love to hear from you.
We know you're out there.
We know you're out therebecause we see the data on
downloads and I've had anecdotalevidence of people listening to
different episodes.
But we'd love to hear from youand if there's something you
want to bring up that we mightbe able to talk about, that'd be
(24:22):
good too.
Kim Swanson (24:23):
Yeah, for sure, we always want feedback, because
we're all about continualimprovement, and that was what
this new policy and guidancedocument is all about is
continual improvement, makingsure it's clarifications of
things.
So we will take your feedbackon the podcast, on anything you
really want.
So thank you very much, brian,for shedding light on this very
(24:44):
confusing topic for me.
Brian Johnson (24:47):
Happy to do it and, yeah, I mean we try not to
have way too many of thesedocuments, but they're.
They're definitely useful andthey get us.
It is in line with transparency, it's in line with consistency
and, like you said, continualimprovement.
So check out our website formore information about other
(25:08):
policy and guidance documentsthat might be of interest to you
as well.
Kim Swanson (25:12):
Thanks for listening to AASHTO Resource Q&A
.
If you'd like to be a guest orjust submit a question, send us
an email at podcast atAASHTOResourceorg, or call Brian
at 240-436-4820.
For other news and relatedcontent, check out AASHTO
Resources social media accountsor go to AASHTOResourceorg.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.