Does Standardisation Ensure a Reliable Assessment of the Performance of Construction Products?

Abstract

The implementation of a standard should be preceded by research work aimed at developing the test method, particularly in validation experiments. Is it actually so? Numerous experiences of producers and labs and an increasing number of scientific works prove the opposite. It turns out that some standard methods are very poorly suited to assessing the performance of construction products. This is related both to the specificity of the methods and the tested products. This article presents some product assessment problems and the risk of using test methods that have not been fully validated. The risk seems relatively low if laboratories account for their own uncertainty. However, in some cases, additional components that both laboratories and product manufacturers might fail to consider can significantly increase the risk. This indicates the need for continuous work in the reference area.

The risk of a different assessment of the performance of cementitious ceramic tile adhesives in the light of the results of interlaboratory comparisons

“…These values were lower than the condition for the laboratory to obtain a positive assessment [not causing a warning signal] set as |z| ≤ 2 (41). During the verifi cation by the construction market surveillance authorities of the correctness of the AVCP performed by the manufacturer, any result below 1.0 N/mm 2 for CTA class C2 would be negative (30,41,63).…”

“…We (41). Podczas weryfi kacji, przez organy nadzoru rynku budowlanego, prawidłowości AVCP dokonanej przez producenta, każdy wynik poniżej 1,0 N/mm 2 dla CTA klasy C2 zostałby sklasyfi kowany jako negatywny (30,41,63).…”

Construction Products between Testing Laboratory and Market Surveillance: Case study of Cementitious Ceramic Tile Adhesives

“…Measurements of construction products and, thus, carrying out PT/ILC, due to the multi-stage nature of the test procedures, product heterogeneity, and when the methods used are destructive tests, are additionally complex. Thus, the conformity assessment is even more difficult—it often raises the question of to what extent the evaluation of the construction product based on the tests is reliable in the case of construction products [ 20 , 21 , 22 ]. Notably, the opinion of the laboratory often plays a decisive role—this is the case in the assessment of construction products collected from the market by market surveillance authorities and checking whether the product meets the parameters declared by the manufacturer [ 19 , 23 , 24 ].…”

Assessment of the possibility of using the measurement of open time to assess and verify the constancy of performance of cementitious ceramic tile adhesives

“…Często pomiary wyrobów budowlanych, a tym samym PT/ILC, nastręczają wiele trudności, przede wszystkim, ze względu na wieloetapowy charakter procedur badawczych, niejednorodność wyrobu oraz gdy stosuje się niszczące metody badań (25). Od kilku lat formułowane jest pytanie na ile ocena niektórych wyrobów budowlanych w pewnych przypadkach jest wiarygodna (26,27).…”

“…Usually, measurements of construction products, and thus PT/ILC, pose many diffi culties, mainly due to the multi-stage nature of test procedures, product heterogeneity, and when the methods used are destructive (25). For several years, the question has been raised as to what extent the assessment of certain construction products is reliable in some instances (26,27).…”