Results of interlaboratory comparison tests of geosynthetic material
https://doi.org/10.22227/1997-0935.2023.8.1230-1240
Abstract
Introduction. The relevance of the study is determined by the need to improve the procedure of construction control of road-building materials in terms of laboratory tests. One of the effective methods of checking the competence of the laboratory is interlaboratory comparative tests. The purpose of their implementation is to detect deficiencies and inconsistencies, analyze the causes of their occurrence, carry out corrective measures and, thus, improve the laboratory quality system.
Materials and methods. Geogrid was taken as the object of research. The results of tensile strength, relative elongation at maximum load, as well as indicators of frost resistance of the material and resistance to ultraviolet radiation were selected for interlaboratory comparison. All tests were performed in the longitudinal direction of geogrid samples. The most and least statistically homogeneous physical and mechanical parameters of geogrids were determined under the conditions of reproducibility of measurement results for each of the indices obtained in different laboratories and by various measuring instruments using an algorithm based on Z-scores.
Results. According to the totality of the test results, the quality of the work of the majority of testing laboratories can be considered as satisfactory. Representative data were obtained for the majority of parameters. No unsatisfactory data were found in the context of parameters; the share of satisfactory results is 87.5–100 %.
Conclusions. The permormance-test data indicate a high level of competence of the participants in the interlaboratory comparisons. Participation in interlaboratory comparison programmes is undoubtedly an effective way to verify and improve the quality of tests; individual analysis of the results makes it possible to improve the laboratory quality system. It seems reasonable to normalize the requirements for the coefficient of variation, convergence and reproducibility of controlled parameters.
About the Author
A. V. Kozlov
Avtodor-Engineering
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Andrey V. Kozlov — Candidate of Technical Sciences, Head of the Regulatory and Technical Department
9 Strastnoy boulevard, 127006, Moscow
ID RSCI: 80360
References
1. Skrzypczak I., Leśniak A., Ochab P., Górka M., Kokoszka W., Sikora A. Interlaboratory comparative tests in ready-mixed concrete quality assessment. Materials. 2021; 14(13):3475. DOI: 10.3390/ma14133475
2. Efremova N.Y., Makarevich V.I., Miranovich-Kachur S.A., Gaiduk M.V. What does proficiency testing mean and what is it for? Design and operation of proficiency testing schemes in Republic of Belarus. Measurement Standards. Reference Materials. 2013; 2:71-87. EDN QIOMBN. (rus.).
3. Kreynin S.V., Kreynin S.V., Ponomareva O.I. Interlaboratory comparisons as evidence base for the competence of laboratories. Industrial laboratory. Diagnostics of materials. 2018; 84(2):70-72. DOI: 10.26896/1028-6861-2018-84-2-70-72 (rus.).
4. Shatalov K.V., Sorokovova I.I. Inter-laboratory comparative testing of petroleum products in test laboratories of Russian Defense Ministry. Vestnik MITHT. 2014; 9(2):104-111. EDN SCJVBN. (rus.).
5. Scott E.M., Karkness D.D., Cooks G.T. Interlaboratory Comparisons: Lessons Learned. Radiocarbon. 1997; 40(1):331-340. DOI: 10.1017/s0033822200018208
6. Bakhur A., Ovsyannikova T., Zuev D., Martynyuk Yu. The concerns of the inter-laboratory comparison for the measurement of gross alpha and beta-аctivity ooncentrations in drinking water. ANRI. 2013; 3(74):13-18. EDN RAEIRN. (rus.).
7. Ozhogina E.G. Modern problems and prospects of development of technological mineralogy. Prospect and protection of mineral resources. 2018; 10:3-6. EDN VCEYVB. (rus.).
8. Ozhogina E.G., Lebedeva M.I., Gorbatova E.A. Interlaboratory comparison tests in mineralogical works. Measurement Standards. Reference Materials. 2017; 13(2):37-47. DOI: 10.20915/2077-1177-2017-13-2-37-47 (rus.).
9. Pashchenko A.I., Ilyina E.A. The use of interlaboratory comparative tests in assessing and confirming the technical competence of the laboratory. Prospect and protection of mineral resources. 2013; 9:49-51. EDN RBTKAH. (rus.).
10. Kolpakova E.K., Khuzagaleeva R.K., Stepanovskikh V.V. Interlaboratory comparative tests of metallurgical materials. Industrial laboratory. Diagnostics of materials. 2018; 84(1(II)):23-27. DOI: 10.26896/1028-6861-2018-84-1(II)-23-27 (rus.).
11. Borodina Ya.V. Metrological certification of industry reference materials of soil. Agrochemistry and Soil Science. 2015; 82:6-13.
12. Trubacheva L.V., Lokhanina S.Yu. Interlaboratory comparison tests (ICT) as a way of verification for technical competence of Udmurt republic laboratories conducting oil tests. Bulletin of the Udmurt University. 2011; 1:99-110. (rus.).
13. Dmitriev V.V., Yarg L.A. Methods and quality of laboratory soil study : textbook. Moscow, KDU Publ., 2008; 542. (rus.).
14. Dmitriev V.V. Optimization of laboratory engineering and geological research. Moscow, Nedra Publ., 1989; 183. (rus.).
15. Vankova N. On the current state of metrological support for physical and mechanical testing of building materials. PNRPU Bulletin. Urban development. 2022; 2(46):22-33. DOI: 10.15593/2409-5125/2022.02.03. EDN MKTSFI. (rus.).
16. Vasil’ev Yu.E., Shlyafer V.L., Kozik P.V., Marinich S.A., Matveevich S.A. Regular interlaboratory tests. Science & Engineering for Roads. 2006; 2(37):6-7. EDN: PYCZNP. (rus.).
17. Vasiliev Yu.E., Kotlyarsky E.V., Kochnev V.I., Menkina U.O., Sarychev I.Yu., T-alalay V.V. et al. Interlaboratory joint evaluation experiments for testing petroleum road bitumen and asphalt concrete mixtures. Moscow, LLC “Techpoligraftsentr” Publ., 2020; 258. (rus.).
18. Kozlov A.V., Kuzin K.A., Rameev D.F. Assessment of the reliability of the results of interlaboratory tests of bitumen binders. Ensuring the quality, safety and cost-effectiveness of construction. Practice. Problems. The prospects. Innovations : Materials of the second joint scientific and practical conference of State Budgetary Institution of the City of Moscow “Center for Expertise, Research and Testing in Construction” and Institute of Applied Mechanics of Russian Academy of Sciences. 2020; 190-197. (rus.).
19. Kuzin K.A., Seleznev K.A. Avtodor-Engineering LLC: experience in conducting interlaboratory comparative tests (ICT). Automobile roads. 2021; 6:29-32. (rus.).
20. Eremeev V.V., Kuzin K.A., Kozlov A.V., Seleznev K.A. Practice of interlaboratory comparative tests of road-building materials. Roads. Innovations in construction. 2021; 98:32-37. (rus.).
21. Mogil’ny K.V., Kuzin K.A., Seleznev K.A. Interlaboratory comparative tests are the guarantor of ensuring the quality of laboratory work. Road Power. 2022; 111:3-5. (rus.).
Review
For citations:
Kozlov A.V. Results of interlaboratory comparison tests of geosynthetic material. Vestnik MGSU. 2023;18(8):1230-1240. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22227/1997-0935.2023.8.1230-1240
Views:
311
Email this article 