The biggest compaction risk isn’t failing a test, it’s not being able to prove you passed it. Across the industry, QA missteps like incomplete records or spec inconsistencies are among the top reasons for litigation and rework. And as legal and insurance expectations rise, contractors need more than checklists, they need traceability.

Here are five compaction-related QA mistakes that put your company at risk and how Compactica helps fix them for good.

1. Mistake #1: Relying on Paper Notes or Memory

Handwritten logs and verbal confirmations leave too much room for error. Whether it’s a test result written in haste or a forgotten pass zone, manual QA records are the root of over 60% of documentation-related construction claims (Chubb Construction Risk Insights).

Without digital tracking, the burden of proof falls entirely on supervisors and crews, adding risk where automation could offer certainty.

2. Mistake #2: Testing Too Little, Too Late

On most sites, density testing covers only a fraction of compacted areas. According to the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, spot tests typically cover <1% of total site area and test results often arrive too late for real-time correction (NCHRP Report 676).

By the time a failure is noticed, paving or backfill may be complete turning a small error into a major rework order.

3. Mistake #3: Inconsistent QA Practices Across Sites

Large regional and national contractors often operate with multiple subcontractors and site-specific QA workflows, leading to inconsistency. What one crew considers “passing” may not align with head office expectations or local specifications.

When audits or claims arise, inconsistent data becomes a major vulnerability.

4. Mistake #4: No Real-Time Alerts or Coverage Validation

Without live guidance, operators may unknowingly under-compact areas. A study by the Federal Highway Administration found that up to 25% of QA failures could have been avoided with real-time operator feedback (FHWA IC Tech Brief).

Yet 4 out of 5 contractors say their field crews still lack real-time access to compaction specs, maps, or pass count coverage (JBKnowledge 2024 ConTech Report).

5. Mistake #5: Incomplete Job Records After Project Closeout

One of the biggest risks doesn’t show up until months later when a claim is filed, and no one can find the original compaction log. QA reports stored in binders or emailed spreadsheets often vanish or degrade over time.

Without a secure, searchable record, even a well-run job becomes hard to defend.

How Compactica Solves All 5 Problems

Compactica transforms your QA process into a smart, automated, audit-ready workflow:

Every pass GPS-tracked and spec-validated in real time

Operators guided with live coverage maps and alerts

Consistent QA standards across crews, subcontractors, and regions

All job records stored, searchable, and exportable post-closeout

Whether you’re managing one job or fifty, Compactica helps you eliminate blind spots and build confidence from the ground up.

Ready to upgrade your QA from reactive to risk-proof? Contact Compactica Today!

References

National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), Intelligent Compaction Technology for Soil and Aggregate Compaction Operations (https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/14511/intelligent-compaction-technology-for-soil-and-aggregate-compaction-operations)
Chubb Construction Risk Insights, Top Risks and Insurance Strategies for Contractors (https://www.chubb.com/us-en/businesses/resources/construction-industry-risk-management.html)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Tech Brief: Intelligent Compaction Technology (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/materials/ic/pubs/hif16006.pdf)
JBKnowledge Construction Technology Report 2024, Adoption of Field Technology in Heavy Civil (https://jbknowledge.com/contechreport )

The Biggest Soil Testing Risk Isn’t Failing, It’s Not Proving You Passed