Hunan Engineering Engineering Technology Reported by Real Name: Suspected Drain Inspection Violations and Data Falsification

Material reported by name to Hunan Engineering Limited for detection of steel-condensed concrete drainage pipes violations

Reported: Hunan Engineering Engineering Co. Ltd.

Detection project: external ballast load detection of concrete and drainage pipes

Date of detection: 23 October 2026

Location of testing: Shaoyang Qing Bong Pipeline

I. Core non-compliance facts

(i) Serious irregularities in detection methods: 1.2 m tube error in 4-point stress mode

In the external ballast load test of the inner diameter of the concrete drains of 1.2 metres, the field test device applied an unauthorized four-point stress mode, not the three-point test method required by article 10.2 of the " Test Method for Concrete and Steel Crushing Drains " (GB/T 16752-2017).

Field situation: Test ballast loads up to 27 kN are cracks; When pressure continues to 129.35 kN, the width of the crack is recorded at 0.261 mm.

Non-compliance confirmed: The whistleblower has informed the station Kang-Chek, the supervisor, that the four points of stress detection are not in compliance and has produced the field test device and three points of test method C in appendix C to GB/T 16752-2017, to be checked against the standard requirements to be met by the test device.

(ii) Detection of unusual data and suspected forgery: 1 metre of cavity in pipe is severely overstated

During the testing of the concrete drains of steel and concrete with a diameter of 1 metre, the original records showed that the crack load was 101.33 kN and the crack width was 0.985 mm at a test pressure of 109.68 kN, which was clearly more than four times the standard limit of 0.2 mm.

Operating irregularities: On-site video and original records reflect that when the payload reached 101.33 kN, the operator reduced the reading from 101.33 kN to 95 kN by means of the device button, and continued to rise thereafter; The post-99kN instrument has stalled. The process does not meet the requirement of continuous and even loading, and the authenticity of the data is in doubt.

(iii) Lack of qualifications of personnel for testing and disruption of field management

In addition to the technical irregularities described above, the detection was conducted in the form of serious violations of personnel qualifications and on-site management:

Unlicensed: Site examiners have not provided valid title and job qualifications and are not legally qualified to perform the test.

The record signature fraud: The person who actually performed the test did not sign the original record to confirm it, resulting in a serious disconnect between the test process and the record, the inability to trace the true operator and the absence of legal validity of the original record.

Non-continuing intervention: The presence of non-continuing personnel not in the project test team on the ground involved in or intervened in the testing exercise, in grave violation of the principles of independence and impartiality of the testing process.

. The legal and standard basis

(i) Violations of mandatory national standards

The detection agency changed the load load method (four points instead of three points) without permission, in violation of the mandatory technical requirement of three points for the test load test under article 10.2 of the Test Method for Concrete and Steel Concrete Drainage (GB/T 16752-2017).

(ii) Violations of State sectoral regulations and administrative regulations

On human qualifications and signatures: the institution uses unqualified personnel and has not implemented §34; Who tested whose signature & #34; The system, which violates article 28 § 34 of the Regulations for the Quality Testing of Construction Works (Order No. 57 of the Ministry of Construction); The testing agency should be responsible for the authenticity and accuracy of the data and reports; & #34; Article 36 states that no person may forge another ' s signature.

With regard to the issuance of false reports: The manipulation of load readings and the falsification of the testing process are typical of false detection reports, in violation of article 31 & #34 of the Regulations on the Quality of Construction Works; The testing agency should produce an objective and impartial test report & #34; and is suspected of having infringed the legal duty under Article 73 of the Regulations to issue false reports of detection.

. Reporting claims

In view of the above-mentioned serious violations of the quality of the entities and procedural violations, the competent authorities are requested to:

One. (b) Preservation of relevant evidence, including original detection records, video material, test devices, etc., in accordance with the law;

1. An investigation was opened into the above-mentioned test conduct of Hunan Engineering and Technology Ltd.

Reporter: Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-Il-I-Il-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-

Call: 15173959366