Concrete delivery ticket checks

A concrete delivery ticket is useful only when somebody compares it with the correct order and can explain where that load went. Filing a photograph after the pour does not resolve a mismatch that was visible before discharge.

This is a receiving-record workflow for ready-mixed concrete. It does not select a mix, prescribe testing, set a universal discharge deadline or decide whether a load is acceptable. Those decisions depend on the controlled project specification, supplier information and the people authorised to make them.

Put the approved information at the receiving point

Before deliveries begin, identify the pour reference, placement location, current concrete specification and confirmed order. Agree who checks the delivery, who can resolve a discrepancy and how the supervisor contacts the supplier or designer when necessary.

The supplier’s short product code may not be self-explanatory. Ask for its relationship to the ordered specification before the first vehicle arrives. A familiar strength designation on a ticket is not a substitute for checking the complete ordered requirements.

Keep the checks within the site traffic arrangements. HSE’s construction traffic-management guidance emphasises separating pedestrians and vehicles and controlling movements. Do not create a paperwork station in a reversing route or ask someone to approach a moving mixer to read its ticket.

Compare the ticket with the order, not from memory

Cemex’s guide to using concrete specifically advises checking the delivery ticket for the correct concrete and quantity. The table below extends that simple check into a practical project record. It is not a claim that every supplier ticket uses the same fields or wording.

Check	Comparison to make	Record if unclear
Destination	Project, order and intended placement location	Wrong location, ambiguous order reference or reassignment question
Load identity	Ticket number, supplying plant and vehicle or load reference available	Missing identity or duplicate ticket reference
Concrete ordered	Supplier code and stated properties against the current order and specification	Exact differing entry, missing property or unexplained code
Quantity	Ticketed quantity against the load ordered and the pour plan	Difference requiring supplier clarification; do not assume ticketed quantity equals placed quantity
Times	Available production, arrival and discharge information against project and supplier requirements	Missing time, delay or requirement needing an authorised decision
Additional requirements	Project-specific instructions, testing arrangements and restrictions	Requirement not confirmed by the ticket or accompanying information

Keep the order revision with the record. If the order changed that morning, an old printed copy can create an apparent discrepancy or hide a real one. Do not silently overwrite the old record; identify the replacement information and who issued it.

Treat an unresolved mismatch as a question to close

Record exactly what differs. “Wrong concrete” is less useful than “ticket code differs from order revision B; supplier equivalence not confirmed”. Identify when the query was raised, the load concerned, who was contacted and the response reference.

Follow the project’s receiving and escalation procedure before using a load with an unresolved specification mismatch. The receiving checker should not invent equivalence between mixes, approve a substitution or treat a driver’s reassurance as the required technical authority.

Record the decision and its basis separately from the initial observation. Possible outcomes include corrected documentary information, an authorised technical decision or rejection under the applicable procedure. This guide does not choose the outcome, assign liability or replace the supply terms.

If material has already been placed when an issue is discovered, preserve the placement location and tell the responsible project team promptly. Do not alter a ticket so that it appears the original discrepancy never existed.

A worked example: one code, two possible explanations

In this fictional example, the confirmed order identifies mix code P17. The arriving ticket shows P71. The checker records both codes and the order revision, then refers the discrepancy through the agreed contact route before the load is used.

The supplier may establish that there is a documentary error, or the vehicle may carry a different product. The checker cannot determine which merely because the slump looks familiar. The completed record should identify the supplier response, any required project acceptance, the resulting instruction and where the load was eventually discharged or returned.

This example is about preserving evidence. It is not a specification, a test result or permission to use a changed product.

Record adjustments and delays without inventing limits

Agree the applicable placing and delivery requirements with the supplier and project team before the pour. Do not substitute a universal internet rule such as “all concrete expires after two hours” for the actual requirements. If delays create doubt, obtain and record the appropriate technical decision rather than resetting the clock on the log.

The Concrete Society’s note on time in transit explains that BS 8500:2023 removed the earlier transport-time limitation clause. That is not permission for indefinite delay: the note also distinguishes transport time from waiting on site and highlights the risk of cold joints between successive layers. Supplier guides may give indicative working times; confirm the requirements for the actual mix and placing operation.

Do not make an informal change to the supplied concrete to resolve a workability concern. Refer it through the agreed supplier and project procedure. If an adjustment is authorised, retain the authorisation and the required details of what was added, when and by whom. The receiving record should point to that evidence, not certify a mix change on its own.

Sampling and testing also need their own specified method, competent personnel and identifiable records. Link any required sample or test reference to the load and placement. A delivery ticket is not a substitute for a test report, and a recorded test is not an automatic acceptance of the finished work.

Keep the whole evidence chain

At close-out, connect the load identity to the pour plan, actual placement area, relevant times, test references and any discrepancy decision. Record returned or diverted material separately so ticketed volume is not presented as a measured volume placed in the structure.

For digital tickets, check that the team can retrieve the final copy, including comments and amendments. Cemex’s electronic-ticket FAQs describe viewing a ticket before signing and downloading copies through its platform. Other suppliers have their own processes, so confirm yours in advance.

Read the document and relevant terms before signing. A signature is not proof that every technical requirement has been met, and its contractual effect cannot be settled by a generic blog article. Keep receipt, technical review and any commercial query distinct in the project records.

The useful handover item is not a folder called “tickets”. It is a traceable record of each delivery, its destination and the decisions made where something did not match.

Rospower Projects delivers civil engineering and groundworks for industrial and commercial sites. Contact us to discuss a defined work package.