No.
Empirical studies show that the sand cone is more accurate than the nuclear density meter. Even when corrected for the inaccuracies (due to the nuclear density meter struggling to accurately determine moisture content), the sand cone still produces more precise results - this means less variability and uncertainty in the test results. Additional work done in 2020 supported by robust computational models also determined the sand cone to offer increased precision over the nuclear density meter.
The complexity of multi-phase and multi-component geomaterials encountered in the real world makes an academic discussion of the accuracy and precision of field density testing a difficult subject. No single laboratory experiment can ever account for the near infinite conditions encountered on construction sites around the world. Other research suggests the nuclear density meter offers greater accuracy in certain situations, specifically, in the paper linked, in shale.
Due to the complexities involved, it's important to retain the services of a testing firm with the requisite knowledge to not simply conduct, but also interpret and understand the result of any laboratory or field testing. Thurston Laboratories has decades of experience with the geomaterials found in Northeastern Nevada and personnel with the appropriate background, education, and certification to do so.
Currently, we do not. We will be adding nuclear density testing to our services in early 2024.
The Goldback is a voluntary currency containing real gold designed to facilitate easy exchange, even for small transactions. See the Goldback website for more information. We will offer a 10% discount on any amount paid in Goldbacks.