Home ] Appearance Retention Reports ] Browning Reports ] Cleaning Errors Reports ] Color Loss Reports ] Delamination Reports ] Design Flaws Reports ] Double Stick Reports ] Fading Reports ] Fuzzing Reports ] Installation Reports ] Latex Problems Reports ] Lines, Bands, & Streaks Reports ] Maintenance Reports ] Matting & Crushing Reports ] Pooling Reports ] Shedding Reports ] Side Match Reports ] Specification Reports ] Thickness & Weight Reports ] Upholstery Reports ] Water Damage Reports ] Yarn Slippage Reports ] Yellowing Reports ]


Bad House Keeper Sues Cleaner ] Blue Dye bleeds in Olefin Nylon Blend ] Color Loss in the shape of triangles ] Crushing Indicative of Olefin ] Delustering Report ] EXTRACTABLE MATERIAL ] Lack Stain Resistance Can be Fixed ] No Stain Resistance Make Spots ] Olefin Spin Finish ] [ Retention of the twist ] Spot From Reflection ] Stain Resist makes Sticky Substance at Tips ]


Home ]

 

THE CARPET

MANUFACTURER: Galaxy Carpet Mills, Inc.
NUMBER on BACKING: Not Applicable
ROLL & INVOICE NUMBERS: Not Given
STYLE NAME & NUMBER: Above All
COLOR NAME & NUMBER: Not Given
FIBER: Nylon
ID METHOD: According To Manufacturer
FIBER COLOR: Green
CONSTRUCTION: Conventional Tuft
YARN STYLE: Saxony
SQUARE YARDAGE: 258
BACK SYSTEM: Action
PRIMARY BACKING: Polypropylene
SECONDARY BACKING: Polypropylene

TYPE LOCATION: Residential
DATE INSTALLED: 11/12/97
METHOD: Stretch-In
CUSHION: 1/2 Inch Rebond 7.5 Lb./Cu. Ft.
SUBFLOOR: Concrete on the First Level, Plywood on the Second
AREA INSTALLED: Livingroom, Diningroom, Stairs, Halls, 3 Bedrooms

USE & MAINTENANCE STATISTICS AT THE TIME OF THE INSPECTION

LITERATURE RECEIVED WITH PURCHASE: No
ADULTS: 3 - CHILDREN: 0 - PET(S): 0
DO THEY SMOKE?
SPOTTING AGENTS: Not Applicable
TEMPERATURE: 73.1F - 22.8 C RH 37%
VACUUM TYPE: Upright
VACUUM FREQUENCY: Weekly & More
ENTRY-MATS: Yes
SOIL: Slightly Soiled
HEATING TYPE: Forced Air Gas
COOLING TYPE: Central - Electric
CLEANING: Never Been Cleaned

GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
This dwelling is located at the edge of the Anaheim Hills.
SITE CONDITIONS
The dwelling is a large, two-story, owner-occupied, freestanding house. The furnishings were neat and orderly.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION MADE TO THE INSPECTOR
The previous carpet of ten years was replaced with this similar green Saxony nylon. The claimant used the previous carpet as a comparison. The dealer reportedly said that the carpet in question was of an equal quality as the one installed at that time. Within the first year of use, the new carpet began to mat and crush. The claimant’s opinion is that the carpet is worn out and needs replacement.
DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM AREA BY THIS INSPECTOR
In the areas most frequently traveled, apparent wear patterns were immediately noticeable. The yarns were slightly crushed with a slight loss of twist. A comparison was made with an uninstalled remnant and there was a noticeable difference. Another comparison was made with the previous carpet and the installed carpet appeared to have received more wear. The claimant’s vacuum cleaner appeared to be in proper working order with an appropriate brush for this style of yarn. No unusual footwear was discovered or reported.
ON-LOCATION FIELD TESTING
Yarns from the edge of the carpet in question and the old carpet were removed and untwisted, then allowed to re-assert their twist. Retention of the twist of the carpet in question appeared to be inconsistent from one yarn to another, with some yarns appearing to have good retention and others not.

THE ISSUE
The issue of this inspection is to determine whether the fiber producer has responsibilities to this consumer for correcting the problem.
GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE ISSUE
The fiber producer warranty is the applicable standards for this issue.
INDUSTRY STANDARDS & DEFINITIONS
According to the FLOOR COVERING DICTIONARY, it says this:
TWIST RETENTION – This type of defect will only manifest itself after the carpet has been in service. Poor twist retention will manifest itself as a general untwisting of the yarns in the traffic areas and areas of heavier use. Poor twist retention is purely a judgment decision; however, a general rule of thumb for adequate retention would be where no more than 25% of the yarn bundle would show untwisting after 12 months service.
THE INSPECTOR'S ANALYSIS
The contrast in appearance between the previous newly installed and un-installed remnant is due to variations in twist retention. The field test suggests, but does not prove that a problem may exist in the heat setting to create polymer memory. In addition, this field investigation did not discover errors from either the claimant or installer. The new carpet appears to be specified very closely to the previous carpet. Therefore, it is recommended that the remnant be tested under the commissioner’s own guidelines to make a more conclusive discussion.
CONCLUSION
Based upon background information, observations, and field-testing done at the time of the inspection, it is the inspector’s professional opinion that the acceptability of this carpet in question should rest upon the outcome of laboratory testing.