|
|
Delamination from WaterThis report was done for the carpet mill and they backing was loaded with filler.THE CARPET FIBER/ ID METHOD: Nylon-Chemical FIBER HUE: Gray CONSTRUCTION: Tufted Cut Loop YARN STYLE: Saxony Plush BACK SYSTEM: Conventional Tufted PRIMARY BACKING: Polypropylene SECONDARY BACKING: Polypropylene THE INSTALLATION LOCATION TYPE: Residential METHOD: Stretch-In CUSHION: 7/16 Inch Rebond, 6 Pound SUBFLOOR: Concrete on the First Level, Plywood on the Second Level. AREA INSTALLED: Living-Room, Den, Stairs, Hall-way, & Bedrooms USE & MAINTENANCE INFORMATION AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION LITERATURE RECEIVED WITH PURCHASE: Yes TEMPERATURE: 69.3°F - 20.7° C RH 59% ADULTS: 2 - CHILDREN: 2 - PET(S): 1 - Cat DO THEY SMOKE? No SPOTTING AGENTS: None Reported VACUUM/FREQUENCY: Kirby Upright Weekly ENTRY-MATS: Yes SOIL: None Noticed HEATING TYPE: Central Force Air Gas COOLING TYPE: Central - Electric CLEANING: Never Been Cleaned REASON FOR COMMISSION To investigate the claims of delamination. THE REPORT Site Conditions and Geographical Information The carpets were laid in the claimant’s free standing two story house located in a residential neighborhood in a hilly area of the Santa Clarita Valley. The house was well maintained and was owner occupied at the time of the inspection. BACKGROUND INFORMATION MADE TO THE INSPECTOR The carpet was selected when the claimant was purchasing and moving into this house. After the installation, seams were noticeable and there was a problem with loose tufts next to the baseboards and other cut edges. Some of these seams were reworked, but only modest improvements were made. The installer reportedly said that the carpet could not be power stretched. Carpet in the stairs appeared to buckle. The work done on this was that the carpet were re-stapled into place. About three weeks prior to the inspection there was a slight amount of water damage in the bathroom off the master-bedroom. Reportedly this section dried in less than one day with the aid of towels and a fan. The next day the secondary backing separated from the rest of the carpet. DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM AREA BY THIS INSPECTOR The claimant immediately took the inspector to the upstairs bathroom where the water damage had taken place. The carpet was pulled back and a small corner of the carpet had separated from the latex. ON-LOCATION FIELD TESTING A carpet stretch test was performed. The test involved a professional opinion by the inspector to determine whether a power stretcher was used on the installation. The industry standard is drum tight. After pulling the carpet up by the face yarns and letting it pop-back into place, it was determined that the carpet was not power stretched. Fifteen Tuftbind Tests were performed over a random area. The results were as follows: 7.75 7.25 8 6.5 8.5 8 4.5 7.5 9.25 8.5 7.5 6.5 7.25 6.25 7 Ave 7.35 The back-side of a remnant was sprayed with water and was pulled apart with ease. THE ISSUE OF THIS REPORT The question that I have been ask to address is what has cause this delamination GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE ISSUE Delamination can be caused by:
DEFINITIONS Delamination is defined in the Flooring Covering Dictionary as "The separation of layers on laminate through failure within the adhesive or at the bond between adhesive and laminate." THE INSPECTOR'S ANALYSIS Backings are significantly weaker while wet, but after drying they retain nearly all of their former strength. This separation likely happened while the carpet was being rubbed with a towel. Whereas most carpets withstand restoration services by professionals, most mills void warranties after such damages. Also, there is generally no warranty on carpet installed in bathrooms. CONCLUSION Delamination was due to short term wetness and agitation from a towel in an attempt to dry the carpet. Carpet in bathrooms is not covered under most warranties. |