[ 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 ]

[ Pile Height Difference in Shearing ] [ Seam Peaking on a ENHANCER BACKING ] [ Thickness Differences on Carpet ]

[ Home ]

Thickness Differences on Carpet

This report was done for the homeowner and then the mill.

THE CARPET

FIBER/ ID METHOD: Olefin-Manufacturer's Specification

COLOR: Taupe

CONSTRUCTION: Tufted Cut Loop

STYLE: Saxony Plush

SQUARE YARDAGE: 180

BACK SYSTEM: Conventional Tufted

PRIMARY BACKING: Polypropylene

SECONDARY BACKING: Polypropylene

THE INSTALLATION

TYPE OF SITE: Residential

DATE INSTALLED: 10/24/94

METHOD: Stretch-In

CUSHION: 1/2 Inch Rebond 6 Lb./Sq.Ft.

SUBFLOOR: Concrete

AREA INSTALLED: Livingroom, Hallway, Two Bed-rooms, Office, Two Hallways, & Laundry Room

USE & MAINTENANCE INFORMATION AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION

LITERATURE RECEIVED WITH PURCHASE:

ADULTS: 2 CHILDREN: 1 PETS: 0

TEMPERATURE: 72.5°F - 22.5° C

RELATIVE HUMIDITY: 51%

VACUUM TYPE: Top-Fill Upright

FREQUENCY: Weekly

DO THEY SMOKE? No

ENTRY MATS: Yes

CONDITION of THE CARPET: Excellent

SOIL: None Noticeable

HEATING TYPE: Central Force Air Gas

COOLING TYPE: Central - Electric

HOME SPOTTING AGENTS: Just Water

CLEANING: New Carpet

TREATMENTS APPLIED: None

REASON FOR COMMISSION

The carpet was inspected to resolve a thickness problem. Reasons for the first inspection were side match, crushing and lines.

THE REPORT

Geographical Background Information

This new, free standing house is located in a rural area in the foothills, between Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks. The approximate distance from the Pacific Ocean is nine miles. The condition of the house is excellent.

THE CLAIM HISTORY

A side match problem was noticed at the time of the installation between the first and second panel in the living room. It was recommended by the installer that the carpet should be vacuumed frequently to help set the nap. There-fore the claimant vacuumed four or five times a week initially. No improvement was noticed as a result of this effort. The claimant noticed that the vacuum cleaner had more drag on this first panel compared to the other side of the seam. This section of carpet also felt thicker when walked on.
Also, at the time of the installation the claimant recalls that some of the cushion or padding did not seem to match. He recalls that some of the cushion had an orange hue. Most of the pads were blue and not all of the blue pad reportedly came off the same roll.
The claimant also said that the carpet does not recover well from indentations made from furniture. Also, the lines made from the vacuum cleaner stay in the carpet in some places and not in others.
An inspection was commissioned by the manufacturer and was performed on 11/13/94 by Ferber Carpet Service, P O Box 1223, Garden Grove, California 922642. This report noted the side match difference and also noted that the carpet felt 'denser between the two sheets'. This report states the cause of the problem as 'roll crush'. It also sites that the problem 'will dissipate with usage and vacuuming'. An added suggestion stated that 'if the condition does not improve after a period of time then it may be necessary to steam the affected areas.'
Samples of the carpet were requested by Claims Manager. The claimant, the installer/dealer, and this inspector met for this inspection report. Samples were sent to mill on May 24, 1995. This inspector talked to Claims on July 28, 1995 who said there were no lab test conducted on the sample, but that the mill agreed that the carpet samples were indeed different in density.

DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM AREA BY THIS INSPECTOR
Walking across the carpet had different feel as if one side was thicker. Vacuuming on the side that was thicker was more difficult. Lifting the carpet up reveal no differences in the cushion or subfloor between the areas that felt thicker.

TESTING

The carpet was pulled back to inspect the cushion. The cushion was measured in several locations at one half inch. However, there was no seaming tape noticed as seen in photograph number six. The open gap between the sections of the cushion conformed to the dips or dark lines noticed in the carpet.

Two twelve inch by twelve inch section of cushion were cut and weighed from opposites side of the side match problem in the living room. Their weight was found to be the same.

Two nine inch squares of the carpet remnants were cut from the reported different sections of carpet where the side match was supposedly noted. These sections measured 5.32 ounces and 5.09 ounces; a difference of approximately five percent. Two more twelve inches squares were cut for the manufacturer's evaluation.

THE ISSUE OF THIS REPORT

The question that I have been ask to address is whether there is a thickness difference between the two carpets.

CONDITIONS THAT CAN CAUSE THE PROBLEM

Thickness difference can occur when;

1. there is a difference in subflooring

2. a difference in cushion

3. or a difference in the carpet.

INDUSTRY STANDARDS AND PRACTICES

It is an industry practice for laboratories to make evaluations in carpet thickness.

ANALYSIS AND SUMMERY

So far everybody is in agreement that the carpet feels thicker between the first two panels in the livingroom.

This inspector knows of no documentation that supports thickness problems as being associated with roll cushioning.

With the on-location weight test supporting a difference in the carpet, the real issue should probably be, what cause this difference.

CONCLUSION

The thickness problem is the result of carpet thickness based upon the infield weight test and the manufacturer's agreement with this assessment.