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 ]


Berber ] Buckling From Power Stretching in Length ] Buckling  Lees Commercial ] Buckling on a Direct GlueDown ] Installations Errors Report made Humorous ] Installation Incorrect Pad1 ] Installation Errors with Urine ] Installation Errors-Side Match ] Lines from Star Roller ] Panels Width to Wide ] Seams are Fuzzy from Double Cut ] Seam Sealer on Seams ] Seam Failure, no seaming adhesive ] [ Unitary Back Carpet Rolled Once ]


Home ]

 

Unitary Back Carpet Rolled Once

This report was commissioned by the mill and installer installed two different carpet with the same faceyarn pattern; one with an ActionBac and the other with an unitary backing. He rolled both of them only once.

THE CARPET

FIBER/ ID METHOD: Nylon-Chemical

COLOR: Mauve Boarder, Multi-Color Field

CONSTRUCTION: Tufted Looped

STYLE: Level Looped

BACK SYSTEM: Unitary

PRIMARY BACKING: Polypropylene

THE INSTALLATION

TYPE OF SITE: Commercial

TYPE OF BUSINESS: Convalescent Hospital

DATE INSTALLED: 10/23/96

METHOD: Direct Glue Down

SUBFLOOR: Concrete

AREA INSTALLED: Walkways, And Rooms On The First Level

USE & MAINTENANCE INFORMATION AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION

LITERATURE RECEIVED WITH PURCHASE: Not Determined

NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 60 to 70

TEMPERATURE: 75.7°F - 24.2° C

RELATIVE HUMIDITY: 43%

VACUUM TYPE: Not Determined

FREQUENCY: Not Determined

ENTRY MATS: Yes

CONDITION of THE CARPET: See Report

SOIL: None Noticed

HEATING TYPE: Central Force Air Gas

COOLING TYPE: Central - Electric

CLEANING: In House

METHOD: Spin Pad

TYPE OF CHEMICAL: Not Determined

DATE LAST CLEANED: 11/6/96

TREATMENTS APPLIED: None Reported

REASON FOR COMMISSION

The carpet was reportedly curling up at the corners of the installation.

THE REPORT

Geographical, Usage, and Maintenance Information

The carpet was installed in this commercial building and was occupied by patients at the time of the inspection. This building was located just north of the I-10 Freeway and was seven and a half miles from the Pacific Ocean. The patients reportedly use wheelchairs and walkers. Other rolling type devises are used as needed for the care of the patients.

The front lobby was undergoing remodeling at the time of the inspection. Also, a section of the carpet in front of the first nursing station was being prepared for in-house, spin-pad cleaning.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION MADE TO THE INSPECTOR

Two different types of carpet were installed at the same time. One was the Graphic loop carpet that was installed in the hallways and patients’ rooms, while the second carpet was installed in the administration offices. This second carpet was a conventional tuft, cut-loop with a primary and secondary backing.

No problems were noticed during the installation, although a few days after the installation the GRAPHIC LOOP carpet began to form gaps between seams and next to walls.

The adhesive used on both carpets was TAYLOR ADHESIVE # 2008 and were both rolled once after they were laid.

DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM AREA BY THIS INSPECTOR

The first area the inspector noted the buckling was in an isolated section in an enclosed lobby as one entered this facility. This carpet had globular shape ‘bumps’ that flattened when stepped on. Next, the area in front of the first nursing station had carpet with a gap of approximately 3/8th of an inch from the wall. In addition, gaps in the seams were noted in nearly all patients’ rooms entrance ways. Some of the hallway seams had small gaps as well.

The carpet was loose enough to pull back as noted in two doorways.

ON-LOCATION FIELD TESTING

An ultra-violet light was shone throughout the installation. The result of this test revealed that no unusual chemicals were used, but there was evidence that seaming adhesive was used on cut edges.

Numerous moisture tests were performed using a Delmhorst Moisture Sensor. The results of these tests revealed that there were no moisture readings.

THE ISSUE OF THIS REPORT

The question that I have been asked to address is: what caused the seam failure in the carpet in question?

GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE ISSUE

Seam Failures Can Occur When:

1. there is a failure in the installation systems

2. extraordinary foot or mechanical action has been rendered to the carpet

3. cleaning has over saturated a natural fiber backing causing shrinkage

INDUSTRY STANDARDS, PRACTICES & DEFINITIONS

Concerning the Rolling of Direct Glue-Down Carpet, the CRI104 - 1994, says this on page 11:

8.6 Rolling - Rolling shall be performed with the lightest roIler that will achieve 100% transfer of the floor adhesive into the carpet back. Refer to manufacturer’s recommendation for roller weight. Normally, do not exceed 75 pounds (34 kg).

8.6.1 Jute or Synthetic Secondary Backing Tufted carpet with jute or synthetic secondary backing should be pressed down into the adhesive bed using a section of carpet core or a roller. Roll in both directions, but do not over roll.

8.6.2 Unitary and Woven - Unitary carpet and woven carpet must be rolled a second time about 3-12 hours after initial rolling to make sure a strong bond is established.

THE INSPECTOR'S ANALYSIS

  1. The moisture test revealed that there was no severe over wetting of the carpet.
  2. The ultra-violet light test indicates that other chemicals such as industrial strength detergents were not present.
  3. The ultra-violet light test indicates that seaming adhesive was used to keep cut edges from fraying.

The one piece of information that the inspector found most significant was that the GRAPHIC LOOP carpet was not rolled a second time as required in Section 8.6.2. The carpet with secondary backing only needed one rolling to form a good bond to the floor. In contrast, carpets with Unitary backing need a second rolling about 3 to 12 hours after initial rolling so as to develop a strong bond to the floor. This is the case in point of the buckling as noted in this inspection.

With the normal traffic of this facility a slight shift occurred forming gaps in the seam and bumps in the field.

CONCLUSION

The seam separation in the carpet in question was due to installation errors, based upon the background information and observations made.