|
|
Yarn Slippage no DefectThe claimant in this report had the option to get a carpet with better tuftbind, but elected not to. When they complained about pulled yarns, there was no defect found.THE CARPET FIBER/ ID METHOD: Nylon - Solution Dyed-Chemical COLOR: Gray & Tan With Multicolor Diamonds CONSTRUCTION: Tufted Loop STYLE: Cut & Loop SQUARE YARDAGE: 182 BACK SYSTEM: Conventional Tuft PRIMARY BACKING: Polypropylene SECONDARY BACKING: Polypropylene THE INSTALLATION TYPE OF SITE: Commercial TYPE OF BUSINESS: Common Interest Residential Community High Rise DATE INSTALLED: 9/95 METHOD: Stretch-In CUSHION: 3/8 Inch Fiber SUBFLOOR: Slab AREA INSTALLED: Common Interest Walkway On Main & Second Levels USE & MAINTENANCE INFORMATION AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION LITERATURE RECEIVED WITH PURCHASE: Just Invoice TEMPERATURE: 72.8°F - 22.6° C RELATIVE HUMIDITY: 63% VACUUM TYPE: Advance Uprights FREQUENCY: Weekly ENTRY MATS: Yes CONDITION of THE CARPET: See Report SOIL: Slightly Soiled HEATING TYPE: Heat Pump COOLING TYPE: Heat Pump CLEANING: Never Been Cleaned REASON FOR COMMISSION To determine the reason for the pulled loops. THE REPORT Geographical, Usage, and Maintenance Information This 190 unit, 13 story twin-tower, common-interest condominium was located at the base of the Santa Monica foothills in the Los Angeles Basin 12 miles from the Pacific Ocean. The carpet was installed in common-interest lobby and walkways on first and second levels. The individual dwellings were primarily owner-occupied and one reportedly used a wheel-chair. The in-house staff performed the maintenance on the premises and vacuum cleaners were in good working order. BACKGROUND INFORMATION MADE TO THE INSPECTOR The carpet was selected by a committee from the home-owners and was recommended by a designer associated with the dealer. An option to up-grade to a similar carpet with superior tuft-bind was offered but was declined. Immediately after the installation pulled loops were noticed and additional pulled loops have been noticed thereafter. Some repairs were made and then halted to give opportunity for this inspection. DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM AREA BY THIS INSPECTOR Pulled loops were noticed near the edges of the walls in the hallways, in the field of the carpet, and seamed edges. They did not conform to any particular part of the carpet nor did they conform to individual stitch or gauge, straight, serpentine, or diagonal lines. The yarns had no visible differences in twist, bulk, or size. Latex was still attached to yarns that had been pulled free and tips of the pulled yarns did not appear frayed. In the areas where the carpet was pulled back, the secondary-backing did not appear damaged. There were no visible impressions in the pile that appeared to resemble those left by a knee kicker or power stretcher. There were no actual voids in the carpet. ON-LOCATION FIELD TESTING An ultra-violet light was shone to find evidence that seaming adhesive was used on cut edges. The use of seaming adhesive was noted. 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 hallways were power stretched, but two sections in the lobby were not. Tuftbind Tests were performed over a random area on looped and cut looped yarns. The results were as follows:
THE ISSUE OF THIS REPORT The question that I have been asked to address is: are the pulled-loops unwarranted? GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATING THE ISSUE Unwarranted Pulled loops occur when: 1. there is a manufacturer’s defect in the latex of the carpet’s backing 2. there is failure to meet minimum standards of installation with respect to cushion thickness and density 3. there is excessive foot and mechanical traffic INDUSTRY STANDARDS, PRACTICES & DEFINITIONS According to the FLOOR COVERING DICTIONARY the following definitions are given for Tuft Bind: TUFT BIND - Force required to pull a tuft from a cut-pile carpet or to pull free one leg of a loop from a looped pile carpet. The DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE SECRETARY FOR HOUSING FEDERAL HOUSING COMMISSIONER sets the standards for minimum tuft-bind called UM44D. For cut-looped carpet this standard is 48 ounces or (3 pounds); for looped carpet the standard is 100 ounces or 6.25 pounds. THE INSPECTOR'S ANALYSIS TEST ANALYSIS The ultra-violet light test indicates seaming adhesive was used to keep cut edges from fraying. The power-stretcher test indicates that the islands in the lobby were not properly power-stretched. This tuft-bind test requires an average of 15 random pulls of unaffected tufts. Also, it is permissible to drop the highest and lowest numbers which in this case would adjust the average to 7.96. Discernment between looped and cut loops was not made at the time of testing, but the results indicate that the latex meets FHA Standards. INSPECTOR’S SUMMARY Most of the pulled loops along the edges of walls were the result of installation, based on the location they appeared after the installation. The rest from usage beyond the performance capabilities on the latex. The lobby carpets did not appear to be more affected than the walk-ways, therefore the lack of power-stretching was not a significant so far but power stretching should be done in the near future. Repairs of pulled yarns should level off at some point. CONCLUSION The in-field-pulled-yarns are warranted based upon their performance capabilities determined from the tuft-bind test. Loose yarns near the edge of the walls are the result of improper installation based on the location they appeared after the installation. |