We moved into our home the middle of August. During the most humid days the end of August we started to notice a "wave" throughout the entire floor. After a few week it seemed to flatten out a bit but was never perfect. Now the waves are dips. The builder is citing "tolerance" We in fact had a hardwood floor inspection by a certified inspector in our area who has quite an impressive list of credentials and has inspected the White House and many other national landmarks. He found 5-6 areas with loose courses of boards exhibiting vertical movement but the waves/dips were within the tolerance--none were over 1/8 inch measured with a string line placed over and then simple measured space underneath. Our builder is refusing to address the waves/dips. They will only replace the loose courses. Is there nothing in the floor assoc. standards to address this? Please look at my photos and tell me why there is nothing in the standards to address this. BTW, Bruce 3/8 inch thick, 3 inch width turlington, glued down. No leveling prep was used. http://photobucket.com/floorissues

Not enough info. Can you post a copy of the report? I will say one thing about the levelness. Some slabs are so out of tolerence that nothing short of pouring five inches of SLC can fix. Been there done that. But then your door wouldn't shut among other issues. Grinding always helps elimiinate lots of leveling but can't take it all out many times. Someone shoulda addressed that with you. Also some cupping is normal.

Here is the inspection report.


Report Date: 10-25-10 Claim Number :

Commissioning Agent:
Dealer:
Inspection Site:
Home Phone:
Product to Inspect: Bruce | Turlington Plank | Gunstock | Unknown

Engineered wood flooring.
Rooms Installed: Living room, dining room, foyer, hall, office, powder room, kitchen, morning room, family room.
Concern(s): Floor not flat, areas loose, boards with dark streaks. Concrete properly dry?
Individual(s) Present Upon Inspection: Mr, Mrs
Site Description: Residential | New Construction | Single Family | Owner occupied
Adults: 2 | Children: 2 | Pets: 0
AC: Central | Heat: Forced Air | Exterior Gradient: Away from building
Subfloor: Concrete

N/A

History & Maintenance per Interviews and Comments of Involved Parties:

Date Installed: 07 -2010 Date Problem(s) Noticed: 08 -2010
Installed By: Retailer
Mr. and Mrs. reported:

* They closed on the home on 8/13/10.
* The house has been continuously occupied in the period since closing.
* The HVAC system has been in operation throughout the period.
* Maintenance consists of dry soil removal primarily. On one occasion a rag dampened with a water/vinegar mixture was applied by hand.
The Striegels expressed concern that; the floor is bumpy looking (particularly in the kitchen), areas make a hollow sound when tapped, there
are dark streaks in some boards, and filler has been used at some joints. They also questioned if the concrete was properly cured prior to the
installation of the hardwood.

Observations & Applicable Field Tests:

* The hardwood is glued direct to an above grade concrete subfloor throughout most of the main floor.
* The inside temperature was 69 degrees and the relative humidity 54% at the time of this inspection.
* Pin meter readings were taken of the hardwood at 8-9%
* A dry line was stretched across the floor in the kitchen and hall. This is to check for the amount of space between the line and the top of the
floor, (an indicator of the relative flatness of the floor). At no point was there a space greater than 1/8".
* Checks were made by tapping individual boards in various areas. Where hollow sounds were detected all of the surrounding boards were also
checked in the same mannner. Areas were identified that had multiple board courses that made hollow sounds when tapped and also showed
vertical travel when finger pressure was applied. Among those areas were; 4 loose courses in the kitchen near the oven, 3 loose courses near the
sink, at least two loose courses at the pier in the morning room, 6 courses in the family room corner (to the outside wall), 2 loose courses along
the rear wall of the morning room, in the kitchen at the angled wall leading to the hall with at least 2 loose courses.
* Individual boards were seen that had dark streaks.
* Occasional use of filler was noted at the end joints between boards.
* To address the question about the cure of the concrete a Concrete Moisture Encounter was used in the closet containing the water heater with
readings of 3.5 to 4 and under the pier between the kitchen and moring room (after Mr. moved the temporary panel to the rear of the
sink) at 4.
Analysis and Conclusion:

* Armstrong installation instructions state that the subfloor should be: "LEVEL/FLAT - Within 3/16" in 10' (5 mm in 3 m) and/or 1/8" in 6' (3
mm in 2 m). Sand high areas or joints. If the floor is to be glued down, fill low areas with a latex additive cementitious leveling compound of
3,000 psi minimum compressive strength such as Armstrong S-194 Patch, Underlayment and Embossing Leveler with S-195 Latex

Underlayment Additive." The evidence shows that the subfloor meets the minimum requirement for flatness.

* Occasional hollow spots are considered an acceptable condition. The hardwood needs to be firmly attached to the subfloor otherwise. Hollow
areas that affect multiple courses indicate that the flooring is not firmly bonded to the subfloor in the areas described. There are a number of
possible causes for this condition including (but not limited to); localized low areas in the subfloor, failure to apply sufficient adhesive due to
the use of a worn or improperly notched trowel, placing the wood into the adhesive after it has set up, etc. These conditions are installation
related.
* The examination found what appear to be mineral streaks in individual boards. This is a naturally occurring condition in the forest product
and is not a defect.
* Armstrong installation instructions state: "Use of stain, filler or putty stick for touch-up and appropriate products for correcting subfloor voids
is accepted as part of normal installation procedures." The use of putty to fill gaps between boards is an acceptable practice.
* Armstrong identifies several acceptable methods for determining the moisture content in a concrete subfloor. One such method is; "Tramex
Concrete Moisture Encounter meter (Figure 3). Moisture readings should not exceed 4.5 on the upper scale. (Figure 3 shows an unacceptable
reading of over 4.5)." The readings taken in the two areas described were below the reading considered acceptable when using this meter for
the purpose of moisture evaluation.
Inspection Date: 10-14-10 Inspected by: --------

Sounds right on according to the manufacturer with the exception of those multiple rows that sound hollow. Small areas within a couple rows seem acceptable to be but I level my floors. Looking at that level on the pic you posted tells me no one spoke to you about it which makes it unacceptable.

Here's one like that I did last week for a client. Took six hours, 55 lineal feet of cracks not all as bad as this major one running down the center of the livingroom. At 10 bucks a foot I totally under bid this one. lol
Course she still needs about ten bags of SLC. Thats one thing I see alot out here. Installers and retailers just do not know how to address a crack or humps like these.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/13772863@N08/

No. no one said a thing about slabs and tolerances. We choose a builder who built on a slab because they had more unique looking plans. The other builders do crawl spaces--our plan is on the water and no one has a basement or I should say no one has a dry basement. I still am just stunned that you are allowed to deliver a floor with unlimited hills and valleys as song as each individual one doesn't exceed the tolerance--without using any of the available products to try to achieve flat What about the cut ends being in the middle of the floor. I also have some boards as short as 9 inches. I wonder if I got scraps from another job.

I thought they said they were going to fix those loose and cut planks?

There actually is an industry standard for slab flatness out there, I got it in my computer somewhere. Local building codes may also include that I would imagine. It is hard to imagine that the inspector missed that spot you show in your pictures. Perhaps he was only using a 3 foot ruler instead of a 6 foot staright edge.

Here's a little snippet of a pdf I found on my computer. It should give you enough info so you can get the source as it specify's and take it to your builder or whoever. It's all about F numbers. Your going to have to do a little research on your own.

1.5—Floor flatness changes with time
Concrete shrinks when it loses moisture, and expands
when it gains moisture. When the top of a slab loses more
moisture than the bottom, the differential shrinkage causes
edges and corners of the slab to deflect upward. This is called
curling or warping. Because of this, concrete slabs that are
built flat do not always stay flat.
The foreword of ACI 302.1R states that it is normal to
expect some amount of curling on every project. Control of
curling will be a design challenge if floor specifications are
written to meet both CSI Division 3 and Division 9 flatness
criteria (Construction Specifications Institute 2000; Craig
2004; Holland and Walker 1998; Suprenant 2002b,c). As
shown in the examples by Suprenant (2003d), curling or
warping can cause floor flatness and levelness, as measured
by F-numbers, to decrease by 20 to 50% in a year.
Time-dependent changes in floor profiles occur on every
project, but the magnitude of the profile change can vary.
ACI 117-90 states: “Since neither deflection nor curling will
significantly change a floor’s FF value, there is no time limit
on the measurement of this characteristic.” Flatness
measurements on given floors at different ages, however,
indicate that this statement is not true. Therefore, the design
team should consider how changes in floor profiles with time
might affect:
• The floor covering installers’ ability to meet Division 9
specification requirements; and
• Long-term floor performance after the floor covering
has been installed.
Figure 1.5 shows schematically how flatness of an unreinforced
floor can vary over time. The FF 50 required by a
Division 3 specification—and produced by the contractor—
decreases after 12 months. Because of curling, unreinforced
jointed floors exhibit a similar flatness loss with time. This
creates the gap between Division 3 and 9 requirements.
Design professionals can use one of several approaches to
provide a floor that meets the flatness needs of the floor
covering installer.
Figures 1.6 (a) through (c) show three possible approaches:
• Produce a higher initial FF. The engineer estimates
the decrease in floor flatness with time, then specifies
an initial FF that later drops to the value needed by the
floor covering installer. Making the estimate is difficult

With a hardwood floor that's loose and cupped I would say it's pretty tough if not impossible to determine if the substrate underneath is within spec, by running a string.
Example- Loose areas can look flat to the eye, or a string, where infact there is a dip or void out of spec under that area.

I am passing the f number bit onto my husband. He is an engineer so that will be his thing. Thank you!

Sweet, then he should understand and get up to speed on this quickly being an engineer. Seen it to many times where the concrete guy says "well it got away from us....then the GC thinks...well if I bust this guys B_lls my project/house is going to be severely behind schedule and I will lose my a_s. Then it becomes the flooring guys problem because the retailer who sent out the measure guy does not know his a_s from a hole in the ground....and they look at it and say....just put'r in and we will worry about it later.

C'use my language.

Good luck,
SP

I see a moisture reading of the wood 8-9%. I see no reference to a gradient measurement comparing the top of the boards moisture content and the bottom of the boards moisture content.

Looking at the ambient conditions recorded, the flooring should be reading higher in moisture content, unless that second in time was not the normal rH seen in the residence.

With that said, a bad, out of spec substrate, or trying to use too much adhesive, can cause a engineered floor to be not in a flat plane across the surface.

The guys sent out to look at Armstrong flooring are not independent, from my recent past experience. They work for Armstrong exclusively.

There is nothing wrong with the flooring, from what it sounds. It is all installation.
Someone is protecting their retail dealer.

An independent you commission, would be in your best interest.
www.NWFACP.org

And the NWFA is not fnded by manufacturers towards any bias at all. ha ha sure

He often wonders who's the largest contributor to the NWFA manufacturer wise. Course us lowly peoples are not allowed to see the books. Nor is anyone else. But I heard A/B is highest on the list.