Post Reply 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
MMS- Are some unreliable with high RH?
11-10-2011, 09:03 PM
Post: #36
RE: MMS- Are some unreliable with high RH?
(11-10-2011 08:33 PM)Ernesto Wrote:  I'd be happy to take that up with them or you in court. If my Rapid Rh reader says less than 82% I am golden prior to installation.

Do you understand the difference between past tense, present tense and future tense?

How can anyone possibly know if the floor is going to be over 82% after the floor is installed? Why do YOU test PRIOR to your jobs?

See what teflon can do to your brain? Cool

LOL!! Yes, I suppose I have Teflon Brain Syndrome.... Confused

This is another situation where you aren't following along....Wink If you meet all the parameters for the warranty you are showing due diligence. That is good.

If you install on a floor with no vapor retarder you are liable for any failure, no matter what the readings were or are! Remember when I said some slabs I don't have to test to know they fail? Any missed checkpoint is a failure. No vapor retarder, FAIL! The manufacturer spells this out clearly. Exclamation And the reason they require the slab to be isolated is because they know that a slab with a moisture source has the ability to become extremely wet and fail over time.

Now if a floor is elevated on a deck, and my Rapid RH tests are 80% at 40% depth, I KNOW the floor is not going to be 90% in a year. That's why I test. I do not test floors with no vapor retarder unless I am doing it as a special request for curiosity sake. There is just no point, as the entire installation is a gamble unless the floor is properly mitigated.

JD Grafton
Concrete Answers for Flooring Problems
[email protected]
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 

Share/Bookmark (Show All)
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Technorati Digg MySpace Delicious

Messages In This Thread
RE: MMS- Are some unreliable with high RH? - CC Solutions - 11-10-2011 09:03 PM