• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Mositure Testing Over Concrete Discussion

#11
I have to disagree. I work (more or less) for one of those manufacturers.

In discussions with the Tech Dept. the only reason we still have ASTM F1869 testing in the spec next to ASTM 2170 testing is that ASTM F1869 is still used by so many contractors. And when you force the contractors to do the ASTM F2170 testing they really overcharge for it. I saw one bid recently where to do the Wagner probes the bid came in at over 300% the cost of the Wagner probes.

There are plenty of commercial flooring mfg's who focus on ASTM 2170. A good example is Nora. They have removed ASTM F1869 almost completely. We may do the same thing in coming years. The biggest issue for us is the reliability of ASTM F2170. The variations between Wagner products, Linomat products, GE Protimeter products are just too great. You can get the same sort of fuzzy test results with ASTM F2170 as you can with ASTM F1869. With ASTM F2170 you just have to switch products you are using. (believe me - anyone want to buy my extra Protimeter probes? please!) Also, with ASTM F1869 you can get different test results based on desiccate size & test kit mfg. However, the reason we push for the rh testing on jobs is that ASTM F2170 is stronger in relation to floor prep and time.

Most ASTM F1869 tests in California are placed in two visits (not the required three) they don't remove the top carbonation and (for me) are usually done by PE's, inspectors, and CalDSA who if you question ... you will have great heartache as they can get vindictive. With ASTM F2170 I can get reasonably reproducible results with the same equipemnt. Joe Nasvik is working with ASTM committee F-6 on revising the ASTM F2170 test to make it more reliable between products. Has called for people to provide their experiences here: http://www.concreteconstruction.net/blogs/postdetails.aspx?BlogId=concretethoughts&PostId=102279

However, the existence of the ASTM F1869 in boilerplate specs still screws me. If ASTM F2170 comes in high, the GC will have the above inspectors do ASTM F1869 which will usually come in low, and then I inevitably have a fight with the GC and the Architect/Owner isn't qualified to make the decision between the two. And all that confrontation ... it hurts the brand name.





Reply

#12
Hilarious that we both posted at the same time and we both praised Nora and bashed Protimeter!!! Big Grin

Who do you work for? Believe me, I KNOW your pain.... Wink
JD Grafton
Concrete Answers for Flooring Problems
[email protected]
Reply

#13
Quote:However, the reason we push for the rh testing on jobs is that ASTM F2170 is stronger in relation to floor prep and time.

I knew it was just about time. Big Grin Still no one can determine wether or not rh numbers coiincide with emissions out of the surface on every slab.

I've said this before and I'll say it again, even Bob does NOT agree with me but in ASTM F1869 there's no reason to grind off the top if there is no sealer on it. especially if you intend to go over it without sanding it anyway. In that situation you should be able to do the test in 2 days. Otherwise you get higher than normal numbers.

Next time I decide to throw down some CaCl tests I will do three extra ones not sanded just to prove it.Tongue
Stephen Perrera dba
Top Floor Installation Co.
http://www.tucsonazflooring.com
http://www.floorsavior.com
Reply

#14
Ouch Ouch Ouch....
Astm 1869 does not require grinding, but if that is what you are going to do.....

The real problem with 1869 is that it doesn't pick up the variables. I can have a super wet slab at 99% Rh and 1869 will say it's good for any flooring .
I have seen hundreds of these floors fail....
JD Grafton
Concrete Answers for Flooring Problems
[email protected]
Reply

#15
Tests sites are to be cleaned of all adhesive residue, curing compounds, paints, sealers, floor coverings, etc. 24 hours prior to the placement of test kits.

The only way I know how to do that is to grind it.

I often refer customers to this youtube:
http://youtu.be/C3GmF8mCJxc
Reply

#16
(04-10-2011, 05:56 PM)eaadams Wrote:  Tests sites are to be cleaned of all adhesive residue, curing compounds, paints, sealers, floor coverings, etc. 24 hours prior to the placement of test kits.

The only way I know how to do that is to grind it.

I often refer customers to this youtube:
http://youtu.be/C3GmF8mCJxc

I can spot three errors in that video that the ASTM calls for. If someone is going to make a video on how to properly conduct a CaCl test, they should follow the ASTM! Sad

As for grinding, there is nothing in the ASTM that calls it out. I can see how grinding can throw the MVER rate off (I always sand the floor by hand with either plumber's tape or a mason's stone). If there is a sealer on the floor that restricts the MVER and you grind through it, you will increase the MVER. So if your goal is to determine the MVER of the floor as it will be when flooring is applied, I think you should prep it the same way the flooring installer will prep it.
JD Grafton
Concrete Answers for Flooring Problems
[email protected]
Reply

#17
Hows that video wrong? I've never actually bought the astm-1869 but I always follow the test manufacturers directions. Some say "mechanically remove" sealers, paints etc etc. I don't believe I have ever heard of anyone stating it should be performed by hand. No wonder your cacl tests are off.Big Grin

I got one here , Vapor Guage that shows a picture of a guy using a grinder.

Taylors says remove sealers, paint etc by approved OSHA methods. What ever that means.Rolleyes

I've ground off 1/4 inch of the top layer on some concrete jobs for a crack repair, (see attachment). The slab had been sealed using a penetrating sealer. It still would not absorb water. The guy who placed the sealer said it penetrated down 1 inch into the slab and I believe him. i doubt a bead blaster wold get it.



Another question is why do they say in astm-1869 not to test coatings? How you going to tell if your mitigation syatem is working or not?

Quote:1.3 This test shall not be used to evaluate moisture vapor emissions over coatings on concrete or over patching or leveling compounds.

(04-11-2011, 06:18 AM)CC Solutions Wrote:  If there is a sealer on the floor that restricts the MVER and you grind through it, you will increase the MVER. So if your goal is to determine the MVER of the floor as it will be when flooring is applied, I think you should prep it the same way the flooring installer will prep it.

Exactly, but if the sealer is not compatable with the adhesive then you must take it off or find another way to install the floor, like floating. And thats why they changed the standard to say you must "mechanically" remove sealers, paint etc. So the mver is raised thus forcing people to use mitigation systems.


Attached Files
.jpg   Roth wide plank european oak 005.JPG (Size: 66.43 KB / Downloads: 5)
Stephen Perrera dba
Top Floor Installation Co.
http://www.tucsonazflooring.com
http://www.floorsavior.com
Reply

#18
Why remove sealers though? If someone sprayed a silicate sealer on a slab in an effort to minimize MVER and then you remove the sealer just in the test area, you really aren't getting the true MVER of the slab.

Another thought: on a burned black slab where the top 1/8" or so is sealed by using a steel trowel, if you grind off the top layer of concrete you will read a much higher MVER compared to not removing that layer. If the installer is not removing the top of the concrete why would you test it that way?

I believe that even when a slab has a low MVER if it is very wet it will still cause problems due to high alkalinity.
JD Grafton
Concrete Answers for Flooring Problems
[email protected]
Reply

#19
(04-11-2011, 08:31 AM)CC Solutions Wrote:  Why remove sealers though? If someone sprayed a silicate sealer on a slab in an effort to minimize MVER and then you remove the sealer just in the test area, you really aren't getting the true MVER of the slab.

Another thought: on a burned black slab where the top 1/8" or so is sealed by using a steel trowel, if you grind off the top layer of concrete you will read a much higher MVER compared to not removing that layer. If the installer is not removing the top of the concrete why would you test it that way?

I believe that even when a slab has a low MVER if it is very wet it will still cause problems due to high alkalinity.

Lots of sealers are not compatable with every adhesive. Adhesive manufacturers tell you to remove ALL of them and will not list which ones are ok. Sure you can do a bond test, that takes more time.

I'm with ya on the steel troweled part and not grinding prior to a test if your not going to anyhow. Been saying that all along.

I still do not believe all the mositure in a slab is going to come through the surface. These manufacturers of testing kits along with astm are taking for granted that every slab is going to be sanded or bead blasted thus opening the surface.

It's no wonder 90% of the jobs are not tested. It just don't jive.Cool

Stephen Perrera dba
Top Floor Installation Co.
http://www.tucsonazflooring.com
http://www.floorsavior.com
Reply

#20
To both your statements the answer is ... because concrete cracks.

Silicates, don't get me started on those suede shoe criminals.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  ICRI pH testing Concrete Repair Bulletin eaadams 4 2,474 05-20-2014, 12:00 PM
Last Post: Ashok Kakade
  35-40 year old concrete with moisture problems Tscdad 13 7,474 05-19-2014, 10:55 AM
Last Post: eaadams
  Concrete Hood Method Blake McFee 9 27,375 11-08-2013, 01:41 PM
Last Post: eaadams
  Tandus removes moisture testing requirement eaadams 2 4,132 09-27-2013, 10:26 AM
Last Post: eaadams
  RH in Concrete for Wood Floor with Vapor Membrane eaadams 35 64,198 05-01-2013, 07:20 AM
Last Post: jim decker
Question Concrete Cork Sandwich Floor System JKJeremy 4 8,264 01-30-2013, 04:43 PM
Last Post: eaadams
  RH Testing Thick Slabs CCR 33 48,255 11-21-2012, 10:19 AM
Last Post: eaadams
  Calcium Carbide testing and Silicates Lepito 51 83,567 11-19-2012, 11:59 AM
Last Post: ILLENTINC
  Carbide moisture testing CC Solutions 4 8,708 09-18-2012, 06:11 PM
Last Post: CC Solutions
  Testing Cost eaadams 22 33,694 07-30-2012, 07:01 PM
Last Post: Ernesto

Digg   Delicious   Reddit   Facebook   Twitter   StumbleUpon  


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)