Howard Kanare Speaks Out On Moisture Emission Tests

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Stephen on April 1, 2009 at 9:59pm

This was just sent to me today, April 1, 2009. I hope it wasn't an April fools joke. Ha ha

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stephen on April 4, 2009 at 10:41am

So after a few exchanges of emails between buddy's of mine I decided to copy Bob Higgins and a couple other great minds of the industry.
Seems there is some descrepency between what these moisture tests do. What else is new?

Below is what Bob Higgens repiled with:

Subject: re: RH probes versus CaCl testing


Thank you for including me in this topic and wow, there is so much to cover, I almost don't know where to start.
First off - let's stick with scientific principles. There is a reason the term "relative humidity" exists.
Relative humidity is how much moisture can be suspended percentage-wise;


Edit; Sorry, had to delete this email from Bob Higgins. Just when you thought the calcium chloride tests were done for. Ole Bob makes quite the argument against not using them.

Wish I could post this but...it's on a need to know basis right now. All I can say is clearly there is still a need for them unless Howard can refute Bob's answer.

Ciao,
SP

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stephen on April 5, 2009 at 10:32am

Depends on the judge and state, but ya gotta you have it in writing that it may change and possibly ruin the flooring if they decide to not go with some sort of vapor retarder.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Roland Thompson on April 5, 2009 at 11:28am

If you do all the testing,log and take photo's of all the testing and go over the findings with the customer and at time of install it all meets manufactors spec's you can not be held responsable for change's in substrate.
Been doing it this way for years and have had two times someone tried to say our fault and it never made it to court, they backed out once they saw all my info.

Roland

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stephen on April 5, 2009 at 4:18pm

Ya mean like this sort of?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scott Tullis on April 6, 2009 at 11:10am

The whole system is full of holes and almost worthless except to those milking it for all the ching they can get out of it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stephen on April 6, 2009 at 12:41pm

Picky picky picky :)) The year it was installed. :) Thats on my invoice.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scott Tullis on April 9, 2009 at 10:08pm

Wouldn't a good attorney just say those photos were just forged? ;)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Stephen on April 10, 2009 at 8:14am

Most likely. However the burden of proof would be on him to prove it was faked.

Just the fact you submitted evidence that the test was performed correctly turns the tide on any lawsuit.

But still, yes, you might be taken to court. This is why the installation community needs that White paper to be re-written to protect the contractor, not to simply make money off him to have some goof off come in and do testing for him. Hell, I can perform my own damn tests.

How would I know this "expert" knows what the heck he is doing?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by said too much.. on April 10, 2009 at 4:59pm

Sir Howard the good talker. not so much accurate or honorable.
these people stole job from me....... bigass tile failure they took from me by sending them a sample to test

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bob Higgins on April 15, 2009 at 11:15am

I couldn't possibly disagree with this statement by Mr. Kanare more. Relative humidity is MORE affected by temperature than any other method of testing. In turn, this makes RH testing unreliable when being used as a predictor of safe floor covering placement. There is a scientific basis for this opinion..and virtually ANYONE can become something of an expert, if they watch the weather reports closely and see HOW relative humidity is affected by changes in air temperature. The established recommendation for years in the painting industry is to not apply a coating if the surface temperature is within 5 degrees of dewpoint..that rule-of-thumb alone would prevent the majority of "moisture-related" flooring failures.

As I have stated in the past, and indicated by others, I believe RH probes are wonderful devices (in my opinion, irreplaceable) for measuring a newer/freshly placed concrete slab for curing effectiveness and for maturity. In fact, I believe that RH humidity probes will become a future standard for the testing of curing effectiveness in newly placed concrete.

Here are the scientific principles for WHY humidity probes are NOT as effective when compared to CaCl Testing of concrete moisture volume:

- CaCl testing gives an accurate volume over a wide range of temperatures in a normal use environment.
- RH Testing cannot measure moisture volume. Humidity changes roughly 5% for every 2 degree F change in temperature.

- CaCl testing measures volume, irrespective of the pore volume in concrete, giving a relatively constant number.
- RH Testing cannot determine the space size..for example, if measuring a one centimeter pore, a two centimeter pore or three centimeter pore, a RH Test will give them equal value, unable to determine there is a 2 or 3 time volume increase as determined by pore size/volume.

but:
- CaCl cannot determine if the moisture is influenced by changes in the room, or the moisture originates from underneath, or some other source.
- RH Tests can show differentials if the moisture is surface condensation, or the moisture is migrating up from the soil.

The simple accompanying graph will show what happens to humidity as the temperatures change, even when the volume of moisture/water is constant.

This being said...there is a gross over-reliance on moisture testing..there are NO scientifically established safe or dangerous levels of moisture. In other words, moisture levels are simply ONE indicator, pH and alkalinity (which are different and non-correlative) are at LEAST as important a consideration..but most, if not ALL pH tests are conducted improperly. I can expand on that (pH testing) if there is enough interest.

Attachments:

• relativehumidity.JPG, 48 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bob Higgins on April 15, 2009 at 3:31pm

testing for alkalinity is tricky...one of the telltale signs it is very complex is when the litmus paper "rainbows" (turning multiple colors)..STOP and get the concrete analyzed. Too often people wait to see what the final color is before they make a judgement on what the pH is. the natural pH of any of the concrete components should never be less than 9. If acidic colors bands show, it is a possible indicator of other undesirable chemical reactions going on.

To properly test for pH is a point of discussion on what the floor exposure is going to be..one thing people continuously get confused..high alkalinity and highly alkaline do NOT mean the same thing. The "normal" alkaline components of concrete are responsive to opposing temperature influences, which REALLY complicates things.

I will blog about this on the forum here if Stephen would like..and try to keep it in bite-sized chunks...some of the information was even news to a couple university professors who confirmed the science behind these complications, and is "new" information for the concrete industry.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page