Butech anticracking anti fracture mat - experience?

[triode]

Hi

Not strictly a DIYer but have come to learn a bit about tiling over the last few weeks. We had a large open plan area tiled over a wet UFH system. Our tiles are from Porcelanosa (don't ask, the wife of course!), 60 by 60 format. We were recommended to use the butech antifracture mat and this was specified on an M40 spec. The tiles were laid over May and into June. We realised within a few weeks that the grout was showing signs of break up and some of the tiles had visible movement on their corners. Most of the tiles sound hollow or even loose.

Initially it was thought that the tiler had made a bad job and he'd not used enough adhesive in places. However, in the areas he tiled without a membrane or mat, the tiles are solidly adhesed.

The builders, to be fair, have taken ownership of the problem. The tiler is devastated and has agreed to come back and fix. We have started taking the whole floor up.

The main technical man from Butech/porcelanosa UK has been back and provided a report. Initially this was critical of the tiler and he claimed tiles had not been 'back butted' and no adhesive on the edges. A couple of tilers have looked at it and have a different take, stating that there is a 'full bed' and without the mat the tiles would be stuck solid.

We are now in the process of taking up the whole floor and salvaging as many tiles as possible. It is apparent that the tiles lift up very easily off the mat. There is a lot of new fangled product on the market but the fundamental of a tile being stuck to the floor hasn't changed. It seems that the decoupling mat just makes the tile layer 'float' and the only thing bonding the tiles is the grout.

It seems the evidence is starting to point towards a material failure but it may be rather hard to get a large organisation like Butech to admit this.

Any experience with this product that you can share would be most welcome.

Chris

 

[J Sid]

Sorry to hear you are having problems.

I take it the mat was only used where you had ufh? And none matted area didn't have ufh
Had the underfloor heating been turned on before you noticed the failure?
What is the area size that has failed and what expansion joints are In this area?

 

[triode]

Thanks for showing interest Julian.

The mat was omitted in a shower room where there is UFH but the floor area is small. ALso no mat in a pantry area and a small storage area off the open plan. The tiles here are solidly fixed and sound totally different when tapped - ie not hollow.

The area is approx 120m2. There are no expansion joints but this was no specified although several passing observers have felt these were/are worth putting in.

Failure was noted before the UFH was turned on / commissioned due to the sequencing of other works. It is not felt failure is screed related.

Just wonder what experience is out there with this fracture mat. As a consumer you are sold a product but you don't expect it to contribute to problems.

Thanks,
Chris

 

[J Sid]

I don't know this mat but would be very surprised if if the reason for failure, maybe wrong.
120m2 is far to big and will cause a failure with ufh. What you describe I have seen a few times due to wrong expansion joints and more often wrong commissioning process with ufh even with the correct expansion joints.
So no heat in pantry, storage area.

Sadly it looks like your floor was not commissioned correctly or tiled correctly.

What adhesive was used? Not that it makes much difference as I said above
[automerge]1571225056[/automerge]
Who gave you the M40 Spec? As was it followed to the letter?

 

[Old Mod]

Was your screed moisture tested?
that’s a large area, what type of screed is it please?

 

[hmtiling]

Is the tile lifting cleanly from the mat or mat from the screed or both?

 

[Dumbo]

A picture showing the back of a lifted tile and also the membrane where it came from , this would be informative .

 

[triode]

I don't know this mat but would be very surprised if if the reason for failure, maybe wrong.
120m2 is far to big and will cause a failure with ufh. What you describe I have seen a few times due to wrong expansion joints and more often wrong commissioning process with ufh even with the correct expansion joints.
So no heat in pantry, storage area.

Sadly it looks like your floor was not commissioned correctly or tiled correctly.

What adhesive was used? Not that it makes much difference as I said above
[automerge]1571225056[/automerge]
Who gave you the M40 Spec? As was it followed to the letter?

Thanks again. Grateful for any input on this.

problems present before UFH on/commissioned. The UFH was not commissioned for some time due to schedule of build. Therefore UFH is not a factor here.
All adhesives flexible from Butech.
M40 spec followed closely. Not quite sure 'to the letter'.

Video of a tile being lifted below -

New item added to shared album

photos.google.com

Whole thing getting lifted up to be done right. Just hope the mistakes of first time round are not repeated.

Will try and post pictures of back of tile - but all who've looked at this say it is an adequate bed and the tile has been back buttered.

Cheers, Chris

 

[triode]

Is the tile lifting cleanly from the mat or mat from the screed or both?

The tile is lifting from the mat with no or little adhesion. The adhesive seems to be sticking to the screed. The mat lifts off this layer relatively easily. The adhesion problem seems to be at the interface between mat and adhesive. This seems to be a anti sticking mat!

Whilst the mat gathered some dust due to other construction the mat was laid fresh on the first bed of adhesive and doesn't stick to that - it lifts up whole without ripping.

 

[Dumbo]

Really need pictures to see technique also showing mat to screed adhesive