Butech anticracking anti fracture mat - experience? - Tile Advice

[Dumbo]

I would have to check but I think. Wrong size trowel for membrane to floor and not bedded in properly . Maybe adhesive a bit dry , see photo .
Also from picture of tile I think looking at tile edges it appears adhesive was applied to tile and not floor and that is why the bond is weak there

 

[triode]

I would have to check but I think. Wrong size trowel for membrane to floor and not bedded in properly . Maybe adhesive a bit dry , see photo .
Also from picture of tile I think looking at tile edges it appears adhesive was applied to tile and not floor and that is why the bond is weak there View attachment 110489

Thanks, yes I noticed these areas in adhesive between screed and membrane that are not flattened and still ridged or notched. I was not around when tiles laid - are you saying the correct technique is to out adhesive on both back of tile and direct onto membrane before sticking it down?
Thanks,
Chris

 

[Dumbo]

You should spread adhesive onto membrane and back butter the tile at the least

 

[Dumbo]

Now I've just looked at the video and it would appear that tile was stuck well enough to the mat to make the mat delaminated from itself . So really not sure . I would test the mat .

 

[Dumbo]

May be lack of technique isn't the reason for failure but because of this you would struggle to prove to a manufacturer that their system is faulty . I would stick a patch to the floor properly , stick a tile on top using the correct technique including collapsing the ridges , leave it for a couple of days if using rapid set then lift the tile and see what happens. Also maybe do another at the same time just in case it needs to be left longer.

 

[triode]

May be lack of technique isn't the reason for failure but because of this you would struggle to prove to a manufacturer that their system is faulty . I would stick a patch to the floor properly , stick a tile on top using the correct technique including collapsing the ridges , leave it for a couple of days if using rapid set then lift the tile and see what happens. Also maybe do another at the same time just in case it needs to be left longer.

Thanks a lot for taking an interest and your comments. I think I am reaching the same conclusion: Technique not perfect so hard to prove against manufacturer. We may well run test as you suggest.
Best wishes, Chris

 

[Dumbo]

Thanks a lot for taking an interest and your comments. I think I am reaching the same conclusion: Technique not perfect so hard to prove against manufacturer. We may well run test as you suggest.
Best wishes, Chris

It's the only way , for peace of mind for future installation as much as anything else

 

[J Sid]

Jerry, a slow set adhesive will take many weeks to reach full bond strength if mixed correctly. We haven't been told what adhesive was used, how long it was down before it started failing.

 

[Dan]

There was a (dural ci?) Matting failure issue some years ago. A bad batch of matting. To be fair to them (or whoever it was - I will edit my post when corrected) they replaced all floor failures, scrapped the batch, and got their batches fixed within a few months.

Other than that one time with one batch of one product, I don't think I've ever known a failure with any form of these mattings. And there are a few now. Schluter being the original kings, and for a long time, nobody else came to market with one then all of a sudden everybody did.

But still no failures even with the gold rush, as it were.

So from a layman's (non-tiler) perspective I would guess it isn't the matting at all. Not much can go wrong with them on their own I don't think.

Almost always a human error when floors use (and really do rely on) a lot of materials and chemical reactions for bonds to take place. Things need to go just right for each layer to compliment and support the next.

Just a 2p of mine but not helpful in your exact case now I guess.

It will be a lovely floor once down again. Get that bit right and argue with whoever about blame and costs as you go on. That's a floor for life when sorted.

 

[Old Mod]

Looking at the images, some are not as they should be.
Adhesive definitely seems too dry in places, and a lot of adhesive under the mat. There should be no signs of trowelling, under mat or tile.
It’s not always the case where one thing is the cause of a failure, quite often it’s a collection of small things that lead to a catastrophic failure such as this.
Its interesting to hear that both the contractor and tiler have agreed to take responsibility.
What’s led them to this decision?

Was the screed primed at all?
An un primed screed can suck all the moisture straight out of the adhesive, and would give the appearance of adhesive being to dry, as above in some images.
And an incorrect commissioning of the ufh would exasperate other issues.
This is a live demonstration video by Butech themselves.
I appreciate salesman technique may be present, but you’ll be able to see why they’re reluctant to take responsibility.

 

[Time's Ran Out]

Ok my take on this mat!
I’ve used it a couple of times in August as it was specified by Porcelanosa and supplied direct to the customer ie. we were labour only!
In my opinion it’s just a roll of stiff J cloth type material that we stuck using their butech adhesive and weight rolled for complete adhesion.
Plank tiles were then fixed and grouted - all butech products.
On completion and within a month I noticed some grout missing, added more additive to grout as supplied and touched up. I showed the builder my concerns with their specified materials and he is aware of the possible outcome.
IMHO this matting is a waxy type surface layer that does not encourage a satisfactory bond with the tiles - so this OP thread is of no surprise to me and I envisage an awful lot more issues in the future.
To elaborate on @Dan post about the Dural failure of a few years ago - their popular decoupling membrane is a 2 part roll that uses an adhesive technology to weld the 2 layers together. A batch manufactured over a 3 month period failed and to their credit the German manufacturers settled every claim that was brought to their attention.
However like this issue now with the Butech matting the Tiler gets the blame first, guilt and responsibility sets in and without notification and support he offers to replace the failure at his expense.
On the Dural situation I knew I had done everything correct so stood my corner and after a short delay received a substantial compensation payment for the customer which allowed for redoing the floor and something for their inconvenience .
I have a roll of Butech mat from the August project which I was going to skip ( not a product I have any confidence in using again) but I shall now keep in case of future testing!

John

 

[triode]

Ok my take on this mat!
I’ve used it a couple of times in August as it was specified by Porcelanosa and supplied direct to the customer ie. we were labour only!
In my opinion it’s just a roll of stiff J cloth type material that we stuck using their butech adhesive and weight rolled for complete adhesion.
Plank tiles were then fixed and grouted - all butech products.
On completion and within a month I noticed some grout missing, added more additive to grout as supplied and touched up. I showed the builder my concerns with their specified materials and he is aware of the possible outcome.
IMHO this matting is a waxy type surface layer that does not encourage a satisfactory bond with the tiles - so this OP thread is of no surprise to me and I envisage an awful lot more issues in the future.
To elaborate on @Dan post about the Dural failure of a few years ago - their popular decoupling membrane is a 2 part roll that uses an adhesive technology to weld the 2 layers together. A batch manufactured over a 3 month period failed and to their credit the German manufacturers settled every claim that was brought to their attention.
However like this issue now with the Butech matting the Tiler gets the blame first, guilt and responsibility sets in and without notification and support he offers to replace the failure at his expense.
On the Dural situation I knew I had done everything correct so stood my corner and after a short delay received a substantial compensation payment for the customer which allowed for redoing the floor and something for their inconvenience .
I have a roll of Butech mat from the August project which I was going to skip ( not a product I have any confidence in using again) but I shall now keep in case of future testing!

John

John - very intersting. Certainly we are not getting a satisfactory bond across most of the floor. What I've come to realise is that as a non tiler, you take the advice of a sales person who tells you that this product is needed for your 'guarantee'. You take this at face value but then when something like this happens you think, what was that 'guarantee' anyway as they will always look at an issue with the installer.
Thanks for your input. So your client is currently unaware of potential issues?
Yes, the tiler who did this job was gutted. He is not wealthy enough to replace materials but is giving his labour back for nothing.
Another tiler who looked at the floor said he'd done a job with Butech and so far OK but if this had happened to him he'd have a heart attack.
Still... it's only a floor, annoying but can be put right even if it means chucking more money and time at it.
Best wishes, Chris
[automerge]1571299406[/automerge]
Butech - Porce quick (3 hours set) and super one N 4 hour set.
[automerge]1571299534[/automerge]

Looking at the images, some are not as they should be.
Adhesive definitely seems too dry in places, and a lot of adhesive under the mat. There should be no signs of trowelling, under mat or tile.
It’s not alwaybut you’ll be able to see why they’re reluctant to take responsibility.


View attachment 110504
[/QUOT

Looking at the images, some are not as they should be.
Adhesive definitely seems too dry in places, and a lot of adhesive under the mat. There should be no signs of trowelling, under mat or tile.
It’s not always the case where one thing is the cause of a failure, quite often it’s a collection of small things that lead to a catastrophic failure such as this.
Its interesting to hear that both the contractor and tiler have agreed to take responsibility.
What’s led them to this decision?

Was the screed primed at all?
An un primed screed can suck all the moisture straight out of the adhesive, and would give the appearance of adhesive being to dry, as above in some images.
And an incorrect commissioning of the ufh would exasperate other issues.
This is a live demonstration video by Butech themselves.
I appreciate salesman technique may be present, but you’ll be able to see why they’re reluctant to take responsibility.


View attachment 110504

I am told screed was primed.
As far as I can tell have commissioned UFH OK.
Thanks for vid - have seen this from the Porcelanosa guy... He is a total believer in his product.

 

[Dan]

Yeah fair play @timeless john you stuck to your guns mate and so you should too.

From my perspective we only saw that dural problem and just the one batch. And we had 1 thread a week for a while and we kept sending them to dural and once they realised it was them, there was no questioning. They would replace it.

That said for the size of a roll I would keep my off cuts if I got bit once.

 

[triode]

screed - yes i think it was primed, so I am told.
Builders say they will put right and don't walk away from job. They were insistent on subcontracting this work even though I'd made initial approaches to a couple of other tilers. They wanted to take their cut and as it's their contractor it's their responsibility. We've given builders a lot of work on this job and always paid up on time - thankfully they value that.
Tiler initially mortified. But has since backed off a little. The builders were not going to pursue but I told them he has to at least give time and labour to putting it right.
It was concluded at this stage it would be hard to prove fault with materials and that we should get on with sorting it.
Initially a guy was recommended who could do a 'resin' injection to stabilise the floor. He quoted 75 quid a square metre and I was a little sceptical about this fix. Any one heard of this? At the price it was better to just get the floor sorted properly.
Chris

 

[Dumbo]

John - very intersting. Certainly we are not getting a satisfactory bond across most of the floor. What I've come to realise is that as a non tiler, you take the advice of a sales person who tells you that this product is needed for your 'guarantee'. You take this at face value but then when something like this happens you think, what was that 'guarantee' anyway as they will always look at an issue with the installer.
Thanks for your input. So your client is currently unaware of potential issues?
Yes, the tiler who did this job was gutted. He is not wealthy enough to replace materials but is giving his labour back for nothing.
Another tiler who looked at the floor said he'd done a job with Butech and so far OK but if this had happened to him he'd have a heart attack.
Still... it's only a floor, annoying but can be put right even if it means chucking more money and time at it.
Best wishes, Chris
[automerge]1571299406[/automerge]
Butech - Porce quick (3 hours set) and super one N 4 hour set.
[automerge]1571299534[/automerge]

Welcome to the world of the installer. That is why if I want to use say a bal product and they if you use all our products on this job it's guaranteed I don't bother. I regularly use different primers to adhesives and grout and silicone . .
I like your attitude yes it's a pain but it's a floor and can be sorted .