Porcelain Tiles - Staining and water ingress

[p20nty]

Hi. I have recently partly laid a bathroom floor using 2'x1' porcelain tiles in my home. The tiles are laid on a 3 ply substrate secured at 6" centres on a new 22mm chipboard batroom grade floor. The tiles were wet cut and laid using Ultratile ProRapid flexible tile adhesive. The day following laying I noticed staining of about 70% tiles which could not be removed using proprietary agents - Flash etc. Appeared as though the stain was under the glazed finish. Inspection of other tiles in the same batch does show staining (before laying). A simple water test on the tiles show water will cause temporary staining of the tiles before they dry out, the supplier arguing that this 'is acceptable and normal for their porcelain tiles' - I thought porcelain was impervious to water? However, on the tiles I set out, cut and laid there was no staining apparent at the point of laying them. The supplier argues that I should not have laid a clearly defective producy, but I contend the stains on the tiles I laid were not visibly stained during laying process (otherwise I would not have laid them). It is the consequential issues of the time cost of ripping up the sub floor and relaying alternative tiles that concerns me but not the tile supplier. Can anyone offer advice please.

 

[Andy Allen]

Are the tiles polished porcelain..?

 

[p20nty]

Hi Andy. Yes tiles are polished - confirmed by supplier.

 

[Andy Allen]

Did you seal them..?

 

[p20nty]

These are polished and sealed tiles - again confirmed by the supplier 'no sealing required'.

 

[ttt tiling]

I'd be really surprised if the tiles didn't dry out . Unglazed porcelain can be sealed once fully dry.

Suppliers can be very holier than thou once the tiles are fixed and if the tiles don't dry out threaten small claims court and bad press!

 

[p20nty]

Yes, I've been careful to avoid naming the supplier - but a big local name. This could very well end up there. The buyer confirmed with supplier that it was a 'defective batch' but all the supplier (to us) is prepared to do is compensate - at cost for the 'unused tiles' - not for the stained laid ones, tile adhesive and 3 ply sub floor boards!! They argue I should have been aware of staining BEFORE tiles were laid. But, I argued that despite marking out tiles (dry and clean) cleaning with clean water after wet cutting and cleaning after laying I should have seen the defects! I would NOT have laid them had the staining been that obvious.



[h=3]

[/h]

 

[Andy Allen]

Im confused. ....you say the staining is under the glaze......polished porcelain tiles are not glazed there a porcelain tile that has been polished some are more porous then others depending on the quality and there fore require plenty of sealing to stop them staining even before fitting..

 

[p20nty]

Perhaps I have used the term 'glazed' incorrectly. I mean sealed. 'Polished and sealed' was the term used when I bought the tiles and would be suitable for bathrooms / showers. The staining appears under the sealed - polished' surface. I noticed today when tiles were removed from packs for further inspection, they were packed in pairs - polished surface to polished surface. And, on some 'pairs' there were 'greasy' type stains, which, when surface wiped, still left marks on the polished (and sealed surface). That's why the supplier has acknowledged the batch was faulty - c80 tiles in total, 60-70% appearing stained to a lessor or higher extent. Point is the tiles I laid, when I laid them didn't manifest staining until following day.

 

[CJ]

Has the surface of the tile got a waxy feel to it??