NTCA Technical Committee

[cx]

2014 TSP Tech Com minutes.doc

Above is a link to the minutes of the most recent meeting of the NTCA Technical committee at Total Solutions Plus in San Antonio, Texas, on October 25, 2014.

I obtained permission to post this from the chair and vice-chair of the committee, James Woelfel and Nyle Wadford, and from the Executive Director of the NTCA, Bart Bettiga, with the understanding that we would keep the thread content at what was described as "an appropriate level" and I assured them that we would do just that.

Everyone is, of course, welcome to participate and I hope we can get some meaningful discussion going here and perhaps provide the committee members some useful input from the trenches. Some of the committee members are, or/and have been, in the trenches themselves, but they haven't been in all the trenches and we have access here on the forums to trenches everywhere.

This was one of the more interesting such meetings I've attended, although the minutes make the best discussions seem a bit dry and lacking in color. And some portions of the discussions can get pretty specific and proprietary and will not find their way into the minutes at all. And while you might be able to catch a bit of the "tone" in some of the recorded remarks, there's nothing like being in the room at the time. These meetings are always nearly always open to the NTCA membership (and others, I think?) and I encourage all of you to attend one at your next opportunity.

If you see something of interest here and want to comment, please do.

If you don't see something of interest to you here and want to comment on that, please do.

The changes and improvements in your industry start at this level and your input here can move up the line. This committee will meet again in January, 2015, at Surfaces in Las Vegas and ideas or comments posted here can very easily find their way there. If you're bashful and don't wanna comment publicly, feel free to send me a PM and I'll pass your torch to the appropriate member. I'm not at all bashful about that.

[Edit] Link to the outline of Eric Astrachan's Keynote address at the above mentioned TSP gathering. Contains possible additional subject matter for discussion here as recommended by Dan Marvin of MAPEI.

[Tiger Mountain Tile Inc]

No. 9: I don't understand what the "inspection" item is about. What gets inspected? Who is the inspector?

The other thing I don't understand was the new business item. Stone in Steam Showers - this suggestion went down in flames. What was the suggestion?

[jcsa]

Jim,
This will be reviewed again when more information from the MIA is obtained. It is a known fact some stones ( water sensitive ) do not thrive well in steam showers. We are trying to define which ones are the most problematic. We can only make recommendations to contractors, homeowners, ect. on which ones are going to have issues in that environment. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.
This will come up most likely in the next technical meeting if the proper data can be obtained, or at least a report. Sometimes it takes a while to get the correct information. Stay tuned. John Cox

Technical committee member.

[tileaz]

The inspection section will start slowly and cautiously. There are no standards when it comes to inspecting tile work as per a consultant or inspector. We(tile contractors) need a defense against arbitrary conclusions from a consultant. In June during the TCNA Handbook meetings the MIA tried to introduce stone into steam showers, it did not pass. This does not mean stone cannot be put in steam showers but this should be an individual decision not a national standard. I will chime in on these discussions to help forward the discussion. James

[John Bridge]

I do want to keep the dialog here at "an appropriate level," but I find it interesting that a tile contractor says there should be no mastic used in showers (an opinion with which I agree), but industry leaders think it is okay as long as certain considerations are met. Item 6.

Nowadays we have dozens (possibly hundreds) of good thinset products at our disposal, all designed for general or specific uses, with a goodly number of them formulated for "wet areas." Why in the world should we use mastics in wet areas?

[tileaz]

Let me clarify appropriate. This is the first time the NTCA has released minutes to the Technical Committee for public consumption. As chairman of this committee I am interested in feedback from the professional installers(contractors) on this forum. I am also looking for good ideas to help solve issues for tile contractors that are brought forth in front of this committee. This committee has been the birthplace for many standards in the TCNA handbook, but more importantly the committee is charged with updating and editing the NTCA Reference Manual. What I would like to avoid would be any mocking and such of this committee, each person around the table volunteers their time and money to attend this meeting in order to help make better standards and solve issues for us tile contractors. My paying job is as a tile contractor that employs 17 people here in Mesa, AZ. To John's point about mastic, I could not agree more with you, and this is what I was hoping for when we decided to make these minutes public, the mfr's are not going to take mastic off the market for showers until there is pressure to do so. My company only uses thinset in showers and I agree that mastic is a bad idea but there was almost no opposition in the room to remove it from the standards. I hope we can change this attitude for the betterment of the industry.

[Tiger Mountain Tile Inc]

The inspection thing seems like a good idea to me. If I understand the issue correctly, it's that a contractor may find themselves at the mercy of whatever the judgement of the particular consultant is on any particular day. Standards would force a consultant to play by a certain set of protocols? I would guess this is a case of a few outliers ruining things for the majority?

I'm on the other side of the fence with the mastic issue. I figure that if a customer wants to pay the cheapest price, and hire the cheapest installer, to use the cheapest products, to install the cheapest tile- why does there need to be a rule against it? To me, those 4 parties are meant for each other. But that's just the way I see the world and I recognize that I'm probably not in the majority on this one.

The steam shower issue I'm not sure I understand: Does the MIA currently recognize any stone as being ok to install in a steam shower? It sounds like the TCNA doesn't currently have a method for any type of stone in a steamer? So right now if we install a steam shower with any kind of natural stone we'd be doing it with no recognized method; aka- we're on our own?

One question on the thin panel issue: The 95% coverage that seems to be difficult to achieve- is this for exteriors/wet areas only? or is 95% coverage being applied to all TPT installations?

-------

It's interesting to me to read over the minutes and get a glimpse of what's going on in my industry. Hopefully we'll be able to keep this going.

[Brad Denny]

Thanks so much for allowing cx to make this available James, and congrats on the new appointment.
cx, wonderful idea to have discussions about these issues for those of us tied down and unable to attend!

1. Thin Tile/Large format discussion/Rapid Set open time, over membranes or not:
I have been working with Crossville, trying to gather all I can to prepare for TPT, and making it known that our company wants to install it. I am looking forward to standards. I for one would love to see mortar beds recommended for all TPT to help achieve the flatness necessary to get closer to 95% coverage. I suppose I can see that kind of coverage possible with a thinset mortar OR specialty adhesive and trowel combo, but without a super flat wall or floor it isn't possible, and from what we see in the real world there aren't many other methods than mortar beds that can get it there, maybe structural foam, but that's probably another discussion.

2. Spot Bonding Statement
Interior vertical "dry" areas, right?

3. Crack isolation movement joints in regards to stone tile-White Paper
Would the thickness of the tile make any difference?

4. Assessment of Hollow tile/ Floating floors – Document
Initially, this sounds scary.

5. Nano Coating Technology – Document
Seems like that would be in fine print on the side of a box?

6. Mastic in Showers, Remove from TCNA Handbook Discussion
I can see leaving mastic as an option for tubs, but think removing it from showers is a good idea. The language limits its use to small and mostly thirsty tiles, so it seems to narrow the options quite a bit.

7. Lightweight CBU’s – too flexible for walls?
Wouldn't there be tile size or thickness that made a huge difference in performance?

8. Wash lighting discussion
I think final lighting is the only way to accurately battle this. As soon as we give ourselves a way to get it right, there could be cases where the mockup light isn't as bright or casts a different shadow or...? Without final lighting recommendation we could burn ourselves.

Stone in Steam Showers
It seems limiting to blanket all stones as unsuitable for steam, but having a place to report problematic stones in wet areas for a national registry to be established might be a way to track the bad ones.

[Higher Standard Tile]

CX thanks for posting and the NTCA for allowing it to be posted.

For those that were in the room. Any more input on the following items?

Originally Posted by From Meeting Minutes

Buck Collins asked Mfgr’s to explain what was full cure time and minimum elapsed time before traffic could be allowed. Hightower answered that the larger a tile, the longer the cure time, but 48 hours would suffice for foot traffic no matter the tile size. Chairman Woelfel asked the difference between “curing” and “setting” of cementitious mortars. Steve Taylor gave the answer.

What was Steve's answer?

and

Chairman Woelfel asked Rich Goldberg if a consultant could tell if a Rapid Set failure could be forensically explained. Rich answered that the engineering of the material would show why it failed. Hightower said that shear failure is visible. He went on to say that testing is required with each specific tile/membrane/mortar combination at TCNA or Mfgr labs.

Tim Bolby said that their installation instructions are consistent with the mortar Mfgr’s recommendations and that Rapid Set mortars are not currently compatible with TPT.

[John Bridge]

Originally Posted by Jim - Tiger Mountain

I'm on the other side of the fence with the mastic issue. I figure that if a customer wants to pay the cheapest price, and hire the cheapest installer, to use the cheapest products, to install the cheapest tile- why does there need to be a rule against it? To me, those 4 parties are meant for each other.

Remember that standards are not rules or laws. People can do anything they want no matter how many standards are penned. Standards often only come into play in a court of law as in "prevailing standards" and "best practices."

[Art of Stone]

I want to say, "The decision to disclose the minutes of the meeting, should be applauded".

This is a great way to boost awareness, interest and participation, of multiple areas of our overall industry. The JB Forum is a great platform, to do just that.

I am in absolute favor of disclosure and hope this practice continues.

[Steve Taylor]

I was asked the difference between "curing and setting". Curing is the hydration process of the cement. As the cement hydrates, crystals grow and interlock. The longer this continues the stronger the cement becomes and this process is indefinite. The majority of the strength is achieved in 28 days. Setting is a laboratory test of how stiff the mortar is at a certain time or at what time will it support a given amount of weight. This is used to determine the time that traffic can be allowed on the tiles assembly and is specified by the mortar manufacturer. We have definitions, but many use these terms interchangeably to know when the assembly can be put into service.

[K_Tile]

Originally Posted by Steve

The longer this continues the stronger the cement becomes and this process is indefinite.

Since we are getting into winter months. Would the process stop at 40 degrees or at freezing?

[cx]

The hydration process would slow a great deal if the Portland mix reaches those temperatures, Kevin, but it doesn't actually stop until the temperature drops below about 14 degrees Fahrenheit.

[eurob]

Originally Posted by TPT

Hightower said that it is possible to get the desired 95% coverage, but the only way to get an accurate measure is to wait until the mortar has cured before checking. He also said that Mapei’s newest mortar can guarantee that the 95% minimum will be reached.

How can we measure -- checking -- if the 95% coverage is accurate while setting the tile ?

What is the name of the newest mortar ?

Originally Posted by TPT

Chairman Woelfel asked Rich Goldberg if a consultant could tell if a Rapid Set failure could be forensically explained. Rich answered that the engineering of the material would show why it failed.

Could you elaborate more on the engineering of the material ? Are we talking about failure which is visible under the microscope and can point the tester to why it failed -- expired product , too much water , improper mixing , etc. --.

Originally Posted by TPT

Tim Bolby said that their installation instructions are consistent with the mortar Mfgr’s recommendations and that Rapid Set mortars are not currently compatible with TPT. Jan Hohn asked if the “halo effect” that Conner had spoken of put the tile contractor in the position of liability.

Why the rapid setting mortars are not compatible with the TPT ?

What is '' halo effect '' ?



Thank you .