Third-Party Quality Inspection Report for Engineered Wood Multi-Layer Flooring Client U.S. Importer (Name withheld for confidentiality) Supplier Factory Hanoi, Vietnam Inspection Date: February 6, 2025 Inspected Quantity Two (2) containers of flooring

Third-Party Quality Inspection Report for Engineered Wood Multi-Layer Flooring
Client: U.S. Importer (Name withheld for confidentiality)
Supplier Factory: Hanoi, Vietnam
Inspection Date: February 6, 2025
Inspected Quantity: Two (2) containers of flooring


1. Executive Summary

On February 6, 2025, our quality control (QC) team, alongside the U.S. client’s purchasing manager, conducted an on-site inspection of engineered wood multi-layer flooring at the supplier’s facility in Hanoi, Vietnam. The inspection focused on two containers of flooring scheduled for shipment to the U.S. The inspection identified critical quality defects in a portion of the products, which were subsequently downgraded. Supporting evidence, including photos and videos, is attached for reference.


2. Inspection Scope & Methodology

  • Product: Engineered wood multi-layer flooring (specifications per client requirements).
  • Sample Size: 100% visual inspection of two containers (random sampling of 15% for detailed measurement and structural testing).
  • Standards Applied: ASTM International, ANSI/HPVA EP-2010, and client-specific quality criteria.
  • Tools: Calipers, moisture meters, visual inspection under controlled lighting.

3. Major Quality Defects Identified

3.1 Surface Imperfections

  • Scratches and Dents: 8% of inspected planks exhibited surface scratches and dents exceeding allowable limits (≥0.5mm depth).
  • Color Inconsistency: 5% of planks showed noticeable color mismatch between batches (see Attachment 1-3).

3.2 Structural Defects

  • Delamination: 3% of planks displayed edge delamination due to insufficient adhesive application (see Attachment 4).
  • Warping/Twisting: 4% of planks failed flatness tests (warping >3mm/1m length).

3.3 Dimensional Tolerance Issues

  • Thickness Variation: 6% of planks exceeded the ±0.2mm thickness tolerance.
  • Width/Length Deviations: 2% of planks deviated beyond the ±1.5mm specification.

4. Corrective Actions

  • Downgrading: All defective planks (total 18% of inspected units) were segregated and marked as “Grade B” (non-compliant with U.S. client’s contractual requirements).
  • Re-inspection: The supplier was instructed to replace downgraded units with compliant stock. A follow-up inspection is recommended prior to shipment.

5. Conclusion

While the majority of the flooring met quality standards, the identified defects (18% rejection rate) highlight inconsistencies in the supplier’s production and quality control processes. Immediate corrective measures are required to avoid future non-conformities.


6. Attachments

  • Attachment 1-3: Photos of surface scratches, color mismatch, and delamination.
  • Attachment 4-6: Videos documenting warping measurements and moisture content tests.
  • Attachment 7: Detailed defect tally sheet.

Prepared by: [Your Company Name/QC Team Leader]
Approved by: [U.S. Purchasing Manager’s Name/Title]

Note: This report serves as an objective third-party assessment. Final shipping approval is contingent upon the supplier’s remediation of defects.


Check Also

Trusted QC Partner for Vietnamese & Southeast Asian Wood Molding (Pine Finger-Joint Mudded Profiles)

Trusted QC Partner for Vietnamese & Southeast Asian Wood Molding (Pine Finger-Joint Mudded Profiles) Dear …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *