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.


About admin

Check Also

Quality Control Inspection Report for FJ Pine Wood Mouldings in CambodiaDate of Inspection March 16, 2025

Quality Control Inspection Report for FJ Pine Wood Mouldings in CambodiaDate of Inspection: March 16, …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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