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. clientโs purchasing manager, conducted an on-site inspection of engineered wood multi-layer flooring at the supplierโs 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 (โฅ0.5mm 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 ยฑ0.2mm thickness tolerance.
- Width/Length Deviations: 2% of planks deviated beyond the ยฑ1.5mm 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. clientโs 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 supplierโs 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 Managerโs Name/Title]
Note: This report serves as an objective third-party assessment. Final shipping approval is contingent upon the supplierโs remediation of defects.
