Kyle Kubs

I concur. I remember reading a trade article some years ago, maybe in Fine Homebuilding, that stated the R-value was better in hard packed blown in Cellulose then it was in loose fill. Kind of the same reasoning as spray in foam, it stops a lot more air movement then fiberglass does.

That's Santa's Summer place. [:-bigmout

Looks like there was rodent intrusion at one time. (Dark stains on the bottom left and the chewed insulation on a few of the black wires). Some Darwin award candidate probably did that to seal on open knockout. I don't think the panel has to be replaced due to some foam insulation, but they will have to get an electrician to clean it out.

I dam near shit my pants the first time that happened. Was putting the cover back on though, and just as it made contact with the panel, Flash! Clients wife taking a picture from behind me... I have a rule about picture taking during the panel inspection now.

I think this is another fine example of inspector lore, more then likely propagated by some genius teaching a night school/correspondence course for would be inspectors. As has been said Rock/Slag wool is the byproduct of iron refining. It really wouldn't make sense, or even a stable product, to try to mix a very different, highly heat resistant material in with it.

Chad! You should be ashamed of yourself. Actually working for your money... What kind of example is that going to set for all the donut munchers and Lords of the Office Chairs? They'll start thinking they should get out of their cars... Hell, they could even get dirt on them somewhere. [:-bigeyes

In the manual for a Weil_McLain WGO/WTGO the Startup - checkout procedure has the statement; "Limit control set to the system temperature requirements (max. 220#730;F)?" But I doubt you'd find a hydronic tech that would recommend running at that temp. in a typical residential setting. In the end, the radiant issue aside and forgetting about the considerable inefficiency, it's not that different then pulling a hot water loop off of a steam boiler. But if that isn't done in just the right way you are begging for trouble. I've seen the results of it being done wrong several times. It pretty dramatic.

I'm not aware of an official legal limit for residential boilers but the common sense limit is 190. Been that way and been accepted throughout the industry for a long long time. Several books I have do have ratings listed for radiation with water temperatures up to 240 but to my knowledge this is only done on specialty commercial/industrial systems with elaborate engineering/controls to prevent disaster. Having the water over 212 is an explosion waiting to happen if there is a sudden loss of pressure. It may also be pushing past the listed limits of the radiant PEX, the recommended limit for the pumps... I would have called it, no question, in fact I just did about three weeks ago. There's just no reason for it to be that high. It likely wasn't that high originally but migrated upwards due to a failing/dirty hydrostat or maybe they did set it that high due to the high end craftsmanship leading to the floors still being cold at 190. Having the radiant tubing at that temperature is absolutely wrong. Should be around 125 going through the tubing and radiating about 85 from the floor. On a hack job like what your describing I'd also expect to find potable water PEX instead of the O2 barrier PEX that is required. OK, just went down and checked the Alumi Pex on my system (my memory is not worth a dam these day''s...) it's rated for a max water temp of 200F.

I know I'm going to be corrected on this, at the very least for the spelling, but I think your talking about Cotswold...

The third course up on the left side is uneven. I think he should redo it. - Jim Katen, Oregon To my eye, it looks like more then just the third course. The angle of the picture may be skewing things a lot from what they really are but it looks like the arcs, angles & exposure are running off. Click to Enlarge 48.79 KB I would starve to death doing that kind of work. I find it impossible to keep my furnituremaker's blood from running the show. Any of my friends seeing me up on that roof would instantly say, "check his tool belt, bet ya he's got a dial caliper in there somewhere" It's not my fault really, I have this geometrical obsession that puts me into the deranged category of anal where that stuff is involved.

As stated above, either can work fine given due attention to the details. Personally I think open valley's belong on certain style homes and are more appropriate for a steeper pitch using composite shingles, as when the pitch increases the angle between the two planes that the shingle must be bent into becomes more acute. This goes double today with the laminated shingles. On the other side of that coin, use an open valley on a lower pitch roof and you can have more danger of falling tree branches poking holes right through the sheet metal, which I find often.

I think the propane suppliers forced air system has dehydrated his brain a little too much. That statement is about as Bass Ackwards as it gets.

Hi & welcome. First off, a little more detail is needed. Are we talking a fossil fuel fired furnace or electric. Same for the water heater. I'm assuming your talking about the return air vent into the blower fan? And it does not have ducting attached extending the return vent out into the house? If so, and it is fossil fuel burning, then yes there is a min. distance of ten feet from the return vent to any combustion chamber, it's own or the water heaters. Only exception would be if there is a sealed combustion chamber with air intake from outside.

It's funny how a recent thread can make you look twice at something or even change your perspective. After John's recent post I took a harder look at this fireplace and noticed the corbeled brick was a little stretched. By stretched I mean the edge of one brick looks like its hardly sitting on the lower brick at all. It was a 1977 house and there was no sign it's had any issues from this but isn't there a limit to the overlay, or lack there of? In regards to John's post, you'll notice quite a bit of creosote on the corbeled area, the flu & rest of the smoke chamber was practically spotless. Click to Enlarge 78.41 KB

Um... Your going to be hard pressed to get any answers to your question that way. Be a little more descriptive, maybe start at the beginning and we may be able to help you.

All the time. A lot of it is in pretty bad shape by now. Found a brand new section of it in the loft of a garage last Summer. Neat seeing what it looked like before it's buried and starting to deteriorate.

They look like little impact craters. Did the neighbor's kid get a bb gun for Christmas? - Jim Katen, Oregon [:-bigmout - That was exactly my first thought also. Was this very localized or widespread on all the walls, high & low?

I've heard home inspectors and electricians both say that the sheathing shouldn't extend very far into the box but I've never heard them offer a code citation to back up the claim. I just spent about 30 minutes combing through article 312 (cabinets, cutout boxes & meter socket enclosures) and article 334 (NM cable) and I can't find any prohibition against bringing the sheathing into the enclosure. If anyone ever hears of a code citation that prohibits this, please let me know. There are two cables in there that look like UF, but UF shouldn't have any paper in it and Richard said that they actually said NM on them. I don't know what's going on with that. - Jim Katen, Oregon I think that the answer might be found not in the code but in the UL listing regarding gutter space/fill limitations not having been calculated to include sheathing. That said, dammed if I could point you to an official source. "Didn't realize it it was "tighter" than normal NM," Not tighter, the sheathing completely surrounds each individual conductor, separating each on from the other. They make sheathing strippers specifically for UF cable, without them it is a bastard to strip properly.

I was privy to this story on a forum for people who heat with wood burning stoves and such. I found it amusing enough to save. Bird story - An Uncle has a cabin on the backwaters of the Mississippi River and it is gathering place for the menfolk in the extended family to fish, playcards and drink beer. Several of us were fishing the week before Thanksgiving...the fish really bite just before freeze up. After a successful morning of fishing we were at the cabin to warm up and fix a noon meal. A box woodstove was lit and heating up nicely with a kettle of stew warming on top. There was a loud keplunk and scratching in the stove pipe that startled the cabin occupants. Within a few seconds there was a commotion in the stove, then a stove lid popped open and a full grown Canada Goose come blasting out. The cabin occupants gave chase to the squaking goose and finally captured the it, but not before the cabin was a total mess. While fishing that morning we heard the gunshots of duck and goose hunters. We speculated that a hunter shot this goose out of the sky and it did a free fall down the stovepipe.

I don't know anything about the product but after seeing the web site I'm wondering if you get a jar of Mama Jebs cure all snake oil with every purchase...

Ya, ok. Tell him to put it in writing with his name and State license # on it. If he's enough of a dim whit to do it, then bring it and the pictures to the State licensing board. Could send it all to Square D also, just for shits & giggles.

Around here 99.9% of the chimney inspectors will fail any and every chimney long before they even get out of their trucks. This from the NJ edition of the 2000 IRC; R1003.8 Smoke chamber. Smoke chamber walls shall be constructed of solid masonry units, hollow masonry units grouted solid, stone or reinforced concrete. Corbelling of masonry units shall not leave unit cores exposed to the inside of the smoke chamber. When a lining of firebrick at least 2 inches (51 mm)thick, or a lining of vitrified clay at least 5/8 inch (15.9mm) thick, is provided, the total minimum thickness of front, back and side walls shall be 6 inches (152 mm) of solid masonry, including the lining. Firebrick shall conform to ASTM C 27 or C 1261 and shall be laid with medium-duty refractory mortar conforming to ASTM C 199. Where no lining is provided, the total minimum thickness of front, back and sidewalls shall be 8 inches (203 mm) of solid masonry. When the inside surface of the smoke chamber is formed by corbeled masonry, the inside surface shall be parged smooth. I don't have older additions so I don't know when it came into play, and not long back, this town adopted the code, that town still hadn't... That being said, I very much share Mikes opinion on it. Very, very rare to see it parged, so the only time I will really "talk about it" is when I see evidence of a need to change it, like scorching/soot staining on the face of the fireplace, really horrendous creosote build up or deterioration I think I can attribute to the lack of parging. If I remember correctly this is one of Bill's favorite rants, no comments Bill?

Somebody from my neck of the woods. Literally right down the road, according to his profile. From the sound of it he's an HVAC contractor & it would probably take me no more than three guesses to figure out which of the top three worst outfits in the area he works for. Here in NJ ignorance is rampant, especially where anything concerning health or environment is concerned. Sometimes it's so thick you can walk on it.

Hey Brandon, The main issue is that not a single shingle on this roof was sealed to another shingle. The exposure also was a little off and your right the spec on these shingles allows a wide margin for nailing. Basically the manufacturer changed the spec to make them idiot installable without so many denials from the code inspectors. Kind of like how the military made the physical testing requirements easier so more people could pass them... Some still had nails way too high, others not set sufficiently.

Ah the old walk it or don't controversy... I shutter to even walk into this room. As several others here have said, I get paid quite well compared to many inspectors in this area and my clients expect me to get up on the roof for the kind of fee I charge. Maybe one out of ten actually asks during the initial contact, "will you walk on the roof to inspect it?". Sure there is a line nobody should cross and for every individual it is in a different comfort zone and that is fine. Never risk your ability to walk or feed yourself or play with your children to show off. But to not get on any roof ever, or even put a ladder up to a gutter? IMHO if you are that scared of falling you should find a desk job, you don't belong in this business. (This is my $.02 and I'm entitled to it.) To answer this question; Quote: Will one traverser offer one true story of finding a noteworthy roof defect that he knows a previous HI missed? Well, I'll admit the timing is lucky but. Tell me how you are going to see this from the ground... Click to Enlarge 88.54 KB The entire field of the roof was like this. Heres the roof it was on. I pulled my ladder up onto the lower roof to access the upper from the gable. Not my preferred thing to do but on this one it was totally within reason. Click to Enlarge 75.41 KB The seller had just bought the house in 2004. He asked why his inspector didn't find this. I didn't ask him, I told him, "your inspector didn't get up on a ladder to inspect the roof". He just nodded his head into a gradual bow and walked away. Most sellers get pissed off at us for the things we find. I have sellers from the houses I've inspected calling me all the time to do their inspection and saying, boy you raked me over the coals so bad, your doing that for me now. And besides if you don't go up you'll never get to enjoy the view. Click to Enlarge 64.72 KB Finally, I'll relate this to my diving experience. Diving to the bottom of the ocean can be exhilarating, awe inspiring and lethal. On any given day it can change from one to the other too fast to imagine. Many people want to get dive certified and be one of the crowd, put on the costume and go where few have. You can always tell the ones to stay away from, more interested in getting their pictures taken in their gear, then doing their safety checks. Then they get down there and the anxiety hits and they panic. At this time they become a danger to themselves and everyone around them. Typically what makes the difference between the guy who will live and the one who will be described as "Failed to surface" will be his comfort level with handling the panic and the situation. A few years ago I told my own wife, your too prone to panic and you don't handle it well, your not a safe diver and you should not dive anymore. She was smart enough to take the advice. The comfort level thing plays into the roof as well. More often on the way down then up, but then, like diving, your already in a dangerous place. As anyone who's taken the fast way down will tell you, it sucks. So in a rather long winded way what I'm saying is, don't ever go up because somebody else thinks you should, bad enough to kill or hurt yourself, worse to land on you clients six year old playing in the yard...