hausdok

It's because power generated by the gentran goes through those breakers in the lower box to where they are spliced into the appropriate circuits in the upper panel downstream from their breakers. From there, power goes through those circuits and must return to earth via the grounded conductors (neutrals) on those circuits. Those end where they should on the neutral bus in the upper panel. The neutral and ground bars in the lower panel are bonded with that copper cable to the bonded bar in the upper panel. I don't see an issue with it. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi Bob, Don't worry about it; I've fixed it. About the lead; I dunno, seems like if it was considered hazardous the gas company installer would have said, "Whoa Nelly; ain't no way I'm hooking up to that stuff, Dude!" Have you called the gas company and asked them what they think? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Well, it could be real bad for the HI if the usual, "do not leave facing exposed because of fire risk" language is printed right there on the facing. WJ id="blue">It's right there upside down at the right side of the picture. OT - OF!!! M.

Pssst, Hey Rich, keep it on the down low, Dude! http://www.harleysestateagents.com/boat/ ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hope you told him that insulation is installed wrong and recommended that it be pulled out, flipped over and reinstalled. OT - OF!!! M.

You're a sponsor, Sponsor's get to post stuff here that other commercial entities cannot....unless they want to become a sponsor, that is. OT - OF!!! M.

Tom, When that happens, the best thing to do is to walk to the front of the store, ask to speak to the manager in private, and then lay it all out for him/her so that word can be put out to all of the employees. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi, I would hardly call that an issue. A gap that wide is too narrow to put any backer rod in. About all you can do is smear a little bit of caulk on the butt joint. If you do it when the siding has expanded lengthwise, as soon as it shrinks, the joint will crack because there's nothing such as a backer rod enabling the caulk bead to remain intact as it moves. The siding, and the framing, expands and contracts with changes in temperature and humidity. When that happens, caulked joints will eventually crack. They all do, and that's why a homeowner has to inspect and touch up the caulking every single year. Don't think that just because the caulk used is supposed to be a "25-year" caulk that it means the stuff will hold without cracking for 25 years. If you think that, get it out of your head right now, 'cuz that's a fable. Sure, the caulk might last for 25 years without completely breaking down and disappearing but it's only the caulk they're referring to; not the house it's applied to. You should expect to have to do that. It's a simple fact of homeownership fact of life,...get used to it. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Only if accompanied by illustrations so that the rest of us know what you're telling him. Cartoons will do fine. [] OT - OF!!! M.

Then that's what you write. OT - OF!!! M.

Hi, Yes, in 1995/96 LP required a MRB behind it's product; even if it was installed directly over studs. If you'are not seeing any head flashings over windows and doors it probably means that what's there has been applied over sheathing and the windows and doors were flashed behind the siding with Moistop or something similar; the bituthene was probably used on the bottom and sides with nothing but the paper overlapping the top nailing flange, and then the perimeter of the window was caulked. With the Hardiplank on, is the window still proud of the siding? If they are vinyl windows and the answer is just barely, there's probably a layer of sheathing behind the siding. The siding guy should have at least popped one panel off to see what he had before he started covering it up though. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Yeah, I know a little about New York; my father lives in Dutchess County and built houses there for more than half a century. It could be worse; we could be working in Chicago where everything is in conduit and they don't know what NM looks like. OT - OF!!! M.

I don't know where "here" is, but I hope you are not under the NEC, because if you are, unless you have a SPECIFIC amendment, it IS quite illegal. ARTICLE 394 Concealed Knob-and-Tube Wiring 394.12 Uses Not Permitted Concealed knob-and-tube wiring shall not be used in the following: (1) Commercial garages (2) Theaters and similar locations (3) Motion picture studios (4) Hazardous (classified) locations (5) Hollow spaces of walls, ceilings, and attics where such spaces are insulated by loose, rolled, or foamed-in-place insulating material that envelops the conductors I'm in Washington State; it says so right next to my user name. You're wrong; the NEC is not a law until it's proclaimed a law by a governing power that has jurisdiction. As you must be aware, neither the NEC, or any other code, is ever adopted in-toto and untouched by legislators. In our case, there is an FPN at the bottom of the section you cite that says: See WAC (Washington Annotated Codes) 296-46B 394 001, knob-and-tube wiring, for insulation voids in spaces containing existing knob-and-tube wiring. If you look at the City of Seattle Electrical Code, which is the NEC, you'll find whole sections lined out that refer to WACs. As Bill and I have already pointed out, some western states permit it 'by law' so it is not illegal. Here's your reference: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx ... 96-46B-394 We all of us have to be careful not to be so quick to declare a code fact when we don't know the rules that were adopted in the area that we're criticizing. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi, I hadn't even see the picture of the back porch. I clicked on the bottom photo; didn't even see the first until you all began talking about it. That said, I still would have climbed that roof from the front; it's not that bad a roof. And Brian, I've fallen off a roof before, remember? 5 broken ribs and a punctured lung. The thing is, it had nothing to do with pitch, I still don't know why I fell 'cuz I don't remember what happened. However, the roof I went off of was practically flat. Guess I'll never know; but I won't let that experience intimidate me. And no, we didn't use toe boards, nor did we wear safety lines when 60ft. off the ground putting roof cages on those glass-coated steel silos or when walking the steel trusses of the steel buildings we built. Like I said, it's a question of experience and listening to the little man in one's head. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

The LP panel siding is rated as structural sheathing and, except for the grooves in it, isn't any different than the ordinary LP sheathing used on about 80% of the new homes today. However, you're supposed to install Hardiplank over some kind of moisture-resistant barrier behind the HP "in accordance with local building codes" and Hardi says it isn't responsible for water penetration. Well, in this case, you've got a layer of paper behind the LP and the LP itself is considered moisture resistant with a perm rate that's less than felt, so I don't know that adding wrap, which is NOT designed to be a moisture resistant barrier and is only designed to prevent air infiltration, is going to be beneficial at all. I guess I have to ask, what is the downside of leaving the wrap, which tends to trap water against OSB, out of the mix so that the OSB beneath the siding is better able to dry out between rains? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

OK, OK, Enough with the testosterone. John initiated the thread to point out an issue that's common with all of us - we inspect the interior of panels and then go through the homes, attics, crawlspaces, and basements doing a visual on the wiring methods used and making certain that the things we see are done correctly and safely, but we don't routinely remove the covers of every switch and receptacle in the home to inspect the connections - nor do we open up and examine the interior of every J-box found in an attic or crawlspace - so it's possible that we'll miss stuff. Not exactly news but a "visual" inspection is what it is. By the way, according to the feedback I've had over the years, electricians also don't routinely remove every switch or receptacle cover, and open up every junction box and fixture to check for proper strain relief and connections, when they're called out to inspect a system based on our recommendations. If an electrician was supposed to have recently "completely upgraded" the electrical system in that home, than he is the most likely suspect to have done this - not the homeowner. One could assume that the homeowner pulled out all of the old 2-slot receptacles, replaced them with 3-slot types, and then added the bootleg pigtails, but it would have been the electrician who would have been in a position to know that the wiring in the pre-60's house didn't have any EGC's and, if it wasn't the electrician who installed them, it would have been the electrician's responsibility to check all of those new 3-slot receptacles to determine how they'd been grounded. Not finding any EGC's and finding the bootleg grounds, it would have been the electrician's duty to have corrected those. So, we have to presume that either 1) it was the electrician who installed all of the bootleg grounds in order to get around the work necessary to "completely upgrade" the electrical system, 2) the electrician was either negligent or an idiot, or 3) the story about the electrician recently upgrading the system is hyperbole from a realtor or seller and that the only thing that the electrician actually did was replace the service panel 'cuz that's what they'd ordered. Personally, I'd suspect the last scenario 'cuz that's what I see most often being the case. Thanks John for assuaging my fears that when I chose the SureTest over that other gizmo many years ago I was making the wrong choice. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

It's not a "serious code violation" here, This is one of those western states that Bill referred to that allows it to be covered with blown-in cellulose. In fact, down by the airport, where they have soundproofed literally tens of thousands of homes by adding new triple-glazed windows, storm doors, pumped cells into the walls and attics, and built sound baffles under/around the attic vents, the city had a program of having Seattle City Light go out, inspect the K & T, and then post a certificate that says it was approved for burial in cells. Blown-in cells is permeated with borate so it won't burn. I've actually found bad K & T connections buried in the cellulose where the connections have been arcing and overheating - probably for years. The cells all around the splice was scorched black, and the material around the wiring was warm - almost hot - to the touch, but the borate-permeated cells surrounding the wiring had prevented any sparks from flying around and igniting any of that old tinder-dry wood in the attic, so all that the bad splices were able to do was scorch the insulation, which had literally snuffed out any fire. The whole idea of not covering it is so that it will cool more efficiently is fine, except I sometimes wonder how much of that was originally based on science instead of supposition. I routinely uncover and touch the insulation on one or more K & T conductors in cells-filled attics to see how hot they are, and it's pretty clear that they don't get hot in the winter months - unless they're overloaded or poorly splices anyway - and even in the summer months they only get mildly warmer. However, it rarely bumps out of the 70's here in the summer and when it does the temps will usually peak around 90 to 93 degrees. Under those circumstances, it might get about 115 to 130 in an attic in the summer and the wiring buried in that insulation is usually fine - not hot at all compared to the rest of the attic. I'm not saying that the cells covering the wiring is a good thing, 'cuz it isn't, but circumstances are different in different places. In other states, where the summer temps are routinely in the high nineties, I suppose attic temps could get so high that the combined heat from solar gain, the heat from an accumulated load, and the inability of the wiring to cool because insulation is packed around it can all combine to make it overheat, and that could ignite the insulation. However, where it's buried in borate-treated cells, I don't think it will do much more than scorch the insulation - it's the other stuff; very dry framing and paper facings on other types of insulation that one has to worry about. I'm not an electrical engineer but some electrical engineer somewhere has decreed that covering K & T is a bad thing. OK, I accept that, except that convincing someone that K & T buried in cells is a bad thing (here) is difficult when it's the utility provider that inspects this stuff here and has posted inspection certificates everywhere that says the wiring is perfectly alright to bury. Here, I have more success just explaining that the stuff is an obsolete system that's usually rife with improperly-made splices outside of junction boxes that can't be seen because they're buried in the cells. Even that used to elicit a lot of push-back from 'zoids until some insurance companies began either refusing to insure a home that has it or charged higher premiums. Once word got out about that, the attitude of the 'zoids changed markedly. This is not a one-size-fits-all business. A good inspector has to know peculiarities of his own region as well as others in order to be able to properly educate clients about their prospective new homes. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Guess it's a matter of experience and perspective. I've never had a shingle slip underfoot and I've gone up some roofs that were so bad they looked like they were going to slide off the framing any minute. I installed covers on roofs that steep long before there was an OSHA around requiring harnesses and such. That roof wouldn't have given me two seconds pause. Walking roofs is an individual decision. If you don't feel comfortable when you're on the top of a 6ft. ladder you shouldn't be going up on a roof. If you start to get off a ladder and your knees feel rubbery, you shouldn't be walking on the roof. If you have a lousy sense of balance, you shouldn't be going up on a roof. If you don't have a pair of lace-on shoes with soft soles and can't bend your foot well back toward your knee, so that you can keep your soles flat on the roof at all times, then you shouldn't be walking on a roof. If you can't descend a roof like that by standing up and walking straight down the roof looking outward from the house, you shouldn't be walking on the roof. There are others, but you get the idea. There are lots of us in this business who are just as comfortable on a roof as we are on the ground and it's our experience - most of it learned in the trades - that makes us comfortable. People who work steel, who build bridges, who work powerline towers, who install roofs, who build silos (like I did as a teenager), have to work high and for them it's just part of the job. You won't find anyone working those jobs who experiences some of the stuff I said above. We aren't showboating when we go up on a roof; it's just part of the job and we know when to listen to the little man inside that says, "Uh uh, no way." That's us; we don't begrudge the others who don't want to walk on roofs, but we sure get tired of all the sermons against doing so. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Thanks Brad, that was interesting. It does look like they've figured the cornering thing out though. They keep the back wheels firmly on the road and then they let the front wheel and body lean into the curves - pretty ingenious. I'm left wondering what happens if the hydraulics fail as you're leaving a curve and you don't straighten up? Looks like she'd just keep right on going and drive right off the road. Their technical discussion talks about a backup hydraulic system - guess you'd need it. 40,000+ euros though? Phew! If I'm gonna spend that kind of money I'll buy a vintage Indian or a Kiwi Indian replica. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi, A few of the previous posters have it right. The rowlocks are canting upward because the framing that's resting on the foundation behind the veneer has either shrunken or the sills have been badly damaged and the weight of the house is crushing them. Either way, the windows tend to slip downward, gaps appear along the top of the windows and the rowlocks end up levering slightly upward. I've seen it a few dozen times. Here in Seattle I wouldn't be that surprised to find it, because lots of houses were built out here years ago with lumber that wasn't kiln dried and was fresh from the mills. It tended to lose moisture and shrink. Don't know what's causing all of the face erosion, though,unless it's the brick ties stressing the wall as they moved downward and this allowed water into the veneer and mortar where it froze and caused the mortar to pop out and the brickwork to spall. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi Brian, Guess you haven't been paying attention to the buzz on this baby that's made by Bombardier. It's been getting some pretty good reviews. Image Insert: 21.04 KB

Hi, It's not a Morgan; it's an Ace Cycle Car built by a fellow that formed a company called Liberty Motors in Seattle. The guy was in love with the Morgan but wanted a Morgan without a lot of the same problems, so he built this one using a Harley engine. It took him years to design it and work out the bugs with several prototypes until he got it right. Now he's building them. The body, cockpit, and everything about it looks very much like the morgan but the motor, drivetrain and suspension are hand built in Seattle. http://cycle-car.com/ ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi, It was banned by the EPA from about 1978 to 1982 but then the manufacturers' lobby got the ban lifted; by then, many companies that had been using it in their products had found substitutes. However, not all companies stopped using it and as far as I know it's still being mined up in Canada. She could have it in the ceiling, in wallboard, in floor coverings, in mastic holding tiles to floors, in floor tile and coverings - even in the hair dryer that she uses to blow-dry her hair. When it's used for ceiling coverings it's usually encapsulated with paint or gypsum anyway. Tell her to get it tested if it's got her spooked but not to go off the deep end about it. To get exposed to asbestos from a ceiling covering, you'd have to scrape the stuff off the ceiling, grind it up enough in a mortar and pestle to free up the encased fibers, and then literally snort it. Then you'd have to sit around and wait about a quarter of a century before you'd know if one of those fibers was able to embed itself in your lungs and gave you cancer or mesothelioma. In terms of scary stuff, asbestos is near the bottom of my worry list. Worrying about getting sick from casual exposure to asbestos when you don't work around it and aren't exposed to it in an industrial setting is, to me anyway, kind of like sitting around and dwelling about the odds of you're getting killed in a head-on on the freeway. It's always a remote possibility, but the odds are pretty steep against it happening if you stay alert and there's really nothing you can do about it anyway. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Pssst, Oh, Riiiicccchhhhhaaaard! Hand made right here in Seattle. Bwahahahahahahahahaha!!! Image Insert: 88.07 KB Image Insert: 74.54 KB Image Insert: 73.89 KB Image Insert: 88.45 KB Image Insert: 70.65 KB OT - OF!!! M.

I can't argue with any of the rest of it, but the statement I've quoted is just plain wrong when it comes to modular homes. Apply that statement to a manufactured home, but don't apply it to a modular and please don't spread that kind of misinformation around about modular homes. Mods are built to the same codes as other homes and have to be built stronger to withstand the rigors of being crane loaded onto trucks, transported hundreds of miles, and then crane loaded onto a foundation and bolted together without suffering damage. For that reason, the framing in a modular is stronger and much more rigid than even a conventional home. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike