Greg Booth

The replies since my previous post have been thoughtful and show insight on the part of the folks responding--the very thing that I admire about the group on TIJ. Properly sited and installed, and maintained, HUD codes function well and are durable. My entire career of 40+ years has been in the construction industry-medical/retail/residential. Owning a 55+ manufactured home community for the past 15 years, prompted me to "get in the business". Seeing the prime issues with home failures as installation related, I trained for, and subsequently operated an installation/service business for 10 years. While I am not blind to the weaknesses within the industry, I have also found quite a bit to admire about manufactured housing. Because there are disreputable examples of HUD code homes, one should not castigate the entire concept/industry. I would also submit, at the risk of being not PC, there are huge differences demographically which affect the homes that we see in our daily travels. I inspect mfg. homes for owners, dealers, manufacturers and park owners/purchasers. I have actually seen my suggestions to factories, adopted to become part of their SOP! I have blathered-on long enough. I simply feel, as I believe most TIJ responders do, that we serve our customers best by providing thoughtful, practical observations/suggestions. Meaningless negative commentary does nothing to help the client, foster industry improvement or demonstrate our level of professionalism.

It is too bad that folks of professional standing, such as found on TIJ can readily bash a product that meets a need within the housing market. Pizza-box components--what childish drivel. And, just to note, Marlette also builds mods.

There are usually plates under the pier (sometimes separate as shown), that serve as the attachment point for the diagonals that are seen in the picture. On slabs they are fastened with expansion bolts and on ground with small driven anchors-sometimes the ground plates have simple cleats that "dig-in" as the pier is loaded. They work on the principle of load transfer through the diagonal members--wind load on one elevation transfers as a down pressure to the piers on the opposite side, thus preventing wind lift. Traditional tie-downs are installed at the ends only. Go here for information http://www.tiedown.com

There are 3 or 4 manufacturers producing these anti-turnover assemblies. One is Oliver Technologies, another is Tie-Down Engineering. Many of these systems still require 1 or 2 traditional style tie-downs on each end of the home. The beauty of these systems is, in many instances,the elimination of 20 or 30 or more tie-down straps. Not all home manufacturers accept all brands-I try to determine the brand and then reference the mfg. installation instructions. If it is not an approved brand I will note it in my report. These systems have been increasing in popularity over the last 8 or 9 years.

It's most likely an issue with interpretation. The key, for me, is the specification of requiring shims of nominal size 4x6x1-it's actually referring to a wedge 4x6x1x0-to be driven tight. Key wording: "driven tight". In installations using transverse beams, such as found for crawl space and basement sets, the carrying beams of the home sit on the steel transverse beams--in that instance, flat, metal shims are ideal. For sets that are on CMU piers, installers will typically use wood or synthetic wedges. Safety for installers is the prime reason for using opposing wedges as they dramatically decrease the tendency of the unit to slide, during side-to-side leveling. For the same reason of enhancing stability, manufacturers specify wood wedges (shims). As well, one never wants steel and CMU direct contact--a sure recipe for blown piers. Are the shims you routinely see actually 4x6x1 steel wedges?

I saw one two weeks ago in a land-lease community. The main water distribution system was connected to the municipal supply and a drilled well at the same time.

It's both. I know it as a single-sense flame prover AND spark igniter.

Hello, For the purpose of our type of work, I would suggest using HUD Title 24, Chapter XX, Part 3285 "Model Manufactured Home Installation Standards" for practical reference. Greg

There is never an appropriate time for steel shims within a manufactured home pier-stack. The only approved materials for a CMU stack, in addition to the CMUs, are a solid ,hardwood cap , and hardwood, or approved synthetic shims. HUD being the AHJ.

Sure makes it easy to figure the square foot cost-LOL

Double duty-frost and backflow prevention. I also see this frequently, and agree that it's due to debris. It is also the bane of folks winterizing, because the backflow preventer will not permit pumping in antifreeze.

Thank you!

Why could I not edit the word seemed (seamed). Said it was successfully edited but would not change in my original post.

Hard to tell without seeing more of the ceiling, but it looks to me like the interior aluminum skin of a rigid foam roof panel used for patio rooms and the like. Is the panel seamed only on the "long" side, or is it also seamed every 2' of the run? Easy to tell if it is a lay-in panel by pushing up on it.

Pretty simple to convert. Furnace requires specific orifices for burner and pilot (if not hot surface ignition). Water heater similar. Also need to alter pressure control on valve, which many times simply requires a reverse of screw-in insert. In the manufactured home industry, units almost always are shipped set for natural gas, and include propane orifices to facilitate changeover.. As mentioned above, one should always clearly label whatever fuel the device is being set-up to operate on.

There are various types of vinyl-siding mounting blocks with integral J-trim, which are designed to provide a flat mounting surface for items such as lights and hose bibs. Several styles allow for firm attachment of a device box.

Having once experienced a roaring chimney fire, fueled by creosote collected on the top and sides of an insert that had been slid into a masonry fireplace (with 12" flue tile) you bet I'll be "invasive". This was 40 years ago, and I have preached about this issue whenever I have had the opportunity.

"How to determine if there is a connection to the flue?" I first look to see if it is visible from stove interior-a simple camera shot will often do the trick. In the case of baffles or catalytic converters or any other number of "burn-efficiency enhancers" blocking simple site-lines, I snake in the borescope.

Just to note....it's important to determine how the insert is connected to the masonry flue. Simply set in place, the top of, and space around, the insert can collect HUGE amounts of creosote.

The highest failure rates were the plastic fittings as opposed to the piping. The copper fittings are good news. That said, the piping is an issue of concern mainly within the context of the radiant heat, as that will be the toughest to deal with. As suggested above, I would recommend that analysis of the heating system be top priority.

Think about drainage of the well also.

A job for Ghost Busters Inspection Service.

Standard Pex, installed by someone who has only ever seen copper. LOL

What I can see from your pic, looks like copper fittings were used. In my experience, most failures were with the plastic fittings, as opposed to the pipe itself. The developed replacement for PB is Pex. There are brass transition fittings to take one from PB to Pex, and they should always be used. If there are copper fittings, instead of plastic, I would call it as an item to be monitored. Further suggest when hiring trades people to work on their plumbing, they be versed in Pb/Pex installation methods.

Looks sorta' like a Train to me.