Jim Katen

Anyone that has attended his seminar is now a millionaire and wouldn't bother to chat with the hoi polloi on this forum. - Jim Katen, Oregon

I thought that 120 degrees was the standard from the manufacturers. Though that isn't hot enough for my own water heater. I happen to like mine set at 130. No reference, but I've heard that anything below 120 could allow bad bugs to grow in the water. Also, I've soaked my own personal body in 120-degree hot springs for several minutes at a time and suffered no burns. Of course, I wouldn't want to see a little baby put in 120-degree water. I don't believe it would burn the baby so much as raise her body temperature to a dangerous level. Edit to add: Here's a link to a US Dept of Energy page: http://www.eere.energy.gov/consumer/you ... opic=13090 - Jim Katen, Oregon Download Attachment: 144-4491_IMG.JPG 186.95 KB

Actually, it does. The name of the product is "Digi-Code Universal Safety Beam Sensor Replacement Kit CR-2149." The description says,"Now you can go out to a job site with one of these universal beams on the truck and feel comfortable that you can solve the beam sensor problems without having to return." The instructions all describe replacing existing non-working eyes. None of the instructions says anything about how to hook these up to an opener that doesn't already have provisions for eyes. - Jim Katen, Oregon

Of course it's a safety feature. It's there to prevent you from being pinned under the door. The adjustment is labeled "down force" because it's intended to adjust the amount of force necessary to cause the door to reverse. Seems pretty simple to me. Why is that curious? To prevent entrapment. One can trap you, the other can't. That's an improvement. Unless you happen to be the one pinned under there and you can't reach the button. I don't see how that would be any safer. It's a rare case when the eyes can't be installed in such a way as to keep them out of the sun. In those cases, you can install a shade on the receiving sensor. A toilet paper tube works just as well. - Jim Katen, Oregon

Those are *replacement* sensors. According to a local installer, they won't work on 98% of pre-93 openers. He specifically asked our association members to stop recommending aftermarket eyes for this reason. - Jim Katen, Oregon

In one of my past lives, before becoming a home inspector, I designed machines that moved large, heavy objects up, down, sideways and round & round as well as the safety features that accompanied them. If someone hired me to design a safer garage door, the first thing I'd do would be to install a spring-loaded leading edge sensor with several inches of travel. It could be calibrated to respond to ounces of pressure consistantly and would remain consistent regardless of resistance and slop in the rest of the system because it would be entirely independent of the rest of the system. I'll bet that I could design one that you could test with a carton of eggs. The only problem with that approach, as many other inspectors have learned, is that the door, motor, or drive system sometimes breaks while you've got your hands under it. Sometimes a door section or a track or motor even falls on your head. - Jim Katen, Oregon

What, you've never heard of photo eyes? If installed properly, they do a pretty darn good job of preventing the kill-crush-dent thing. What's the matter with those? The 2x4 just represents a 2x4. Nothing else. There's no reason to equate it with a body part. That part of the safety system is only intended to prevent entrapment. From a design standpoint it'd be foolish to use the amp-draw auto reverse any other way. In addition to the limb you're going out on, the danger is that you'll create an unrealistic expectation in the mind of the buyer. He might see you do that and think, reasonably, that you "tested" the pressure and determined that it was safe. He might even think that, because you approved it, there was no real danger to his kids. I agree. I think that, from this day forward, I'll be reporting that pre-93 openers that lack photo eyes are flat-out unsafe because they could crush someone and that if the buyer wants a door that's less likely to crush someone, he should replace the opener with a new one that includes modern safety features. - Jim Katen, Oregon

Unfortunately, that adjustment is unlikely to be good for more than a short while after you adjust it. The down-pressure adjustment on these things just isn't intended to prevent someone from being squished. It'd be a nice idea, but it isn't so. About the only thing you'll achieve by creating this correlation is a false sense of security. Well geez, if it's a pre-93 opener it's, by definition, unsafe. You might as well guarantee that if someone's hit by it that they'll be hurt or killed. How could you walk away from that without an unreserved recommendation to upgrade to the safer modern equipment? Once again -- if you're worried about being crushed by one of these things, the downforce adjustment alone ain't gonna protect you. - Jim Katen

Pshaw! I'm amazed to see so much misunderstanding of this subject. Really, I though you guys would know better. The auto-reverse feature on a garage door IS NOT INTENDED TO PREVENT SOMEONE FROM BEING KILLED, CRUSHED, DENTED OR OTHERWISE HARMED by the door as it travels downward. Its ONLY PURPOSE is to prevent entrapment. That's all that's being tested by the 2x4. It's not sensitive enough or consistent enough to hold an adjustment to the degree of precision necessary to prevent injury. As I explain to my customers, if the door reverses with the 2x4 under it, this only means that you'll be able to retrieve the body or, if it’s you, that you might be able to crawl for help. The test is done low to the floor because that's the place where the armature is changing from a horizontal to a vertical position and its leverage greatly increases at that point. That is, the motor exerts the least effort to impart the most force on the door at that point. A door that reverses easily at waist height might not reverse at all at a point 2" off the floor. The opposite is rarely true because of the geometry of the armature. Feeling for resistance with your hands is not going to achieve much. First of all, you would be amazed, really amazed, at how little force is necessary to kill a kid with one of these things. With the mass behind a garage door, I'd guess that it takes about 15 pounds of force to seriously injure or kill a small kid if it hits them in the right spot. Many adult men that I know can resist that force with one hand. If you don’t believe me, get a few cats from the shelter and do your own experimenting. Second, as Kurt pointed out, there's a lot of latitude in these things. Anyone ever taken one apart? They're ridiculously primitive. They rely on amp draw from the motor to decide when to reverse. This is about as inaccurate as you can get, even the old clutch systems were better. There’s enough consistency there to reverse reliably with the 2x4, where the amount of force can vary widely, but the design isn’t sophisticated enough to reverse reliably at a specific level of force. They’re NOT DESIGNED TO BEHAVE THAT WAY. A hand test that you do today is worthless tomorrow, but a 2x4 test today will be very, very similar to a 2x4 test tomorrow. Look at it from a design point of view. The force necessary to open and close a door while overcoming uneven rails, sticky rollers, and ornery tracks is almost always going to be greater than the force necessary to injure or kill a person. A resistance-to-pressure based safety reverse is not a valid design goal. Even if you could get it to work while the door was new, it would likely fail as the door aged. That’s why we have to rely on other means to achieve real safety. If you’re concerned about injury, a photo sensor mounted near the floor is the most reliable safety feature out there today. Second runner up is a leading edge sensor on the door. If I wanted a truly safe door, I think I’d install a leading edge sensor on the door and three photo sensors, one at 4â€

It seems pretty darn obvious to me. I think you're spot on. Ten humans living in a 700sf cape isn't going to work in your climate. There's no solution to the problem unless the occupants are willing to make drastic changes to their lifestyle. - Jim Katen, Oregon

The absence of a bonding jumper together with the absence of a main breaker might suggest that this is a sub panel. (Or that it's just a screwed up mess.) If the neutral terminal bar is isolated from the grounding bar, how is the grounding bar grounded? I only see three wires in that feeder cable. Something is missing. - Jim Katen, Oregon

No, I don't think that would work either, unless the original installer installed an unnecessary 3-wire cable. The AC circuit only requires two phase conductors and a grounding wire. The fan and fixture in the gazebo need a hot, a neutral and a ground. Are there four wires running from the breaker to the disconnect? If so, your electrician's idea would work, but it'd be silly. Much easier to just tap off another nearby outlet. - Jim Katen Oregon

I don't suppose that the fan/fixture was fewer than 10 feet from the AC disconnect box? - Jim Katen, Oregon

And that only deals with hard coat stucco. They need to do another for EIFS. I have one criticism, though. If the publishers of this slide show want to be taken seriously, they need to hire an English teacher to edit it. The spelling and punctuation errors were embarrassing. I suggest an English teacher because those people are usually underpaid and under appreciated. - Jim Katen, Oregon

Sleuth, As Bill & Richard have said, it's a small technical violation that doesn't really end up affecting much of anything. I'll bet that the wall was constructed around the panel. If you had the opportunity to catch this as it was happening, it'd be worth heading off the problem. Now that it's done, I wouldn't worry about it. The time, effort and cost to correct would be wildly out of proportion the benefit that you'd gain. One other thing I've learned. As a home inspector, when you see something like this, it's always a red herring that the house jinn put there to distract you from a bigger issue. Every freaking time. When you see something like this, step back, clear you head and look for the real problem. - Jim Katen

Steve, the Bradford White date codes are slighly more complex than that. Here's a chart with the details. Mike. If you don't have this already, it's a good one to add to the web site. It seems like the question about how to decode BW water heaters comes up frequently. - Jim Katen, Oregon Download Attachment: BradfordWhiteDateCodes.doc 20.44 KB

If they didn't offer warranties, I'm sure they would. - Jim Katen, Oregon

I'm not sure that I understand your question, but I'll try to divine your intent. A meter can that's rated for use outdoors, doesn't need to be flashed to protect the can or its contents. The enclosure weatherproof. However, it may need to be flashed to protect the stucture that it's attached to just as you need to flash windows, doors and trim. - Jim Katen, Oregon

I wonder how the people who live in Venice feel about our mold-fever in this country. - Jim Katen, Oregon

How thin is "too thin"? Don't worry about moisture build up between layers of plywood. Make sure that the existing deck is dry and nail the new one tightly against the old. I disagree with Mike's suggestion of using spacers. In addition to providing a nailing surface for the shingles, the deck provides stiffness to the roof plane and prevents racking of the framing. If you use spacers, you'll lose a surprising amount of additional strength in that regard. - Jim Katen, Oregon

What does the license agreement say? - Jim Katen, Oregon

Scott knows that there's current at the back of the outlet. He's wondering if his volt stick will pick it up from the front of the outlet. - Jim Katen, Oregon

George, welcome to the forum. I hope you stick around. In his original question, I think that Wayne understands what a fused neutral is and what its implications are, but he's looking for reporting language to convey that information to his clients. As home inspectors, we have the difficult task of explaining this stuff to a non-technical audience. We've got to be able to recognize a problem and then explain it to folks who are CPAs, soccer moms and software consultants. Here's an interesting challenge for you that will help you to understand what we do: Take the explanation in your paragraph and re-write it for a non-technical audience. Explain: A. What the problem is. B. Why it's important. That is, what "bad thing" could happen if no action is taken? C. What the homebuyer should do. That is, what action should he take? Remember that the explanation must be understood by someone who doesn't know the meaning of words like "volt," "watt," "grounding," etc. In other words, explain it so that Aunt Martha can understand it. Oh yes, keep it short, you've got 40 or 50 other defects to write about on this house. I'd suggest aiming for 50-100 words. And no spelling or grammar mistakes allowed. Some of your customers might be schoolteachers. - Jim Katen, Oregon

OK, I'll bite. What's the relationship between reversed polarity and the danger of arc flash? - Jim Katen, Oregon

Just to be clear, I'm sure that when you say, "whenever you access them" that you aren't referring to home inspectors. I'd hate for a home inspector to read this thread and think that he ought to be torquing electrical connections. Also, as I'm sure you're aware, there's a danger that by overtorquing aluminum connections you can cut right through the wire over time, especially on residential equipment. I know it's commonly done in industrial settings, but how many residential electricians do you know who carry torque screwdrivers? I've never met one. Without a torque screwdriver, repeatedly tightening an aluminum connection is a dangerous practice. - Jim Katen, Oregon