SNations

Huge mistake to list "use recycled products" ahead of "improve energy efficiency" in the hierarchy of green building. HUGE.

There's a big difference between an advocate and a zealot, isn't there.

I had a co-worker once who, after somebody else who should have known better stuck his hand into a piece of electronic equipment and shocked himself, commented how interesting it is that so many really good swimmers drown. Familiarity really does breed contempt.

yes, a 3 ft minimum height is required and the chimney should be 2 ft higher than any structure in a 10 ft radius. In that case, I suspect the taller chimney was installed after which would explain the height difference and the roof vents are brand new. Around here it's sort of common practice to stagger the heights of flues that are near each other, so I don't think the different heights necessarily indicates that they were installed at different times. And I don't think the 3-2-10 rule applies to other nearby flues.

If you're interested in an architectural tour you should come out to Oak Park and visit the Frank Lloyd Wright home and studio, and then take a walking tour of some nearby FLW homes. Just last week I inspected a 1903 FLW home. It was spectacular. Oak Park is the first suburb west of Chicago, so it's a short cab ride.

What's the difference between semi-rigid and flexible metal? I always thought they were synonymous. In fact here's a link to a dryer manufacturer installation manual that says on page 31: "Use rigid exhaust duct or 521P3 semi-rigid flexible metal duct kit." So they seem to think the two terms are interchangeable. Download Attachment: dryer info 503806.pdf 695.93 KB

I'm not sure what you mean here. IRC still doesn't allow single wall connector in an attic or crawl space. 2012 -- G2427.10.2.2 (503.10.2.2) Vent connectors located in unconditioned areas.

I can see this guy's point, to some degree. But the solution, if there is one, doesn't involve limiting the post-inspection negotiating rights of the buyer. It involves requiring much better pre-offer disclosure from the seller. Information is the great economic equalizer, and that's what we provide.

Thank you Kurt. You've made my point for me. If better spec sheets call for sloped flashing, then doesn't it follow logically that sloped flashing is better? I don't think JLC is wrong in their best practices specifications. Further, here's what Building Science Corporation has to say on the subject. From their document "Info-303 Common Flashing Details": QUOTE: Head Flashings Head flashings are used to direct water away from openings such as windows and doors. Head flashings should be installed with a positive slope to the exterior. The cladding above the head flashing should never rest on the flashing as this leads to problems with the flashing being bent in the wrong direction and sloped back towards the building. Head flashings should extent (sic) laterally past the opening on either side. END QUOTE Translation: the marble should roll off. Remember please, I'm not defending Mr. Marble's reporting methods. But I think to be fair to him and to this forum we have to acknowledge that he's right on the technical merits. To his great credit, Mike did this in his first post on this thread. And Kurt, you did this over on the ASHI forum just a few days ago. Regarding the TPR discharge pipe in the sink, you said that you wouldn't report on it, but (again to your great credit) you acknowledged that it was in fact a cross connection. So please, let's at least acknowledge that both JLC and Building Science state that flashing should be installed so that it's sloped. Then we can haggle over wether or how it should be reported.

OK, I'm going to break the cardinal rule of a discussion like this: I'm going to ask a question that I don't know the answer to. Why do flashing products for multifamily jobs come with a built-in bevel, but not flashing for single family construction?

I still disagree. There are various methods for flashing these details. What's deemed "best" today might be deemed "crap" tomorrow. If you use a method that involves a flashing product that comes with a built-in bevel, then you should install it that way. Such products are exceedingly rare in single family construction. (By the way, I work with them regularly in some of my outside gigs on multifamily jobs. The drip edges are also bevelled and hemmed and we include end dams that extend both above and below bevel at each end - each one is painstakingly custom fabbed in the field. If we're taking "best practices, I'd say that the JLC specs are crap and, therefore, "wrong.") The stuff off the shelf comes preformed with 90 degree angles. Are you proposing altering it in the field? When you buy and install pre-made flashing with 90-degree angles, there will be some that slope one way and some that slope another after they're installed. This is reality, not a drawing in a book. The installation will contain discrepancies. While that might make it "imperfect," it doesn't follow that it's, "wrong." Maybe what's "best" today will be "crap" tomorrow. Maybe not. I'll go with best practices at the time of construction. (Standards change, I know that. I said it here a few weeks ago.) If I'm a builder and the flashing comes with a 90-degree angle then I'm going to slap it up as fast as I can and then move on to the next house and not lose a minute of sleep. I run a business too, and I understand that you can't worry about every little detail, especially on something that has a very low chance of making a difference. But if it's my house, then I want to find one of the exceedingly rare pieces of flashing with the bevel built in, because I think that's best practice. And while I repeat that I'm not going to condone your local inspector's reporting methods, I'm not going to fault someone on the technical side for wanting to see best practices, especially when it comes to water resistance detailing.

I don't think it's wrong, no matter how strictly you speak. The downside to this is very close to zero. Yes, and I said pretty much exactly that in my first post. I said "Well sloped might be only infinitesimally better, and maybe not significantly better. . . ." Translation: the downside to this is very close to zero. So please be clear about my position. However, if the downside is not *exactly* zero then it's wrong. Maybe not wrong enough to bother fixing, and maybe not wrong enough for the builder to worry about in the first place. But still wrong, and JLC Best Practices clearly agrees. It's all a matter of how it's reported, and this guy appears to be going overboard with the fear factor. I certainly agree with that.

So is the bigger question this: Should we report on things that are wrong, strictly speaking, but won't make a difference? I would say the answer is, it depends. . . .

Yeah, that's right to a point; but saying they need to be replaced? He's pushing the credibility envelope there. Someday he's going to get called out by a builder, end up in court and then a siding manufacturer's tech rep is going to be called in by the other side as a witness and the tech rep will say something like, "Yeah, we liked those pics so we borrowed them from so-and-so. Sure, sloped flashings work better, but the truth is we don' t have any data anywhere to prove that flat flashings aren't working. We'll still honor the warranty on that product." Then he'll walk out with so much egg on his face he'll looks like a Denver Omellete with it's head stuck up it's ass. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Well, I'm not defending his reporting. I thought about making that point in my first post, but decided it was extraneous. On the other hand, he's never going to end up in court. We all know that. But if he does, and the rep says, "Sure, sloped flashings work better" then he'd win.

I think this fellow is right on the technical merits. Any exterior detail is going to work better and last longer if it sheds water well. Well sloped might be only infinitesimally better, and maybe not significantly better, but better nonetheless. And just because everybody does it wrong doesn't make it OK.

I can assure you that this position isn't based on any type of industry pressure. And I don't even know what kind of pressure any outside organization could possibly bring to bear on ASHI. Where would their leverage be? It's based on solid evidence. And it's based largely on the belief of many inside ASHI that we should stop just standing on the sidelines. The vast knowledge that all of the combined ASHI inspectors can bring to bear on an issue can be an overwhelming force. We're on the front lines, seeing what's going on every day. And if we take all that information and pool it then ASHI could really be a leader in the entire real estate industry. That's the direction many of ASHI's leaders want to take the organization, and I'm in complete agreement with that position.

You can use your bank card, but just don't try using a punch card to program your computer. You can buy an appliance and plug it in, but if your receptacle isn't grounded and polarized how will you know if you've plugged it in correctly? You can't buy a Blu-Ray DVD and play it at home. (At least I can't.) How many people have gotten sick the last few years from eating packaged spinach tainted with e-coli? Standards change. Better technology comes along, or just better information.

I have a friend who's a surgeon, and I asked him about this sort of thing a while ago. He said that no doctor would ever have to appear in court or at a deposition without charging a fair (but hefty) consulting fee, even if they're just testifying to facts. I don't see why your situation is any different. To Bill's point about just authenticating your report, maybe some sort of affidavit would suffice.

To consider having some work done won't prevent water damage. To prevent water damage you must actually take some action, not just consider it. Maybe you're trying to hedge your bet in that water damage might not occur even in the absence of any action. But you've done that in an inarticulate manner.

Maybe, but a newer Goodman furnace would only try to fire three times, then it would shut down. I don't think it would keep trying to fire for 45 minutes.

Air is a fluid. www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid

When clients ask me something like this I tell them that the person doing the installation is a lot more important than the brand. That's almost always true.

Try Brick Industry Association Technical Note 28. www.gobrick.com/TechnicalNotes/LinkstoT ... fault.aspx

I'm with Kurt on this one. If there's a lawyer involved in a dispute between the buyer and seller, then the HI is part of that relationship, and you can't just end it. You could get saddled with lots and lots of legal issues that you don't want. Better to be a helpful partner up front, when the time commitment is minimal.

I don't know how things get on the radar, but I'm cynical enough to know that things don't get on the radar just because they deserve to be there. Take decks, for example. I think we all take deck safety seriously, looking at ledger board attachment and that sort of thing. There's even a deck safety awareness week, so it's definitely on the radar. So I looked up information from the North American Deck and Railing Association. Their website says that from 2000-2008 "at least" 30 deaths occurred from deck collapse. Let's assume the real number is 50% higher, or 45. And that's over a nine year span, which comes to an average of 5 a year. So that would make septic systems 10 times more deadly than decks. I would wager that last week, if you asked 1,000 HI's which was more deadly -- decks or septic systems -- at least 999 would have said decks. And if you had asked them which of these was 10 times more deadly than the other the response would have been unanimous for decks. But they all would have been wrong. (As a caveat, I'm just taking it as gospel that the 50/year figure is right. Maybe, maybe not. Maybe I should look that up.) Things get on the radar for lots of reasons, in all professions and areas of interest. But we shouldn't assume that because something is on the radar that it actually deserves to be there. We need to double check the data and our assumptions on a regular basis. I think our profession would be well served by taking a good look at what we really think is important on a more regular basis and in a systemic manner.