SNations

Marc, have you ever read "The Checklist Manifesto" by Atul Gawande? Very interesting. I highly recommend it. Among other things you'll learn why Van Halen required that all of the brown M&M's be removed from the large bowl that they wanted back stage.

I can't give you a definitive answer, but I have a Honeywell model W8735B Telephone Access Module that works over the phone lines and let's me control my thermostat. That would be a good place to start (or continue) your search. Good luck. It sounds like a fun project.

Your information says you're from Charleston, WV. Why did you request R-30 as a minimum? According to the International Energy Conservation Code 2009, Table 402.1.1, for your climate zone the minimum ceiling insulation R-value is R-38. This minimum applies to the entire state of West Virginia.

I'm all for the idea of this article, if the idea is that standardizing procedures is a good idea. But the idea that any of this makes for the "perfect inspection" is far fetched. It's a good idea for everyone in the office to answer the phone the same way. But that has nothing to do with finding a broken vent pipe in the attic. I'm all for arriving before the client, but that still won't help you find that water leak at the soffit. I'm all for being able to quickly set up your ladder, but that won't help you find the missing flashing. This is a good article as it relates to business practice. But tone down the whole "perfect inspection" angle. The article has little to say about the technical aspects of doing a better inspection.

Is there ever a legitimate reason to have a 30A 120V circuit? It's my understanding that 30A is allowed for "fixed utilization equipment" (and obviously I see 30A 240V all the time) but I can't think of any equipment that uses 30A on 120V. Is there anything like that? In the case I saw yesterday it was clearly an attempt to get more juice out of the six circuits supplying a 1400 square foot 3 bedroom duplex.

Aside from the lack of a proper T- or Y-fitting, I don't think there's anything wrong with this setup. Now, I have no idea and no way of knowing if the sizes are proper. But the configuration is OK. According to the International Residential Code section 2427.10.4, "Two or more appliances connected to a single vent": Where two or more vent connectors enter a common gas vent. . . the smaller connector shall enter at the highest level consistent with the available headroom or clearance to combustible materials. But that's not the case here. There aren't two connectors entering the vent. There are two connectors combining. According to section 2427.10.3.4 "Common connector/manifold": Where two or more gas appliances are vented through a common vent connector or vent manifold, the common vent connector or vent manifold shall be located at the highest level consistent with available headroom and the required clearance to combustible materials and shall be sized in accordance with Section 2428 or other approved engineering methods. " The code is silent on how the common connectors meet up. I know that there is a Dura-vent installation guide that says that vent connectors from multiple appliances, installed on the same floor level, may enter the manifold from below or from the side of the manifold. According to that standard, this installation seems OK.

Just curious, but why are you going to use unfaced insulation and then add a vapor barrier? Why not just faced insulation? And what kind of vapor barrier to you plan to use? A couple of weeks ago someone had a very similar issue and I recommended using closed cell spray foam at the exterior walls of the bathroom. Sacramento might be too mild of a climate to make this worthwhile, though. Check out the July 2011 issue of the Journal of Light Construction and look for an article titled "Energy Retrofit in Stages."

The ratios used for roof ventilation are based largely on voodoo. I would say that you have enough ventilation if you have no moisture problems in your attic. Although you need to remember that things change over time, so what's fine now might not be fine next year. If you're concerned, you should work inside the house to prevent moisture from getting into the attic in the first place (source control), rather than worrying about removing it with ventilation.

The applicable section is titled "chimneys". The definition of chimney, as I read it, does not include the flue liner, which is not part of the "primary vertical structure". Maybe that was the intention of the code writers -- I don't think they did a good job in this case of translating their ideas into the written word. Maybe others think that the flue liner is part of the primary vertical structure. I don't. I think the flue liner goes inside the primary vertical structure. At any rate, this is a huge non-issue. Believe me -- I understand how much of a non-issue this is. I'm only engaged in an academic exercise.

I think Randy's right. The drawing says a combo or 1/8+Wye is prohibited from horizontal to vertical.

Well, I agree that makes sense, but I don't think that's what it says. Maybe the IRC language should be changed.

Bill, My problem with this diagram is that it does not make clear where to measure from. Is it the top of the flue, the top of the bricks, or the top of the crown? From the IRC: 1003.9 Termination. Chimneys shall extend at least 2 feet (610 mm) higher than any portion of a building within 10 feet (3048 mm), but shall not be less than 3 feet (914 mm) above the highest point where the chimney passes through the roof. CHIMNEY. A primary vertical structure containing one or more flues, for the purpose of carrying gaseous products of combustion and air from a fuel-burning appliance to the outside atmosphere. So from this, I read it as measuring from the top of the bricks -- maybe the top of the crown. But definitely not the top of the clay flue. Would that be your interpretation also?

I agree with Brandon. The landing does not meet the requirements of IRC 311.7.5 because the "landing" does not have the same width as the stairway for 36 inches. So I'd say you could make a very good argument that a handrail is required all the way down. R311.7.5 Landings for stairways. There shall be a floor or landing at the top and bottom of each stairway. A flight of stairs shall not have a vertical rise larger than 12 feet (3658 mm) between floor levels or landings. The width of each landing shall not be less than the width of the stairway served. Every landing shall have a minimum dimension of 36 inches (914 mm) measured in the direction of travel.

The problem is that your experiment doesn't come anywhere close to modelling the physical situation that I'm proposing. I'm not suggesting foaming all six surfaces of the bathroom (4 walls, ceiling, floor), let alone installing a magnetically sealed airtight door. I'm just suggesting foaming the exterior wall where the vapor drive from warm and wet to cold and dry is the highest, and where cold sheathing could cause condensation and all its problems. Jim Olson, the author of the JLC article, thinks it's a good idea and I agree.

Even though the JLC article details an intensive retrofit job, the basic principle is exactly the same as Mark's situation. I'm just taking one small idea from a larger project. Agreed that economies of scale may be a problem here. This will probably need to be a do-it-yourself job. That's OK. I'm sure Mark's a handy guy. Why? What mechanism are you proposing that might make this problematic? The author of the JLC article seems to think it's a great idea.

Tom, I'm not sure what your point is. But I'm not suggesting using foam because it would improve the energy efficiency of the house. I'm suggesting its use because it's a great vapor barrier. To quote from the JLC article: "To eliminate any possibility that high indoor vapor pressure in the bathroom could drive moisture into the framing cavities, we completely filled the stud cavities of that short section of exterior wall with spray foam."

In the July 2011 Journal of Light Construction there is an article titled "An Energy Retrofit in Stages." In this project, all of the exterior sheathing was removed. Over most of the house they put up new sheathing and blew in cellulose. But at the exterior wall of the bathroom they used spray foam. If you're at all concerned (and you must be at least a little because you posted the question), I would suggest you do the same and use spray foam instead of fiberglass.

Interesting news: The state of Georgia has outlawed the use of power attic ventilators in its newest energy code. You can download the document here: http://www.dca.state.ga.us/development/ ... ve_001.pdf Section 403.10 near the bottom of page 13 says: 403.10 Power attic ventilators. In new construction, power attic ventilators shall not be connected to the electric grid. Power attic ventilators connected to a solar panel are allowed. Of course they still allow solar powered ventilators. But at least they're acknowledging that the power from the grid to run one of these things does not offset the energy saved.

Here are some links to building science documents that describe power attic ventilators as a bad idea. http://www.homeenergy.org/archive/hem.d ... 51103.html http://tinyurl.com/m7nrq http://tinyurl.com/66qq8jv http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=d ... entilation I've seen several attics with a PAV that had terrible moisture problems, not to mention the problem of not saving any energy during the summer.

It seems to me that there is not enough information to solve the puzzle. Information you should get / tests you should perform: blower door testing duct leakage testing historical fuel usage and general history of the home and homeowner Good luck

This is interesting, Jim. Has anybody else ever done this? The folks at the Freakonomics blog talk about "pay what you want" pricing models on occasion, and it usually seems to work out pretty well. And I remember the guy who wrote "What They Don't Teach You at Harvard Business School" (can't remember his name -- sports agent guy, died a few years ago) wrote that in his early years he did the same thing and only once did somebody not pay him the original quote. It's an interesting concept but I've yet to see a Doctor, Attorney, Gas Station, Grocery Store, Auto Mechanic, Snow Plower, Pizza Shop, Flower Shop, Yoga Master or Shoe Shine Boy do this. No, it's extremely rare. But you just heard Jim Katen, one of the very smartest guys you are ever going to meet, say that he's done it a few dozen times and never had a problem with a client. You can argue with a lot of things, but you can't argue with success.

This is interesting, Jim. Has anybody else ever done this? The folks at the Freakonomics blog talk about "pay what you want" pricing models on occasion, and it usually seems to work out pretty well. And I remember the guy who wrote "What They Don't Teach You at Harvard Business School" (can't remember his name -- sports agent guy, died a few years ago) wrote that in his early years he did the same thing and only once did somebody not pay him the original quote.

Unico. Hot water delivered from the boiler. Very old house, with a second floor addition put on a few years ago. They left the boiler, and the radiators on the first floor, and put in this high velocity heating/cooling system on the first and second floors. So heating on the first floor is now both radiators and high velocity air, and the two heating systems can't be controlled independently. I told them that high velocity air works well for cooling, because moving air tends to cool you so everything is working towards a common goal. With high velocity heat that's not the case. There were also barometric dampers on the gas-fired boiler and water heater. I'd never actually seen such a damper because I've never seen an oil-fired heating system. But I looked it up and these dampers are designed for gas appliances, although I don't know why someone thought it necessary or desirable. So there were some interesting design decisions made several years ago. Thanks for your input Jim. (p.s. This is what I mean by home performance. This is what intrigues me.)

I heard from a source that I trust that Tesla was not able to eat any food until he calculated its volume. He was a nutcase. A super genius nutcase, though.

I just saw my first ever high velocity forced air heating system. Does anybody know any significant problems or downsides to this type of system that I should warn my clients about?