An average day

[ICE]

The new forum software has opened this thread again.

Tank-less water heater. In the kitchen. The handle of the T&P valve is painted blue because that's the color of the trim and the handle is up against the trim. I was there to inspect the furnace, not the water heater.

 

[ICE]

 

[Alias]

Amazing................I'm speechless........... :mrgreen:

Sue

 

[ICE]

The hard part was getting all this stuff on the roof without damaging the shingles.

 

[ICE]

Condensing furnace vent.

Makes me wonder how they got this far.

Notice the daylight around the pipe.

 

[ICE]

This is a front porch on a house that's for sale. Asking price is $425K. I guess they haven't heard about the great recession.

Besides the nails sticking through the sheathing, carriage bolts at the ends of the rafters, undersized lumber and goofy electrical, there is a mistake that almost all of you have never seen before now. I know that I haven't and I've seen just about everything.

 

[pyrguy]

Other than the bad fix on the far end I think I see a common clip used in a novel way. I have never seen anything like it either.

 

[Francis Vineyard]

Agree 100%.In defense of the inspetor most can barely keep up with the current adopted codes and will not even look at the newer editions till they are being adopted.

In Virginia the 2009 edition became effective March 1st, 2011; unless the permit application was approved before that date with a written request to be reviewed under the 2006.

Francis

 

[steveray]

Plywood run the wrong way.....but at least they knew they needed edge support......

 

[mtlogcabin]

Besides the nails sticking through the sheathing,

No mistake in most residential construction

R905.2.5 Fasteners.

Fasteners for asphalt shingles shall be galvanized steel, stainless steel, aluminum or copper roofing nails, minimum 12 gage [0.105 inch (3 mm)] shank with a minimum 3/8-inch (10 mm) diameter head, ASTM F 1667, of a length to penetrate through the roofing materials and a minimum of 3/4 inch (19 mm) into the roof sheathing. Where the roof sheathing is less than 3/4 inch (19 mm) thick, the fasteners shall penetrate through the sheathing. Fasteners shall comply with ASTM F 1667.

 

[ICE]

No mistake in most residential constructionR905.2.5 Fasteners.

Where the roof sheathing is less than 3/4 inch (19 mm) thick, the fasteners shall penetrate through the sheathing.

That's the arguement I get from lousy contractors. There is also a code section that states that work shall be done in a workmanlike manner. Well there used to be such a section but it may not be in the IRC. When I see nails blasted through the overhang I tell the owner that this may not be what they paid for. I tell the contractor to do the work in a workmanlike manner and this ain't it.

 

[mtlogcabin]

That's the arguement I get from lousy contractors. There is also a code section that states that work shall be done in a workmanlike manner. Well there used to be such a section but it may not be in the IRC. When I see nails blasted through the overhang I tell the owner that this may not be what they paid for. I tell the contractor to do the work in a workmanlike manner and this ain't it.

It is not an aurgument it is a code requirement. Unless you can require a minimum 3/4" roof sheathing the contractor is correct. The code does not address if the underside of the sheathing will be exposed or not

 

[ICE]

It is not an aurgument it is a code requirement. Unless you can require a minimum 3/4" roof sheathing the contractor is correct. The code does not address if the underside of the sheathing will be exposed or not

I advocate for the owner and don't allow the code to be a scapegoat for the contractor.

I am pretty sure that if this were anybody but me, this wouldn't be an issue for you.

At least, for your sake, I hope that's the case.

 

[mtlogcabin]

ICE

I am not intending this to be personal. I am just pointing out the code requires fasteners to be a minimum 3/4" in length and it permits them to penetrate sheathing that is less than 3/4" thick. I don't like the look either but what is the alternative?

 

[kilitact]

ICEI am not intending this to be personal. I am just pointing out the code requires fasteners to be a minimum 3/4" in length and it permits them to penetrate sheathing that is less than 3/4" thick. I don't like the look either but what is the alternative?

I would agree. Cosmetic, perhap your planning department would disapprove it.

 

[ICE]

To each his own. I hope nobody from the planning department sees this. They meddle with our stuff enough as it is.

 

[ICE]

ICEI am not intending this to be personal. I am just pointing out the code requires fasteners to be a minimum 3/4" in length and it permits them to penetrate sheathing that is less than 3/4" thick. I don't like the look either but what is the alternative?

R905.2.5 of a length to penetrate through the roofing materials and a minimum of 3/4 inch (19 mm) into the roof sheathing. Where the roof sheathing is less than 3/4 inch (19mm)thick, the fasteners shall penetrate through the sheathing.

Then if nails aren't sticking through the plywood sheathing there exists a code violation. Obviously the answer is for the nails to be showing. Even with V-Rustic which is 3/4" thick because the code says "a minimum of 3/4 inch (19 mm) into the roof sheathing".

It may be just my way of thinking but this is a stupid code when it comes to overhangs. Hardly ever does someone let the nails show. Almost always a short nail is used. I have never heard of overhang shingles blowing off a roof where field shingles didn't blow off the roof.

Then again, if the overhang shingles don't start peeling away in the wind, the entire roof may stay intact. Who knows. I do know what we have been doing forever and a clean roof job done by a professional will not have nails showing.

 

[mtlogcabin]

You have a history of shorter nails working in your area. What is your wind speed? Perhaps the fastener length should be determined by the wind speed.

 

[ICE]

You have a history of shorter nails working in your area. What is your wind speed? Perhaps the fastener length should be determined by the wind speed.

For most of my career, the wind speed that we built to was 80mph. I think that with the adoption of the IRC, we went to 100mph. I don't think it has exceeded 45mph except at the coast and mountain passes.

We have done it this way ever since shingles were invented.

What are people doing in other parts of the country?

 

[ICE]

 

[Mac]

That looks pretty stout!

 

[Frank]

Then if nails aren't sticking through the plywood sheathing there exists a code violation. Obviously the answer is for the nails to be showing. Even with V-Rustic which is 3/4" thick because the code says "a minimum of 3/4 inch (19 mm) into the roof sheathing". It may be just my way of thinking but this is a stupid code when it comes to overhangs. Hardly ever does someone let the nails show. Almost always a short nail is used. I have never heard of overhang shingles blowing off a roof where field shingles didn't blow off the roof.

Then again, if the overhang shingles don't start peeling away in the wind, the entire roof may stay intact. Who knows. I do know what we have been doing forever and a clean roof job done by a professional will not have nails showing.

If it is 1/2 inch sheathing and the nails don't penetrate then there is a code violation and a reduced strength of hold--the tapered end of the nail does not hold as well as the shank and with shallow penetration will tend to push the nail back out.

Roof failures typically start at corners and edges where the wind uplift force can be up to 2-1/2 times greater than in the field area. Many standards require extra fasterers in these areas in high wind areas.

http://www.fmglobal.com/shamrock/P0283.pdf

 

[ICE]

That looks pretty stout!

Ah but it's Chinese steel from the days of Mao Zedong and the other side is attached to fascia.

 

[ICE]

will tend to push the nail back out.

The real danger is when the lawnmower spits out those short nails.