• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

An average day

We don't get too many residential RTU's....On commercial jobs I always grill the designer on the connection to the curb....They usually start with "What do you mean?"
 
This insulation came from an illegal addition that was torn down. That addition was from the 90's. Now a new addition has been built and they want to use the insulation again. It hasn't been wet. Would you allow them to reuse the insulation?

16604689787_d4a9e3bc5e_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
16186167223_71ee893b9f_b.jpg

The C-Tap is allowed to have two wires....and no more than two. The splice block terminal is allowed to have one wire and no more than one. The C-Tap violation is moot in this case.

The fact that the wires were stripped and a C-Tap is installed points out that when inspecting solar one should expect the unexpected.
 
Last edited:
ICE said:
This insulation came from an illegal addition that was torn down. That addition was from the 90's. Now a new addition has been built and they want to use the insulation again. It hasn't been wet. Would you allow them to reuse the insulation?
Click to expand...
To start with it doesn't look like it's thick enough to be compliant with today's insulation standards. If it does meet current code I don't see any way that you can actually deny him the ability to use it. I just make sure that each piece had markings that show the R-value of it. If it isn't marked it can't be used!
 
Msradell said:
I don't see any way that you can actually deny him the ability to use it.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I couldn't think of a reason either.....so I didn't offer one.....and he didn't ask for one.

It's just musty and smashed...looks a little moldy and smells....reason enough for me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ICE said:
This insulation came from an illegal addition that was torn down. That addition was from the 90's. Now a new addition has been built and they want to use the insulation again. It hasn't been wet. Would you allow them to reuse the insulation?
Click to expand...
Sure they can...provided they can prove it is tested to the correct standards in the building code.
 
16226479364_54cc4a2af1_b.jpg

The carpenter, being smarter than the designer, realized that shooting a short block won't work. So he glued it instead.

16847671292_47c3939e2e_b.jpg

This vent is inside out and is not for use with stucco.

16641609317_b2e3f4aed1_b.jpg

But hold on....we can make it worse.

16226560744_4f03e0a1fe_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
16661495370_bc34e191e3_b.jpg

16661357008_fe48f971d5_b.jpg

Installing hangers is not such a big deal.....providing an air gap isn't going to be easy. Well at least it only happened four times.

Make that three times.



Notice the blocking. There are four rows of blocks and they missed the girders.
 

Attachments

  • 16226731704_cef5385f56_b.jpg
    16226731704_cef5385f56_b.jpg
    218.9 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
Around here we tell them with short posts to lay them down (maybe 2' long) and rip them to the right size or they will be standing toothpicks in short order....
 
This is after I explained, with drawings, how to install a window. Several times on different days.

16832668786_65a50f6ee6_b.jpg

There's about 900 sqft of addition and they called for insulation inspection. That one piece of insulation with the face showing is the only piece of insulation with the face showing. It's near the door and as soon as I saw it I said, "Well the insulation is inside out." He said, "Give me a second and I'll have Martin switch it."

16832662116_d83fffe3af_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
"Well the insulation is inside out."
Click to expand...
Depends on the climate zone you are in. CA is a 3 or Marine 4.

Typically the vapor barrier (Kraft Faced) is in stalled on the "warm" side of the wall which is the inside in the upper climate zones.

However I don't know if it really matters according to this link

http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/building-science/should-paper-facing-batt-insulation-face-inside-or-outside

R702.7 Vapor retarders.

Class I or II vapor retarders are required on the interior side of frame walls in Climate Zones 5, 6, 7, 8 and Marine 4.
 
ICE is in the desert, CA climate zone 14 & 16 per CA energy code map/zones. Per CA amended R702.7 that uses the CA defined climate zones, vapor barrier goes to inside.
 
mtlogcabin said:
Depends on the climate zone you are in. CA is a 3 or Marine 4.Typically the vapor barrier (Kraft Faced) is in stalled on the "warm" side of the wall which is the inside in the upper climate zones.

However I don't know if it really matters according to this link

http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/building-science/should-paper-facing-batt-insulation-face-inside-or-outside

R702.7 Vapor retarders.

Class I or II vapor retarders are required on the interior side of frame walls in Climate Zones 5, 6, 7, 8 and Marine 4.
Click to expand...
I'm in zone 9.... It just looks like zone Twilight.
 
IBC and IRC 104.9.1 would allow the AHJ the right to permit the reuse of that insulation.

IMHO it would NOT be allowed if it has been WET and if it does'nt meet a newer IEEC code that has been adopted for proper thickness required.

Might want to find the proper owner of the insulation before its reused, call in ICE-T to investigate!

pc1
 
16939703032_2805cd30af_b.jpg

Helluva place for a window. Tempered or not it has got to go. I could show you scars from tempered glass.
 
Last edited:
Considered hazardous location, IRC20012, R308.4.6, Glazing adjacent stairs and ramps, unless a guardrail is installed. Check stair riser heights, are they maximum 7-3/4"?

A stair is listed as a walking surface in this section.

pc1
 
This is what ICE is trying to enforce:

R30S.4.6 Glazing adjacent stairs and ramps. Glazing

where the bottom exposed edge of the glazing is less than

36 inches (914 mm) above the plane of the adjacent walking

surface of stairways, landings between flights of stairs

and ramps shall be considered a hazardous location.

Exceptions:

1. When a rail is installed on the accessible side(s)

of the glazing 34 to 38 inches (864 to 965 mm)

above the walking surface. The rail shall be capable

of withstanding a horizontal load of 50

pounds per linear foot (730 N/m) without contacting

the glass and be a minimum of 11/2 inches

(38 mm) in cross sectional height.

2. Glazing 36 inches (914 mm) or more measured

horizontally from the walking surface .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top