Brandon Chew

A ground lift adapter is the thing that is used to insert a three prong plug into a two prong receptacle. http://cinemasupplies.stores.yahoo.net/grliadco41.html I haven't tried using the adapter on a plug-in GFI tester, but I would expect that you still couldn't get your plug-in tester to trip the GFI unless you took the time to connect the grounding tab to a good ground. The best thing to do is to perform the test as Jim described -- by using the test button on the GFI receptacle and then use the tester to confirm that the power has been interrupted. The test button on the GFI receptacle (or breaker) mimics the condition that the GFI device is monitoring, while the plug-in tester creates an alternative condition which causes the GFI to trip under most (but not all) circumstances. Brandon

Ok, now that we've established that I'm a freak [:-hypnoti , I think that I might fit in here at TIJ just fine. I mean that in the nicest of ways, of course. [:-smile_g Brandon

A few weeks ago I tried demos of several report software programs. One of them was highly recommended by many inspectors for it's boilerplate comment library. It was the one written by the guy with the Ph.D. in English. While I really liked how this program organized the comments and how easy it was to find what I was looking for, I quickly came to abhor the boilerplate. I had to wade my way though tons of CYA gobbledygook and fluff in order to figure out what he was actually trying to say. This might be ok for some inspectors, but for me I knew that if I bought this program I'd have to extensively re-write every single comment to reflect my style before I could use it. Granted, I'll be rewriting the boilerplate for any program I use, but I thought for me it would be best to start off with something that was written well (from a utilitarian perspective) and build upon it. Brandon

A few weeks ago I was in the process of deciding which report software to use in my soon-to-be-launched HI business. After reading the message boards I visited about a dozen report software web sites of the products most frequently mentioned by people in favorable terms, and of those, I decided to download a half dozen demos. I ran the demos through their paces for several days and then narrowed it down to the three that I had the most "good feelings" about. Those three were Inspect Express, AHIT's InspectIt, and 3D Systems. At that point I cracked open MS Word and made a list of some of the most important things I was looking for in my software, and I made a table where I could record how these three programs stacked up on those items. I then put the three programs through their paces paying particular attention to how each of them handled these items. Since my report will be the tangible "product" of my interaction with my client, at the very top of my list was the ability to be able to customize the content and format of the report in any way that I see fit. Inspect Express and InspectIt had a big advantage in that regard because their reports are created in MS Word. 3D has its own built-in word processor and has some ability to customize the format, but it is not as flexible as using MS Word. Working within Word I can even automate some tasks by programming my own macros, and I can share information between Word, Excel, Access, and PowerPoint which may prove handy down the road. Here are my notes on some of the other factors as I compared Inspect Express and AHIT. In the end, I decided to go with Inspect Express. Overall report type/format? InspectIt -- Pseudo checklist that flows item-by-item, but allows you to customize narrative for that item to include photos, links, diagrams, formatting, etc. It does not seem possible to change away from that basic layout. Has "positive attributes" bullet, which I find unnecessary and irritating. Inspect Express -- Reports created in either partial narrative or full narrative styles. Partial narrative has the description of components sections written in list style, followed by narrative for observations and recommendations. Ease of navigation between view of report as it will print, and view where you are working on creating & adding comments? InspectIt -- Works within Microsoft Word. You see actual report in the background at all times. When a panel/menu popup is open for a particular sub-section, you must close it before you can scroll or access the document, or move anywhere else in the program. Pain in butt. Inspect Express -- Works within Microsoft Word. You see actual report in the background at all times. You can scroll, access and edit the report while the menu popup is open (remains in foreground but can be moved around). Convenient. Ease of editing & adding new comments to the library? InspectIt -- Type new or edit existing comment anywhere within your report and format it as you want it to look. Select the text and then go through multiple step process to add it to your library. It is automatically added to end, then you must go through another process of editing another document to move the entry where you want it in the list. Cumbersome process. Inspect Express -- Click of a button can store a variation of a default comment in the archive (attached to observation check box) for quick recall in the future. Right click default comment to permanently change it. Right click available “custom commentâ€

It doesn't take an engineer or a rocket scientist to figure out that if a tree is farther away from a house than it is tall, then it can't hit the house if it falls over. My guess would be that's his reasoning, and it's good advice if you want to reduce the risk of the tree causing damage to the house to zero. But most of us are comfortable with bearing some level of risk. I might mention that fact to my client to inform him of the risk, but stop short of recommending a tree be taken down simply because it was closer to the house than it was tall (assuming the tree has no obvious signs of disease or decay). The client can weigh the risk vs. enjoyment of the tree and decide. Regarding the tree's root system, it extends out to roughly the spread of the tree's branches (in other words, where the shadow line would be if the sun was directly overhead). However, the roots out that far are the little feeder ones, not the kind that would move foundations, but the kind that like to find their way into your house sewer line or your leach field piping as they search for water. The big honking roots are closer to the trunk. They're the ones you see still attached when the tree is uprooted and falls over. Mature (not ancient) oaks, maples and pines I've seen around here that have fallen over have roots sticking up in the air about 12-15 feet from the trunk. So a rule of thumb that a large tree should be at least about 12-15 feet away from the foundation sounds about right to me (to reduce the risk that the tree roots would grow large enough at the foundation to damage it). Of course a mature tree growing that close will likely have large branches which overhang the house, so if the branches fall, or if the tree falls over into the house, it could damage the roof or framing (but the foundation would probably be fine). At my own home, there are three large red oaks near my house, one about 2 feet in diameter located 6 feet from the corner of my 30 year old CMU block foundation, and the other two are about 3 feet in diameter and about 14 feet from the foundation. I have no cracking or damage to the foundation walls visible in my basement. The one 6 feet from the house will be taken down this summer, as I feel it is too close to the foundation, and I don't want to let it get any larger before bringing it down. The other two will remain, and will probably grow better because they were being crowded by the one that will be taken down. They overhang the house, but if they fall, that's why I have homeowner's insurance. I'll enjoy the trees and the house, and pay my insurance company to bear the risk.

Well, my bags are packed and I'm off to Rochester for classroom training during the next two weeks, followed by a week of field training in July. Since I last posted, I am now fully committed to making a go at this, and I have been busy with: -- lining up my legal, accounting, and insurance support services -- attending local chapter meetings of ASHI and NACHI. There were some interesting contrasts between the two groups, and at each meeting they each took some un-provoked jabs at the other org, but they both had some genuinely friendly people and a common desire to make themselves better inspectors. -- doing some ride-alongs with a couple of local inspectors, so I could see first hand what this was all about before I got myself into it. -- doing my pre-course homework for the ITA 12-day course -- studying the IRC to prepare for taking some of the ICC certification exams -- taking some online business courses that I found through the SBA, putting some flesh on my business plan, and punching some numbers into Brian Hannigan's "Cost of Business" spreadsheet. Lots of work is still ahead. I'm hoping to get all of the pieces to drop into place this fall. Regards

After having some great phone conversations with Chad, Steven and Mike N. during this past weekend, and getting the final ok from my better half, this morning I signed up for the ITA training in Rochester. I'll be taking the 12 day class in June and the 40 hour field training in July. Thanks guys, for taking the time to answer my questions. My hat is off to all of you at TIJ for sharing your knowledge and experiences for the benefit of others. I look forward to the day when I can give something back to you, and provide my own contributions to this forum and to the inspection profession.

That's a beauty. When it comes time to replace it, they should sell it on E-bay. I'll bet someone would pay a pretty penny for it.

Hi folks. Thank you all for the responses. I have been traveling with family for Easter break and have just now returned and am catching back up. Jeff R. - Thanks for the well wishes. I hope it is just a dip in the cycle and that business soon picks up for you. I learned a lot from many of your old posts on the NACHI board. With regards to schools popping up, new inspectors in NY now need 140 hours of pre-licensing training from a NY approved school, so there has been a demand in NYS created by this licensing law. I was glad to see an established school with a good reputation for training inspectors, such as ITA, get on the state list of approved schools. I have some reservations about getting training from an unproven school where their primary business seems to be training real estate agents or appraisers and which has only recently begun training home inspectors. Bill K. – Good advice. I am definitely going to try and get out on some inspections with established inspectors. I hadn’t thought of purposely going out with some bad inspectors, but will add that to my to-do list. Being able to compare the good vs. bad inspectors seems like a great educational tool. BTW, aren’t all inspectors ugly?! I am wondering how receptive my local area is to mentoring new inspectors, so I am planning to attend some local association meetings to meet some inspectors and test the waters. I am planning to do some practice inspections at friends and relatives houses, with full reports and get some peer review, before opening my doors for business. I’ll make it a point to try and get a variety of property types and ages. Mike O. – Also good advice. I have worked for someone else all of my life, and this will be my first try at going on my own. Aside from the subject matter, being self-employed is one of the things about HI that appeals to me. I have been plowing my way through the SBA, IRS and state tax sites, and am starting to flesh out a business plan. I live near a Small Business Development Center and soon plan to take advantage of their free counseling services. I’ll also be looking for a lawyer and an accountant. I figure I may get some leads on those from inspectors at one of my local association meetings. Lastly, I hear you about pricing too low. I plan to crunch the numbers using Brian Hannigan’s “Cost of Businessâ€

[Note: I have also cross-posted this over at InspectionNews, so for those of you who frequent both forums, I apologize for the duplicate posting] I am on the verge of making a change away from my engineering job of the past twenty years, and I have been learning as much as I can about the profession and business of inspecting homes in order to see if this would be a good fit for me. I have spent the last six months devouring the content of several HI message boards (Inspection News, The Inspector's Journal, and NACHI), Carson Dunlop's "Principles of Home Inspection: Communication & Professional Practice" and "Building Your Home Inspection Business", and the two Journal of Light Construction “Field Guides to Residential Constructionâ€

While the deer mouse is the primary carrier, it can be transmitted by other rodents as well. From the CDC website: "Which rodents are known to be carriers of hantavirus that cause HPS in humans? In the United States, deer mice, cotton and rice rats (in the Southeast), and the white-footed mouse (in the Northeast), are the only known rodent carriers of hantaviruses causing HPS." The carriers are located throughout the US. As of Feb 2006, there have been 416 cases of HPS in thirty states, most of them west of the Mississippi. There are a few cases in the northeast and middle atlantic states, but none reported yet in southeast. More info from the CDC is here: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/hant ... es/FAQ.htm Edit: Doh! [:-paperba Looks like Mike and I were tracking down the same info at the same time!

Yep, very true Carl. I probably wouldn't be a successful production home builder. I would approach building homes as if I was building it for myself (or mom, son, daughter, etc). I remember now where I had come across those photos. Hope this link works. http://www.apawood.org/level_b.cfm?cont ... ed_katibhs Scroll down about six photos or so.

It may be commonly done, but in my opinion it is not a good construction practice. Wind blown rain will get behind the siding. This can be managed by a properly applied layer of building paper, as Mike noted. Lack of sheathing can make the siding susceptable to damage, either from wind driven debris striking the outside, or very strong winds pressurizing the attic space and causing the siding to blow off from the inside out. The pressurization can occur from a strong enough wind on the soffet side of the house (air is forced into the soffets faster than it can exit the ridge or downwind vents), or more likely by wind blown debris that damages siding on the upwind gable, opening a hole which then causes the siding on the downwind gable to be blown outward. I recall seeing pictures of many homes that were damaged in this manner during last summer's hurricanes. These houses had the foam energy board for sheathing beneath the siding. The gable ends adjacent to the attic space were completely blown off. The gaping holes provided ready access for the wind driven rain to soak everything inside the homes. Structurally, the houses were fine. The rain trashed the interiors. It only costs a few dollars for plywood or OSB on the gable ends. In my opinion, that is money well spent. This and $5 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.....

You need to use Real Player to play those audio and video files (.ram file extension). You can get it here for free: http://www.real.com/ A suggestion: pay close attention during the install process, so it doesn't install a lot of junk you don't want, or change all your media file associations to Real player. I set it to only play the Real file extensions, while keeping my Windows Media Player and Jukebox settings the way they were.

These have served me well over the years as sources of inspiration and as crutches in times of need. Most recently, as I have decided to leave my job of 20 years (engineering management) in order to spend more time with my two boys (ages 7 and 5) and learn to be the best home inspector I can be: "Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever." ~Gandhi "Life is what happens to you while you are busy making other plans." ~John Lennon "There is no worse bitterness than to reach the end of your life and realize you haven't lived". ~M. Scott Peck "Life is a journey. Enjoy the ride." ~Nissan advertisement "The more I learn, the more I realize how little I know" ~author unknown "I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who overcomes his enemies." ~Aristotle "Act as if what you do makes a difference. It does." ~ William James "Never look down on anybody unless you're helping him up." ~ Jesse Jackson "I don't measure a man's success by how high he climbs, but how high he bounces when he hits bottom." ~General George S. Patton "A man's feet must be planted in his country, but his eyes should survey the world." ~George Santayana "There is nothing noble about being superior to some other man. The true nobility is in being superior to your previous self." ~ Hindu Proverb

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 Hi Jim, Yep, using pressure measured along the business end of the door for the reverse trigger is probably the best way to do it. But I'll halt this discussion about building a better mousetrap here, so we don't drag this great discussion too far off topic. [] Good point about the door breaking and/or possibly falling. I had that in the back of my mind, which is why I posted that I would do the 2x4 test first. That way I could observe the operation of the door (from a safe distance) through a full cycle without touching it. If it broke while I used an industry standard procedure, and while using normal operator controls, they MIGHT not expect me to pay for fixing it. Having gone through a cycle without mishap on the 2x4 test, I think the odds would be pretty low that it would break doing the hand test. But you raise a good point so I think for safety reasons it would be good practice to always do the hand test while standing on the outside of the door. If the door went through the 2x4 test without mishap but then broke when I did the hand test, I'd probably be offering to pull my check book out, as I'd feel I was responsible for breaking it. [:-ouch] Brandon

Great article and discussion. Jim Katen's post made some very good points. I am a PE with 20 years of engineering experience but I am by no means an expert on garage doors. After reading this thread and thinking about it for a bit I think there are two areas to consider. First, the 2x4 protocol tests whether the reverse mechanism functions under a set of very standard and easily created conditions, and, as Jim states, really only addresses the issue of entrapment. However, injury may be caused by the force exerted by the door as it approaches the floor, and the 2x4 test does nothing to measure this force. In other words, the force applied by the door could kill you but at least they will be able to pull the body out because the door will be up and not pinning you down. If what Jim posted about using amp draw on the motor to kick the reversing mechanism is true (and I have no reason to doubt it), then trying to set a standard based upon force applied wouldn't work very well .... there's just too much slop in the system between the business end (the door bottom edge) and the measurement point (amp draw) to develop a force which was constant along much of its length of travel and which would be the same each time the door closed. With the amp draw 2x4 method, the motor is trying to drive the door that extra 1 1/2" down to the floor and will keep cranking and the amps will build until it reaches the amp set-point for the reverse (or the circuit breaker, whichever is less) -- force applied at the door edge can vary widely and has little to do with the actual reversing of the door in this system. To base the reverse mechanism on the force applied, would probably require either fitting the entire door bottom edge with a pressure sensor, or a redesign of the linkage between door and motor so there is very little "slop" in this linkage, and then in some manner measuring the strain being placed on the linkage. Either of these methods would probably add considerable cost to your door/opener. So you approach the safety problem a different way. Keep the existing opener/door design, and add the photo eyes down by the floor which reverses the door before it could travel low enough to crush or suffocate somebody. Now, any object down by the floor will cause the door to reverse without even needing to touch it. If I decide to make the jump and become a home inspector, I think my procedure would be to first test the reverse with the 2x4 method, and then repeat the test with the hand test (down near the floor, keeping the 2x4 in place to keep fingers from being crushed) in order to feel the pressure. I would report my observations of both tests. I would call the door/opener a defect if it failed the 2x4 test. I would recommend photo eyes as a safety upgrade if they were not present. I might even go so far as to have my client do the hand test and feel the pressure themselves as I explained why having the photo eyes installed would be a good idea.