Brandon Chew

I understand where you are going with the qualitative vs quantitative thing. I think your logic breaks down somewhere between the tester being "not quantitative" (with which I agree) and then from this you draw the conclusion that it is a "visual inspection" of the receptacle wiring (with which I do not agree). The standard of care that is routinely set by many inspectors goes not only beyond being a visual inspection, but it also frequently crosses that line between qualitative and quantitative. Ever use a tape measure to actually measure something before calling it out as a defect? My point with all this is that home inspections have evolved into something more than a "visual inspection" and they involve some degree of quantitative analysis. What that thing should be called, I really don't know. Supply and demand, my brother. Uh, now, can anyone tell me where Katens at? I heard he just got on a plane to Mexico.[:-wiltel] Chris, Oregon There is an endless supply of new home inspectors pricing their services below the level which is necessary for them to remain viable as a business. There is certainly a demand for home inspections at that price. Neither the supplier nor the purchaser of those services may be making a wise decision. That we see the same thing now happening with IR is probably the biggest reason why I don't already own an IR camera. At this point in time I can't justify a capital outlay of that size when there are guys springing up that are willing to give that capital, and the value of their own time (because as you and others have observed the IR cam adds a significant amount of time to your inspection process), away for free.

Welcome back Brad. I hope things will soon be returning to normal for you and your family. Brandon

A comment and a (rhetorical) question. We need to stop calling what we do a "visual" inspection. It may have been a visual inspection at one time, but the standard of care that is routinely set by many inspectors goes beyond being a visual inspection. I'll use the moisture meter as an example since we are all familiar with its use. If I see something that looks like a water stain or some other sign of a current or past moisture problem, or even a bad flashing job on a roof, and then I use the moisture meter as a tool to provide more information to me about the thing that I observed, then I think we are still in the realm of doing a visual inspection. But if I start routinely scanning the walls below windows or the floor around toilets in the bathroom, because this is where I find a lot of leaks at houses I inspect and not because I observed something at this house that lead me to believe there may be moisture present in these locations at this home, then I'm no longer doing a visual inspection. Here's another example. When I open up an electrical panel and report my findings, I'm doing a visual inspection. When I stick a three light tester into a receptacle and report my findings, I'm not doing a visual inspection on this portion of the electrical system. If, instead of using the tester, I remove the cover plate and report on how the receptacle is wired, I'm doing a visual inspection. In this case, the cost of the tool is cheap and it speeds up my inspection process, because I can use the tester to decide which cover plates I want to pull for a visual inspection, instead of pulling every one of them or relying on a "representative sample". With an IR camera, I see two different ways of using it in HI work. The first way is that you see something, such as a water stain, with your eyes. You pull out your IR camera and you find a "thermal anomaly" around the stain. You pull out your moisture meter and scan around the stain and confirm that the thermal anomaly is due to moisture. You use the IR pic to communicate to your client information about the location and extent of the leak. You could switch the order of grabbing the camera or the moisture meter; I don't think it matters because each tool is being used to provide you with more info about what you originally observed with your eyes. In this case, the cost of the tool is large and time added to the inspection is small. The other way is to use the IR camera as a primary inspection and diagnostic tool, much the same as using the three light receptacle tester or the moisture meter to scan areas of the home that have no visible signs of moisture. In this case the IR camera is being used as a tool to find problems that you cannot normally see with your eyes during the course of a typical home inspection, or maybe, as in the case with the three-light tester you use it to help you more quickly zero in on areas that you want to conduct a more thorough visual examination. You are using the camera to hunt for thermal anomalies and then conducting further investigations to nail down their cause. Now for the question. You make a considerable investment in money and time to add and learn how to properly use a new tool (IR camera) in your routine inspection business. Using this tool adds a significant amount of your time to each inspection. It adds considerable value to your inspection for your client. Why give all of that away for free?

I use this: DOE R-Value Recommendations

Video inspection of the sewer between the house and the street Well yield, water quality, and well equipment installation Household water treatment systems (disinfection, softeners, filters, R/O systems, etc.) Septic or other on-site wastewater disposal systems Solar water heating systems Geothermal heat pumps Fire sprinkler systems Lawn sprinkler & irrigation systems Look at the things that inspectors are not required to inspect in the plumbing & general exclusion sections of the various HI SOPs . If you are qualified to do so, start inspecting them.

I don't think the roofer stayed in a Holiday Inn Express.

I've been following this thread and Caoimhín has been doing so well I thought there was not a lot I could add to the discussion until now. Having worked as an environmental engineer in a government regulatory agency for more than twenty years, I've witnessed a lot of sausage being made. Even when you begin with "good science", what comes out of the other end of "the machine" in the name of good policy can be barely recognizable. Sure, if you take the time to read the label, it will usually truthfully list the ingredients, but ...

Thanks Richard. My 2006 IRC is the paper version and that was too much for me to type with one hand.

For asphalt shingle roofs, drip edge flashing at the eaves and gables (rakes) is required in the building code (IBC) but not in the residential code (IRC). Most shingle manufacturer installation instructions recommend it but do not require it. On a house, roofers building to "code minimum" do not install it, while roofers using "best practices" install it. Or as Les said "lack of metal edge indicates cheap = poor installation". It's a signal to keep my eyes open because I'm likely to find problems elsewhere on the roof -- especially at places where flashing is required. The purpose of drip edge is to provide edge support to the shingles that overhang the eaves and rake, and to protect the edge of the roof decking and fascia from moisture damage. If it is missing, I look for damage to the shingles at the overhang and damage to the decking and fascia. In my report, I just state that drip edge is not present, explain its purpose, and report whether or not I found damage. If I find damage I tell them the damage needs to be fixed.

Good tip Chad. That's something I plan to do when I get my website up. BTW, I need to add Fabry to my spell checker. It keeps suggesting that I replace it with 'fairy'. [:-slaphap I always click 'ignore', but one of these days...

That is not correct. 2006 IRC P2803.6.1 says the discharge may be to the floor, to an indirect waste receptor, or to the outdoors. There must be an air gap in the same room as the water heater.

Ok, I'm beginning to come around. From the article: According to a survey done by Domestic Engineering Magazine, approximately one of every three T & PR vales is frozen shut and non-operational. Does anyone have access to this survey or know anything about it? - Jim Katen, Oregon Mitchell linked to a reprint of the article in post #13. T&P Valve article in May 1986 issue of Domestic Engineering magazine The On The House website mis-interprets what the article says. Lopp works(ed?) at Modern Electric Co., a water utility in Spokane, WA. They sent info to their customers about how to do a self-inspection of their TPR and asked them to report the results. Results were: 18 percent, no T & P valve installed two percent, T & P valve incorrectly installed four percent, pressure only relief valve one percent, T & P valve would not discharge less than one percent, T & P valve plugged. "However, Lopp says that 15 percent of the T & P valves inspected by his company would not discharge, leading them to believe that the figure for unprotected hot water heaters in their area is closer to 30 percent." My analysis: The 30 percent figure for unprotected water heaters comes from adding the 18 percent with no TPR reported by customers to the 15 percent reported by his company that would not discharge, and then rounding off. Regarding "On The House", "one in three" is another way of saying 33 percent. They are referring to the "closer to 30 percent" figure in the DE article that that I quoted above. They incorrectly state that as the number for TPRs being "frozen shut". The correct number that should be attributed to Lopp for stuck TPR valves is 15 percent, not one in three, and this is based on the utility's experience from doing their own inspections and not from the customer survey.

Home builder stocks (chart XHB) have been outperforming the broad market since mid-January. Previously they were tanking well ahead of the broad market and led it downward. It's too soon to tell if the final bottom in the builders has been reached but for now the good news is that it hasn't been getting worse and is starting to show signs of life. FWIW, stock prices generally lead the economy.

Very common around here. Going back to the 70s.

Domestic Engineer ... isn't that just a fancy name for housewife? Great info in this thread guys. tx.

You'll be seeing this more and more in the future. One day they'll be banned in the IRC, just like drum traps. Grinding up your food and throwing it down the drain to get rid of it is no longer a good idea. Neither is piping your building sewer directly into a stream, or connecting your storm water and sanitary sewer systems together. Each of those at one time was considered "state of the art" technology. As our wastewater treatment system infrastructure ages and reaches capacity, the federal funding that flowed so freely for that infrastructure in the 70's and 80's has dried up, and the public's demands for clean water force ever tightening regulation, communities are being forced to bear ever increasing costs to build and maintain their wastewater treatment systems. People don't want their sewer bills to increase and one way that communities can hold those increases down is to reduce the volume and strength of stuff that gets sent down the drain. There's no compelling public health reason to flush household food waste down the drain and there are readily available alternatives to doing it. It's done as a matter of convenience. The days of the carefree flush are gradually coming to an end.

Alright... I tried to keep my explanation simple, but I should have known better at TIJ where inquiring minds want to know! The one handed typist has reached his limit for now. Stay tuned for a post that discusses the finer points of tensile and shear stress, force vectors and bending moments, hardness and brittleness, root diameter, screw head shape and length of threads along the shaft, and cascading failure. BTW, I agree with Jim that my biggest concern is that there's a good chance at least one of the drywall screws was damaged during installation, but the head is still there and it looks ok. My other concern is with drywall screws that do not snug everything together -- from the head through the hanging rail and drywall and into the stud. Meanwhile, can someone post some kitchen wall cabinet installation instructions that specify drywall screws. My bet is you'll find either #8 or #10 wood screws, panhead screws, or cabinet screws. I leave with this parting thought. There's a reason why there is a market for cabinet screws.

Thanks Richard. I'm planning to install one of those when I remodel our master bathroom... a project that is now pushed back some 6-12 months []

I think your concern is valid. State your concern and let common sense prevail. At the link: Tyvek Install Instructions

All three lights lit should mean that you have current flowing between: hot and neutral neutral and ground hot and ground all at the same time. Here is some good info on three-light testers which may shed some light [] on the subject: Interpreting 3-Prong Outlet Testers Download Attachment: Three_Light_Electric_Tester.pdf 250.24 KB For Jim & Bob, see figure 3 in the pdf.

Lots. I used to write them up frequently but I'm getting a bit more forgiving. There's bigger fish to fry. If someone can give me a good reason to start writing them again, I'll go for it. How about this. Drywall screws are designed to hold the weight of sheets of drywall, and they are strongest when the force is applied on them in the same direction as the shaft of the screw. They are pretty weak screws. I've snapped the heads off of them when trying to drive them into tight grained wood. Use drywall screws to hang upper cabinets and you have a situation where: -- Weight can be substantially greater than sheets of drywall -- Substantially fewer screws are used than when you hang a sheet of drywall -- The weight is being applied to the screws in their weakest direction, perpendicular to the shaft Now, six year old Johnny is thirsty and wants a drink. The glasses are in an upper cabinet that is stacked full of dishes. He hops up to sit on the kitchen counter, opens the door on the cabinet, and then grabs on to the bottom shelf to pull himself up so he can reach the glass on a higher shelf....

Ditto that!!!! Huge liability ($$$) on you if you screw it up. For guidelines, they should contact the local office of the NY State DEC (there are some nice folks in Avon) or a company that does residential oil tank removals.

Tough call. That code cite that Tom provided was changed in the 2006 IRC. They replaced that single sentence with a whole paragraph that first defers to the manufacturers installation instructions. Then it says if the install instructions do not specify the location and minimum size of the opening, the code spells it out for you. Then it says the opening can be closed with a door or a panel. In the old code or the new code, the key word is "access" without any other modifiers such as "readily". IRC section 202 has the following definitions: ACCESSIBLE. Signifies access that requires the removal of an access panel or similar removable obstruction. ACCESSIBLE, READILY. Signifies access without the necessity for removing a panel or similar obstruction. While I would carefully cut caulk around an attic access hatch, or through paint or wallpaper to open an electrical panel, I don't think I would do so on a whirlpool tub without having permission from the owner.

I was taught to run a layer of shingles parallel to the rake edge before applying the shingle courses. It protrudes out 1" beyond the 1x2 trim or the rake metal. I've done it this way on every roof I ever installed. It helps to keep the edge straight as you go up and the slight increase in thickness helps to direct water back onto the roof rather than out over the rake edge. This way, you don't get as much water flowing down the roof within the last foot of the edge. If I use rake metal, it goes over the felt. I've never used ice & water shield on a rake edge. - Jim Katen, Oregon Jim - I'll buy that, for running one strip parallel to the rake. Installing an extra layer perpendicular to the rake, and only at the rake, seems goofy. During a tear off, would the roofer cut the shingles near the rake so that they would remain? That seems silly. If he did that, how would he install the underlayment in this area? If he did a complete tear-off and those are new shingles, it seems like a lot more work to run it perpendicular vs running a starter strip parallel to the rake like you described. Just thinking out loud....

Welcome Dennis. How about coming over to this thread: Shingles at the rake and giving us your thoughts about proper installation details at the rake edge...drip edge flashings, extra layers of shingles and the direction they run, etc.