Roof venting, ridge vent or power fan?

Page 2 of 3  

snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Specifying the type and installation method in _writing_ would be a very wise decision. Hope I don't come off as a sales person on the manufacturer & type we always used.
My choice was Shingle Vent II by Certainteed. At the time, it was the _only_ brand & type, which met Dade County's stringent code because of the severe wind driven elements. (BTW, I roofed in the Midwest, not Florida).
I would specify the ridge is to be cut no more than 1" on each side from the peak of the rafter/truss. A line to be chalked to follow for cutting, with the blade of the saw being no more than 1/16" through the plywood. - Reason being is some never set the saw depth, and they attempt to free hand their cuts, cutting to far down from the peak.
I would also specify a bead of Geocel 3300, with a minimum width of 1/4" x 1/4" high running the continuous length of the ridge vent of both sides, so the vent can be imbedded (this will prevent wind driven elements from entering underneath. Mechanical fasteners to be _screw_ type, being 2-1/2" in length being placed at least every 24" O.C. on each side to hold the vent down. Shingle caps to be mechanically installed with barbed nails being at least 2" in length.
I would not let anyone install the rolled vent. At first, people thought the netting/cloth/fabric used in these would deteriorate. They are designed to keep bugs/wasps out. The problem is attics get a lot of dust, after years, the cloth collects the dust, reducing the ability to function properly.
Maybe I come off as being anal on how to install roofing. However, back in the day, I was proud of my work, which consisted of highly specified projects, down to the diameter of a fastener head. In fact, I'd still be doing this type of work, if age didn't catch up with me some years ago.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

No disrespect intended here because I think your knowledge is helpful but I wouldn't spec all of this (even if possible). No problem spec'g material because that's easy to confirm but spec'g workmanship is another unless you have an inspector up there during installation.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Just further thought on this.... I guess you can spec workmanship but just hope it's done to your specs if you can't inspect it during construction.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


Here's a perfect example of why certain items need to be spec'd. You can _never_ include too much information in a contract to protect yourself & your interest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEQtn3RM_rc

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The whole idea is, to let the contractor know, you won't tolerate short cuts. There's too many contractors to take advantage of people not in the know. Roofing/HVAC/Mechanics are a few trades where the general public get totally ripped off.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Agree with you but still agree with my earlier posts. Where I think the specs really help is educating the homeowner what and how it's installed (well supposed to be). Then if it's not, legally he has some recourse assuming the roofer is still in business.
When I recently had a new roof, I took a different approach. I bought the whole crew lunch one day hoping that they knew I appreciated their hard work. In return I hoped they would do a good job. So far so good.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I failed to mention I did have a contract of what was to be installed with some specs (not a lot tho).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You can't have it both ways.

Then why did you say that specifiying how something is to be installed is a waste unless you have an inspector up there? You think your chance of prevailing on your attempts at recourse is better or worse when you have workmanship:
A - specified in the contract in writing
B - unstated
As far as requiring an inspector, many of us are competent enough to take a look ourselves....

That's reassuring.....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 08:07:32 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

I think you can. I'm not against specs and by all means write them in but you have to hope they do the work per specs if no one is watching them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, you were against them, before you were in favor of them.....
"No disrespect intended here because I think your knowledge is helpful but I wouldn't spec all of this (even if possible). No problem spec'g material because that's easy to confirm but spec'g workmanship is another unless you have an inspector up there during installation. "
And aybe the work gets done without being looked at in your world, where you rely on hamburgers, but not in mine.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:49:47 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

Ok... let me say it this way... I'm not against specs but I wouldn't spec everything but if you feel that it will make them do a better job, do it. I just hope they can read them and understand them if you go into a lot of detail. I once was offered a job in Florida because the guy told me his crews (underground utilities) couldn't read the blueprints.
I guess I have different experiences about kindness than you so I rely on kindness when I have no other choices.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There you go again. Kindness is your only choice? I guess if you're so dumb you can't spec key workmanship points, put those in the contract, and then keep an eye on the contractor to make sure it's done that way, then relying on kindness may be your only option. But I'd say it's not a good one. And if the job doesn't get done to your satisfaction and you wind up in a dispute with the contractor, I'd rather have a contract with specs, than a receipt from McDonalds.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 13:56:04 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

I guess if you want to sit on the roof and count how many nails per shingle, enjoy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm sure you agree with yourself.

Certainly a kind gesture, however, it has to be one of the most silliest ways I've heard of, in hopes you get a good job instead of relying on contract language. Ok, now my sarcasm seems to take over for a bit. Did you buy them a hamburger, or a double hamburger? After all, the type of job you got depended on it.
All wording is in a contract for a purpose, although you may find it to be gibberish. You appear to be attempting to justify a bad decision you made, without properly educating yourself before hand.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

See my other post.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think we're on the same page here. I looked into the vaious ridge vents a bit and saw that a lot of pros were recommending the Shingle Vent II. The leading contractor for the job is proposing OC Duration shingles. OC makes a similar ridge vent. It's rigid plastic, comes in 4ft sections, and allows 20 sq in of airflow per foot. So, I think I'm going to spec that.
On another subject, one roof section which is over the garage is low profile. It's right at the 2:12 min pitch for shingles. Two of the contractors want to put down ice barrier over the whole roof section.. The other one wants to use ice dam on the lower, two layers of felt on the upper part. His thinking is that applying a rubber like surface over the whole thing is not good, because it's better to let the sheathing breathe even a little from the top through the felt and shingles.
I looked into this a bit online and seems there are folks vigorously arguing both sides of that one two. The ice barrier the whole roof approach guys claim:
Done properly it's virtually impossible for water to even get behind the ice barrier material.
Even if it does, the roof can still dry out from the other side, ie attic side.
With felt and shingles the roof really can't breathe from the outside anyway.
Additional factors are that this section of roof has the least venting. It has continous soffit vents, but only a fraction of that near the top. I can increase that a bit but it's still not going to have the best venting. I also can't do a rolled roof, because it faces the street. The existing shingles have worked fine for 28 years and I'm assuming there is at most just 2 layers of felt, if that. Also they did lay the shingles closer together, I think 3" exposure vs 5". But can't do that with the new architectural shingle. Spec for that shingle say 2:12 is the min pitch, so I'm right at min there.
Any thoughts?
And thanks for all the excellent advice...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Without a bit more info, I can't say for sure, but I'm betting your soffit vents are woefully too small.
The "standard" * is 1 sq ft of soffit vent for every 150 sq ft of attic space. If your house, for example, is 50 x 50 feet (2500 sq ft), you need about 20 sq ft of soffit, or At your 2" wide existing soffits, and ignoring dimunition for screening, you'd need (mumble, mumble, carry the three...) 2880 sq inches of soffit. At 2" wide, that works out to be 1400 linear feet.
Now since this example house's perimeter is only 200 feet, well, yep, you're under-soffited!
There IS a fall-back rule and it's this: You can't have too much soffit venting.
-------- * I think this "standard" is for passive ventilation. If you have fans that are putting the big suck on the attic, you can probably get by with much less.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday 21 February 2013 20:52 HeyBub wrote in alt.home.repair:

The UK guideline for building regs is 1" continuous equivalent.
That means a 1" wide slot all the way around - or the equivalent area. As this is obviously bad for letting mice in, it's usually implement as a 2" wide series of slots (50/50) or a 1" wide slot with mesh.
That's the soffits - obviously it needs to be balanced with vents up top.
--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Funny you mention this... I recall one of my homes has this continuous venting in the soffits, my own residence does not.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tim Watts wrote:

I strongly disagree, for reasons I worked out above using real math.
Further, the notion of "balance" is foolish. If you have too little soffit vents, you're not getting maximum ventilation. If you have too much, they're not doing any good.
Remember, you can't have too many or too much soffit vents.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.