It also says this:
A. Plywood/Oriented strand board (OSB) roof sheathing attached to the roof truss/rafter (spaced a maximum of 24” inches o.c.) by
staples or 6d nails spaced at 6” along the edge and 12” in the field. -OR- Batten decking supporting wood shakes or wood shingles. -
OR- Any system of screws, nails, adhesives, other deck fastening system or truss/rafter spacing that has an equivalent mean uplift less
than that required for Options B or C below.
as opposed to this:
I would submit that all of the options in group A would be considered equivalent. And the all of the options in group C would be as well.
Therefore, the fact that the battens are dimensional lumber using 2 nails that are, in this instance,more than likely 10D nails, I would mark C.
Eric you underlined everything except for the specific wording that relate to this thread. Lol. Also battens typically only have 1 nail in them. Decking is different than battenn boards. Not sure how you can eliminate the specific wording for specific roofing materials
Typically in a re roof of the kind the batten boards would be new- and only have 1 nail per board. also I know someone in delray beach that had to fight to have ther wood shake roof installed this way as it did not meet current codes. According to the building department.
Regardless the form specifically states which box to check in this situation. You can spin it however you like unfortunately the wording is already there
We all know, that marking UNKNOWN equates to a serious loss of credits. However, reinspection firms love this selection. They use it to point out a descreptancy between the original inspection and the reinspection as validation for their business scheme.
Here’s the client’s situation: -Batten deck was sheeted over with plywood and nailed 6 x 6 with 8d or greater nails, (Ashpalt Shingles with permit in 2006 re roof).
Reinspector marked UNKNOWN.
Their reasoning is:
‘since the reinspector is not a professional engineer, that don’t know what the psf rating would be.’
Jusitfying their conduct with an insinuation that the psf rating could actually be higher than the 182psf.
Either way, the client loses credits for a permited feature that was performed to current Florida Building Code and passed inspection. That is criminal.
Weren’t we talking about “intent of the form” at the meeting?
It is quite apparent to me, the “intent” and that is what I would go by.
As an aside, I notice there is no check-box for a shake roof. An oversight or on purpose?
What band of monkeys uses one nail for anything?:mrgreen: :mrgreen: Way way back, we used two nails minimum for this decking.
Now, I do have a question which may be the cause of the confusion.
In all of the ceder shake roofs I have seen down here and the ones I have installed, where battens were used, the battens were 1 x 4 x 8 wood. The felt was woven in between the battens and then, the shakes were installed on top of the battens. The battens were 4 inches apart.
I know of some installations that have decking and then 1 x 1 battens on top of the decking and then the shakes are attached to that. There are also some types of cement tile roofs that are done that way.