Warning: Air infiltration In TN = moisture in the summer.
But have not seen anything significant in that report.
Call me 615 406-6808
In this case; I am…
Bob,
I had talked to him a couple days after the inspection to try to get some clarification on why he thought one pic showed air leakage and the others moisture. He said it was the streak pattern that showed air leakage and the rest he felt showed moisture. So I have him saying moisture and the energy auditors saying lack of insulation (they say they have used infrared for years and from what this guy said on the phone, it seems like he didn’t feel this guy knew quite what he was talking about). It is just really confusing, and hard to tell who is “right.” But like several of you pointed out, apparently you have to confirm the moisture with something other than IR.
Thank you to everyone so far who has given me your opinions!
With outdoor temp of 44 degrees and assuming (72)? indoors what temperature would you expect ?
I see some of the suspect image areas are 54 degrees as others are 44 degrees. Facing different direction perhaps?
Did not note RH if that is a factor and there is that box fan he perhaps may have used.
Just curious what you see.
You do not own a thermal camera, correct?
Looks like air to me in most of the report.
And for the life of me and cannot understand why no verification of moisture was done before calling it out as moisture problem.
I completely agree with Dave on this one.
Most of the images in the report look like everyday insignificant items and common air infiltration. If the inspector truly did not verify his findings, the report is not worth the PDF it is written on.
ditto Dave
Conidering my question was towards David and not you your total lack of answer due to you not having a clue here is obtrusive as my question has nothing to do with if I own one so pwrhaps you should shut up and learn without posting nonsense.
Since I actually own an IR camera my opinion hold a fair amout more weight than yours fella
Your post added exactly nothing to the discussion.
the word you need to understand is qualitative.
http://regentsprep.org/REgents/math/ALGEBRA/AD1/qualquant.htm
You are looking for quantitative answers.
Patterns are much more relevant than temps in this case.
Bob, After the years, things just pop out.
There is not enough information in the report (that’s obvious).
Look up weather records…
Rh is required, wb is required, OA, IA,…
An isotherm was used in may of these scans that unlike mine, are used to “extend” the exception beyond the normal boundaries rather deep into them…
He is making a bigger deal of something that is not really there.
Some scans are from the basement, some from main floor.
They will be different.
Moisture is generally within 4 degrees F of IA.
I have about 7,000 scans of air vs. moisture (as well as air causing moisture) that were “confirmed” exceptions. Something to draw from.
Pay attention:
After talking with the buyer, the biggest concern here is that this report will initiate “Further investigation” and added expense to the seller and ultimately the buyer.
What happens when ripping the walls out to find the moisture and mold results in nothing but air? Who is going to pay for this deferral?
This is not Home Inspection!
You don’t find Blue Spots and recommend further evaluation. It’s your damn job to find out (now that you took out that camera and called it)!
A good moisture meter would have solved this quikly. From what i can see in the pictures it looks like air intrusion. The one isotherm is of the stud in the wall. Of course it is going to be a different temperature. He indicates he is a level II but from what I can see he may not be truthfull.
Okay very educational here.
Thanks for the other reply as well Mike.
Yeah a level II should have no excuse for such pitiful IR reporting. This is a prime example of how levels, certificates, memberships, etc… aren’t always necessarily what distinguishes an Infrared Thermographer.
This is also a great example of how someone poorly demonstrating thermal imaging hurts all of us. I bet the buyer or any agent connected with this property will never care for an IR inspector again. When people buy cheap “budget” cameras and show people the camera’s capabilities than people feel they’ve been fully exposed to the capabilities of thermal imaging. Very rarely do people inform the clients they decided to go with one of the cheapest cameras they could get but instead they boast about how they’re using the most cutting edge technology available.
Cheap cameras are damaging this career-field just as much as the crappy inspectors using them.
You guys are beating a dead horse in this thread it should be very obvious that the guy taking those images has no training or at best he slept through the class.
I deal with these kind of people weekly they low ball a bid and end up producing false information, you get what you pay for.
Looks like someone purchased a thermal camera and is duping the public.
For one, it’s not a cheap camera and two he did not low-ball at $800.00
Lets beat the real dead horse! 
The client was about to impose significant harm to the seller because of this report…
I believe I understand what was going on my statement was a general statment as to what I see in my market and yes we do have to deal with the low ballers and that includes Dave Andersen they are all around you Buddy;-)
I just finished reviewing this report and would say that you were done a disservice with this thermography inspection. There is little excuse for reporting moisture intrusion in any of these locations without verification with a moisture meter.
Based on review of these images alone, I would say that the thermal patterns displayed at most of the window and door openings appear typical for the conditions and in most cases likely represent minor air leakage, insulation anomalies, thermal bridging and corner effect. There are a few places that I might consider suspect enough to check with a moisture meter, just to be sure.
I’m not sure how best to advise you to proceed from here, but I think it is unfortunate that you were sold this as a “service”. I agree with David and Bill and believe that this “thermal inspection” was deficient and has done more harm than good.
Ambient temperature is not static. I routinely record the low and high ambient temperature observed through the course of the inspection.
The fact that the ambient temperature changed 22 degrees during the course of the inspection will also affect thermography observations, as the house will never really reach thermal equilibrium. Areas with greater thermal mass will appear cooler simply due to their greater thermal capacitance (assuming that the temps were on the rise).