Thank you. I’m glad to know I helped.
It always amazes me that non-members spend so much time on this board trying to prove things.
He’s arguing roofing code with a roofing contractor:roll:
I, too, would love to hear the rest of the story.
I have no idea who you are…have we even meet?
I have also never meet Meeker, not sure where you are getting your information from. Just ask Meeker…
Also, I have never meet nick and the only contact or information he has about me is from this board…I would also love to here the story.
But nick knows our organization and the individuals who originally deisgned and came up with the CMI program. Nick knows virtually everyone at FABI, both past and present members…
Disgruntled?..you bet your bullocks to a barn dance I am!
As Hi’s, we all get lumped into the same category in the publics eyes and we don’t exactly have the best reputation. Shows like Holmes on Holmes showcasing HI’s pitfalls and inadequacies to the public like we are a bumbling bunch of fools. And them I come here and see why. When presented with the factual information, you buck and kick refuting everything and learning nothing…all the while shooting the messenger.
You don’t want to learn, you want someone to give you the answer…which accompliches nothing. I’m tired of the phone calls and reports coming across my desk from your membership…so I come here to provide information and maybe get you guys to think about what you are doing. And what happens? You learn nothing, throw insults, start name-calling, and generally can’t accept anything.
the informatin I provide is factual and backed up by codes and statutes…yet you still can’t accept it. And the reason you give is my attitude? We are all grown-ups here with our big-boy pants on, right?
As for Meeker, ask him about a trip to north Florida and a bag stuffed with about 100K? That’s your membership!
I have never meet Nick, don’t care to.
No, the code requires testing of the attachment to determine uplift BEFORE application over an existing layer of roof covering…remember, the codes are inclusive with exemptions being “in addition to” the general requirement. And, as stated before, were there is a general requirement and a specific requirement, the specific or more stringent application takes precedence.
Simplified: If you have a general requirement in the Residential Code that is further defined in the Building Code…the Building code requirement takes precedence. And vice-versa.
1512.2 Application. </B>
These high-velocity hurricane zone roofing requirements with associated roofing application standards (RAS) and testing application standards are solely to be implemented in areas of high basic wind speeds, and where the jurisdiction having authority has adopted their use. **
1512.2.1 **
All roofing components, roofing systems and roofing assemblies for construction regulated by this code shall comply with this chapter. All roofing components, roofing systems and roofing assemblies shall have a valid and current Product Approval. In the event that the manufacturers published literature or instructions are in conflict with those of the Product Approval, the Product Approval shall prevail. Where items specifically and expressly addressed in this chapter are in conflict with the Product Approval, the provisions of this chapter shall prevail.
The RAS standards, which most manufacturer’s reference for installation, require uplift testing of the applied decking to determine resistance to uplift BEFORE application of the new roof covering. It’s required and seldom done. The existing roof covering is now the new roof deck, can we agree on that?
The roof deck, and all components relating to such, are required to meet the wind loads of ASCE-7. This is not just for HVHZ, but all of florida. This is required in the Building and Residential Code. To confirm this, it must be tested…
1609.5.1 Roof deck. </B>
The roof deck shall be designed to withstand the wind pressures determined in accordance with ASCE 7.
Lets wrap this up…the code seems to allow the application of shingles over and existing layer of shingles…much the same way it seems to allow application of elastomeric over shingles…but, the terms and conditions of that application do not exist nor could it be reasonable or efficient to do so…that’s the point!
I wasn’t going to bother, but what the heck. If the roofing system being applied has a Miami/Dade NOA or is located in the HVHZ, which has been adopted by many counties not located in the HVHZ, this is what applies…you tell me if all the aplicable conditions can be meet resonably?
***R4402.10.9</B> ***
One additional roofing system may be applied over an original roofing assembly, providing the existing roofing assembly complies with the requirements of Section R4402.10.
R4402.10.10</B>
If the recover roofing assembly is to be bonded to an existing roofing membrane, the existing roofing membrane shall be tested in compliance with TAS 124 for uplift resistance. The existing roofing membrane shall resist the design pressures calculated under Section R4403 of this code. Test results shall be submitted with the uniform roofing permit application.
R4402.10.11</B>
If the recover roofing assembly is mechanically attached through either a base sheet or insulation layer, the attachment assembly shall be field tested for fastener withdrawal resistance, in compliance with TAS 105, and laboratory tested for pull-over resistance to ensure compliance with wind uplift requirements set forth in Section R4403 of this code. Test results shall be submitted with the uniform roofing permit application. Recover roofing assembly anchor sheet or base sheet shall not be mechanically fastened directly to existing gravel roof unless all gravel is completely removed.
R4402.10.12</B>
Moisture content of the existing roofing assembly to be covered by a new roofing system shall not exceed 5 percent by weight in the roofing membrane and 8 percent by weight in the insulation system, as verified by moisture survey performed in accordance with TAS 126. Test results shall be submitted with the uniform roofing permit application.
***R4402.10.14</B> ***
If the new roofing system is to be bonded to the existing roof surface, the surface shall be free of all loose gravel, dirt and silt and dry prior to commencement of the roofing application. All blisters shall be cut and repaired prior to roofing application.
R4402.10.14.1
If the existing roof surface has gravel embedded in hot asphalt, all loose gravel shall be removed together with any dirt and silt. The dry membrane surface shall be primed with ASTM D 41 primer or proprietary roofing system primer and allowed to dry thoroughly. A flood coat of ASTM D 312, type III or IV asphalt shall be applied to sufficient depth to cover the remaining embedded gravel. The prepared substrate shall be suitable for application of a new insulation layer only.
R4402.10.14.2
In the case of existing coal tar assemblies, the existing roof surface shall be primed with ASTM D 43 primer or covered with a mechanically attached separation board prior to application of a new coal tar assembly. If an existing coal tar assembly is to be covered with an asphalt applied roofing system, only the separation board is acceptable. The attachment of the entire assembly, including the separation board, shall meet the design pressure requirements set forth in Section R4403.
R4402.10.14.3
Insulation shall have product approval as a roofing component approved for use as a part of the roofing assembly. The insulation panels shall be bonded or mechanically attached in compliance with the Product Approval and RAS 117.
R4402.10.17</B>
Asphaltic shingle assemblies may be applied over one existing layer of asphaltic shingles having not more than 1/8 inch (3.2 mm) difference in level in the existing shingle material. Recover over an existing shingle system shall be with a product having Product Approval as prepared roof covering, in strict compliance with the application method detailed in the Product Approval.
Are we clear now?
There are three types of roofing permits for roof coverings, new, replacement, and recovering. The 1802 only references Original or replacement, not recovered roofing systems.
ROOF RECOVER. The process of installing an additional roof covering over a prepared existing roof covering without removing the existing roof covering.
ROOF REPLACEMENT. The process of removing the existing roof covering, repairing any damaged substrate and installing a new roof covering.
[FONT=Arial,sans-serif][size=4]The 1802 does not address Roof Recover. It only addresses Original Installation / Replacement.
1802
**Roof Covering: **Select all roof covering types in use. Provide the permit application date OR FBC/MDC Product Approval number OR Year of Original Installation/****ReplacementOR indicate that no information was available to verify compliance for each roof covering identified.
You cannot certify a “Recover” That was the intention as that provides an opportunity to harden the decking[/size][/FONT]
What’s that about? Let’s take the thread this direction.
Cue Miami Vice theme…
Meeker in a Testarossa. …
Don’t you have a go fast boat?
That line is one of the “OR’s” for original existing (year built) or year of replacement when there is no other means to verify compliance . The 1802 absolutely applies to recovers or roof overs with a valid approval or permit. I just love the way you only reference items that support your convoluted interpretations. Did you go to law school too…?
Seems pretty clear to me. I thought you were refuting this…
show me where it says reroof or roof recover on the 1802?
Not now…but had a few in the 80s…
Why don’t you show me where is doesn’t. If the new roof covering has a valid permit or definitive approval #, then it qualifies on the 1802.
Definitions were posted earlier…how simple can it be?
So now we are flip-flopping?
It has been everyone’s position that the form is to be filled out as simple as possible and only to the questions asked. The form asks specifically:
**[FONT=Times New Roman][size=1]Year of Original Installation or
Replacement
**[/size][/FONT]
If you have the permit date, that would include original date of installation OR replacement? No?
It is asking for the new roofing installation (original) OR date of replacement, not date of recovering.
**ROOF REPLACEMENT. **The process of removing the existing roof covering, repairing any damaged substrate and installing a new roof covering.
**ROOF RECOVER. **The process of installing an additional roof covering over a prepared existing roof covering without removing the existing roof covering.
You’re right, it is simple. Why do you still not understand this?
Thank you…that one gave me a chuckle…
Robert,
How does a question about recovering a roof, evolve into the 1802 form??
Why do references for elastomeric coatings come up? I never said anything about this at any time, but you are using it.
and if you bring the form on Tuesday I will be glad to show you where you can put it. I have no need for a form from the 90’s I use the 2012 version that everyone else does.
Your problem is all you know is code. Code doesn’t always apply in home inspections, especially with older homes.
You learned absolutely nothing.
Great!
you bring you 2010 book at the meeting and you can show me exactly how the books tell me that a re-roof in not allowed.
I have a roofing contractor on this thread, that has done roofing over and over, say its allowed but you say its not.
Please bring your book. I will buy a huge yellow highlighter so you can teach me your wisdom.
BTW, the original post was for a second layer of shingles, not a coating. Stick to the topic. I will repeat myself. I said nothing about elastomeric coatings. I understand they could count as a 2nd layer, but that dog isn’t in the hunt.