I did an inspection today and the “What to do” thread in the ethics section raises some questions about what happened and what should be done.
This question pertains to the wind mitigation inspection.
The first picture shows what the inspector wrote as far as the nailing pattern. I have blocked out the name and license number.
The second and third pictures show the numerous trusses throughout the roof where the nails had missed the truss. It was roughly 70% of the trusses that had nails that missed.
Does this qualify for 8D nails 6 inches in the field?
The next issue is picture 4.
I am pretty sure that the inspector marked single wrap.
What would you mark?
I mean no harm, but am curious what everyone would write on the 1802 form.
I would rate it a 6x6 (and Clips) for the following reasons:
Note the misses seem to run about 3 feet and then are back in the truss. That tells me the roofer was sloppy. But once he realized he was off the truss, he corrected himself. We cannot rule out he went back over the missed area once he realized he missed the truss.
The deck was re-nailed obviously. So the original attachments are in place. The form says, “any combination” of attachments.
Do the math: if the original nailing was 6d nails at 55 psf(old form). Then re-nailed with an additional 6x6, 8d for a 182 psf. The combined total per sheet of plywood would likely be equal or greater than 182 psf, even with a 10-20% miss. (At least that’s my view.)
There is no missed nail language on the document…I follow the language of the form.
However, I have given an A rating when the roofer has clearly not hit the truss over an extended area.
Jay, 70% of the nails missed, it wasn’t just those two trusses.
The form also says “Weakest form of attachment”, so, if you had several pieces of decking that were only secured with the 6D nails and all of the new nails missed, what would that be considered?
If you look at the pictures, there are 8 nails visible in each. At six inches apart, how many total inches is that out of 48?
I can’t possibly see how C could be marked.
…My advice is always to do the math…If you got 70% missing (or anything close to that), you certainly can’t get anywhere near the 182 psf. In addition, if that many nails were missed, you can probably rule out that the roofer went back over the missed spot.
However, the form states:
*"-OR- Any system of screws, nails, adhesives, other deck fastening system or truss/rafter spacing that is shown to have **an equivalent or greater resistance than 8d common nails spaced a maximum of 6 inches in the field or has a mean uplift *resistance of at least 182 psf."
You wouldn’t rate an Stapled roof deck as an ‘A’ after it has been properly re-nailed with 8d nails would you?
Yet, Staples are the weakest form of attachment.
You have to make the call as you see it and be willing to document how you came to that decision.
I agree with Jay’s 3rd post. There is no missed nail language and the strap is clearly a “clip” on the form.
Interesting would be to have an engineer do an uplift calculation on that strap, one nail on the front side and 2 or three nails on the back side. I would be willing to bet it meets a strap with one more added nail on the front side.
And just for giggles there is no definition of what is the “front” or “opposing side” of a connector;-)
I agree with you about the lack of a true definition and the fact that it may be an arguable point if it came to that one day. Although, I “think” the “intent” (which I don’t agree with) is that the “front side” is the side which comes up from the tie beam and wraps over to the "opposite’ side of the truss. This again is another example of a slight flaw in the form or an intentional omission?
Again, yours is a very valid point and one that may be defensible, in my view anyway.
I agree with clip after further review. I assume the 2 nails coming thru are attached to the wrap but cannot tell for sure without an additional picture. I would show pictures from both sides “if” possible but if I could only get the one shot I would say as you all did clip and would tell any underwriter that questioned it that the 2 protruding nails are the other 2 of three in the strap.
Usually I get pictures of bot sides, but, I wasn’t doing a wind mit so I didn’t, and, as you pointed out, the two nails coming from the other side are through the strap.
Jay, using your do the math statement, if 8 nails nailed six inches apart all missed the truss and the decking is 48 inches wide, what percent of the nails missed the truss. I would say at least, 90% of them if not all did. So if half the roof was like that, how could the uplift equal 182?
(Marvin Maizel, CMI® Fl State Lic HI 681)
Mike / Eric ;
What software do you use for your wind mitigation reports?
I am comfortable and I am not missing your point, you simply don’t have one. As you said, you weren’t in that attic.
First, the roofer didn’t do the work. The laborers did. Second, if you truly believe, in your heart, that the idiots that did this were bright enough to go back and renail the decking, then you certainly have more faith in these guys than I do. And, can someone prove it?
There doesn’t have to be. Common sense would dictate that the entire roof has to be nailed with 8D nails in order to meet the criteria. If a majority of the nails missed, then how are you going to calculate what the uplift is. Now you would be guessing, wildly at that.
The “industry” as you put it, is wrong. Using a blatant code violation to determine something could be the stupidest thing I have ever heard.