[RE-wrenches] L feet no flashing in shingle roof

David Brearley david.brearley at solarprofessional.com
Wed Jul 4 13:23:02 PDT 2012


Bill, 

FWIW: none of the companies with flashed attachments solutions mentioned in the article we ran in SP1.1 were advertisers. 

Having said that, I do see a lot of articles in trade publications that are pretty shameless exercises in product placement. I've always found that off-putting and assumed that others feel the same way. That's why we try to develop content that does not insult our readers.

Rather running a pay-to-play kind of shop, our goal has always been to publish the best technical content possible. If readers like the content, then we get more industry subscribers. Reaching that audience is desirable to advertisers. Having advertiser support allows us to compensate authors for their high quality technical content that readers enjoy. Ideally, it's a win-win-win situation. 

Let me know if there's something you think we could be doing better.

Thanks, 

David Brearley, Senior Technical Editor
SolarPro magazine 
NABCEP Certified PV Installer ™
david.brearley at solarprofessional.com
Direct: 541.261.6545


On Jul 4, 2012, at 2:25 PM, Bill Loesch wrote:

> 
> David,
> 
> Why does your editor put Todd's articles (and use him as a cover story) in your magazines (more than once, I believe) if it is not for his _experience_? 
> 
> The fact that there is a prescribed product (more than one in this case) that gets blessed when old fashioned, time tested, craftsmanship has already solved the problem is a testament to what payola will buy. No leak, no negligence, no claim. But then your magazines wouldn't garner such a big advertizing budget without all those manufacturers with new and "improved" products. Additionally, this List would perhaps have to find alternative funding, too. 
> 
> If you are really interested in eliminating the "irresponsible, fly-by-night, subsidy chasers" one easy way may be to eliminate the subsidy.
> Bill Loesch
> Solar 1 - Saint Louis Solar
> 
> 
> On 04-Jul-12 10:07 AM, David Brearley wrote:
>>  Todd,
>> 
>> The issue isn't whether your approach works, but whether it is defensible in the event that something leaks. Most solar contractors receive public funds (rebate monies, ARRA program distributions, etc.). Some of those companies are installing systems in a manner that is not building code compliant. It just takes a high profile leaky roof at a VA hospital or a public housing project where a solar system was installed in a manner that does not meet the building code to lose years of goodwill and support for the industry. Modules prices have fallen quite a bit, but we all loose if State and Federal or public (opinion) support for the industry goes away. 
>> 
>> Obviously, that's the worst case scenario: That somehow the industry gets painted as being made up of a bunch of irresponsible, fly-by-night, subsidy chasers. Probably nothing to worry about, though. I'm pretty sure there's no precedence for that sort of thing actually happening. Right?
>> 
>> What's more likely is that AHJs will get hip to the fact that they need to inspect the building code compliance of roof attachments. When they do, which side of the curve will your company be on? (Since your mind seems to be made up, Todd, that question is addressed to List at large.)
>> 
>> Happy Independence Day,
>> 
>> David Brearley, Senior Technical Editor 
>> SolarPro magazine 
>> NABCEP Certified PV Installer ™
>> david.brearley at solarprofessional.com
>> Direct: 541.261.6545
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 3, 2012, at 10:37 PM, toddcory at finestplanet.com wrote:
>> 
>>> i wasn't going to enter into this discussion, but this posting prompted me. 
>>> 
>>> my most recent job was done with the assistance of the customer. he and i have a long working history, my being his employee some 25 years ago installing shw systems in the area, and now he hiring me to do his personal home's pv system.
>>>  
>>> he insisted on straight L foot mounting without flashings... and i have to agree. in the 25 to 30 years since we did those shw systems, not a single one has leaked. plus, the installation was at the roof ridgeline, so pv quick mounts wouldn't have worked anyway. we put 2 X 8 blocking in the attic between the trusses to acomodate the mounting bolts and used a nice fattie gob of black silicone on each foot, which gooshed out when tightened. the mount will easily outlast the roof... leak free.
>>>  
>>> honestly, i don't care what the ubc/ibs says. if done properly, these kinds of mounts are bombproof. years of experience backs this up. also, i have seen plenty of 'code compliant' oatey no-caulk sewer vent flashings with rotten rubber leaking into homes to know flashed penetrations are no panacea either.
>>>  
>>> todd
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> On Tuesday, July 3, 2012 2:53pm, "David Brearley" <david.brearley at solarprofessional.com> said:
>>> 
>>> +1 on the use of structural screws. We ran an article about lag screws a couple years ago:
>>> 
>>> http://solarprofessional.com/article/?file=SP3_4_pg70_Shelly
>>> 
>>> One of the things that surprised me when I read this manuscript is how variable lag screws are in terms of construction and quality. Besides the convenience of being able to drive a structural screw without a pilot hole, the engineering specs are likely better documented and the manufacturing tolerances are probably tighter as well.
>>> 
>>> FWIW: I think that using unflashed attachments in these litigious times is unwise. It's not consistent with best practices in the construction industry. It does not meet building codes. It violates the roof warranty. It makes your competition look good.
>>> 
>>> We ran our first article on this topic 4 years ago, in our inaugural issue of SolarPro magazine:
>>> 
>>> http://solarprofessional.com/article/?file=SP1_1_pg72_Fain
>>> 
>>> The industry has come a long way since then, both in terms of awareness and in terms of off-the-shelf flashed attachment options. There are so many quality flashed attachment solutions to chose from now that I'm not sure why anyone would knowingly expose themselves to a possible construction negligence claim.
>>> 
>>> Drive straight,
>>> 
>>> David Brearley, Senior Technical Editor
>>> SolarPro magazine 
>>> NABCEP Certified PV Installer ™
>>> david.brearley at solarprofessional.com
>>> Direct: 541.261.6545
>>> 
>>> On Jul 3, 2012, at 4:11 PM, Garrison Riegel wrote:
>>> 
>>> The EcoFasten GF1 flashing is easy to install on a retrofit and will not necessarily add any height to the rail.  If you do need to trim the flashings installed around the skylight, then I would recommend adding sealant to these penetrations.  We ditch the included lag and use a 5/16” GRK RSS (self tapping structural screw).  The combination works great and does not require a pilot hole.
>>>  
>>> RSS:
>>> http://www.grkfasteners.com/en/RSS_1_2_information.htm
>>>  
>>> GF1
>>> http://ecofastensolar.com/pdf/GF1%20Cutsheets.pdf
>>>  
>>> Best,
>>>  
>>> Garrison Riegel
>>> Project Manager
>>>  
>>> Solar Service Inc
>>> [p] 847-677-0950
>>> [f] 847-647-9360
>>> www.solarserviceinc.com
>>>  
>>> NABCEP Certified Solar PV and Thermal Installer™
>>>  
>>>  
>>> “There is no room for flashings. The L feet will go very close to the skylights and the flashing would hit the edge of them. Plus there is an existing array that was done by another installer that is done with L feet only. The new array would be higher.”
>>>  
>>>  
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>>> 
>>> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>>> 
>>> Options & settings:
>>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>> 
>>> List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>> 
>>> List rules & etiquette:
>>> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>>> 
>>> Check out participant bios:
>>> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sent from Finest Planet WebMail.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>>> 
>>> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>>> 
>>> Options & settings:
>>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>> 
>>> List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>> 
>>> List rules & etiquette:
>>> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>>> 
>>> Check out participant bios:
>>> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
>> 
>> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>> 
>> Options & settings:
>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>> 
>> List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>> 
>> List rules & etiquette:
>> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>> 
>> Check out participant bios:
>> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2012.0.2179 / Virus Database: 2437/5110 - Release Date: 07/04/12
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Home Power magazine
> 
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
> 
> Options & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
> 
> Check out participant bios:
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20120704/88c62add/attachment-0004.html>


More information about the RE-wrenches mailing list