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.brear...@solarprofessional.com
<mailto:david.brear...@solarprofessional.com>
Direct: 541.261.6545
On Jul 3, 2012, at 10:37 PM, toddc...@finestplanet.com
<mailto:toddc...@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.brear...@solarprofessional.com
<mailto:david.brear...@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.brear...@solarprofessional.com
<mailto:david.brear...@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 <http://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@lists.re-wrenches.org
<mailto:RE-wrenches@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
<http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm>
Check out participant bios:
www.members.re-wrenches.org <http://www.members.re-wrenches.org/>
Sent from Finest Planet WebMail.
_______________________________________________
List sponsored by Home Power magazine
List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
<mailto:RE-wrenches@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@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 <http://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@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
