MyFloridaCode.com

Patrick,
I should have included the word 'Decorative' in the title.  My question 
is, other than the builder's claim that a wall finish is a decorative 
cementitious finish, what is the differences between the two finishes, 
in relation to the need for expansion joints and weep screeds, when 
applied to a 2nd floor frame wall?
Thanks-

Patrick Hoag wrote:
> I find the title mis-leading. There are distinct differences between
> "cementituous finishes" and stucco. You seem to be speaking of stucco which
> is a three part application.
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Chandler Knowles" <chandlerknowles at att.net>
> To: <codetalk at myfloridacode.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 6:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [Florida Code Talk] Cementitious Finish
>
>
>   
>> Sorry, but I beg to differ.  You can't SUPPORT concrete or masonry with
>> wood -- only masonry, concrete or steel.  But stucco is not a structural
>> element.
>>
>> Cement stucco is applied all the time over wood framed walls on metal
>>     
> lath.
>   
>> Stucco is exterior plaster.  Unfortunately, there is not as much in the
>> Codes as there is in manuals of good practice.  I always reference the
>> standards (and suggestions) of the Portland Cement Association for stucco
>>     
> on
>   
>> plans and in contracts.  BTW, EIFS is not stucco.
>>
>> I don't use OSB or Tyvex/housewrap for, what I believe to be, good reasons
>> so I think the basics of your problem start there (only plywood and
>> asphaltic felt or a butyl based peel and stick).  If the house isn't
>> moisture proof before the stucco goes on, it won't be after the stucco is
>> applied.
>>
>> The most "dangerous" areas of a stucco job are the openings in the walls
>>     
> and
>   
>> where it joins dissimilar surfaces.  These places have to be handled
>> properly or the system will leak.  I wouldn't dream of using cement stucco
>> without using expansion joints and other stucco accessories but their
>> placement requires some consideration and it is difficult to have hard and
>> fast rules for locations.  A general rule is no more than 600 SF without
>> expansion joints.  The lath at opening corners must be butterfly
>>     
> reinforced
>   
>> or cracks will happen there too.
>>
>> There is a lot of ignorance in our industry about cement products of all
>> kinds and stucco is right up there at the top of the list.
>>
>> Chandler Knowles
>> Construction Manager
>> Pensacola, FL
>>
>>
>> .  ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Mark Cramer" <mcramer1 at tampabay.rr.com>
>> To: "'codetalk'" <codetalk at myfloridacode.com>
>> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 4:34 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Florida Code Talk] Cementitious Finish
>>
>>
>>     
>>> You can't apply a decorative cementitous finish over wood framing. Only
>>> over
>>> masonry.
>>>
>>> >From the 2001 code: DECORATIVE CEMENTITIOUS COATING. A skim coat, as
>>>       
>>>> defined
>>>>         
>>> in ASTM C 926,
>>> of portland cement based plaster applied to concrete or masonry surfaces
>>> intended for cosmetic purposes.
>>>
>>>
>>> BOAF interpretations:
>>>
>>> BOAF #2290
>>> Date: Fri Feb 28 2003
>>> Report #: 2290
>>> Code: Building
>>> Section: 2504
>>> Question:
>>> Is it the intent of 2504, by its reference to ASTM C926 - Table 1, to
>>> require 7/8" thickness, for stucco
>>> applied over wood framing, even if elastomeric paint is applied on top
>>>       
> of
>   
>>> the stucco?
>>> Answer:
>>> Yes, and it is required to be three coat work.
>>> Commentary:
>>> ASTM C926 is the application standard for stucco, with or without an
>>> elastomeric paint topcoat.
>>>
>>>
>>> BOAF Report #: 4198
>>> Code: Building
>>> Section: R703.1, R703.6
>>> Question:
>>> Is it the intent of sections R703.1, 703.6 and the 2005 Supplement
>>>       
> section
>   
>>> 703.11 to disallow Decorative
>>> Cementitious Coatings other than official cement plaster (stucco)
>>>       
> compling
>   
>>> with ASTM C 926?
>>> Answer:
>>> Decorative Cementitious Coatings, as defined in Section R202, are skim
>>> coats
>>> and would not meet any of
>>> the standards found in 703.1 or Table 703.11 of the 2005 Supplement.
>>> Commentary:
>>> The building official may accept the manufacturer's specifications and
>>> installation instructions for other
>>> coatings provided they are equivalent (or greater) in weather resistance
>>> to
>>> those items specified.
>>>
>>>
>>> It's stucco. Even if it wasn't, it's a moot point as it's failed to keep
>>> water out of the wall.
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark Cramer
>>> Mark Cramer Inspection Services, Inc.
>>> 492 20th Ave.
>>> Indian Rocks Beach, FL 33785
>>> 727-595-4211
>>> http://www.BestTampaInspector.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: codetalk-bounces at myfloridacode.com
>>> [mailto:codetalk-bounces at myfloridacode.com] On Behalf Of Jack Wingo
>>> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 4:20 PM
>>> To: codetalk
>>> Subject: [Florida Code Talk] Cementitious Finish
>>>
>>> Hello To All,
>>> A 2 story house built in 2002 after the 2001 FBC became effective.
>>> First floor walls are poured concrete and second floor walls are frame
>>> with OSB sub-siding, Tyvek, wire lath with an under coating of what
>>> appears to be 1 or 2 coats of plaster.  Both 1st and 2nd floor walls
>>> have what appears to be a stucco finish, that was painted.  The 2nd
>>> floor walls have no expansion joints and no weep screed.  The homeowners
>>> have complainted to the builder about water intrusion from wind driven
>>> rains.  After tropical storm Fay, stalled in our area for several day,
>>> while dumping several inches of rain, the homeowner removed some
>>> sections of drywall on the 2nd floor exterior walls.  There is extension
>>> water damage to the sub-siding and damage to some wall studs.
>>> During a meeting with the builder and the homeowner, I handed the
>>> builder a copy of code 2504.2 Exterior Lathing and Plastering, a copy of
>>> ASTM C 926 and ASTM C 1063, and some pages from the Portland Cement
>>> Association's "Plaster/Stucco Manuel".  The builder stated he was not
>>> obligated to the ASTM requirements because he applied a decorative
>>> cementitious finish in lieu of stucco.  I ask for the name of
>>> manufacturer, but he refused to provide that information.  He simply
>>> stated he was not require to install expansion joints and weep screed,
>>> although he is now on homes he is presently building.
>>> My questions include, what or who determines if a product is stucco or
>>> decorative cementitious finish and no matter what the exterior finish
>>> may be, wouldn't the requirements of expansion joints and weep creed,
>>> still be required?
>>> Your assistance will be greatly appreciated.
>>> Jack Wingo
>>> Melbourne Beach, FL
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>>> Name: wing6790.vcf
>>> Type: text/x-vcard
>>> Size: 166 bytes
>>> Desc: not available
>>> Url :
>>>
>>>       
> http://myfloridacode.com/pipermail/codetalk/attachments/20080919/1f74b75f/at
>   
>>> tachment.vcf
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CodeTalk mailing list
>>> CodeTalk at myfloridacode.com
>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at:
>>> http://myfloridacode.com/mailman/listinfo/codetalk
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CodeTalk mailing list
>>> CodeTalk at myfloridacode.com
>>> Unsubscribe or change your options at:
>>> http://myfloridacode.com/mailman/listinfo/codetalk
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> CodeTalk mailing list
>> CodeTalk at myfloridacode.com
>> Unsubscribe or change your options at:
>> http://myfloridacode.com/mailman/listinfo/codetalk
>>
>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
>>     
> signature database 3457 (20080919) __________
>   
>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>>
>> http://www.eset.com
>>
>>
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> CodeTalk mailing list
> CodeTalk at myfloridacode.com
> Unsubscribe or change your options at:
> http://myfloridacode.com/mailman/listinfo/codetalk
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: wing6790.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 166 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://myfloridacode.com/pipermail/codetalk/attachments/20080920/ed4bfdf8/attachment.vcf