MyFloridaCode.com

Hi Jack:
 
Great response Bob. 
 
Jack:
 
You mention cementious finish.  This in itself is augmentative. If the  
contractor used a exterior finish system, such as the product used by Cemex,  which 
as many of the products does not require the application over insulation.  
But however, then I would caution,  that it would have to abide  completely by 
the Manufacturers specs. 
 
And please remember. Normally Builders Grade Paint is not a  waterproofing,
 
Tom Ricci 
 
 
In a message dated 9/22/2008 3:47:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
Bob at contractorsinstitute.com writes:

Jack,  the situation you have encountered is all too familiar with many
of  us.  The question however is complicated in its scope.

First, the  water intrusion problem the owner is experiencing relates to
violations of  the code concerning interstitial water intrusion - rather
than improper  stucco application and I believe the owner should seek
primary recourse  along that path (secondary recourse is the stucco and
waterproofing  issues).

As to your question, I have been in many court cases where  this issue
has been litigated, and there are no exact answers.  Yes,  if stucco is
applied according to the Florida building code then it must  meet the
requirements of ASTM C-926. But what if the stucco is not being  applied
pursuant to code requirements, i.e., it is simply being applied as  a
decoration? Herein lies the problem.

If stucco is a being applied  for fire resistance value, or is being used
for its shear value, or is  being applied over "open" framing members,
then it must meet that  requirement.  If it is not used for any of these
purposes - then it  falls outside of the code requirements. It is
decoration. (read the 553  mandate for the code and the purpose of the
code)

Consider the  requirements over masonry block.  The code requirement
would mandate a  minimum of 1/2" thickness.  Blocks however need
absolutely no stucco  requirement in order to attain C/O. Then why 1/2"
thick?  Absence the  requirement for additional wall shear, or fire
resistance value there is no  reason for such thickness.  Therefore the
code defined a "decorative  cementitious coating" to eliminate this
requirement since it was being  applied by people in the field who failed
to understand that the ASTM  documents are not Florida specific. They are
meant to be read by technical  trades who interpret them.

Likewise goes the argument for a fully  structurally sheathed frame wall
in Florida.  You could simply paint a  plywood exterior sheathed wall,
and receive the certificate of  occupancy.  All shear value, fire value,
and water resistant value  being attained without any other product
(other than the required coating  or stain for waterproof integrity). At
this point all code requirements  have been met. So what if the owner did
not like painted plywood, or  painted OSB?  We could simply nail some
vinyl siding over a waterproof  underlayment and pass inspection.  Or we
could simply trowel some  stucco for cosmetics over the plywood.  But of
course, stucco does not  stick to plywood and it is not watertight.
Therefore we need an effective  water management barrier and metal lath
to serve as a mechanical "key" to  hold the stucco on.  At this point it
matters not (with this specific  wall framing condition) the thickness of
the stucco.  By the nature of  its installation it will be approximately
half an inch thick.  So if a  product is being applied for cosmetics, and
not subject to the requirements  of the code, does it need to follow the
code reference document?  The  argument continues.

What is a fact is that either an effective water  management system such
as 15 pound felt, stucco wrap, peel and stick must  be used under the
stucco, and a means of letting the water drain out once  the water
management system carries it down to its termination (this is  what is
missing in your application, along with I am sure insufficient  or
nonexistent window flashing) or the other option of a face  barrier
system.  This system prevents any water from getting behind  the stucco.
Obviously this is a far more complex system and must employ  correct
coating materials as well as correct sealants. Any windows will  probably
need to be pulled and reset with a proper pan. 

There are  thousands and thousands of houses in Florida that perform
perfectly well  with stucco over these fully sheathed frame walls.  Most
were painted  to the correct mil thickness by painters with rollers and
brushes (not  airless sprayers) and many have been painted several times.
Either way  there is a quasi face barrier system created. These houses
have performed  without the weep screed's or expansion joints.
Nonetheless your house is  not quite one and not quite the other.

(note; I am not against air-less  sprayers used by a competent painter.
The fact remains however, that if you  test many new homes in the field,
it is not un-common to find 1/2 to 2/3 of  the required mill thickness
missing)

As for expansion joints, they  are required by the ASTM documents,
"unless otherwise specified".  We  always make sure to specify them out.
They cause far more harm than good  and if you think about it cannot
provide any expansion mechanism when the  metal lath is nailed 7 inches
vertically - 16 inches horizontally on  center. The available panel for
expansion could not exceed 16 inches in  width.

What we need to do in our Florida environment is mandate the  requirement
of peel and stick on all residential exterior wall and roof  areas that
have wood sheathing that is to be covered with any other  material.

IMHO,

R.J.Koning - Director
Contractors  Institute
rjkoning at contractorsinstitute.com
8301 Joliet  Street
Hudson, Fl 34667
727-863-5147



-----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/20080919/1f74b75
f/attachment.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







**************Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial 
challenges?  Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and 
calculators.      (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://myfloridacode.com/pipermail/codetalk/attachments/20080923/d6a17c76/attachment.html