Thread: Weep hole diameter

......

Similar Threads:

• Weep Holes
• Gap between stucco weep screed and concrete slab
• Weep holes
• makes you weep
• Weep Screed

Possible entryway for insects and vermin. But my main concerns would be: 1) Is that "masonry" extending below grade and parged with mortar? (In any case, insufficient clearance from grade?) Why someone "retrofitted" the weeps in the first place - I would assume there was likely to have been a water problem, or they would not have bothered - and what damage may have resulted. 3) Damage to the flashing (if any) / weather-resistant barrier (house-wrap) / sheathing behind the brick the weeps were installed.

And... it these were indeed retro-fitted (a high possibility), that would mean that the hole (only) was installed and there is no flashing in the drain plane.

Rich

Installing "weep-holes" after a masonry wall is built can often cause more problems than not. Hey Clyde, where's my drill?

"No flashing in the drain plane..."

This flashing may not be present:

http://www.luckstone.com/arch/downlo...onryVeneer.jpg

http://www.luckstone.com/arch/downlo...onryVeneer.jpg

Jeff,
Where did you get a maximum of 3/8ths? From 2006 IRC R703.6 Weepholes: Weepholes shall be provided in the outside wythe of masonry walls at a maximum spacing of 33 inches (838mm) on center. Weepholes shall not be less than 3/16inch (5mm) in diameter. Weepholes shall be located immediately above the flashing. , so if you have one, I'll appreciate knowing it.
It wouldn't be unusual for me to miss another reference.
In any event, I would be concerned with damage to the substrate and flashing (if present) in which case you've just made a direct path to the interior.
Were you able to identify the debris seen on the grass and foundation? Was that actually stone and mortar or was it shaved stone embedded into a thin layer of concrete over EPS. I know you were there and I'm looking at a picture. I'm just curious because of all the debris.

Thom,

I could be wrong (again) but, I think that is water driplets on the grass/ ground.

RR

That's what I originally thought, but look on the foundation and inside the hole.

Originally Posted by Warren Alderman

Nothing wrong with retrofitting weep holes, I recommend it all the time.... just make sure to recommend a qualified contractor do it.

Richard,

"No flashing in the drain plane"?

What do you exactly mean?

Well that recommendation is not very good if the wall is not flashed properly and the air space is full of mortar, or their is not air space. If they are not installed during the construction of the wall it is very doubtful that they will do any good if they are put in post construction.

Warren, all brick veneer walls should have through wall flashing.

I would not tell a client to have weeps installed post construction, simply because I have seen post construction weeps that do not work. You have to understand how the wall is constructed and then you will understand why they seldom work if they are installed post construction.

This is what I said two days ago on a 12 year old home that did not have any weep holes.

"I did not find any weep holes in the brick veneer walls. Weep holes are an important part of the brick veneer wall system. They help air to circulate through the walls and help moisture in the walls to dissipate. Weep holes need to be installed during the construction process for them to work properly.

I did not see any moisture problems with the home that I could link to the lack of the weep holes. This is not uncommon in the South but it does not mean that future moisture problem could arise due to the lack of the weep holes."

This is what I typically end up writing about the lack of weep holes. It changes from home to home but this is my common verbiage.

Originally Posted by Jeff Eastman

So do you guys do what Dan suggest, just note the lack of weep holes or just not comment on it?

Jeff,
There is never a case I can think of where I would not comment on it. My canned comment is similar to Scott's and gets modified as necessary.
In most cases, even when they're present, you will not be able to tell if they are functioning. But you will have cases where you can definitely tell when they are not.

Originally Posted by Jeff Eastman

Thanks , Scott! That rocks!

For new construction though, you tell builder to install if they don't put them in, right?

Even on new construction I do not tell them to put in weeps after the fact. The main reason is that I don't want to be held responsible if they do not work and I told them to install them.

Originally Posted by Warren Alderman

Nothing wrong with retrofitting weep holes, I recommend it all the time.... just make sure to recommend a qualified contractor do it.

West Coast Jerry nailed it with "Installing "weep-holes" after a masonry wall is built can often cause more problems than not. Hey Clyde, where's my drill?"

You ever looked inside one of those holes?

Typically, they drill right through to the siding, past the weather resisting membrane and the paper, right through everything ... now EACH and EVERY hole is a "leak" right through that wall into the sheathing, which will just rot out.

Originally Posted by Jeff Eastman

For new construction though, you tell builder to install if they don't put them in, right?

New or old, I said "No weep holes present. Weep holes are required and needed and should be properly installed."

That by-passes Scott's problem of "The main reason is that I don't want to be held responsible if they do not work and I told them to install them." because, *if done PROPERLY*, there will be no problem.

How to do it "properly"? It requires brick removal by a mason and is not cheap or easy. *IF* it is discovered that there is no through-wall flashing there, then the problem just explodes bigger.

Either way, no need to be concerned that they might come back to you, heck, if you were, you might as well quit doing home inspections, because they could come back to you for anything and everything following that scenario.

"Do it properly." It is that simple to state. (Not always that simple to do, though.)

Proper weep holes are not present in the brick veneer. Flashing is supposed to be installed behind the brick to direct water to the weep holes. I can't tell if flashing has been installed in the required areas behind the brick veneer.

Even though some local jurisdictions require it, I seldom see proper weep holes in brick veneer in recent construction in this area. For more information on brick systems on the internet see: http://www.bia.org/html/frmset_thnt.htm Look at Technical Note #7 for weephole information.

Also see attachment "Weep Holes In Brick Veneer". Click the link on page three of the report.

Water does get behind brick veneer. It needs a way out so it doesn't sit in the wall rotting the structural wood until it evaporates.

Weep holes are openings in the brick mortar that provide drainage for water (usually in vapor forn) that has penetrated into the space between the brick and the wall sheathing. When installed, these are combined with flashing (a piece of sheet metal or other similar water resistant material) between the sheathing and bricks which lead the collected moisture out the weep holes.

There is no way to see into this space behind the brick without removing brick or opening the interior wall. Making a determination about moisture issues inside the wall is beyond the scope of this inspection.

The Brick Industry Association (the people who make the brick and design installation requirements for it) recommend "weep holes should be located above all doors and windows, below all window sills, and above the ground at the base of the wall." Generally accepted nationwide building practices also call for proper weep holes in brick construction. However, local generally accepted building practices usually lag behind nationally accepted practices and may not require weep holes.

Walls may be retrofitted with weep holes by drilling but this may lead to more problems as the driller usually drills straight through any flashing present giving moisture a straight shot to the structural wood. Without flashing to direct the water to the weep holes, retrofitting may be useless. Installing flashing would require removing a short span of bricks, installing flashing, putting the bricks back and doing it again and again until flashing is installed at all required locations.

You may also want to review the following resources about the need for flashing and weep holes in brick walls.
a. The Brick Industry Association web site at www.bia.org.
b. An article on The Journal of Light Construction web site www.jlconline.com.
The article is: Keeping water out of brick veneer, by Jerry Carrier. Great
explanations, great pictures. Costs $5 to download if you're not a
member.
c. The Building Science Corporation web site at
www.buildingscience.com/resources/walls/solar_driven_moisture_brick.htm
d. Construction books at your local library.

I recommend three courses of action:
1. Review the above resources to educate yourself about the need for
brick weep holes and flashing.
2. Consult the local building inspectors office for local requirements.
3. Contact some knowledgeable qualified brick or masonry contractors to
determine repair methods, estimate costs, and perform the necessary
repairs.

Originally Posted by Erby Crofutt

I recommend three courses of action:
1. Review the above resources to educate yourself about the need for
brick weep holes and flashing.
2. Consult the local building inspectors office for local requirements.
3. Contact some knowledgeable qualified brick or masonry contractors to
determine repair methods, estimate costs, and perform the necessary
repairs.

Erby,

#2 could backfire and work against your client if the local officials think 'weep holes are not necessary'. I would skip that one (unless I already knew that the local officials and code did require weep holes, in which case I would simply state that).

Whether or not 'local officials' and/or 'local requirements' call for, or do not call for, weep holes, the BIA and basically anyone with any real knowledge of what needs to be done does say that weep holes are necessary.

Whether or not 'local officials' and/or 'local requirements' call for, or do not call for, weep holes, the BIA and basically anyone with any real knowledge of what needs to be done does say that weep holes are necessary.

Good Point. But in Kentucky, it is illegal for me to "indicating in writing in the initial home inspection report that any condition is not in compliance with any building code enforced under KRS Chapter 198B.”"

====
Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) Chapter 198B.738
”Home inspectors are prohibited from indicating in writing in the initial home inspection report that any condition is not in compliance with any building code enforced under KRS Chapter 198B.”
====

I'd have to reword it to something like

"While I can't tell you whether or not it is a code violation, ( see Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) Chapter 198B.738 ) the Brick Industry Association and basically anyone with any real knowledge of what needs to be done does say that weep holes are necessary."

Originally Posted by Erby Crofutt

Good Point. But in Kentucky, it is illegal for me to "indicating in writing in the initial home inspection report that any condition is not in compliance with any building code enforced under KRS Chapter 198B.”"

====
Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) Chapter 198B.738
”Home inspectors are prohibited from indicating in writing in the initial home inspection report that any condition is not in compliance with any building code enforced under KRS Chapter 198B.”
====

I'd have to reword it to something like

"While I can't tell you whether or not it is a code violation, ( see Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) Chapter 198B.738 ) the Brick Industry Association and basically anyone with any real knowledge of what needs to be done does say that weep holes are necessary."

Well, that is a stupid law! I guess you could always add an addendum to the report. Or you could say that it goes against all good building standards and guidelines.

Naaaaah... all you would have to do is re-issue a second report as the ammendment with the code information.

Then, the *INITIAL* report thingy no longer applies...

Rich

Originally Posted by Erby Crofutt

Good Point. But in Kentucky, it is illegal for me to "indicating in writing in the initial home inspection report that any condition is not in compliance with any building code enforced under KRS Chapter 198B.”

And, as I keep pointing out, make your "initial" inspection at the front of the drive, make your "follow -up" inspection when you arrive at the house.

That statement has such a large loop hole that you would get that new super large 800 passenger jet through it and miss the side of the loop hole by the distance between Miami and New York.

Erby,
I feel your pain, but not quite as much as you do. I read the HI part of the KRS. Based on the wording, it looks like Kentucky legislators know at least as much about construction as Texas lawmaker types.

Since I couldn't figure out how to cut and paste from pdf to here, I attached the provisions I considered most interesting.

198B.010 It's interesting what they consider non structural.
198B.700 They can't mean you are supposed to recommend repair methods, can they?
198B.734 That part I like. Here in TX it's 4 years.

As I have pointed out before ( and done upon occassion) and a couple of you are now pointing out, it ain't a hard one to get around, just one I keep bitchin about cause it shouldn't be there to start with.

Stupid laws are made everyday.

Thom, where did you get the "4 years" in Texas? I have read and re-read the TREC standards and have never found a definitive statute of limitations time frame. Can you point me in the right direction?

After reading all these I have a question. I had weep holes in my walls which were filled with caulk. I pulled the caulk out and put in a piece of 3/8 cotton rope putting it in as far as possible then used clear caulk to secure the rope. Any problem with doing that ?

Originally Posted by Bill Wieczorek

After reading all these I have a question. I had weep holes in my walls which were filled with caulk. I pulled the caulk out and put in a piece of 3/8 cotton rope putting it in as far as possible then used clear caulk to secure the rope. Any problem with doing that ?

I'd remove the rope and leave the hole open. They make a fine metal screen (kind of like brass or copper steel wool) at the very most.

Originally Posted by Jim Luttrall

Thom, where did you get the "4 years" in Texas? I have read and re-read the TREC standards and have never found a definitive statute of limitations time frame. Can you point me in the right direction?

What is in the statue is attached. What I got for an answer by phone with TREC legal was four years. I asked for citaion of statue and never received. I have sent the email below again.



How long must an Inspector keep copies of reports from form REI 7A0 in file? Please cite statute.

Thank you.

Thom Walker
Lic# 4489

Originally Posted by Jeff Eastman

It appeared to me homeowner retrofited weep holes here along the bottom of the stone (on wood frame). The diameter of the weep holes are approximately 1 ". Any concerns with this? I know the maximum allowed is 3/8".

That hole looks like a liquid termite treatment access.

Originally Posted by Jim Luttrall

Thom, where did you get the "4 years" in Texas? I have read and re-read the TREC standards and have never found a definitive statute of limitations time frame. Can you point me in the right direction?

Got this response this morning.

Mr. Walker:

There is no statutory requirement that inspectors retain copies of their reports for a specific period of time. However, because the statute of limitations on consumers filing complaints against licensees is four years, I would recommend that you keep copies of your reports for at least that long. You may also wish to consult your attorney or tax professional for advice about any other reasons you should retain copies of your records and the applicable time periods.

We hope this information is helpful to you.

Devon V. Bijansky
Staff Attorney
Enforcement Division
(512) 465-3960
fax (512) 465-3962

Well, that is helpful, but they still did not cite the statue, did they?
Thanks, Jim