Thread: Adhere Stone Veneer Siding

NC licensed board just published recommended language for Adhere Stone Veneer Siding as attached at the end. However, I got a changllege letter from the stone veneer manufacturer:

It has been brought to our attention that xxxxx recently had questions arisen pertaining to “improper installation of stone�.
The first concern was regarding the stone coming into contact with the ground. We have researched this instance and have identified that the code in question is the “Four inch Two inch rule�. The four inches above grade and two inches above concrete rule was implemented by the MVMA as a Suggestion intended for Northern Climate States. This rule is based on the constant year around freeze thaw cycle of northern states, which doesn’t occur in the southern states.
Second, was the concern about not having weep screed above the windows, on the floor and above doors. The windows and doors are already Self-flashing but also have Tape flashing on them as well. Tape flashing is an equivalent to Drip Edge Flashing and these are standard patterns of practice for waterproofing. In the MVMA guide, Figure 21 “Window Head� states that weep screed or casing bead is optional. For weep screed missing on the floor, this is because weep screed is only required at intersections of dissimilar materials. For this instance, the wood framing goes all the way to the floor thus not needing the weep screed.
We at xxxx fully stand behind this install as well as 100% of our stone work.

I still feel the clearance should be maintained even in NC.
I still think the weep creed flashing should be required at the top of windows and doors.

How do you guys think?
How do you do in this case?

Thanks

Adhered masonry stone veneer cladding has been installed on this house. An inspection of the visible components suggests that the stone cladding system may not have been installed in such a way as to prevent water penetration behind the cladding. At the time of the inspection, the following concerns related to the lack of proper detailing and flashing were observed:
 No visible weep system was noted at the base of the wood frame walls or horizontal transitions.
 No visible weep system was noted at the tops of window and/or door openings.
 No visible sealants were noted along seams between the stone cladding and siding, trim, windows, and/or doors.
 No indication of a flashing and/or weep system was noted where the stone cladding is in contact with roofing materials or along head flashings.
 Metal lath was visible, indicating that the proper base coats of mortar were not applied prior to installation of the stone cladding.
The lack of proper detailing and flashing is conducive to water penetration behind the stone cladding and possible hidden damage to the home.
Additional concerns related to installation are listed below:
 Clearances were not maintained between stone cladding and the ground and/or paved surfaces to prevent wicking and frost heave problems.
 Clearances were not maintained between stone cladding and roofing materials to allow for proper drainage and future roof repairs and/or replacement.
The installation of the stone cladding should be evaluated by a licensed general contractor and repaired as needed to correct any possible water penetration issues and verify that the stone cladding is installed to the specific installation requirements of the stone manufacturer and/or Masonry Veneer Manufacturer’s Association (MVMA). www.masonryveneer.org
Please note that because the water resistive barrier, metal lath, and base coat(s) of cement stucco are completely concealed behind the stone cladding, they cannot be evaluated by a visual inspection.

Similar Threads:

• Stone Veneer over Brick
• Gaps at the transition between stone veneer and siding
• Brick and Stone Veneer
• Stone veneer
• Installation of Stone Veneer

The NC recommendation suggests the installation follow the manufacturers installation instructions or the MVA recommendations.

Last time I looked at the install instructions, they did not state one set of instructions for South and one for North. You did your job and said the installation did not follow the install instructions. If the installer wants to take on the liability of an incorrect installation, that is up to them.

Dear Bruce:

Thanks for your reply.
The client is asking my opinion right now.
Should I just reply like "they are the professionals and they will take the liability"?

Thanks,

Mike

Originally Posted by Bruce Ramsey

The NC recommendation suggests the installation follow the manufacturers installation instructions or the MVA recommendations.

Last time I looked at the install instructions, they did not state one set of instructions for South and one for North. You did your job and said the installation did not follow the install instructions. If the installer wants to take on the liability of an incorrect installation, that is up to them.

Originally Posted by Mike Tao

Dear Bruce:

Thanks for your reply.
The client is asking my opinion right now.
Should I just reply like "they are the professionals and they will take the liability"?

Thanks,

Mike

If they didn't follow the manufacturer's installation instructions then they didn't follow the manufacturer's installation instructions ... period.

Your report should ONLY address that issue.

If YOU indicate anything else then you could be added to the defendant's list when you could have stayed with 'not installed per the manufacturer's installation instructions'.

Tell your client what the manufacturer's installation instructions state and keep your personal opinion out of it ... and what YOU THINK may be improvements - if someone tries your 'improvements' and screws it up ... YOU will be the one who said to do that work and YOU will become the responsible party.

Let the manufacturer say differently if they feel compelled to.

Your client wants YOU to say it's okay ... YOU tell your client if the installation meets the manufacturer's installation instructions ... your CLIENT then decides what they want to do - purchase the house or walk away.

Jerry is correct, do as he posted!

I agree with Jerry. If the installation did not meet the Manufacturer's Guidelines, that is what you report. But would like to add:

(The following is my opinion and is based upon training and experience. Others may have other opinions, and my opinion is subject to change as I grow. I welcome any discussion that will add to such evolution.


I found your post a bit confusing (and/or somewhat incomplete), forgive me in advance for any misunderstanding(s). I am going to assume the first portion that starts off with; "It has been brought to our attention..." to be from the manufacturer, and the last portion with the little boxes to be from your report. If so, I believe the manufacturer is agreeing that clearance is required from the stone to grade/hardscape.

They also mention weep screed. In which case I believe they are telling you that the fact that you cannot see the actual "appliance"; does not necessarily mean that the ability of the system to drain does not exist. Don't confuse and think they are telling you that the system does not have to drain. Considering that there are MSV tiles shaped like outside corners, a common weep screed may not always work. BUT, every system MUST drain. (Every system designed to be Water Managed must drain. There are systems that are not designed to drain; such as mass storage systems)

I also found the purported Manufacturer's response to be a bit incomplete because it did not mention other guidelines or the Guideline itself.

I assume that when I read the word "floor", it actually refers to "floor line". Here is where I begin to have a problem. I don't agree that a provision for drainage is only required at a change in material. I am more concerned with the drainage plane and I profess that a provision for drainage be provided where there is a change in the drainage plane.

I can understand that a "weep screed" (or a visible external appliance/provision for drainage) may not be necessary if there is no change in material (or more important; no change in drainage plane), but because it is a floor line there is a need for an expansion joint (if structure is less than 2 years old at time of installation and I am assuming we are discussing a wooden structure).

The expansion joint is a change of materials, but more important it is a change/break in the drainage plane. In my opinion a provision for drainage would be needed (whether it be incorporated into the expansion joint, a visible weep screed or otherwise). I concede that a certain amount of drainage will occur at the bottom of the system by means of seepage, but seepage alone is impeded drainage, and may not be sufficient.

Also, while the Manufacturers' specifications are the rule; they are the basic rules and can be surpassed. Don't be afraid to recommend beyond the printed guidelines if you believe it is needed. Your clients are paying you for your opinion and not to read them the "rule book"... just be prepared to back up what you say.

MSV is a relatively new product, I believe the installation guidelines of MSV have a way to go.

Some say installing MSV is like a installing EIFS. I think it is more like installing hard stucco.

The following was copied and pasted from the EIMA website.

The primary objective of inspecting the exterior of any existing house is to determine whether or not it is functioning properly. Simply comparing the home's existing details to current published guidelines fails to accomplish this objective. An inspection should identify repairs that are necessary, effective and economical. Strict conformance to a manufacturer's published details does not answer the question: "Is a repair necessary, and will it be effective?"

Inspection reports that identify existing details and conditions as "defective" because they deviate from current published manufacturers' guidelines can mislead the homeowner, real estate agent, or other parties into initiating unnecessary remedial work. This is especially true if there is positive evidence that the existing details are functioning properly.
- See more at: EIMA Inspection Guidelines | Â*EIMA : EIFS Industry Members Association

MVMA Installation Guide 4th Edition PDF-68 pages

http://ncma-br.org/pdfs/masterlibrar...20Printing.pdf

"The windows and doors are already Self-flashing but also have Tape flashing on them as well. Tape flashing is an equivalent to Drip Edge Flashing and these are standard patterns of practice for waterproofing."

The statement above says to me that they don't know what they are talking about.

IMO, there would be nothing wrong with drip edge flashing in place of a weep screed above windows, but windows are not self-flashing and tape is not flashing.

You are right. That is why I thought I should stand out to protect my client.
With the help of my teacher, I asked them to word their warranty to meet the code R703.1 requirements and also asked their permission to forward the letter to the board director for justifying.

Originally Posted by Mark Reinmiller

"The windows and doors are already Self-flashing but also have Tape flashing on them as well. Tape flashing is an equivalent to Drip Edge Flashing and these are standard patterns of practice for waterproofing."

The statement above says to me that they don't know what they are talking about.

IMO, there would be nothing wrong with drip edge flashing in place of a weep screed above windows, but windows are not self-flashing and tape is not flashing.

Unless I missed it the type, kind and age of window was not stated. So it seem the discussion is speculative.

As for installation methods and standards, they have changed over the years.

So here is the lat two standards for you to look at 2002 AND 2010. Which can offer information to argue over.

Standard Practice for Installation of Windows with a Mounting Flange in Stud Frame Construction


http://www.milgard.com/_doc/products...ma-2400-02.pdf


http://www.milgard.com/_doc/products...ma-2400-10.pdf

Originally Posted by Mark Reinmiller

"The windows and doors are already Self-flashing but also have Tape flashing on them as well. Tape flashing is an equivalent to Drip Edge Flashing and these are standard patterns of practice for waterproofing."

The statement above says to me that they don't know what they are talking about.

IMO, there would be nothing wrong with drip edge flashing in place of a weep screed above windows, but windows are not self-flashing and tape is not flashing.

"tape is not a flashing"

That is news to me.

There are several manufacturers of flexible "tape flashing", many window manufacturers manufacturer's installation instructions call for tape flashing, codes recognize flexible tape flashing.

While there may be nothing wrong with installing a drip cap at the time of construction ... there may indeed be problems with retroactively installing a drip cap.

You guys do as you wish, but don't be surprised when that fat attorney's letter arrives for damages caused by or related to retroactively trying to install your "recommended" drip cap.

How do you know it is "fat"?

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

"tape is not a flashing"

That is news to me.

There are several manufacturers of flexible "tape flashing", many window manufacturers manufacturer's installation instructions call for tape flashing, codes recognize flexible tape flashing.

While there may be nothing wrong with installing a drip cap at the time of construction ... there may indeed be problems with retroactively installing a drip cap.

You guys do as you wish, but don't be surprised when that fat attorney's letter arrives for damages caused by or related to retroactively trying to install your "recommended" drip cap.

Originally Posted by Mike Tao

How do you know it is "fat"?

Because I get the "skinny" attorney's letter ... those have checks in them.

The "fat" letters contain the complaints ... I don't get those.

@ Mike Tao

Pardon my curiosity, but:

Do you have any photos of the "faulty" window(s)?

Who is your teacher?

Did your "teacher" inspect this property with you?

Did you test the moisture content at these windows (and other areas)?

Is there any damage, or are you making these recommendations because it does not conform to published guidelines?

Is the "manufacturer's letter copied and pasted or is it your interpretation of what they told you?

They really changed their warranty (in writing) for you?

Jerry,
I should have worded my response better. I meant that tape is not head flashing. Although it was permitted in the past, taping over a window flange and not installing head flashing or something equivalent is not correct. I am assuming that this is a recent installation.

Originally Posted by Mark Reinmiller

I meant that tape is not head flashing. Although it was permitted in the past, taping over a window flange and not installing head flashing or something equivalent is not correct.

Please explain/define/describe what you mean as being "head flashing".

The letter is copied and pasted.
I have not got their response back yet.

Thanks

Originally Posted by Steven Turetsky

@ Mike Tao

Pardon my curiosity, but:

Do you have any photos of the "faulty" window(s)?

Who is your teacher?

Did your "teacher" inspect this property with you?

Did you test the moisture content at these windows (and other areas)?

Is there any damage, or are you making these recommendations because it does not conform to published guidelines?

Is the "manufacturer's letter copied and pasted or is it your interpretation of what they told you?

They really changed their warranty (in writing) for you?

Originally Posted by Steven Turetsky

@ Mike Tao

Pardon my curiosity, but:

Do you have any photos of the "faulty" window(s)?

Who is your teacher?

Did your "teacher" inspect this property with you?

Did you test the moisture content at these windows (and other areas)?

Is there any damage, or are you making these recommendations because it does not conform to published guidelines?

Is the "manufacturer's letter copied and pasted or is it your interpretation of what they told you?

They really changed their warranty (in writing) for you?

Mike,
Do you have any answers to Steve's questions...

Also, exactly what type and kind of window were installed, wood, vinyl , new construction or a remodel window???

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Please explain/define/describe what you mean as being "head flashing".

Jerry. First I should mention that around hear stucco and manufactured stone on anything building since about the 1960's to 1970's is on frame construction. I mention that because I believe that you have mostly masonry construction in FL?

Head flashing is installed above windows with a vertical leg against the wall sheathing and under the WRB, a horizontal leg extends out over the projecting window frame, and a short vertical leg turn down. Like this: (very similar to Z flashing used at horizontal joints in T111 plywood siding, if that is ever used down there-where it may be called termite food).
|_
...| (ignore the periods)
The shrinkage gap that develops between the top surface of the flashing and the stucco or manufactured stone allows for drainage. That assumes that the materials are installed in a manner that does not allow bulk water to get behind the materials (i.e. joints caulked where needed, etc.).

-

Originally Posted by Mark Reinmiller

Jerry. First I should mention that around hear stucco and manufactured stone on anything building since about the 1960's to 1970's is on frame construction. I mention that because I believe that you have mostly masonry construction in FL?

South Florida is mostly masonry, but get above Palm Beach County and there are still a lot of frame houses along with the masonry houses, and get above Central Florida (basically Daytona-Orlando-Tamps) and there are more frame houses than masonry.

Yes, I know what head flashing is, and on basically all the frame installations I have inspected, the WRB (building wrap) is taped up and over the sill, taped in and over the sides, and lifted up at the top - the flexible tape flashing is installed at the sill (and sometimes up the sides) - the windows are then installed and flexible tape flashing is installed across the window's bottom flange (fin) and up its side flanges (fins), the WRB is then lowered to cover the head jamb flange (fin) - then flexible flashing tape is then applied over the WRB and over the flexible tape flashing on the side fins.

The above is a 'typical' installation, there are variations from in.

Head flashing is installed above windows with a vertical leg against the wall sheathing and under the WRB, a horizontal leg extends out over the projecting window frame, and a short vertical leg turn down. Like this: (very similar to Z flashing used at horizontal joints in T111 plywood siding, if that is ever used down there-where it may be called termite food).

There is no separate head flashing installed, nor is it required by the window manufacturer's installation instructions.

The shrinkage gap that develops between the top surface of the flashing and the stucco or manufactured stone allows for drainage. That assumes that the materials are installed in a manner that does not allow bulk water to get behind the materials (i.e. joints caulked where needed, etc.).

The stucco (when stucco) is applied to the window frame (correct in what you are likely thinking - they typically do not leave the required space for the sealant to be applied at the dissimilar surfaces).

And, no, when they install projecting wooding trim they do not (or maybe they will install that flashing on very rare occasions) install the required flashing above the projecting wood trim, or projecting cement board trim, or above the projecting ... (write in type of siding here).

To Steve's question,

The window and garage door images are attached.

My teacher is not in this website and I am not sure if she wants to release her name here. She did not do the inspection with me. She gave me advice once I got the first letter from the company.

I did not test the moisture level of the windows but did check several area in crawl space. Please educate me how to check the stone veneer window moisture level.
From the copied letter, it is obvious that the contractor admitted that they did not leave enough clearance from the ground and they did not install the weep holes/screeds. These are obvious not complying with the NC guidlines. In my opinion, I will call out even if there are no obvious damage to protect my client from the potential problem, especially this is a less than 3 years old house.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Mike,
Do you have any answers to Steve's questions...

Also, exactly what type and kind of window were installed, wood, vinyl , new construction or a remodel window???

Hi Mike,

Thank you for your responses.

I started responding to this thread, mentioning that I did not have a clear understanding of your explanation. It is still a bit unclear.

While I agree with you that I don't see any drainage appliances in the photos, I cannot determine if the system is draining and more important is that without moisture content and resistance testing it is unclear if there is any unseen damage or other adverse effect.

I cannot determine the material of the window, but the garage seems to be of wood (door frame and trim). If the system is draining onto/into wood... that cannot be good and I would prefer to see drainage flashing (including head flashing) to protect the wood and divert the water.

If you want to learn about how to test moisture content, I recommend signing up at EDI for level 1 and level 2 classes. At that point you will be "Certified" (and have a basic understanding), but under no circumstances will that make you an "Expert". Just like if you attend the very best auto mechanic school you will not walk out an "Expert" mechanic. (unless you were an expert before you walked in and yes, I do think EDI is the very best!). Becoming an expert takes time and practice. It requires taking everything you learned at EDI (or elsewhere), putting it to practical use, and making it your own. At some point you begin to figure things out yourself and also form your own opinions. Time and experience are the best teachers.

Now is when I will really confuse you.

When I do an inspection, the least I am concerned with are the Manufacturer's Guidelines. Actually, nowadays, there are so many different systems and appliances that it is almost a problem keeping up with all of the appliances, etc. But if you understand the way any system should work... (remember 3 D's)... Deflect, Drain and Dry out, you can understand all systems. EIFS, Stone veneer, Stucco, Brick, etc.

When I do an inspection, and as I explain to my clients; I don't think my clients care if there is a clearance difference, or just about anything else. I don't believe they need me to tell them there is a hair crack somewhere. But what they do need me to tell them is if the difference is having an effect on the structure in other words; if their building is rotting away.

Understand; I am not saying that it does not matter if the installer/system did not/does not conform to the guidelines. I am saying that what matters is if there is any damage. The guidelines are guideline to help prevent damage but what really matters is if there is damage. Not seeing the install guidelines is a clue. Without knowing if there is damage is not answering the most important question.

Just as time is the best teacher, it is also the best test. The more time that passes after the initial installation, the less the guidelines matter and the more the ramifications matter.

I've seen quite a few installations that appear to be done correctly and yet there is damage. I also see quite a few that appear to be done "wrong" and yet have no internal damage. That is the nature of the beast.

I am not saying that the guidelines don't matter and I include them in my report, but before I recommend tearing a place up, I try to confirm that the repair is needed.

Mike,
What is the brand of stone?
In addition to the recommendations put forth by the MVMA there is the ESR that is available for the specific brand of stone.
Stone is stucco with rock attached as the final coat. It is good to be drainable at the window head and every other protrusion through the stone and at the base.
I often see the paper stop at the sill and the veneer applied directly to the foundation. This dams up the moisture at the sill and floor assembly and we see a lot of rot at those areas.
I have said it before and will again. If you think EIFS had problems, it is only a tiny drop in the bucket compared to those problems we are seeing and will see with AMSV.
I currently have 5 cases going with Adhered Stone failures.

I do EIFS, stucco, and stone inspections for relocation companies. On the last couple of hundred I have done I have seen 2 houses that have gotten 3 details right of 10 details that are necessary to have a fully drained and compliant assembly.
This does not mean that all of these will turn into disasters but the potential is there given the right circumstances. If the install is done correctly you really manage your rick well and drop the incidences of failure way down to almost nothing.
Here in Iowa a builder gets to live with their homes for 15 years against construction defects. For $500 to $1500 I can show a builder how to drop their exterior moisture intrusion risk to just about zero. I say just about because it seems that some can screw up even the simplest details.
Remember the 4 D's Deflection, Drainage, Drying, and Durability. Pretty simple really; why don't we get it?

Email me and I will send you an article I wrote on this product. It can be done so it won't leak just as EIFS can but most installations are not.