Battling Experts?
To the Editor:
The article
“Building
Airtight Homes” by Steve Lentz (2/02) recommended
putting vapor barriers on both sides of a wall assembly. In the
same issue (On the House), Joe Lstiburek responded to an
interesting question about vapor barriers by saying that
installing a vapor barrier on both sides is never a good idea
in any climate. What is a reader to think? Is this a case of
battling experts?
From my own experience I tend to agree with Lstiburek.
However, I live on the Oregon coast, where 100 inches of yearly
rainfall and high winds mean that water sometimes gets into
wall assemblies in any number of ways despite our best
efforts.
Jay Raskin, AIA
Cannon Beach, Ore.
Steve Lentz responds: I install foam (a vapor barrier) on
the exterior of my homes and an air-vapor barrier on the inside
of my walls. Most vapor barriers are not good air barriers
against wind pressure, but certain air barriers are very good
vapor barriers. A vapor barrier on one side and an air barrier
on the other will not cause a problem as long as the exterior
of the wall is flashed and constructed properly with a good
drainage plane (per Joe Lstiburek). In that case, you should
not get water into the wall cavity from the outside. If water
is indeed entering the wall cavity from the outside,
you’ve got a leak that has to be fixed. If you install
a sealed, continuous high-quality air barrier, tested with a
blower door to confirm its airtightness, then water vapor (a
gas) cannot enter the cold wall cavity and condense (turn to
liquid or ice) in great enough quantities to create a problem.
A good air barrier will stop even wind-driven water vapor from
getting into the wall cavity as long as it is capable of
stopping air infiltration and exfiltration.
I began using these details in 1984. Since then, I have
opened numerous wall assemblies in my customers’ homes
while adding on or remodeling and have not seen any evidence of
moisture or mold. I even opened the dense-packed, air-sealed
cathedral ceiling in my own home to prove the point.
One word of caution: If you install a vapor barrier on both
sides of the wall with no regard to stopping air infiltration
or exfiltration, you can create a monster. However, it takes
only care and attention to detail to install a good air
barrier. My air leakage rates are around .18 cfm per square
foot of floor area, 0.08 cfm per 50 square feet of surface
area, and .4 to .6 air changes per hour at 50 pascals. This is
not rocket science. Builders who care about their customers and
the quality of their homes can build homes that are safe,
comfortable, durable, affordable, and energy efficient
— if they want to!
Joe Lstiburek responds: Mr. Lentz does not have a problem
because he seals the air barrier well and limits the interior
moisture levels with an HRV. His workmanship is
impeccable.
However, just because something is possible
doesn’t mean it makes sense. Installing a double-sided
vapor barrier is not a prudent thing to do in any climate
— despite being able to get away with it if the
building assembly is built dry and water never gets into the
assembly because the workmanship is perfect.
In my experience, things often start out wet, and
workmanship is rarely perfect. There are not enough Steve
Lentzes around building quality buildings. Buildings are more
likely to be built by Red Green.
Blower Door Confusion
To the Editor:
In the article
“Building
Airtight Homes” (2/02), Steve Lentz states that
his homes have a natural air change rate of .48 to 1. Here in
Iowa, they require a natural air change rate of .35 or below.
Mechanical ventilation is recommended below .31. I blew a .19 a
year ago on a brick veneer ranch with 1-inch polyethylene
sheathing and no interior vapor barrier. This year I blew .19
on another brick ranch with the same construction, but with an
interior vapor barrier. I was told I would need to add some
mechanical ventilation.
Mr. Lentz describes a fairly elaborate procedure to make the
home airtight. I just wrap the interior (in the first case this
wasn’t even done) and don’t mess with any
taped joints, band-joist wrap, or taping of electrical boxes
and plumbing penetrations. Given this, I’m blowing a
.19 and he’s blowing a .48. What gives?
Mike McConkey
Dexter, Iowa
Don Jackson responds: Part of your confusion stems from a
mistake in the article’s opening paragraph. Steve
Lentz’s homes have an infiltration rate of .48 ach
when measured with a blower door at 50 pascals (ach50), not a
natural rate of .48 as the article stated. An old rule of thumb
used to relate infiltration at ach50 to natural leakage rates
says to divide by 20. Steve’s natural rate would be
suffocatingly low, which is why he always uses mechanical
ventilation. Chances are that the .19 rate on your brick
ranches had been converted by your blower door technician from
ach50 to a natural leakage rate, to better relate to the
code-required ventilation rate of .35 ach. Your blower door
rating at 50 pascals pressure difference would probably have
been closer to 3.8.
Cash Accounting Advantage
To the Editor:
Accounting was never my strong point, so it’s no
surprise that the “Tax Talk column”
(“IRS
Surrenders to Contractors,”Notebook, 3/02)
confounded me. Still, I hope someone can explain why accrual
accounting leads to higher taxable income. If all
that’s happening is that I’m including some
income in the tax year before I actually receive it,
isn’t the same thing happening the following year?
Aren’t you basically shifting your accounting forward
by whatever the normal lag time is between billing and
receiving payment? The only time I can see where your tax bite
would be significantly increased would be the first year you
file taxes for that business. Please let me know what I am
missing here.
Dan Kolbert
Kolbert Building & Renovations
Portland, Maine
Chris Morse responds: You’re right. All you
achieve with cash accounting is a deferral of taxable income.
But you hinted at the true benefit in the next-to-last sentence
— with accrual accounting, “your tax bite
would be significantly increased [for] the first year you file
taxes.” If your business grows (or even if it stays
stagnant), your receivables and payables will always be growing
(or at least staying the same). Thus, with cash accounting, you
postpone at least that amount of income every year for the
entire duration of your business. If that happens to be more
than 10 or 12 years, the present value of the taxes you pay at
the end of that period is next to nothing. So what
you’ve really achieved is almost permanent
postponement of those taxes!
Controlling Woodshop Noise
To the Editor:
The article
“Successful
Sound Control” (4/02) offers a good economical
approach, but to only part of the problem. The people in the
office are in peace, but the carpenters are all deaf. They need
to reduce the sound at the source. The shop looks like an echo
chamber — lots of hard surfaces facing each other,
ideal for amplifying those machine noises. Opposing surfaces
create standing waves, which will amplify and sustain well
above the other frequencies. These standing waves are capable
of penetrating the economical sound wall featured in the
article.
Thick rubber mats fastened to the walls and floor (similar to
the type used in weight rooms at a gym) will reduce the
reflective noise. The sawdust can be easily cleaned off of
these type of surfaces. Sound baffles, or sound-absorbing
panels, can be hung strategically from the ceiling — a
common practice at large manufacturing facilities.
We carpenters need a little peace, too.
Matt Macarewich, GC
Capistrano Beach, Calif.
Not So Crazy After All
To the Editor:
In response to
“Cross-Threaded
Between the Ears” (Notebook, 4/02), putting
a reducer and drain valve into a cleanout wye has a perfectly
sound basis. When the building drain is blocked downstream and
a few feet — or perhaps a few stories — of
head pressure has built up on the other side of that cap, you
want a safe and controlled way to release it before unscrewing
the cap. A gate or full-port valve works best.
Vincent Kuntz, Owner
Alliance Builders
Buffalo, N.Y.
The Hole Story
To the Editor:
The response to the question about drilling holes in the web
of I-joists (On
the House, 4/02) states that a hole can be drilled
anywhere in the web of a BCI joist as long as it is at least
two hole diameters from any other hole. The answer concludes
that “a 1-inch hole needs to be at least 2 inches away
from any other hole.” True, but possibly
misleading.
Wouldn’t the diameter of the larger hole be the
controlling factor? If you have an existing 4-inch hole,
it’s not likely to move over to make room for a hole
you propose to drill. Therefore, a new 1-inch hole would have
to be at least 8 inches away from an existing 4-inch hole.
Presumably, that dimension is edge to edge, rather than center
to center.
Anyone planning on drilling an I-joist would be well advised
to consult with the manufacturer of the particular joist in
question.
Mike Freedman
General Contractor
via e-mail
Thanks for the clarification. You’re exactly right
— the distance is measured edge to edge.
— The Editor
Markup Money on the Table
To the Editor:
In the article
“A Simple
Time & Materials Contract” (11/01), the
author mentions that he does not mark up his materials, that he
allows his customers to supply their own materials, and that he
charges $40 per hour for his time, $21 for a carpenter, and $10
for a helper. These labor rates supposedly include
administrative costs and any pickup and delivery time the
company incurs dealing with the materials.
I think the author is leaving money on the table. Surely any
remodeling business needs some kind of a markup on materials
and subcontractors. Many in the industry suggest 50% as the
minimum markup.
Paul Winans
Winans Construction
Oakland, Calif.