# Wet Deck Roof



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

I have been having a screened deck built. Once the roof was put on, its had a variety of water issues, and some areas of flashing that have needed correcting. Its a metal roof over T-111. Pitch is 12/2. Even after the flashing fix and add, there is still a water issue. There is no dripping water I can see . However the underside of the roof is wet to the touch in areas. I have attached a picture of one of the more prominent areas this happens<not sure why its posting upside down>. This is the part closest to the house. To me it means water is getting under the metal and soaking through the T1-111. There are also some wet areas where the joists meet the T1-111. Its also not an immediate event. It can be dry right after a rain, but wet two hours later.

Any possible causes or solutions? 

Before they come back and give it yet another whirl, I would like to have some ideas in my head. Its been going on since mid December and its getting rather old.

Thanks!


----------



## tinner666 (Mar 14, 2005)

Sorry for the delay. I was dizzy after standing on my head for 2 minutes. Been 50 years since I did that! 

We need pictures of the roof.


----------



## tinner666 (Mar 14, 2005)

As a side note, I doubt T-111 is considered strcturally sound for a roof deck. It should have been 3/4" CDX if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

A picture outside would be nice. 
Are you saying they used T111 for the roof decking?
I hate to see it but it should have been one the walls not the roof.
Even still it has nothing to do with the roof leaking.
Some pictures outside may shed some light.


----------



## tinner666 (Mar 14, 2005)

joecaption said:


> A picture outside would be nice.
> Are you saying they used T111 for the roof decking?
> quote]
> 
> ...


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

tinner666 said:


> joecaption said:
> 
> 
> > A picture outside would be nice.
> ...


----------



## OldNBroken (Jun 11, 2008)

I've used T-111 like that in the past for aesthetics, but sheeted over it with cdx. Don't know if it's got additional sheeting over or not so not going to assume either way. 

Can't tell much by the picture but based on what you said and what I see I would really like to see pictures of the tie-in. If it's a passive leak it can take the longest time to show up underneath, depending on how far it has to travel. The pitch looks better than many we see having problems which is why I would suspect the tie-in.

Need more pics. So far I don't see anything in that pic that would suggest shoddy workmanship. Actually looks pretty clean.


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

I took another look at that picture, is that a door on the right and a window on the left?
Looks like they just attached the ledger board to the fashia board instead of running the rafters up on to the old roof or at least through so they would rest on the top plate of the outside wall.
If the ledger is just attached to the rafter tails, that's a really big no no.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

Thank you so much for the replies..

Its the t1-11, a black tyvek like covering and the metal. Our codes require 5/8 thick for roof sheathing, from what I read today.

Yes, if you are looking at the house, there is a door on the left and window on the right.

I have tried taking the very best pictures that I could, as I don't do heights well and I am not totally sure which views would be the most beneficial. So if you need another angle or view, I will be happy to try again. I think I even got the pictures right side up this time. Sorry about the water mark, long story.

A few more pics will follow in the next post.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

A couple of more from inside the deck.
Thanks again!


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

That type of roof metal is not rated for that low a slope.


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

That roof should have been started up on top of the old roof by at least 2, ft.
Now you have to low a slope as pointed out, with any wind at all the water will just blow under the trim where the roof meets the side of the house, those screws are far more likly to leak because the water can not run off the roof like it should, that door must just barely clear the rafters.
Looks like the whole area around that chimmney is going to be the main source of leaking.
All we have is the pictures to go by, but it looks like thay may be trying to count on caulking to stop the leaks. Caulking will fail everytime when you have two differant materials that expand and contract a lot in contact. 
What do you want to bet everytime you call the person that built this shows up with a tube of caulking and a ladder. 
Unless you completly redo the roof it's always going to be leaking.
It looks more like a first time DIY attempt to build a roof.
The rest judging by the pictures looks fine.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

Windows on Wash said:


> That type of roof metal is not rated for that low a slope.


Can you tell me what type it is? All proposals just reference 40 year metal roof. 

Also is there somewhere to see the acceptable slopes for different roof types?


Thanks

Sent from my iPad using DIY Forum


----------



## OldNBroken (Jun 11, 2008)

Sorry but you have two major problems here. First T-111 may be 5/8" but it is not structural sheathing. Second, that low of a slope tying into your shingle roof should ONLY have a low slope roofing material (single-ply or torchdown/BUR). There are metal systems we can install on there but if you/your contractor has to ask what it is it is best to not use it. The metal you have on there is rolled rib. THE bottom of the barrel cheapest material one can install on anything. It has absolutely no business on that roof. Odds are their transition flashing only extends under the shingles six inches at best. Proper installation would be a single-ply system extending 18-24" up the roof and the shingles brought back down over the top of that. 

I'm going to guess the worst area leaking is right under that valley. Your tie-in to the shingles as well as every lap on your roof is sucking water and will continue to do so and there isn't enough caulk in the world going to stop that. Sorry to have to tell you this but you asked why it leaks.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

No need to be sorry-- as I want to know all the possibilities.. and while I hope the contractor knows the whats and whys, I have no pretense in knowing alot. That is why I am trying to give myself a crash course in trying to get this resolved.

Codes has already approved the construction. However, they weren't aware of the water issue when doing so. They have also required the contractor fix it. It's a very long story, and this deck is just one part of the overall.

Anyway, from the contract paperwork I have it notes classic rib sheet metal roofing panels 40 year. It seems there are a few brands of this. So far i have found the minimum slope to be either 2-1/2/12 or 3/12 depending which brand. I don't understand why two brands of the same thing would have different mins.

Is rolled rib the same as classic rib?

When codes asked what the slope was the answer was 2/12, so that is how I know the installed slope.

And yes, first it was foam, next flashing and caulk, and them some more flashing and more caulk. The caulk part always makes me nervous. The foam was also a big issue, but they removed it, as it was doing more harm than good.

So visually for someone like me...down low on the knowledge ladder.. if it had a bigger pitch, lets say 3/12 how would it look different visually to me?

Thanks again for all the helpful comments.


----------



## tinner666 (Mar 14, 2005)

It would be a good idea for them to come back and tear that off, run rafters up into the roof, re-tie in the chimney, use a roof decking material, a standing seam roof, properly tied in, etc. All this will require all the siding to be removed from the chimney so it can be redone with the tie-in so the leaks will quit. The metal material on there now is OK for chicken coops and the like in which small, persistant leaks aren't an issue.
I can't imagine any lesser patch that will work. That's what I'd do. 

I can't imagine them charging again to do it correctly. They had to know that was wrong from the get-go.

Is does appear the the deck rafters were attached at the fascia which is also wrong. Sorry.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

tinner666 said:


> It would be a good idea for them to come back and tear that off, run rafters up into the roof, re-tie in the chimney, use a roof decking material, a standing seam roof, properly tied in, etc. All this will require all the siding to be removed from the chimney so it can be redone with the tie-in so the leaks will quit. The metal material on there now is OK for chicken coops and the like in which small, persistant leaks aren't an issue.
> I can't imagine any lesser patch that will work. That's what I'd do.
> 
> I can't imagine them charging again to do it correctly. They had to know that was wrong from the get-go.
> ...


+1 on all accounts.

This is a full tear off and gut. Sorry for the bad news.

Metal is acceptable but only mechanically seamed standing seam (metal of that look variety) would work at that pitch.


----------



## OldNBroken (Jun 11, 2008)

I have a hard time believing that is a 2/12. Looks 1/12 at very best if that. What do you guys see? Easy to check that steelgoddess. Measure from the top of the handrail to the bottom of the rafter at the edge of the deck and again at the house. What is the depth of that deck? 12 feet? If it' a 2/12 then the difference between the height should be 2 feet. Looks more like 6" to me. That is why I suggested a membrane rather than metal. Yes it can be done and we do it all the time. But that's just it, we do it all the time so we know the do's and don'ts involved. Doesn't sound like your contractor does. It looks like random screws holding it down and absolutely no trim whatsoever. He just slapped up some panels and screwed them down randomly. 

As far as the roofing on there, yes classic is the same as rolled rib. Just because the mfr says it's good down to 2/12 don't believe it.

As a side-note Frank, that valley coming into the left side of the roof will make raising the pitch a bit of a pain.

Edit: Looking at the header over the pass-through to the deck, it looks to be at least 3' wide yet the rise of the rafters above it seems to only rise about an inch or so the whole width. I'm thinking 1/2" per foot rise maximum.


----------



## tinner666 (Mar 14, 2005)

I see 1/12 or less too, OB. I forgot to mention the valley. I saw it and included it in my calculations. I also saw the other things you mentioned, I just hated to keep saying bad things.
I'm 98% sure that's 2 layers of shingles on there. I could be wrong, but that wavy roof, and 3rd. row hump makes me a believer.


----------



## tinner666 (Mar 14, 2005)

BTW, I also saw the leaking pipe collar and leaky vent job.


----------



## OldNBroken (Jun 11, 2008)

tinner666 said:


> BTW, I also saw the leaking pipe collar and leaky vent job.


showoff


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

Oy!
The deck is 14 x 14.

Leaky pipe collar, valve?

The mfg of classic rib and 95 percent of sites I have visited today call for 3/12. Lap sealant ??? mentioned with less.

This gets worse by the minute, doesn't it? But better now than later. He sees nothing wrong with it.

I will measure the pitch in daylight.

Thanks again. I do really appreciate it.

Sent from my iPad using DIY Forum


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

steelgoddess said:


> Oy!
> The deck is 14 x 14.
> 
> Leaky pipe collar, valve?
> ...


I mean vent. Have plumbing on the mind too.

Sent from my iPad using DIY Forum


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

Should have been done more like this roof.
http://images.search.yahoo.com/imag...b=13cnbnba1&sigi=11j3l5cu6&.crumb=cpCLpHoH11V


----------



## tinner666 (Mar 14, 2005)

Sorry for the confusion. The vents in the shingle roof were done wrong.
The larger vent to the left should have been installed like this. http://www.albertsroofing.com/Power Vent Installation.htm

The collar to the right should have been done like this. 

SOmebody else already mentioned the chimney. The lowest corner of it appears to be completely closed off and catching water. The upper corners don't show any flashing which is supposed to extend pastt he corners to direct the water away from the chimney is a manner similar to how this one is done. This one had to also allow for a downspout the water had to clear. http://www.albertsroofing.com/Blind and Dead End Valleys.htm


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

First, thank you again for all of the pictures, instructions, explanations and attempts to help me understand. I very much appreciate all the time you have taken to do so.

We did our attempt at slope measurement today. I had an extra set of eyes and hands with me to make sure.

I have attached a couple of photos of our beginning and end points.

Beginning at the outer rafter where the rafter met the soffit? <the white thing this is all attached to>, and going to the end of the hand rail. That is a rough measurement of about 160".

The difference in the two spots from the bottom of the rafter to the top of the 
handrail was approximately 3". It was done a couple of times.

I bought one of those pitch gauges. It didn't seem to register any noticeable pitch.

Nothing even close to 24".


----------



## OldNBroken (Jun 11, 2008)

So by your measurements you have less than 1/4" rise per foot. Even roofs that are intended to be flat try to achieve 1/4" minimum. Whoever told you it was a 2/12 needs to go back to flipping burgers. The most expensive standing seam metal roofing system we install is only good down to 1/2" per foot. 

IF the structure itself is sound (and there are concerns there) you absolutely need to have a low-slope roofing system of some kind installed properly or your problems will only get worse. 

If you do anything about it make sure you also add 1/2" cdx over the t-111 since t-111 is not a structural panel. 

Best of luck


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

I am meeting with the contractor tomorrow.

I am reviewing all of what has been said here too, in preparation.

I do have one question--one thing <for now> that I don't quite understand--

how attaching the ledger board to the faschia board was wrong , and the ledger just being attached to the rafter tail is wrong.

For my knowledge what makes this wrong. Is it a pitch thing? A structural strength thing?

Thanks again!


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

Nailing into the end grain of a piece of any wood has almost 0 fastner holding power, the tails are going to want to split along there length with any downward force, two pieces of wood just butted together even if glued and nailed them will not hold them together,
In most cases the old fasia was no more then a 1X piece of pine, just pounding a large gauge nail in it can split it.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

joecaption said:


> Nailing into the end grain of a piece of any wood has almost 0 fastner holding power, the tails are going to want to split along there length with any downward force, two pieces of wood just butted together even if glued and nailed them will not hold them together,
> In most cases the old fasia was no more then a 1X piece of pine, just pounding a large gauge nail in it can split it.


+1

Not only did he attach them wrong but they are attached to the wrong locations.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

Windows on Wash said:


> +1
> 
> Not only did he attach them wrong but they are attached to the wrong locations.


As usual I need to ask, what does this mean? What locations?
Something else in addition to them being attached to the fascia board?

He postponed until tomorrow, so I am making sure I have all my roof ducks in a row.


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

Should have been on top of the old roof, not attached to the fashia.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

So I am making a guess here in my final review..

If he attached properly to the room, I wouldn't have the mangled guttering..

The board bowing and cracking may not be a good thing.. and definitely is not a 5/8" solid substrate per manuf instructions either, separate and apart from the need for it to have been a structural grade...

The nails are a lovely touch...although I guess if I saw more in a uniform pattern, it means perhaps more would have been used in a uniform pattern.

And last but not least.. of course another question.., does this look like the beginning of the board pulling away, since its no longer evenly across? 

So in conclusion, its not to good construction practice, not to manufacturers guidelines, code <awaiting their new response> and just plain old common sense...

Armed with all of the information I have gotten here, and some addl research of my own.. it will make for an interesting discussion tomorrow.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

last pic :thumbup:


----------



## tinner666 (Mar 14, 2005)

There are so many things wrong. They did not know enought to go up 2' intot the roof and that mess is obviously nailed into the fascia. They knew that was wrong so they added blocking and nailed it to death too.

"So in conclusion, its not to good construction practice, not to manufacturers guidelines, code <awaiting their new response> and just plain old common sense..." 
That sums it up. A carpenter could talk code and explain it better than I can. Not being sure of code facts, my common sense would have given a 400% better job. Too flat for barn metal. Not tied into the roof nor the house properly, etc. Wrong materials, et al.

You know, I've never seen anybody put 6+ nails in pieces of blocking like that either.:whistling2:


----------



## tinner666 (Mar 14, 2005)

Not structural, but I just noticed those random exposed screws through the T-111. :no::whistling2:


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

Who suggested the T-111? Were you going for the exposted wood look on the ceiling for some reason? Or did they just do it that way?
If someone wants the exsposed wood look you use 1-1/2 thick X 6" wide T & G boards. That way the screws would not have been coming through and the roof would have been plenty strong enough.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

The unfortunate long and short of it is this....it needs to be completely torn down.

Right from the start, the structure is all wrong and if you build your house on a foundation of sand...it will fail.


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

They also left a gap where water can run down the roof, miss the gutter and run down untreated lumber.
They know it's there because they tryed to fill it with foam.


----------



## Windows on Wash (Aug 30, 2011)

joecaption said:


> They also left a gap where water can run down the roof, miss the gutter and run down untreated lumber.
> They know it's there because they tryed to fill it with foam.


That isn't how you do it? :whistling2:


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

Silly boy.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

So..
to answer an earlier question.. the T1-11 wasn't my idea. It was suggested.
The use of it for decorative purposes to get more of that rustic look appears somewhat common around here.

The roof was also supposed to originally be asphalt shingles like the rest of the house. He switched gears on that, saying the metal would be a better roof for the deck.

We did have our meeting...The concise version

We broach the water issues. His moisture meter on a hot sunny day confirms to him that yes, there is a water issue. He is somewhat perplexed as he can't figure out after all they have done to fix it, why it still is happening. And that he will make it right, and its just murphys law at my home. Of course I expect out definitions of make it right to not be the same as we deal with this issue. 

We go in the construction of the roof, pitch etc. His plan and what he thought he had was a 2/12. I'm like.. nope thats not a 2/12.. Does it look like that to you. After some internal calculating, he agreed. Then onto the T1-11, how its not a solid, structural 5/8 sheathing. Then onto the pitch in relation to the metal roof, the flashing job etc. And then a biggie-- it being connected to the fascia.

At that time <as it can change in a heartbeat> he was open to changing the roofing material. He suggested rubber. He was open to changing out the T1-11. And of course open to, and doing it, not the same. However, when it came to the fascia.. he saw nothing wrong in doing that. He's done it before. Its fine. He can add some brackets if need be. To change that, would require additional framing. Of course, this is not acceptable to me. He wanted to bring another roofing sub of his out to look at it, to get his opinion. He was going to do this on Wednesday, but I think he may have been out here already looking at it.

In the interim, I have begun making appointments with third parties <roof, construction> to come look at it. I did have a nice chat with a local framer here. He of course confirmed all the issues brought to light, and got me personally thinking the portion that is cut around the chimney as its over siding. On each side its attached to the fascia-- but I can't see especially since it is going over trim, where its connected in the center. So of course I wonder, is it just floating in the middle? What about loads and stresses and weight distribution? Then I get a headache.

We also had some bad weather, due to the tornado activity in our area Friday.
It gave me an opportunity to see fresh water infiltration in areas I haven't seen before-- down the white chimney trim, and more in the middle. Of course once it dries especially on the ceiling, you can't really tell to the eye. So this means there are more areas than initially thought that are getting wet. 

The roof material also still does not sit firmly on the wood at the end of the roof. He previously said it was fixed, but its not either. If its raised up and you can see daylight, probably not good either.

Of course, what's a long boring post without pics-- and btw I did mention that area of gutter with the foam. He just kind of gave me a look. 

I am just thankful that these issues have reared their head now, before its complete rather than 6 months down the road. I used to think having my home destroyed in a natural disaster was really bad. In hindsight, that's not as big as I once thought. Getting it rebuilt is worse.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

*more questions*

I need to impose on all of your great knowledge again..

Discussions have continued with the contractor, and of course it did not immediately result in a "we'll build it correctly"... He wants to salvage what he has..He admits he made a mistake with the covering, and in many contradictions that the pitch wasn't what he thought it was or should have been.. but other than that he feels its fine and dandy..

His solution is to put a rubber roof on it, and since it appears there is a gap between the two roofs, build some type of slope going from one roof to the other.. He says the rubber roof is an upgrade, and I will be getting that better roof for free. What a bargain :laughing:. He feels there is nothing wrong with the flashing, but if there is, it will be fixed at the same time, as well as any damage the backflow of water caused to the regular roof.. And if I had any concerns about the structure he would add some lag bolts and try to make them look nice. He says now its attached to the subfascia so its structural and attached to the roof rafters through that. My first instinct and reaction was no as a) it sounds like masking issues to me b) it never was supposed to be a flat roof. and c) subfascia-how does that make it different.

So knowledgeable experts thoughts and opinions?

I have also felt compelled to have an engineer come look at it as well this coming week.

Going through the history of the project on what was built and what was supposed to be, as mentioned earlier it was not spec-ed out to be a flat roof. Even his sketch which he doesn't deny had a definite angle to it.
I was so wrapped up in water, those details were not forefront in my mind. It's noted as a shed roof system. I found these basic definitions--
Shed Roof: One high pitched plane covering the entire structure. Often used for additions and porches.
Flat Roof: Contains no slope. May or may not have eaves.


So am I correct that there is no way that can be considered a shed roof, since its flat?

As always thank you very much


----------



## OldNBroken (Jun 11, 2008)

You are correct. 

Is this an established contractor or umm let's say "start up" contractor? 
Not sure if any permits were required or if anything was inspected but that is one thing to look at. Also it may behoove you to bring in an objective expert because you may end up threatening legal action against them. 

As far as the roof, anything is an "upgrade" from the crap that's on there but rubber isn't an upgrade, it's just the cheapest thing he can put on there that is proper for a flat roof.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

An established contractor --even builds houses. He claims I am the exception to the rule, and this house is always Murphy's law...
There have been several issues, and this is just the latest...

A permit was pulled... and this part of the deck is just one part of a multilevel deck...the other is awesome.. looks like two different companies built it, not the same people.

Inspection, a final was done with the water issues present, and it not being complete, and it passed. The roof isn't even to code, due to its pitch with the material. I've been dealing with codes since December as well in one form or another on this. It should not have passed. He was advised he needed to fix the water.

I have had other roofing companies out this week...that's been interesting.. and as I mentioned am also having the engineer come out as well for his input on structure and structure regarding codes. So I have been having third parties come and give it a gander.

It will be an interesting week.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

*update*

I can't be more grateful for your blunt assessment of this roof.

The engineer came out, and I am awaiting his formal report. He agrees the roof is improperly attached to the house and that you can't attach a roof with a 14 ft span in that manner. I had him concentrate on the structure because at that point that was the major source of disagreement. Contractor already acknowledged material and flashing issues. 

Contractor has agreed to redo the roof. He noted he had talked with some engineers he knew as well, and was told that attachment was not correct-- would have been nice if he did so before I was pushed to hire the engineer.

The question is now how will it be redone. He is awaiting the formal report and there will be a recommendation in there. He wants to keep it a flat roof and I don't, as it was never supposed to be a flat roof to begin with. So once we get the report we can go from there, and hopefully it won't become yet another battle. However he will use a different sub.

It still amazes me, with all that I know now, that it passed inspection--as it is not to code.

So there you have it...for now. It's a good turn of events, because the water issue is getting worse with each rain.


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

Meeting code just means it meets min. code. 
Cracks me up this this guy is still trying to say your roof is Murfys Law and it should have worked.
It looks like every DIY roof I've ever seen that's leaking from day one.
I've had to work on dozens of these shed style roofs before and every single one of them leak when built the way yours is.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

He definitely is a piece of work... its been a very long, rough haul with him...

It doesn't meet code.. code doesn't allow the use of metal panel roofing on a 1/4-12 slope.. without getting into the structural part of it.. that should have been flagged... that's the most obvious.. 

Hopefully it will all get properly resolved and soon.. without much fighting.. and the project can come to its long overdue conclusion...


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

If not see if you can get on the Holmes on Homes show.


----------



## tinner666 (Mar 14, 2005)

I wouldn't call 'rubber' an upgrade. If you do go with it, INSIST on no lesser spec than .060 Reinforced EPDM. Metal with hidden fasteners would be best of all worlds, after the thing gets rebuilt.


----------



## kwikfishron (Mar 11, 2010)

What a mess… Your contractor is an Idiot. Fire and sue him. Then find someone competent to fix this very simple job.

 If Judge Judy gets the case let us know, I want to watch.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

*on the road to a new roof*

Yes it is a mess, and this roof is just a part of it. Sad thing, is he really is not an idiot. He just chooses to act like one at times. It's a very long and complicated saga.

Pretty much he has decided on the rebuild method, which is also a method put forth by the engineer. I posted this below.

So we are to the questions of pitch, material, and sheathing. Would the 3/12 be ideal no matter what, or would 2/12 suffice?

Based on everything here, the existing classic rib is junk and must go no matter what. I've learned that much from this thread .

Originally it was supposed to be the same asphalt shingle that is on the house now. Would that be a bad thing? 

He's real fond of the rubber roof..I'm not unless it proves to be the best solution. In that case, I would relent and go rubber.

Then of course back to metal and standing seam. I'm not sure how the cost compares to the above options. However, it seems to be the way to go with metal, if I am not mistaken.

Thoughts? Suggestions?

Here is the method:

One method to reduce the load on the end of the overhang would be to extend the deck roof rafters such 
that they bear directly on the back wall of the house between the roof trusses. This would require removal 
of the fascia and trimming the roof sheathing to allow clearance for the rafters. If a greater pitch is 
desired for the deck roof a 2x4 knee wall with studs bearing on top of the back wall (between the roof 
trusses) may be installed to support the rafters. Alternatively, a 2x6 bearing plate could be installed to lie 
flat on top of the roof sheathing directly above the truss bearing on the back wall. Solid blocking installed 
between the roof deck and the top plate would serve to transfer loads to the back wall of the house. The 
bearing plate can be attached through the sheathing to the top of the trusses using 1/4 in. diameter 
Simpson SDS screws (or equivalent). 

2x6 SYP #2 spaced approximately 16 in. on center may be used for rafter spans up to 15 ft. and 2x8 SYP 
#2 spaced approximately 16 in. on center should be used for spans between 15 ft. and 19 ft. We 
recommend that metal hangers (Simpson HUS26- 2 or equivalent) be installed between the header located 
at the back of the fireplace chase and the doubled rafters located on either side of the chase. 

Thanks as always for the guidance.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

*update, with of course pictures*

I thought I would post an update of the new roof..
Unfortunately at this point it is just a new roof still in progress...

The engineers recommendations were pretty much mirrored, and the roof is at 2.5/12 with the asphalt shingles. It really is nice to have the extra height in the future screen room if it ever gets finished. He did go back with the T1-11, but this time, its on the underside of OSB. Different guys framing, different roofer and flasher this time around.

Of course, can't have the positive without the major negatives--unfortunately. He decided to do the work and the roof demo/cutting on a day where there was 100 percent chance of thunderstorms. And the rain came. He did tarp it, but it wasn't properly tarped and protected, so the interior of the house in that area where it meets the deck was inundated with water. Lots of damage. That whole area had to be gutted, and now has to be rebuilt. In fact the water spread into the adjoining rooms, damaging the wood flooring in those rooms as well. 

They did go on to finish the roof, from what I saw of it, it looked ok to me.
Definitely much better than the first roof. I was allowing myself to be hopeful that the water issues were over. NOT!

We had a rain over the weekend. Water pouring down the chimney on the outside of the house, actually moreso than ever before. And there was water on the inside of the house as well in the wall and on the floor on both sides of the fireplace. I guess it was a blessing in disguise that the wall was demoed and the flooring was gone, or it might not have been readily seen, and the issue on the interior would have been hidden.
For all I know, it was doing it with roof 1 as well, since there was water on the exterior around the chimney then too.

So he and yet another roofer will be troubleshooting on Saturday. Hopefully that will be the charm, because the interior damage can not be fixed until the issue is found and properly resolved. There you have it. 

I also have posted some of the in process photos.


----------



## tinner666 (Mar 14, 2005)

If that's a dip I see where the new and old decking join in the last pic, the leaks are going to get much worse. I don't see any metal showing on the back corners of the chimney. The metal MUST exit the siding there and toss the water away from the chimney. Tight, neat very close fits there look good, but rely solely on caulk and will deteriorate.


----------



## Gary in WA (Mar 11, 2009)

Add to that the vinyl "j" appears to sit right on the roof shingles, to transfer the heat and distort, Figs. 34, 43: http://www.vinylsiding.org/PUBLICATIONS/I1_-_Vinyl_Siding_Installation_Manual_English.pdf

It appears they just cut the vinyl siding at the chimney side wall...... I wonder if they metal step-flashed it or the shed-end wall/roof.

Gary


----------



## AndyWRS (Feb 1, 2012)

This speaks volumes about the folks your dealing with.

Hes already under the gun, you would think he would get his shiat together, get this done to your liking and be done with it. It appears they have created more issues and incurred more costs. The new pics bring more Q's to the table as already indicated by others.

hang in there, there is light someplace at the end of this tunnel.


----------



## joecaption (Nov 30, 2011)

I see no J moulding on the sides of the chimmney.
J moulding under fashia sticks out past it so water can get in behind it.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

Thank you so much for the input and valuable information. It will definitely be discussed when I see him tomorrow. Hopefully he can get it resolved sooner rather than later, for both of our sakes. So close and yet so far.

Sent from my iPad using DIY Forum


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

*update*

Well, it seems I am finally roof leak free....
After one more nightmarish heavy rain episode-- luckily the interior wall was already gutted from their damage-- he finally got it fixed.
Made it through some vigorous water testing, and a couple of more heavy rains, and the water stayed outside where it belongs...
And that area of the house is now finally being able to be repaired.
What an adventure.
When I get the final roof pics, I will post the final result.

As always, thanks!!


----------



## OldNBroken (Jun 11, 2008)

Good to hear.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

*update*

Hello!
I thought I would post an update to this saga... Unfortunately it didn't have a happy ending, with the contractor doing right, and all issues resolved. It's still ongoing, but now its not a work issue, its a resolution issue with lawyers involved.

The concise version:
It's going to have to be re-roofed. The water issues came to light again in July 2012, not to long after he bolted yet again, pretty much leaving my home a trashed mess. He also didn't have the necessary inspections for the roof. Unfortunately, the roof is not the only issue. I'm knee deep in preparing a lengthy complaint to the contractor's board as well. It's the story that keeps on giving, but not in a good way.

So for those, who still saw issues, you were right! I again thank you for all of your valuable input that was given.

Yet another visit by a structural engineer was necessary, and a couple more roofing professionals have also been here. And to boot, this all brought to light my siding isn't installed correctly, and my doors are not flashed.

It's hard to believe that we are steadily approaching three years since this mess began.

At least now, in the end, there is the one saving grace that it will be eventually done properly, and that at some point, there will be an end to this nightmare.

While the flood in itself that set this rebuild in motion was a very bad experience, I would rather live through that a 100 times over, then ever go through a rebuild again.

I, however,look forward to in the end finally being able to post pictures of my properly done roof.


----------



## OldNBroken (Jun 11, 2008)

Thanks for updating us. We do like to hear how things turn out with people posting here. Unfortunately, just like people's roofs, once the problem is solved we get ignored and forgotten and it really makes us sad...:icon_cry: :icon_cry: :icon_cry: :icon_cry:


----------



## jagans (Oct 21, 2012)

Things wrong.

1. The panels are through fastened and the wrong type. These look like wall panels, not roof panels. They look really thin also.

2. The upper end of the panels should have been turned up. Cant tell what they did.

3. The upper end shoud have had a Z cleat, ant an apron flashing should have been run up under the shingle roof and been enveloped with ice dams flashing.

4. Need tight shot of flashing at base of chimney but its a pretty good chance its wrong. They would need sleepers and another deck over the T1-11 to be able to fasten the clips for a proper standing seam roof to be fastened.

THE NOMENCLATURE _*CDX *_WAS DISCONTINUED IN THE EARLY 60'S WHEN PANEL MANUFACTURERS DECIDED TO STOP USING INTERIOR GLUE. IT IS NOW 2013 

IT HAS BEEN _*CD-EXPOSURE 1*_ FOR OVER 50 YEARS. GET WITH THE PROGRAM VERNE.


----------



## steelgoddess (Nov 21, 2011)

Hard to believe this thread started so long ago. Final update. In February 2017, the repairs were made. It was a long, slow litigious process which wound up in trial finally ending in the summer of 2016. Luckily, the court ruled in my favor. I've been in the process now of repairing and finishing my home, and this was at the top of the list. -The End-


----------

