Face Sealed barrier wall

[FredSly]

FBC Residential 2004 Chapter 14: Does this code address "Face Sealed barrier wall systems". I cannot find anywhere, were it addresses this in particular other than 1404, thank you .

[Jerry Peck - Codeman]

Chapter 14 of the 2004 Florida Building Code, Residential, addresses Heating and Cooling Equipment.

Are you meaning EIFS systems?

There are two basic types of EIFS systems: a) drainage systems ... which work similar to Portland cement stucco systems in that there is (is supposed to be) a drainage plane behind the cladding system; b) barrier systems ... which are supposed to work by having a finish coating which is "the" "barrier" intended to stop water from getting past 'the barrier'.

[FredSly]

Jerry thank you for getting to this timely. No to EFIS. I have an engineering firm is stating that a "Face-sealed barrier wall" is an approved method for a wood frame wire lath and stucco assembly. This would be similar to an article by Stucco Institute found here: Hope this helps.

[Jerry Peck - Codeman]

[FredSly]

Thank you Jerry for your answer much appreciated. I am aware of Bob K's position since his axe is ground in that way. Curiously however in his last paragraph Bob mentions the " Sealed Cladding System Installation Specifications". I would assume he is referring to his, "Sealed Cladding System" that has received Florida Product Approval FL# 30710. [url]FL30710_R2_II_UGL19001.2 2020 FBC Eval DRYLOK Extreme final.pdf[/url]. This system appears to be nothing more than a "Coating" and not a "System" , can you opine on that? Other than this approved method are you aware of any other reference in the 2004 FBC Residential Code that deals with "Sealed Systems" ? I hope I am articulating this in manner that is correct, if not my apologies, TY

[Jerry Peck - Codeman]

Fred,

First, a question: you've referred to the 2004 Florida Building Code, but are applying a newer method - if New work is being done, the current Florida Building Code Edition would be applicable.

[FredSly]

I have a 3 story, coastal constructed wood frame wire lath and stucco project done during the 2004 code cycle that has experienced sever water intrusion issues. The opposing party has had an engineering firm say that the reason for the damage was caused by the homeowner's neglect in maintaining a "barrier wall system". I personally have always understood a "barrier wall system" as one that would be similar to a granite or limestone cladding and or original EFIS style cladding, not a "wire lath and stucco" system.

[Jerry Peck - Codeman]

[FredSly]

This was a remodel/recladding of a wood sided structure. Unfortunately the only records that can be found by the AHJ are the permit application that says: EXTERIOR REMODEL- ADD NEW FACADE.

[Jerry Peck - Codeman]

Is it an older house with the stucco over the original wood exterior being done in 2004; or is it a 2004 house and the stucco was done later?

No other electronic or paper permit information, or older information on microfiche?

What city/county?

Have you brought out a stucco contractor to take core samples to show what was used and to identify each layer of the application? You may be equipped to take the core samples yourself, however, you will want a stucco contractor with you to make proper repairs where the core samples were taken.

You need to be able to document what the core samples show was done "on that specific" house, not set up a discussion about what was 'supposed' to be there or how it 'typically' was done at the time - you want to be able to show 'these are core samples from (give location on wall and which wall each sample was taken from), and the core samples show (what was found at each core sample location, and the consistency or inconsistency of what was found - inconsistency in core samples shows an inconsistency in the work, and inconsistency in the work is not good; consistency in the work can be used as an indicator of what was done ... whether done right or wrong).

If you find consistency in the core samples, then you can show that the core sample consistencies indicates the following system was installed (then describe the system), and that system is in compliance/not in compliance with the requirements stated in the code at the time of installation/application.

But there are a lot of unknowns right now.

[FredSly]

Jerry,

House constructed in 1983 with what appears to be T-1-11 4X8 siding over wood frame with 1/2 CDX substrate. In 2005 the owner of the house has the home re-sided with paper back WL&S. applied directly over old T-1-11 siding with plastic beading used at corners (not rodded at corners). Remove's all spindle type exterior railings/balconies /stairways to stucco cladded knee walls. Horizontal/Vertical plane intersections have no weep for stucco buckets conditions, no weep screeds/expansions joints/ dissimilar material interfaces etc. or a complete disregard for typical ASTM C926 & C1063 requirements. The owner of the house at the time 2005 thru & 2014 had the house is painted twice 2010 and 2014 with some on crack repairs and repointing of sealants, resealing windows /doors and stucco delamination repairs reported by the neighbors. 2014 my client purchase property. 2 years later in 2016 client starts some remodeling work that uncovered severe water intrusion, wood rot with significant exterior wall structural damage. Client has filed a failure to disclose lawsuit against seller for the water intrusion/structural issues. Sellers experts claim (engineering company) that stucco system applied in 2006 is a “Face Sealed Barrier Wall System” and that during the time that that the client owned the home they failed to maintain the structure in a manner outlined in the Florida Lath & Plaster Bureau Technical Bulletin TB-ST-04-12 “Stucco Building Maintenance” and not performing crack repairs.

Since there is no permit/design drawings/specifications/NOA etc. for the new façade in 2006 (2004 code in affect) for the so called “Face Sealed barrier Wall” how do I determine if this “system” is an approved method. A footnote; the last paragraph of the aforementioned “Stucco Institute’s” Sealed Cladding Article that these systems “require the elimination of plastic type corner beads with inhibitive flange embedment properties” , plastic corner beads were used everywhere as well as horizontal plastic M style expansion joints. It as also states; “stucco contractor to provide the waterproofing contractor the grooves and reliefs necessary to obtain a subsequent seal with a quality sealant”. No grooves were presented. It is also goes on to mention coating which I assume are the coating mentioned in aforementioned “Stucco Institutes” NOA for their “Sealed Wall System”. The paint applied appears to be regular exterior latex grade coatings without doing an lab tests or deposing painting contractor.

I hope this gives a clearer picture and thank you again for you very generous time.

[Jerry Peck - Codeman]

[FredSly]

Jerry,

Thank you so much for opining on this for me and being patient with my description. You area treasure trove of information.

Here is a web site that explains my reference to the term "Stucco Bucket" a vertical plane/horizontal plane intersection.

Again thank you for taking the time to respond, very much appreciated!