New code requirement
Was at a local training for energy codes. And this will tick off the sheetrockers.
No more inset stapling of the batts. New code face stapling of the batt is required per the 2009 energy code. Just thought I would pass this on. Does not bother me in the least.
we've had that issue locally the past year with guys not understanding the sealing requirements.
Being a layman it just makes more since to me to do it that way and less likly to put holes in the insulations vaper barrier that way.
Things are getting tighter these days.
There are entire companies dedicated to helping the builders meet the new codes.
I think it came up in response to this; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...9yRrrdP1VBztDg
OTOH, lol; "4.2.1 Insulation batts and blankets or the flanges of insulation batts or blankets shall not be applied to the face of framing members to which gypsum panel products are to be attached.” From; http://www.lafargenorthamerica.com/G...%20English.pdf Is the current version up-dated with a change?
For those that think the facing requires stapling/complete coverage like an air barrier rather than a vapor barrier/retarder;
"Magnitude of Vapor Diffusion and Air Transport of Vapor
The differences in the significance and magnitude vapor diffusion and
air transported moisture are typically misunderstood. Air movement as
a moisture transport mechanism is typically far more important than
vapor diffusion in many (but not all) conditions. The movement of water
vapor through a 1-inch square hole as a result of a 10 Pascal air
pressure differential is 100 times greater than the movement of water
vapor as a result of vapor diffusion through a 32-square-foot sheet of
gypsum board under normal heating or cooling conditions (see Figure
In most climates, if the movement of moisture-laden air into a wall or
building assembly is eliminated, movement of moisture by vapor diffusion
is not likely to be significant. The notable exceptions are hot-humid
climates or rain wetted walls experiencing solar heating.
Furthermore, the amount of vapor which diffuses through a building
component is a direct function of area. That is, if 90 percent of the
building enclosure surface area is covered with a vapor retarder, then
that vapor retarder is 90 percent effective. In other words, continuity of
the vapor retarder is not as significant as the continuity of the air barrier.
For instance, polyethylene film which may have tears and numerous
punctures present will act as an effective vapor barrier, whereas at
the same time it is a poor air barrier. Similarly, the kraft-facing on fiberglass
batts installed in exterior walls acts as an effective vapor retarder,
in spite of the numerous gaps and joints in the kraft-facing.
It is possible and often practical to use one material as the air barrier
and a different material as the vapor retarder. However, the air barrier
must be continuous and free from holes, whereas the vapor retarder
need not be." From; pp.5, http://www.buildingscience.com/docum...researchreport
|All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:30 AM.|
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.