3 ms·

> The cladding can not stop any water... The fact that the cladding does help in blocking rain... Clearly you are using some words differently than I do, but i

> The cladding can not stop any water... The fact that the cladding does help in blocking rain... Clearly you are using some words differently than I do, but it is not clear to me which ones. >...blocking rain is just a nice bonus to its primary function. In our house and our neighbor's houses, blocking rainwater is its primary function - we do not live in a desert. > Or if you have shingles on your roof that leak (or get blown off in a storm), they can still block UV, but there will be dripping. And that's why you want the control layer(s) further in. And that is when you need to fix your roof, regardless of what is underneath. In your replies here, you seem to be trying to turn this into a discussion about water vapor, but I have made it very clear that a) my questions are about what the author has to say about rain and water, and b) the author himself makes a distinction between water and vapor control. Tellingly, you have nothing to say about this quote from the article: "Figure 2: "The Perfect Roof"—The perfect roof is sometime referred to as an “inverted roof” since the rainwater control layer is under the insulation and ballast." [my emphasis.]

throw0101a 5y ago
> In our house and our neighbor's houses, blocking rainwater is its primary function - we do not live in a desert. Wherever you live the sun shines, and UV damage can be extensive against materials that are not designed against it. Cladding is about physical protection to the layers underneath. > And that is when you need to fix your roof, regardless of what is underneath. Yes, when you notice it. The shingles may be leaking into the roof structure without you seeing it for a while. Then once the roof has disintegrated, the leakage may go into the attic, which most people don't visit/inspect very often. So by the time it gets to the ceiling in the livable space, where it is actually noticeable, there could be a lot of damage done. > "Figure 2: "The Perfect Roof"—The perfect roof is sometime referred to as an “inverted roof” since the rainwater control layer is under the insulation and ballast." [my emphasis.] You can call the things Foo, Bar, Baz, or whatever you want. The important points are the principals in the design and the order in which the different layers are (ideally) put together. If you want to argue Joe Lstiburek, be my guest: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Lstiburek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Lstiburek
- mannykannot 5y ago
  >>>...blocking rain is just a nice bonus to its primary function. >> In our house and our neighbor's houses, blocking rainwater is its primary function - we do not live in a desert. > Wherever you live the sun shines, and UV damage can be extensive against materials that are not designed against it. Cladding is about physical protection to the layers underneath. This is a non-sequitur on at least two levels. Firstly, regardless of the truth of your statement about UV, it does nothing to address the point I was making here. If our houses were stripped of their cladding, they would soon fail - from rainwater damage, long before UV took its toll. Secondly, it is yet another attempt to avoid the overall issue, which is the author's position on the placement of the rain (not vapor or UV) barrier. You seem to think that you can make an argument by quoting out of context and then stating some vaguely related fact, but, unless that fact has relevance, it does not work. Your comment about roof repair is of the same type. > You can call the things Foo, Bar, Baz, or whatever you want. This is just ridiculous. You are not even trying to address the question. > If you want to argue Joe Lstiburek, be my guest: I am not arguing with Joe Lstiburek, I asked a question about something he wrote, and have ended up arguing with you about what you mistakenly think would work as answers to that question. Your replies make it clear that you are no Joe Lstiburek.

throw0101a 5y ago

> In our house and our neighbor's houses, blocking rainwater is its primary function - we do not live in a desert. Wherever you live the sun shines, and UV damage can be extensive against materials that are not designed against it. Cladding is about physical protection to the layers underneath. > And that is when you need to fix your roof, regardless of what is underneath. Yes, when you notice it. The shingles may be leaking into the roof structure without you seeing it for a while. Then once the roof has disintegrated, the leakage may go into the attic, which most people don't visit/inspect very often. So by the time it gets to the ceiling in the livable space, where it is actually noticeable, there could be a lot of damage done. > "Figure 2: "The Perfect Roof"—The perfect roof is sometime referred to as an “inverted roof” since the rainwater control layer is under the insulation and ballast." [my emphasis.] You can call the things Foo, Bar, Baz, or whatever you want. The important points are the principals in the design and the order in which the different layers are (ideally) put together. If you want to argue Joe Lstiburek, be my guest: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Lstiburek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Lstiburek

mannykannot 5y ago
>>>...blocking rain is just a nice bonus to its primary function. >> In our house and our neighbor's houses, blocking rainwater is its primary function - we do not live in a desert. > Wherever you live the sun shines, and UV damage can be extensive against materials that are not designed against it. Cladding is about physical protection to the layers underneath. This is a non-sequitur on at least two levels. Firstly, regardless of the truth of your statement about UV, it does nothing to address the point I was making here. If our houses were stripped of their cladding, they would soon fail - from rainwater damage, long before UV took its toll. Secondly, it is yet another attempt to avoid the overall issue, which is the author's position on the placement of the rain (not vapor or UV) barrier. You seem to think that you can make an argument by quoting out of context and then stating some vaguely related fact, but, unless that fact has relevance, it does not work. Your comment about roof repair is of the same type. > You can call the things Foo, Bar, Baz, or whatever you want. This is just ridiculous. You are not even trying to address the question. > If you want to argue Joe Lstiburek, be my guest: I am not arguing with Joe Lstiburek, I asked a question about something he wrote, and have ended up arguing with you about what you mistakenly think would work as answers to that question. Your replies make it clear that you are no Joe Lstiburek.