Came Behind Experienced Inspector

[David A. Andersen]

What was the cause of moisture intrusion. Windows or condensation?
24% -- 50% may or may not be condensation.

For those who ask what did we do without infrared cameras, my answer is "infrared thermometer". I found just as much stuff before infrared as I do now. Quality of home inspectors assures this. It also assures accurate interpretation of infrared thermography.

The poster that talked about using their senses, the receptors on your skin are far more sensitive than the sensitivity of an IR camera.

I am not disputing John's find, but I'd like to point out some considerations. Delta T was discussed quite a bit in this thread about moisture. It should be noted that a Delta T is not always required in moisture detection. Evaporative cooling does not require a Delta T, it requires a Delta h. This causes evaporation (which cools). Actually a high Delta T may dehumidify the conditions and make detection even more difficult in some instances.
Depending on the source of moisture intrusion/condensation there may not even be a good cool spot. Evaporation removes heat from its substance, Condensation increases temperature of the substance and will make the anomaly very faint.

In Charlie's scenario, he had a very low relative humidity reading from his moisture meter. This does not necessarily mean there is not still a water intrusion problem. Depending on the weather conditions and the conditions of the leak source, at the time of testing the moisture may have been almost completely evaporated. This summer we went for months without rain and temperatures exceeding 100°. There was no chance in hell for me to find a moisture issue with my IR camera due to rainfall.

The example of a former water leak still identifiable is a good example (Bruce King). When materials become damaged from moisture, their conductivity may change and their thermal capacity characteristics may be modified. Is this still a defect? Yes. Would you be wrong to call it moisture? Yes, if it's no longer leaking. The moral to the story is that you cannot accurately interpret most of these conditions with the camera when you do a qualitative analysis. You must put your camera away and get out your flashlight and screwdriver and get to work.

Moisture is probably one of the hardest things to deal with under any circumstance. The infrared camera doesn't make it all that much easier in many circumstances.

If I find suspected moisture with the camera and have low moisture readings (below 80% Rh) and I cannot find the active source of intrusion, I indicate further testing is required when testing conditions are more appropriate. You cannot always do and infrared inspection in conjunction with the home inspection. The camera is a big help in direct thing you to the source, but will not give you a definitive answer every time.

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by dandersen

The camera is a big help in direct thing you to the source, but will not give you a definitive answer every time.

True. Always confirm. I would say that there are sometimes when I find
hidden moisture that would be missed by ANY inspector. There are no
stains and in very unlikely areas.

I have come behind many inspectors and found moisture when they swore
there was none. Why spend thousands of dollars for a tool that
does not supply a superior service?

[cyezza]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

The IR camera helps the inspector discover things that are normally
covered within the SOP, but in a greater way.

To those who see the camera as a benefit because of it's ability to
find defects, there is no insult. To those who have an insecurity
about their self esteem, it makes them feel insecure and offended
to imagine that they are missing things during their inspections.
Relax and try to digest the information without emotions blocking
the reality of the facts.

Obviously you missed my point as well as others. As far as insecurity about my self esteem, I walk away after every inspection with the feeling I have done my best, so have you been insecure for nine years and feel the camera has helped? Man you really hit below the belt sometimes. I appreciate all your valuable input about many subjects on this message board. One day I hope to have a camera too. I'm sure you didn't mean it as an insult but many have taken it that way. Have a nice day

[Michael J. Ashburn]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

True. Always confirm. I would say that there are sometimes when I find
hidden moisture that would be missed by ANY inspector. There are no
stains and in very unlikely areas.

I have come behind many inspectors and found moisture when they swore
there was none. Why spend thousands of dollars for a tool that
does not supply a superior service?

Yes, follow up is most imprortant. You mentioned earlier that you were scared as hell seeing what you could have missed before. I as well. I use the IT camera on every home to assist in my evaluation.

I am going to inspect a home that a "green contractor", he is the real deal, finished in Pittsburgh. I sat with this guy for 1 1/2 hours yesterday and learned a great deal about "green building, properly sized equiptment, & building envelopes". I will post any TI pics that I find issue with.

[Charley L. Bottger]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

OK... thanks for your concern.

I will continue to post images from time to time about my IR
findings, and if you like, you can continue to suspect my motives
and give me fatherly council. I don't mind.

If someone says my moisture meter and camera did not reveal
moisture, that's fine. If I respond and say they are wrong, that
is OK too. Live and let live.

That's just fine John enough said

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by cyezza

Obviously you missed my point as well as others. As far as insecurity about my self esteem, I walk away after every inspection with the feeling I have done my best, so have you been insecure for nine years and feel the camera has helped? Man you really hit below the belt sometimes. I appreciate all your valuable input about many subjects on this message board. One day I hope to have a camera too. I'm sure you didn't mean it as an insult but many have taken it that way. Have a nice day

I am simply responding to the fact... that when I post some IR pictures and
say this tools helps to find more defects than can be seen with the naked eye...
that I get responses about them being insulted.

The feeling of being insulted is a personal problem that people read into
the message. There is no need to feel offended.

If I went back to inspecting without an IR camera, I would feel half blind.
I know what it can do.

It says in the InterNACHI Thermal Imaging Agreement:

Thermal imaging is a technology that allows the InterNACHI INSPECTOR
to show you things about your home that no one can show you using other
inspection methods

It is not an insult, it is simply a fact.

[cyezza]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

I am simply responding to the fact... that when I post some IR pictures and
say this tools helps to find more defects than can be seen with the naked eye...
that I get responses about them being insulted.

The feeling of being insulted is a personal problem that people read into
the message. There is no need to feel offended.

If I went back to inspecting without an IR camera, I would feel half blind.
I know what it can do.

It says in the InterNACHI Thermal Imaging Agreement:

Thermal imaging is a technology that allows the InterNACHI INSPECTOR
to show you things about your home that no one can show you using other
inspection methods

It is not an insult, it is simply a fact.

Ok John

[William J. Decker]

Originally Posted by mashburn

I am going to inspect a home that a "green contractor", he is the real deal, finished in Pittsburgh. I sat with this guy for 1 1/2 hours yesterday and learned a great deal about "green building, properly sized equiptment, & building envelopes". I will post any TI pics that I find issue with.

All this kind of stuff was around way before the "green" fad.

In our area, there are many house, usually built in the early 50s, that are brick venner and the frame sheathing asphalt impregnated fiberboard and there is no insulation (just an empty stud bay) with mesh plaster interior wall.

Back then, heating prices were dirt cheap and the cost of "insulation" was too expensive, comparatively speaking.

So, even though the concepts of building envelope and hygric buffer capacity and vapor barriers and semi-permiable membranes and the like were known, no architect cared about them because there was no profit in designing the house well.

This is the housing market that I work in, in great part.

Thermal imaging is a tool (and just a tool) that will help the inspector to transition to these new requirements for our profession.

Just like there are builders who have been building for 30 years (but building the same house they were 30 years ago, with regards to the envelope and such) there will also be HIs who inspect the same way they did years ago.

But times, materials, best practices and designs change.

And "codes" rarely reflect or represent "best practices". They are, at least im my area, more politically and "union worker" based than based upon the latest understandings of building science.

To be professional, HI also must change.

Any thermal imaging courses, for HIs, must take these things into account.

We have to be, pretty much, as "up to speed" as the new architects and the builders who put it all together.

I am finding that many "old school" builders have very little, if any, clue.

And there are only about half the architects who have a clue.

New house, being built to the "most cutting edge" "green" and energy efficient standards. I was doing a draw inspection. Got a chance to talk to the architect (he wanted to be present for the inspection). Only about 1/2 built.

This guy had included some real interesting design. Post and beam. Double walls with interior wall thermal mass (concrete, 3 feet thick). Conical heat pump pipes implaced 30 feet down (into the water table) and all kinds of cutting edge (read: bleeding edge) stuff.

But the guy still had standard, conventionally vented water heaters, not the new 98+ tankless units. Still has extensive mold growing on the 8 x 10 posts and beams (didn't bother to cover the structure during rain and many posts were partially rotted). Still using just sprayed asphalt "waterproofing" instead of asphalt emulsion with membrane waterproofing (the former is not waterproofing, just "damp proofing").

In other words, he was all "cutting edge", but hadn't taken the time to learn about the "old school" techniques that still work.

BTW: He was using clay roofing tile, but hadn't designed sound proofing in the attic. The place will be really loud. There are houses in this area, built in the 1910s, which used jute burlap containing horse hair (still in place and working great) as tile roof soundproofing. He "didn't think about that".

Some things to think about.

[Dan Bowers, CMI]

I'm looking at the Flir Bcam-SD vs the Fluke TiR ot Ti10 (within $100 of each other). Never seen then head to head. Has anybody else??

I like Flukes picture in a picture. I like Flir's temp alarm and longer battery life.

Any thoughts.

[Charley L. Bottger]

Originally Posted by dbowers

I'm looking at the Flir Bcam-SD vs the Fluke TiR ot Ti10 (within $100 of each other). Never seen then head to head. Has anybody else??

I like Flukes picture in a picture. I like Flir's temp alarm and longer battery life.

Any thoughts.

Dan I bought the B-cam to start with did not do enough research on my own just listened to what others were saying, big mistake. Do your own research the Lower resolution cameras are fine if you are only using them for hi Inspections but in the commercial area they do not fit the bill Flat roof commercial buildings electrical motor control centers where temp is critical buy what fits your business plan the first go around.

BTW will be ordering my upgraded camera this next week

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

I think the original intent of this thread was to show that the use of IR as an inspection tool gives a great advantage to us, over those who are not using it. Not to say one inspector is better than another, but certainly better equipped.

IR imaging is simply the "cutting edge" of what may well become a standard part of future home inspections.

Roughly 15% of the homes I inspect have moisture intrusion issues that have gone undetected. I can say with reasonable certainty, that without the use of IR, in many cases the intrusion would not have been discovered during the normal course of a home inspection.

[Charley L. Bottger]

Originally Posted by jpope

I think the original intent of this thread was to show that the use of IR as an inspection tool gives a great advantage to us, over those who are not using it. Not to say one inspector is better than another, but certainly better equipped.

IR imaging is simply the "cutting edge" of what may well become a standard part of future home inspections.

Very nice statement wished everyone on this board had your attitude.


Roughly 15% of the homes I inspect have moisture intrusion issues that have gone undetected. I can say with reasonable certainty, that without the use of IR, in many cases the intrusion would not have been discovered during the normal course of a home inspection.

Jeff I certainly agree the day of the screw driver and the flashlight is being replaced with the IR camera for the serious Hi in this business for the long haul, the camera will be common place.

[Larry D. Kage]

Originally Posted by cbottger

Dan I bought the B-cam to start with did not do enough research on my own just listened to what others were saying, big mistake. Do your own research the Lower resolution cameras are fine if you are only using them for hi Inspections but in the commercial area they do not fit the bill Flat roof commercial buildings electrical motor control centers where temp is critical buy what fits your business plan the first go around.

BTW will be ordering my upgraded camera this next week

Good advice. I did the same thing, listening to others. Fortunately within 2 weeks I was able to return the camera to FLIR and upgrade according to my business plan.

[asargisian]

If you can't afford a IR camera at least invest in a good Moisture meter, run it down and across the walls especially the bathrooms, kitchen,attics space, and other areas of the home. I just spent 439.00 for a moisture meter from Professional Equipment, it has a LED readout and also it comes with a light detection to verify high moisture content or not.

[asargisian]

Originally Posted by jpope

I think the original intent of this thread was to show that the use of IR as an inspection tool gives a great advantage to us, over those who are not using it. Not to say one inspector is better than another, but certainly better equipped.

IR imaging is simply the "cutting edge" of what may well become a standard part of future home inspections.

Roughly 15% of the homes I inspect have moisture intrusion issues that have gone undetected. I can say with reasonable certainty, that without the use of IR, in many cases the intrusion would not have been discovered during the normal course of a home inspection.

I have to agree with you for sure Jeff..very well said. I just purchased the B-CAM SD and I'm going to ITC for my level-1 course in 2 weeks, in hoping to climb the ladder of the future of technology..and I will assist any inspectors in our area who need to use my services, once I have taken the course.