(517) 403-6875 e-mail us
- Sample report of
a structural investigation - Improper
Customer Name: Owner
Project Name: Facility
Submitted to: Owner
Submitted by Thomas R. Price P.E., of
Structural Solutions LLC, a licensed
I. Purpose of Investigation:
At the request of Owner, Thomas R. Price
P.E., of Structural Solutions LLC
inspected the Facility in the attempt to
determine whether the installation of
roof and wall materials has been done in
accoDrance with manufacturer guidelines
and appropriate quality of workmanship.
II. Description of Building:
The building in question is a metal
building originally manufactured by a
metal building manufacturer. It was
located at a different site, then
disassembled and shipped to the new site
where it was re-erected. The wall and
roof sheathing was not salvaged - new
wall and roof systems were utilized.
Materials and installation of the walls
and roof was provided by contractor. The
manufacturer of the wall and roof
materials is a leading producer of metal
The building is 70 wide by
120 long, with a symmetric gable
roof. Roof slope
is approximately 1:12 on each side of the
ridge. The roof is a 24 wide
standing seam system. Roof panels are
continuous from eave to ridge with no
intermediate panel lap splices. Panel
attachment clips are the
fixed type. Frame spacings
are 24 and 22-6.
Purlins are cold-formed zees with
approximately 5 spacings.
A stud framed one story office building
extends along the NE end of the main
building, around the SE corner, and part
way along the SE side of the main
building. This buildings roof meets
the main building NE and SE walls approx-
imately 6 below the main building
rake and eave.
Shortly after the roof was installed,
leaks in the ridge area became evident,
as well as
at least one leak along the NW eave, and
one leak in the south corner.
A second, wider ridge cap was installed
over the first in an attempt to prevent
the ridge area.
IV. Referenced Documents:
Manufacturers Instructions on
installation of the roof system.
V. Field Observations and Notes:
The inspection took place between 10:00
am and noon. Weather was partly cloudy,
with a temperature of approximately 60
°F. Present on the site was the owner, a
representative of the contractor, and Mr.
Price. Our comments relative to the
inspection of the main building are
It must be noted that all details and
materials of construction are not readily
and verifiable without some disassembly
of the ridge and eave details. No
other than removal of a small section of
ridge pan was done during the inspection.
1) Excessive distortion and oil canning
type deformations were observed in
many of the roof panels. It was noted
that the roof has undergone a lot of
2) Only one screw has been installed
between the minor ribs of the roof panels
attachment location to the eave plate.
AccoDring to the component supplier, two
screws (#5 &
#6) are required, and each should be
located adjacent to the minor rib. See
3) The roof panels do not extend
adequately past the edge of the
sculptured eave trim.
Caulk has been applied between the roof
panels, and the eave trim. This caulk
remedy the intent of the design which is
to ensure that water runs off the panels
not onto, the eave trim. Ref: component
supplier installation manual. Water can
pool just upslope of the caulk, and
siphon back up under the roof panel. A
narrower eave trim is a possible
4) At some panels, screws have been
installed through the panel near the
downslope of the outside closures. These
screws are not specified in the component
and since they directly penetrate the
building envelope, they contradict the
intent of a non-through fastened roof.
These fasteners also tend to inhibit
and contraction of the panels.
5) The fasteners described in item 4 are
in the same pattern as the standaDr
holes. If these are indeed the
pre-punched holes, then the outside
closures have been
installed too far upslope. Since the
pre-punched holes are very close to the
the panel, the outside closures may be
partially or completely off the panels.
assumes that the holes have been properly
located in fabrication. Inspection from
below. with ridge pan removed revealed an
outside closure located aside, and not
on top of, its mastic strip. Ref:
component supplier installation manual.
6) Wide (3/4 to 1) beads of
caulk/mastic have been applied between
the outside clo-
sures and the roof panels, downslope of
the closures. This material is not
the component supplier installation
manual, and should not be necessary if
the outside closures are properly
installed with double bead tape sealer
between the closure and the panel. Ref:
component supplier installation manual.
7) Items 3,4,5, and 6 indicate that the
roof panels may be too short. The
dictates that the panels must overhang
the eave strut by the thickness of the
covering plus 4-3/8, and the ridge
purlin web by 7. Ref: installation
The panel length should be verified to be
as per installation manual guideline. The
installation manual states that the
purlins at the ridge be located exactly
as detailed, and that any
mislocation can cause fouling. We suspect
that this could be the cause of the ridge
leaking problems, and a thorough
investigation of the ridge detail be
This involves some disassembly of the
region to the extent that all details
the component supplier have been complied
with. A similar investigation of the eave
regions should be
Any deviations from component supplier
installation procedures should be
verified to be
approved by the component supplier.
8) The modularity (main rib spacing) of
the panels varies from the target
as much as 1/2. Modules of
24-1/2 were measured in various
locations. This exces-
sive panel stretching is causing the main
ribs to flare out at the ends, which in
causes the excessive gap between the
inside (eave) closures and the panel. The
is likely causing at the ridge is not
visible due to the wide bead of mastic
The installation manual indicates that
fasteners into the outside closures are
not to be installed
as roof panels are laid. This is
questionable, as fastening these as
panels are laid will
help maintain modularity.
9) The panel ends at the eaves exhibit
noticeable stairstepping. This, combined
poor modularity indicate that problems
were encountered in maintaining panel
ness. Panel width adjustment techniques
are described in installation manual .
cedures are intended to make minor
adjustments as the roof is laid. More
measuring of modularity should be done to
determine if excessive adjustments were
made during installation.
The building must be verified to be
square and true prior to roof
for out of plane substructure is
described in installation manual .
Inquiries to the installers
should be made in regaDr to what
measuring was done to assure building
and substructure levelness prior to roof
installation. Ref: installation manual
10) Approximately 12 panels in the NW
region of the roof show damage from crane
straps. Some corrosion appeared to be
forming in these areas.
11) The second ridge cap did not appear
to be fastened in a manner secure enough
withstand Code required wind loads.
Documentation of design should be
for owner inspection.
12) Roof panel termination at the rake
ends have not been installed per
instructions. See Variable termination
flashing, p.26, 36. It appears that the
panel has been cut longitudinally, and
bent up under a counterflashing member.
No cutting of panels is prescribed by
installation manual details.
13) Screw holes, or possibly panel end
pre-punched holes plugged with silicone
caulk were observed in some locations at
the ridge and eave.
14) Five exterior floodlights have been
installed , with anchorage and electric
through the wall panels. These openings
should be sealed for weather tightness.
15) 3070 door on NW side has uneven
jambs. This should be repaired to assure
16) Wall panel at transition to masonry
does not appear to have adequate
Attaching this panel to masonry should be
17) Office roof to main building high
eave parapet: The main building wall
closures should be present, and ideally
should have mastic tape sealing them,
and helping to hold them in place under
pressures from ice build-up.
The apparent deviations from the
manufacturer details at the ridge may be
the cause of
the first ridge cap leak problems.
There is evidence to suspect that the
panels are too short too meet the
installation manual prescribed
overhangs of eave plate and ridge purlin,
thereby compromising the integrity
and weather tightness of the roof system.
The second ridge cap does not appear to
be fastened adequately.
Roof panels marred and distorted by
apparent heavy traffic should be
the manufacturer to determine their
Holes in roof panels plugged with caulk
is typically considered unacceptable for
non through fastened standing seam roof.
An investigation involving some
disassembly of the eave and ridge regions
undertaken to verify all details,
dimensions, and materials are in place as
by the manufacturer.
It is recommended that the panel length
be verified to be in accoDrance with
facturer guidelines, as part of the above
It is recommended that the ridge caps be
removed and replaced with materials
and details per the manufacturers
procedures, or approved retrofit
satisfactory design documentation can be
provided, regarding structural integrity
and weather tightness.
Specific remedy procedures should be
designed based upon the information
from the ridge/eave investigation, and
reviewed with the manufacturer and this
prior to any further work proceeds on the
roof. The second ridge cap may or may not
be deemed appropriate based upon the
The flaring of main ribs at the eave are
excessive to the point that weather
cannot be assured. These areas must be
remedied such that the standaDr inside
closure fits properly, or other solution
be devised and approved by the
The areas damaged by the crane straps
should, as a minimum be treated to
localized corrosion. Appropriate
procedure should be discussed with
- 1200 Troon
- Grand Rapids, MI
[ Home ] [ Engineering Services ] [ Gallery of Projects ] [ Request For Quote ] [ Resources ]
2012 Structural Solutions LLC, 1200 Troon Ct. SE
Grand Rapids, MI 49546 Kent County