Then don't read the thread. I have better things to do than to put up with your peanut gallery comments WHEN YOU'VE OBVIOUSLY NOT READ THE ENTIRE THREAD!
4300 Gallon Plywood Build (3600+ Take 2)
- Thread starter Nolapete
- Start date
Poor captmicha, between her little avatar and your last comment, I could almost hear the background music to the movie JAWS.:22_yikes: But you spared me this time and my head is still intact, so having said that Ill move my comments back to shore where its safe...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLAYvjaGGqM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLAYvjaGGqM
As I said before, contact a mold remediation company, they will have one. I was just showing you such devices do exist.
I know he is still trying to track down the leak. I am sure its depressing to keep having problems after all the work and effort he has put in this.
:iagree:
Heck, I'd be in a cage throwing poo at spectators if I had been through all that just to have a leak
I had previously taken the time to read the entire thread and am just getting caught up again. Sorry to hear about your hair pulling Pete.
Before you completely dismiss the Tramex, they do work well and could save you a lot of angst. Not trying to spend your dough for ya (that's a wife's job...you'll see - and congrats BTW), but you might think about buying one to do your testing and then just reselling or maybe "returning" it as soon as your done. Even if you resold it as lightly used you should be able to recover a significant portion of the cost.
Another approach might be to check with some of the boat builders and refurbishers down your way since they're the ones that typically buy that model. They also make a fancier one that some roofers, boat surveyors and insurance adjusters use. The smaller boat model just takes a while to test a large area but they are a better bet than anything else for leaks that you can't find with still water and dye. This is especially true with composites such as glass over wood hulls and elastomerics over wood such as in your case.
I also don't believe that your problems relate to settling but the water level test that was done when you bought the house isn't relevant either. Settling of the slab can still occur inside of the house without there being any detectable changes on the exterior, such as around the drive and walks. The surfaces have little or nothing to do with each other, especially since you don't have a 4,300 gallon tank sitting on your drive or sidewalk.
Another perspective on the settling issue is that whatever settlement occurred after your home was first built was without the effect of 4300 gallons of water being placed on it. Just because it settled once doesn't mean that adding more and more weight can't cause it to happen some more. There's a reason that engineers don't tell people to go ahead and add another floor or two to a building that was "overbuilt" unless they've inspected and tested the structure.
The design strength of your concrete also has little or nothing to do with the potential for settlement. Whether the concrete is 2500 psi or 6500 psi, failed or not, it can still settle. There are a multitude of issues that can effect the final strength of concrete, not the least of which are problems with it being placed in a uniform thickness as well as the mix itself not being what it was supposed to be. Back in the sixties, and even today, it is extremely unusual for anyone to take test cylinders of the pour and have them lab cracked to verify the mix integrity. Just because a builder or inspector says so doesn't mean that it is so. I once had to remove a slab that was poured by someone else for a new bank vault because its level and finish were out of tolerance. As we began grinding a high spot in the supposedly 12" thick slab we went right through it after removing only 1/2" of material in one spot. Apparently the inspector wasn't the one who actually poured the slab, and I've never seen one hang out all day to watch a residential pour. Again I don't believe that this is your problem but that doesn't mean that it is totally impossible. That assumption is just not valid.
The Ames coating that you applied I would also tend to discount, presuming that you followed all of the recommended application and re-application procedures. I've not used it but have seen larger storage tanks where it was used with very effective results. The major difference being that they didn't have a huge piece of dissimilar material glued into their side wall.
One problem when applying a buildup of viscous sealants, paints or adhesives is that the portion that is exposed can very often dry and cure before the underlying material has a chance to completely de-gas. This can happen even with something as thin as sprayed on contact cement that is put down in too thick a coat before covering with a piece of plastic laminate. This is a familiar cause of failure in HPL applications that are a lot easier to manage than the placement of your mother slab of acrylic.
Often this can also be due to temperature change between the time of application and the time that the cure is occurring. For example, when working with epoxy based fiberglass resins part of the trick to keeping a clear finish is to heat the materials beforehand and apply them while the temperature is falling.
The reason for doing this is that the additives that make the epoxy flow will evaporate and/or bubble out more efficiently as the material is cooling and contracting. If done in the reverse fashion the expanding material (as it warms) will often trap micro bubbles throughout the mix leaving a less than optimal clarity as well as a less than best strength. In composite construction, especially where wood is the substrate, the cell walls of the wood will expand and de-gas as it warms contributing to the micro bubble population. When the wood has already been warmed before being coated its cell walls will contract and tend to draw the coating into a better bond with it.
This is further exasperated by expanding cellulose (wood) that contains higher levels of moisture, such as in construction grade lumber that is frequently used while containing much higher moisture levels than what is normally used in building furniture for example. A sure way to ruin a wood finish is to apply it over a piece of material that is not at least at a moisture equilibrium with its surroundings, like say a piece of wood that may have been lying outside or on a concrete floor in the garage before being brought in and used in a house with air conditioning or forced air heat.
Obviously this is all hypothetical since even with all of your posts and pictures it's impossible for anyone to have as good a feel for the potential culprit as yourself, but I'm just throwing it out there for your consideration. My gut suspicion would be the seal around that monster piece of acrylic since it was such a bear to handle in the first place, and everything else that you've done was much more easily controlled. I've also experienced situations when working with marine sealants on boats where too thick of a single application has remained uncured for several months behind a thick outer skin of material that had cured. Think of it as transferring the sealant from one caulk tube to another. The material in the tube doesn't dry out because it's deprived of exposure to the atmosphere. If your sealing of the window inadvertently created a condition such as this you may well find uncured sealant where you thought that there was no chance for it to exist. Just because you wish it and insist that it isn't so doesn't make it happen. You may well discover that two of these conditions have conspired against you with the window sealant trapping uncured material behind it as well as developing gas channel leaks.
Good luck.
Before you completely dismiss the Tramex, they do work well and could save you a lot of angst. Not trying to spend your dough for ya (that's a wife's job...you'll see - and congrats BTW), but you might think about buying one to do your testing and then just reselling or maybe "returning" it as soon as your done. Even if you resold it as lightly used you should be able to recover a significant portion of the cost.
Another approach might be to check with some of the boat builders and refurbishers down your way since they're the ones that typically buy that model. They also make a fancier one that some roofers, boat surveyors and insurance adjusters use. The smaller boat model just takes a while to test a large area but they are a better bet than anything else for leaks that you can't find with still water and dye. This is especially true with composites such as glass over wood hulls and elastomerics over wood such as in your case.
I also don't believe that your problems relate to settling but the water level test that was done when you bought the house isn't relevant either. Settling of the slab can still occur inside of the house without there being any detectable changes on the exterior, such as around the drive and walks. The surfaces have little or nothing to do with each other, especially since you don't have a 4,300 gallon tank sitting on your drive or sidewalk.
Another perspective on the settling issue is that whatever settlement occurred after your home was first built was without the effect of 4300 gallons of water being placed on it. Just because it settled once doesn't mean that adding more and more weight can't cause it to happen some more. There's a reason that engineers don't tell people to go ahead and add another floor or two to a building that was "overbuilt" unless they've inspected and tested the structure.
The design strength of your concrete also has little or nothing to do with the potential for settlement. Whether the concrete is 2500 psi or 6500 psi, failed or not, it can still settle. There are a multitude of issues that can effect the final strength of concrete, not the least of which are problems with it being placed in a uniform thickness as well as the mix itself not being what it was supposed to be. Back in the sixties, and even today, it is extremely unusual for anyone to take test cylinders of the pour and have them lab cracked to verify the mix integrity. Just because a builder or inspector says so doesn't mean that it is so. I once had to remove a slab that was poured by someone else for a new bank vault because its level and finish were out of tolerance. As we began grinding a high spot in the supposedly 12" thick slab we went right through it after removing only 1/2" of material in one spot. Apparently the inspector wasn't the one who actually poured the slab, and I've never seen one hang out all day to watch a residential pour. Again I don't believe that this is your problem but that doesn't mean that it is totally impossible. That assumption is just not valid.
The Ames coating that you applied I would also tend to discount, presuming that you followed all of the recommended application and re-application procedures. I've not used it but have seen larger storage tanks where it was used with very effective results. The major difference being that they didn't have a huge piece of dissimilar material glued into their side wall.
One problem when applying a buildup of viscous sealants, paints or adhesives is that the portion that is exposed can very often dry and cure before the underlying material has a chance to completely de-gas. This can happen even with something as thin as sprayed on contact cement that is put down in too thick a coat before covering with a piece of plastic laminate. This is a familiar cause of failure in HPL applications that are a lot easier to manage than the placement of your mother slab of acrylic.
Often this can also be due to temperature change between the time of application and the time that the cure is occurring. For example, when working with epoxy based fiberglass resins part of the trick to keeping a clear finish is to heat the materials beforehand and apply them while the temperature is falling.
The reason for doing this is that the additives that make the epoxy flow will evaporate and/or bubble out more efficiently as the material is cooling and contracting. If done in the reverse fashion the expanding material (as it warms) will often trap micro bubbles throughout the mix leaving a less than optimal clarity as well as a less than best strength. In composite construction, especially where wood is the substrate, the cell walls of the wood will expand and de-gas as it warms contributing to the micro bubble population. When the wood has already been warmed before being coated its cell walls will contract and tend to draw the coating into a better bond with it.
This is further exasperated by expanding cellulose (wood) that contains higher levels of moisture, such as in construction grade lumber that is frequently used while containing much higher moisture levels than what is normally used in building furniture for example. A sure way to ruin a wood finish is to apply it over a piece of material that is not at least at a moisture equilibrium with its surroundings, like say a piece of wood that may have been lying outside or on a concrete floor in the garage before being brought in and used in a house with air conditioning or forced air heat.
Obviously this is all hypothetical since even with all of your posts and pictures it's impossible for anyone to have as good a feel for the potential culprit as yourself, but I'm just throwing it out there for your consideration. My gut suspicion would be the seal around that monster piece of acrylic since it was such a bear to handle in the first place, and everything else that you've done was much more easily controlled. I've also experienced situations when working with marine sealants on boats where too thick of a single application has remained uncured for several months behind a thick outer skin of material that had cured. Think of it as transferring the sealant from one caulk tube to another. The material in the tube doesn't dry out because it's deprived of exposure to the atmosphere. If your sealing of the window inadvertently created a condition such as this you may well find uncured sealant where you thought that there was no chance for it to exist. Just because you wish it and insist that it isn't so doesn't make it happen. You may well discover that two of these conditions have conspired against you with the window sealant trapping uncured material behind it as well as developing gas channel leaks.
Good luck.
