Author |
Message |
   
Defsams (Defsams)
New member Username: Defsams
Post Number: 3 Registered: 07-2009
| Posted on Wednesday, July 08, 2009 - 09:42 am: |
|
Tonyeriepa that's what I was looking for. Thanks! |
   
Tonyeriepa (Tonyeriepa)
Member Username: Tonyeriepa
Post Number: 21 Registered: 03-2007
| Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 02:04 pm: |
|
I was watching a synthetic slate roof (by a manufacturer whose name begins with "I") being put on a house recently in Chautauqua NY and I noticed, that because of overlap and required nail positioning, each plastic slate ends up having four nails in it (because two from the overlying course catch the corners). That would suggest that four nails are needed to give these plastic slates a decent degree of structural stability. Inserting plastics as replacement slates would only allow you one slate hook (or at most two vertically aligned nails in the gap between slates in the overlying course) to attach them with. That could be a problem because they might be predisposed to deforming and/or flying off the roof easier? |
   
Kwhord (Kwhord)
Senior Member Username: Kwhord
Post Number: 238 Registered: 10-2006
| Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 01:31 pm: |
|
If they are making an argument for synthetic slate, they should not be working on the project. |
   
Braymer (Braymer)
Senior Member Username: Braymer
Post Number: 123 Registered: 09-2008
| Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 11:23 am: |
|
Try this link, pretty sure it is the roofing guidelines page at nps.gov. Heres the link> http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/tps/standguide/restore/restore_roofs.htm#top They are pretty clear for sure::text says this:: NOT Recommended Failing to reuse intact slate or tile when only the roofing substrate needs replacement. Using a substitute material for the replacement part that does not convey the visual appearance of the surviving parts of the roof or that is physically or chemically incompatible. Commercially available modern shingles and shakes are for the most part machine-made. Roofing products with rustic split faces are not appropriate for historic preservation projects. especially this item AGAIN: NOT RECOMMENDED-- Using a substitute material for the replacement part that does not convey the visual appearance of the surviving parts of the roof or that is physically or chemically incompatible. Also, it is just plain ugly compared to real slate, real stone.. Most people with a clue can see the difference right away. Just get a good, reputable slater out there and let them do it right. If the roofer is suggesting this product, they dont belong there. |
   
David_spradlin (David_spradlin)
Advanced Member Username: David_spradlin
Post Number: 49 Registered: 06-2007
| Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 10:34 am: |
|
I can't imagine Ecostar would warranty their product being used as a repair material in a completely different roof system. Like Braymer said, its hard enough to get a manufacturer like that to honor their warranties under "normal" conditions. I don't see you having any recourse if this ugly experiment fails. You can be confident in a slates performance based on track record alone, never mind the distributors warranty. You can't say that about any synthetics. |
   
Braymer (Braymer)
Senior Member Username: Braymer
Post Number: 122 Registered: 09-2008
| Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 08:41 am: |
|
The color will never really match up. The 50 year warranties they claim have not been time proven, look up the warranties online for the product, they are very vague and in cases of storm damage, look out. I have seen them curled up and warped after 10 years in some cases. The heat from the adjacent real slates could curl these up even quicker. If you pay the labor for a slater to be up there, why not use the correct materials. Slate has been time proven - many types are known to last over 100 years. Sliding pieces of plastic into a traditional roofing system is a dumb idea. The historic preservation guidelines for National Register properties are pretty clear, you should be able to find more guidelines and rules for maintenance of thyese sites online- either your State SHPO office or the National Park Service site. They are pretty clear on materials that should be used. When you have a wood shingle roof , you wouldnt try to blend in synthetic materials,, you would fix it correctly with the same materials. If it was wood clapboard siding, that composite stuff would be out of the question also. If the property is Listed on the National Register, there are plenty of rules for maintenance that should protect the integrity of this place. Not Sure about Maryland, but New York's rules are pretty clear about listed properties. |
   
Defsams (Defsams)
New member Username: Defsams
Post Number: 2 Registered: 07-2009
| Posted on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 - 07:50 am: |
|
Those are good reasons, but I was looking for something like, synthetic slate must installed over a certain membrane or sheathing or it will fail...that it will expand and contract at different rates than stone, causing cracking/breakage...that the "slates" are installed in a way that is not compatible with a true slate roof installation...that mixing materials like this is work that cannot be warranted...any of this true? Not looking for excuses to approve, looking for reasons to insist on real slate. Thanks |
   
Old_school (Old_school)
Senior Member Username: Old_school
Post Number: 171 Registered: 01-2009
| Posted on Monday, July 06, 2009 - 07:21 pm: |
|
Size, Weight, thickness, texture, color,...How many reasons do you want? Why put gasoline in your car tank? Wouldn't diesel work just as well? |
   
Defsams (Defsams)
New member Username: Defsams
Post Number: 1 Registered: 07-2009
| Posted on Monday, July 06, 2009 - 01:23 pm: |
|
The owner of one of our historic sites (a 1913 neoclassical house with an original, hipped slate roof) is proposing to replace missing slates with Ecostar synthetic slate. It does not seem to be a good idea to me, and strictly speaking it would not meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the treatment of Historic Properties, but I am in need of some concrete reasons why it should not be permitted, other than appearance. Any thoughts? Thanks. |