In article , "CraigT" wrote:
All right, I've been convinced by you guys to open up the wall.

My prediction of what you will find: absolutely nothing wrong.

I still think the cause is what I said the first time: solvent exposure,
either in the form of overspray from staining the deck, or whatever was used
to clean up the overspray.

Before opening up the wall, at least look at the back side of the siding you
removed. If the problem *was* a heat source inside the wall, then the damage
on the back side should be at least as bad as the damage on the face. OTOH, if
there is no (or only slight) discoloration visible on the back side, that
would be the strongest possible indication that the source of the damage was
on the outside of the house -- with solvent exposure being IMO the most likely
culprit.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Meat Plow wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:26:32 -0500, Pete C. wrote:

Have you checked the melting point of Tyvek (polyolefin) vs. the siding
(polyvinyl) vs. the temp required to discolor the OSB siding?

No have you?

No, therefore I don't jump to conclusions like you do.

Claiming that the "plastic under the siding" i.e. the polyolefin Tyvek
would be "exponentially more melted" had the heat come from inside the
wall vs. the polyvinyl siding is rather like claiming that the silicone
baking mat would melt before the cookies on it baked if the heat came
from under it which obviously isn't true.

As for the OP's siding, tyvek, OSB and house, there is a fair amount of
evidence pointing to the likelihood of a heat source from inside the
wall and given the ease of removing and replacing a section of sheathing
and the risk if the problem is as suspected, there is no point in
looking up polyvinyl and polyolefin melt temps.

Bottom line - open the wall and see what the hell is going on.

Pete C.

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
I think the chance of it being chemical related are close to zero. If it
was a chemical that got on the surface of the siding there is virtually
no chance that it would have any effect on the tyvek underneath.

"Virtually no chance" is completely incorrect. Vinyl siding is *not* air-tight
by any means. Solvent wiped or sprayed on the outside would very rapidly lead
to solvent vapors on the inside.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Not in enough concentration to affect the tyvek. Solvent on the outside
would almost entirely evaporate on the outside as well. Sure you'd get a
detectable amount on the inside if you were sampling the air inside, but
certainly not enough to do the damage seen on the tyvek.

Pete C.

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "CraigT" wrote:
All right, I've been convinced by you guys to open up the wall.

My prediction of what you will find: absolutely nothing wrong.

I still think the cause is what I said the first time: solvent exposure,
either in the form of overspray from staining the deck, or whatever was used
to clean up the overspray.

Before opening up the wall, at least look at the back side of the siding you
removed. If the problem *was* a heat source inside the wall, then the damage
on the back side should be at least as bad as the damage on the face. OTOH, if
there is no (or only slight) discoloration visible on the back side, that
would be the strongest possible indication that the source of the damage was
on the outside of the house -- with solvent exposure being IMO the most likely
culprit.

Very dangerous advice. Heat coming through the sheathing could very
easily build to the level required to soften and deform the vinyl siding
without discoloring the back side. Open the sheathing and see what's
behind. Heck, even cut a 2" hole with a hole saw to look through and
inspect the removed plug.

Pete C.

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , "CraigT" wrote:
All right, I've been convinced by you guys to open up the wall.

My prediction of what you will find: absolutely nothing wrong.

I still think the cause is what I said the first time: solvent exposure,
either in the form of overspray from staining the deck, or whatever was used
to clean up the overspray.

Before opening up the wall, at least look at the back side of the siding you
removed. If the problem *was* a heat source inside the wall, then the damage
on the back side should be at least as bad as the damage on the face. OTOH, if
there is no (or only slight) discoloration visible on the back side, that
would be the strongest possible indication that the source of the damage was
on the outside of the house -- with solvent exposure being IMO the most likely
culprit.

I gotta' go w/ PeteC on this mostly...the OP said the solvent/deck was
done in '06 and this damage didn't show up until within the last two
weeks -- that's pretty long incubation time for a solvent to act.

Definitely OP should find out what's going on inside the wall if only to
confirm conclusively it was all a surface damage on the outside...

If we're betting/guessing, I'm still on the side of somebody pushed the
still hot grill over there sometime...

--

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "CraigT"
wrote:
All right, I've been convinced by you guys to open up the wall.

My prediction of what you will find: absolutely nothing wrong.

I still think the cause is what I said the first time: solvent exposure,
either in the form of overspray from staining the deck, or whatever was used
to clean up the overspray.

Before opening up the wall, at least look at the back side of the siding you
removed. If the problem *was* a heat source inside the wall, then the damage
on the back side should be at least as bad as the damage on the face. OTOH, if
there is no (or only slight) discoloration visible on the back side, that
would be the strongest possible indication that the source of the damage was
on the outside of the house -- with solvent exposure being IMO the most likely
culprit.

Very dangerous advice. Heat coming through the sheathing could very
easily build to the level required to soften and deform the vinyl siding
without discoloring the back side.

Oh, come on. Let's hear your explanation of that: how "heat coming through the
sheathing" to damage the siding will discolor the side *away* from the heat
source without discoloring the side *nearer* the heat source. That's complete
nonsense.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C."
wrote:
I think the chance of it being chemical related are close to zero. If it
was a chemical that got on the surface of the siding there is virtually
no chance that it would have any effect on the tyvek underneath.

"Virtually no chance" is completely incorrect. Vinyl siding is *not* air-tight
by any means. Solvent wiped or sprayed on the outside would very rapidly lead
to solvent vapors on the inside.

Not in enough concentration to affect the tyvek. Solvent on the outside
would almost entirely evaporate on the outside as well.

Got any data behind that assumption, or are you just guessing? Even a light
breeze could easily push solvent vapors through the gaps in vinyl siding --
that's why the Tyvek is there, because the stuff is so leaky.

Sure you'd get a
detectable amount on the inside if you were sampling the air inside,
but certainly not enough to do the damage seen on the tyvek.

How are you going to get a detectable amount on the inside if it almost
entirely evaporates on the outside? If you can get a detectable amount on the
inside -- after it's passed through the siding, the Tyvek, the sheathing, the
insulation, the drywall, and a layer or two of paint -- how can you possibly
think that there "certainly" wouldn't be enough to damage the Tyvek? Do you
have any data behind that assumption, or are you just guessing again? Do you
even know how much solvent, or what type of solvent, it takes to do that?

Look, I'm not saying that he absolutely shouldn't open up the wall -- just
saying that he should look at the back side of the vinyl siding first, which
he does not appear to have done. Somebody asked him a couple days ago what the
back side of it looked like; as far as I can tell, he hasn't answered that
question yet.

It's also been suggested to the OP that he perform a test on a scrap of
siding, to see if the stain and the solvent he used will produce similar
damage. He hasn't yet reported results of that test, either.

Both you and the OP have got the idea so firmly fixed in your heads that a
heat source inside the wall is the only possible cause of this problem, that
neither one of you is the least bit willing to entertain any alternative
explanation.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C."
wrote:
I think the chance of it being chemical related are close to zero. If it
was a chemical that got on the surface of the siding there is virtually
no chance that it would have any effect on the tyvek underneath.

"Virtually no chance" is completely incorrect. Vinyl siding is *not* air-tight
by any means. Solvent wiped or sprayed on the outside would very rapidly lead
to solvent vapors on the inside.

Not in enough concentration to affect the tyvek. Solvent on the outside
would almost entirely evaporate on the outside as well.

Got any data behind that assumption, or are you just guessing? Even a light
breeze could easily push solvent vapors through the gaps in vinyl siding --
that's why the Tyvek is there, because the stuff is so leaky.

The reason the Tyvek is there has nothing whatsoever to do with the
siding being "leaky". The Tyvek it there to block air infiltration while
allowing water vapor to pass preventing condensation buildup within the
walls. Vinyl siding is specifically vented to prevent condensation
buildup behind it, traditional wood siding or shingles are similarly
ventilated due to their lap joints.


Sure you'd get a
detectable amount on the inside if you were sampling the air inside,
but certainly not enough to do the damage seen on the tyvek.

How are you going to get a detectable amount on the inside if it almost
entirely evaporates on the outside? If you can get a detectable amount on the
inside

Inside as in behind the vinyl siding, not inside the house. The vinyl
siding has vent slots at each lap location just as traditional wood
siding effectively does. Of course you will get detectable amounts of a
solvent behind the siding, but detectable and sufficient to affect the
Tyvek are not even remotely synonymous.

-- after it's passed through the siding, the Tyvek, the sheathing, the
insulation, the drywall, and a layer or two of paint -- how can you possibly
think that there "certainly" wouldn't be enough to damage the Tyvek?

I never said that solvent applied to the surface of the siding would
ever make it past the Tyvek, OSB, etc., that is your moronic assumption
and entirely false.

Do you
have any data behind that assumption, or are you just guessing again? Do you
even know how much solvent, or what type of solvent, it takes to do that?

You're the only one making unfounded and dangerous assumptions. Suggest
you stick your head back up your butt and stop endangering people by
suggesting they ignore signs of a possible fire hazard in their wall.


Look, I'm not saying that he absolutely shouldn't open up the wall -- just
saying that he should look at the back side of the vinyl siding first, which
he does not appear to have done. Somebody asked him a couple days ago what the
back side of it looked like; as far as I can tell, he hasn't answered that
question yet.

And I've noted that looking at the back of the siding is not likely to
show any discoloration since it was not exposed to direct flame, it was
exposed to moderate heat, heat that will deform the vinyl siding well
before it discolors it.

Suggest you go to your local building supply place and get a sample of
vinyl siding and a piece of OSB. Place the siding on top of the OSB in
your oven and start baking it at the lowest temp, say 150-170 degrees.
When the siding starts to sag check the back for any discoloration.


It's also been suggested to the OP that he perform a test on a scrap of
siding, to see if the stain and the solvent he used will produce similar
damage. He hasn't yet reported results of that test, either.

The solvent use in question was many months ago, and the damage to the
siding was obvious enough that it is very unlikely it went unnoticed all
those months.


Both you and the OP have got the idea so firmly fixed in your heads that a
heat source inside the wall is the only possible cause of this problem, that
neither one of you is the least bit willing to entertain any alternative
explanation.

No, we have objectively analyzed the available information and concluded
that an internal heat source is the most likely cause. The relative
location of the damage vs. the electrical boxes, combined with the
notable extra nail in that immediate area further support that
conclusion. Giving the significant risk of the likely cause, that avenue
needs to be investigated immediately.

Pete C.

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "CraigT"
wrote:
All right, I've been convinced by you guys to open up the wall.

My prediction of what you will find: absolutely nothing wrong.

I still think the cause is what I said the first time: solvent exposure,
either in the form of overspray from staining the deck, or whatever was used
to clean up the overspray.

Before opening up the wall, at least look at the back side of the siding you
removed. If the problem *was* a heat source inside the wall, then the damage
on the back side should be at least as bad as the damage on the face. OTOH, if
there is no (or only slight) discoloration visible on the back side, that
would be the strongest possible indication that the source of the damage was
on the outside of the house -- with solvent exposure being IMO the most likely
culprit.

Very dangerous advice. Heat coming through the sheathing could very
easily build to the level required to soften and deform the vinyl siding
without discoloring the back side.

Oh, come on. Let's hear your explanation of that: how "heat coming through the
sheathing" to damage the siding will discolor the side *away* from the heat
source without discoloring the side *nearer* the heat source. That's complete
nonsense.

You're quite the moron aren't you? You are the only one who has ever
suggested that there would be discoloration on the vinyl siding. Vinyl
siding will soften to the point of sagging from gravity well before it
will discolor. The photos the OP posted clearly do not show any
discoloration on the siding either.

Pete C.

Pete C. wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
....
Both you and the OP have got the idea so firmly fixed in your heads that a
heat source inside the wall is the only possible cause of this problem, that
neither one of you is the least bit willing to entertain any alternative
explanation.

No, we have objectively analyzed the available information and concluded
that an internal heat source is the most likely cause. ...

I still think the _most_ likely is an external heat source...

Why OP hasn't opened the wall to confirm/deny the indication of an
internal heat source is, I think, owing to being uncertain enough of the
repair process that he thinks cutting into the sheathing is a much
bigger deal than it really is.

Where, in fact, the bigger deal is the possibility that Pete is right --
I really don't think that will turn out to be the case as I think the
amount of heat required to produce this external damage if it was
arcing-generated would have shown up w/ some electrical anomalies
although that certainly isn't absolutely required.

The solvent problem I think can be discounted as being too far removed
in time and frankly the damage pattern just doesn't have the shape for
that to have been the cause unless it were a misdirected spray gun blast
and the reported application was rubbing w/ a rag instead...

Only when and if OP actually finishes an investigation and reports back
will anything else possibly be learned...

--

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C."
wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C."
wrote:
I think the chance of it being chemical related are close to zero. If it
was a chemical that got on the surface of the siding there is virtually
no chance that it would have any effect on the tyvek underneath.

"Virtually no chance" is completely incorrect. Vinyl siding is *not*
air-tight
by any means. Solvent wiped or sprayed on the outside would very rapidly
lead
to solvent vapors on the inside.

Not in enough concentration to affect the tyvek. Solvent on the outside
would almost entirely evaporate on the outside as well.

Got any data behind that assumption, or are you just guessing? Even a light
breeze could easily push solvent vapors through the gaps in vinyl siding --
that's why the Tyvek is there, because the stuff is so leaky.

The reason the Tyvek is there has nothing whatsoever to do with the
siding being "leaky". The Tyvek it there to block air infiltration

Isn't that what I just said?

while
allowing water vapor to pass preventing condensation buildup within the
walls. Vinyl siding is specifically vented to prevent condensation
buildup behind it, traditional wood siding or shingles are similarly
ventilated due to their lap joints.

How does that "vent" traditional wood siding?


Sure you'd get a
detectable amount on the inside if you were sampling the air inside,
but certainly not enough to do the damage seen on the tyvek.

How are you going to get a detectable amount on the inside if it almost
entirely evaporates on the outside? If you can get a detectable amount on the
inside

Inside as in behind the vinyl siding, not inside the house.

Oh, yeah, sure, that must be what you meant. How were planning to get a
sniffer between the vinyl siding and the sheathing?

The vinyl
siding has vent slots at each lap location just as traditional wood
siding effectively does. Of course you will get detectable amounts of a
solvent behind the siding, but detectable and sufficient to affect the
Tyvek are not even remotely synonymous.

Got any data behind that assumption? Or are you just guessing again?

-- after it's passed through the siding, the Tyvek, the sheathing, the
insulation, the drywall, and a layer or two of paint -- how can you possibly
think that there "certainly" wouldn't be enough to damage the Tyvek?

I never said that solvent applied to the surface of the siding would
ever make it past the Tyvek, OSB, etc., that is your moronic assumption
and entirely false.

You wrote "detectable amount inside". If you meant "behind the siding" you
could have said so -- not my fault if you didn't write what you meant.

Do you
have any data behind that assumption, or are you just guessing again? Do you
even know how much solvent, or what type of solvent, it takes to do that?

You're the only one making unfounded and dangerous assumptions.

OK, so you *don't* have any data behind that assumption, and you *are* just
guessing. Got it.

Suggest
you stick your head back up your butt and stop endangering people by
suggesting they ignore signs of a possible fire hazard in their wall.

*What* signs?


Look, I'm not saying that he absolutely shouldn't open up the wall -- just
saying that he should look at the back side of the vinyl siding first, which
he does not appear to have done. Somebody asked him a couple days ago what
the
back side of it looked like; as far as I can tell, he hasn't answered that
question yet.

And I've noted that looking at the back of the siding is not likely to
show any discoloration since it was not exposed to direct flame, it was
exposed to moderate heat, heat that will deform the vinyl siding well
before it discolors it.

Still waiting for your explanation of how your magic heat source discolors the
vinyl siding on the surface *away* from the heat, but not on the surface
*toward* it...

Suggest you go to your local building supply place and get a sample of
vinyl siding and a piece of OSB. Place the siding on top of the OSB in
your oven and start baking it at the lowest temp, say 150-170 degrees.
When the siding starts to sag check the back for any discoloration.

That "test" obviously doesn't even come close to replicating the conditions
you believe to exist. Here's a better one: place the siding on top of the OSB,
outdoors, and then build a wood fire underneath the OSB. When the surface of
the vinyl siding *away* from the heat source begins to discolor, examine the
surface of the siding *toward* the heat source, *and* the OSB, for signs of
damage. Go ahead -- try it. Then tell us what you find.


It's also been suggested to the OP that he perform a test on a scrap of
siding, to see if the stain and the solvent he used will produce similar
damage. He hasn't yet reported results of that test, either.

The solvent use in question was many months ago, and the damage to the
siding was obvious enough that it is very unlikely it went unnoticed all
those months.

Yet you don't find it unlikely at all that a heat source inside the wall would
discolor the surface of the vinyl siding *away* from the heat source, while
leaving the surface *toward* the heat source undisturbed.

Doesn't say much for your ability to evaluate what's likely or unlikely.


Both you and the OP have got the idea so firmly fixed in your heads that a
heat source inside the wall is the only possible cause of this problem, that
neither one of you is the least bit willing to entertain any alternative
explanation.

No, we have objectively analyzed the available information

ROTFLMAO!

and concluded
that an internal heat source is the most likely cause. The relative
location of the damage vs. the electrical boxes, combined with the
notable extra nail in that immediate area further support that
conclusion. Giving the significant risk of the likely cause, that avenue
needs to be investigated immediately.

Uh-huh. And it was this "objective" analysis that let you to conclude that the
presumed heat source discolored the side of the vinyl siding *away* from the
heat, the side exposed to free air, the side *guaranteed* to be the coolest,
while leaving undisturbed the surface of the siding with the greatest exposure
to heat.

The same "objective" analysis of the damage apparent on the successive layers,
namely, severe damage to the siding (outermost), slight damage to the Tyvek
(next inside), no damage evident on the OSB (innermost of the three visible),
also led you to conclude that the damage was caused by a heat source INterior
to the home. Right, a heat source INside the wall causes the greatest damage
on the OUTside, and the closer you get to the heat source, the less damage is
apparent.

Phooey. You *began* with the assumption of an internal heat source, and you're
inventing explanations for it, in the absence of any clear evidence.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , "Pete C." wrote:

You're quite the moron aren't you? You are the only one who has ever
suggested that there would be discoloration on the vinyl siding. Vinyl
siding will soften to the point of sagging from gravity well before it
will discolor. The photos the OP posted clearly do not show any
discoloration on the siding either.

Moron? Me? No, actually, Pete, I think that would be *you* here. The photos
the OP posted VERY CLEARLY show substantial discoloration of the siding.
Here's the link that was in the original post:
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/Squisher/IMG_6627.JPG

Now go look at that for the FIRST time, Pete, since it's blindingly obvious
you've never seen it before. See the discoloration, MORON?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , dpb wrote:

The solvent problem I think can be discounted as being too far removed
in time

Maybe so, but it's also possible that the OP's memory of what was done when is
imperfect, and that the solvent use was actually much more recent; that's more
likely IMO than an internal heat source that doesn't cause *any* apparent
damage to the OSB, *or*, apparently, to the paint on the inside of the house.

and frankly the damage pattern just doesn't have the shape for
that to have been the cause unless it were a misdirected spray gun blast
and the reported application was rubbing w/ a rag instead...

No, he said he sprayed the stain:

"I did use something to remove some overspray at the time which was the
spring of last year. I think it was Motsenbocker's Lift-Off." [from the OP's
second post in the original thread]

Only when and if OP actually finishes an investigation and reports back
will anything else possibly be learned...

True enough.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

According to dpb :
The solvent problem I think can be discounted as being too far removed
in time and frankly the damage pattern just doesn't have the shape for
that to have been the cause unless it were a misdirected spray gun blast
and the reported application was rubbing w/ a rag instead...

While I'm by no means convinced of what the cause actually was,
the solvent was rubbed off with a rag.

I could see a solvent dissolving into the siding, and not showing
any physical effects until some time later when hit by high
temperatures because the vinyl's melt point has effectively
been reduced, and raises only slowly as the temperature forces
outgassing.

Eg: applied in the fall, doesn't show any severe effects until
full hot days in the summer, which have driven out the solvents
and the plastic rehardened.
--
Chris Lewis,

Age and Treachery will Triumph over Youth and Skill
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

dpb wrote:

Pete C. wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
...
Both you and the OP have got the idea so firmly fixed in your heads that a
heat source inside the wall is the only possible cause of this problem, that
neither one of you is the least bit willing to entertain any alternative
explanation.

No, we have objectively analyzed the available information and concluded
that an internal heat source is the most likely cause. ...

I still think the _most_ likely is an external heat source...

Why OP hasn't opened the wall to confirm/deny the indication of an
internal heat source is, I think, owing to being uncertain enough of the
repair process that he thinks cutting into the sheathing is a much
bigger deal than it really is.

Quite possibly.


Where, in fact, the bigger deal is the possibility that Pete is right --
I really don't think that will turn out to be the case as I think the
amount of heat required to produce this external damage if it was
arcing-generated would have shown up w/ some electrical anomalies
although that certainly isn't absolutely required.

I don't think the hear was generated from arcing, I think that there is
a very intermittent arc, perhaps only occurring once that started a fire
in the wall cavity and the fire is what produced the heat before it self
extinguished, probably due to good sealing of the wall cavity preventing
it from getting enough air to really get established.

Also, having some familiarity with PVC I'm pretty confident that the
siding would be dripping down the wall well before it could transfer
enough heat to affect the Tyvek behind it.



The solvent problem I think can be discounted as being too far removed
in time and frankly the damage pattern just doesn't have the shape for
that to have been the cause unless it were a misdirected spray gun blast
and the reported application was rubbing w/ a rag instead...

Either way it's both unlikely that a quick spray of a solvent or a wipe
with solvent on a rag to remove overspray would cause that kind of
damage, much less have it appear suddenly many months later. PVC pipe
and conduit is largely the same thing and it's primed and glued with
solvents stronger than any you'd use to remove some stain overspray and
it doesn't suddenly deform either.


Only when and if OP actually finishes an investigation and reports back
will anything else possibly be learned...

Quite correct. Let's hope we hear back soon.

Pete C.

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , dpb wrote:

The solvent problem I think can be discounted as being too far removed
in time

Maybe so, but it's also possible that the OP's memory of what was done when is
imperfect, and that the solvent use was actually much more recent; that's more
likely IMO than an internal heat source that doesn't cause *any* apparent
damage to the OSB, *or*, apparently, to the paint on the inside of the house.

He "forgot" this within the last two weeks?

I personally couldn't tell there was no apparent damage or not to the
OSB from the last pictures because all was shown was a fairly distant
view of the sheathing through the hole in the Tyvek so there was no way
to judge any coloration difference of that localized area vis a vis the
removed area.

Other than the possibility of the postulated arcing being almost
directly in contact w/ the inside wall of the sheathing, I agree it's
difficult to imagine there being such visible exterior damage w/o there
being any indication on the inner wall except for the fact that the
location is below the cabinet top and therefore, there presumably is a
back to the lower cabinets which is another layer of
protection/insulation/coverup.

Overall, I'm still convinced from the picture it was external, it was a
heat source and most likely somebody pushed the grill over there at some
point; perhaps while OP was out of town or making a "honey-dew" run to
the market for the forgotten items from the market or some such...

and frankly the damage pattern just doesn't have the shape for
that to have been the cause unless it were a misdirected spray gun blast
and the reported application was rubbing w/ a rag instead...

No, he said he sprayed the stain:
....

Yes, but he said he wiped the solvent on manually to clean up the
overspray (and, no, I'm _not_ searching back through the thread to find
it... )...

Only when and if OP actually finishes an investigation and reports back
will anything else possibly be learned...

True enough.

But, being usenet, it certainly can't/won't slow down conjucture,
can/will it?

--

Doug Miller wrote:

The reason the Tyvek is there has nothing whatsoever to do with the
siding being "leaky". The Tyvek it there to block air infiltration

Isn't that what I just said?

No, it isn't. The siding is supposed to be ventilated and can be used
with or without the Tyvek. The Tyvek is there to improve sealing of the
building envelope i.e. the joints between the sheets of OSB, regardless
of the siding placed over it, not to overcome some deficiency in the
siding.


while
allowing water vapor to pass preventing condensation buildup within the
walls. Vinyl siding is specifically vented to prevent condensation
buildup behind it, traditional wood siding or shingles are similarly
ventilated due to their lap joints.

How does that "vent" traditional wood siding?

There is no sealant in the laps of traditional wood siding, nor is it a
very tight joint. This "leaky" overlap joint provides the same
ventilation function that the cut slots in the vinyl siding provide,
allowing water vapor migrating from inside the house to escape rather
than condense behind the siding and cause rot, mold or other problems.



Sure you'd get a
detectable amount on the inside if you were sampling the air inside,
but certainly not enough to do the damage seen on the tyvek.

How are you going to get a detectable amount on the inside if it almost
entirely evaporates on the outside? If you can get a detectable amount on the
inside

Inside as in behind the vinyl siding, not inside the house.

Oh, yeah, sure, that must be what you meant. How were planning to get a
sniffer between the vinyl siding and the sheathing?

How about sticking the sampling hose through one of the vent slots in
the vinyl siding?


The vinyl
siding has vent slots at each lap location just as traditional wood
siding effectively does. Of course you will get detectable amounts of a
solvent behind the siding, but detectable and sufficient to affect the
Tyvek are not even remotely synonymous.

Got any data behind that assumption? Or are you just guessing again?

Yep. You're the only one guessing and making dangerous suggestions.


-- after it's passed through the siding, the Tyvek, the sheathing, the
insulation, the drywall, and a layer or two of paint -- how can you possibly
think that there "certainly" wouldn't be enough to damage the Tyvek?

I never said that solvent applied to the surface of the siding would
ever make it past the Tyvek, OSB, etc., that is your moronic assumption
and entirely false.

You wrote "detectable amount inside". If you meant "behind the siding" you
could have said so -- not my fault if you didn't write what you meant.

Only a moron would take "inside" to mean inside the house, when the
entire discussion has centered around the siding, Tyvek wrap and OSB
sheathing.


Do you
have any data behind that assumption, or are you just guessing again? Do you
even know how much solvent, or what type of solvent, it takes to do that?

You're the only one making unfounded and dangerous assumptions.

OK, so you *don't* have any data behind that assumption, and you *are* just
guessing. Got it.

Yes, I do have data. I've read the OP's posts and they have provided
quite sufficient data to indicate that the solvent was applied many
months ago and was thinner wiped on to remove overspray from staining
the deck and has pretty much zero chance of being related to the OP's
recently deformed siding.


Suggest
you stick your head back up your butt and stop endangering people by
suggesting they ignore signs of a possible fire hazard in their wall.

*What* signs?

* More damage to the Tyvek wrap than the siding.
* Extra nail visible in the sheathing in the suspect area.
* Four electrical boxes surrounding the suspect area.



Look, I'm not saying that he absolutely shouldn't open up the wall -- just
saying that he should look at the back side of the vinyl siding first, which
he does not appear to have done. Somebody asked him a couple days ago what
the
back side of it looked like; as far as I can tell, he hasn't answered that
question yet.

And I've noted that looking at the back of the siding is not likely to
show any discoloration since it was not exposed to direct flame, it was
exposed to moderate heat, heat that will deform the vinyl siding well
before it discolors it.

Still waiting for your explanation of how your magic heat source discolors the
vinyl siding on the surface *away* from the heat, but not on the surface
*toward* it...

I never made any such claim. You are the only one who ever suggested
there would be discoloration on the siding.


Suggest you go to your local building supply place and get a sample of
vinyl siding and a piece of OSB. Place the siding on top of the OSB in
your oven and start baking it at the lowest temp, say 150-170 degrees.
When the siding starts to sag check the back for any discoloration.

That "test" obviously doesn't even come close to replicating the conditions
you believe to exist. Here's a better one: place the siding on top of the OSB,
outdoors, and then build a wood fire underneath the OSB. When the surface of
the vinyl siding *away* from the heat source begins to discolor, examine the
surface of the siding *toward* the heat source, *and* the OSB, for signs of
damage. Go ahead -- try it. Then tell us what you find.

Try applying Tyvek and vinyl siding onto the OSB and then torch the OSB
from the back until the vinyl deforms. Again, you are the only one who
has made any claims of discoloration on the vinyl siding.



It's also been suggested to the OP that he perform a test on a scrap of
siding, to see if the stain and the solvent he used will produce similar
damage. He hasn't yet reported results of that test, either.

The solvent use in question was many months ago, and the damage to the
siding was obvious enough that it is very unlikely it went unnoticed all
those months.

Yet you don't find it unlikely at all that a heat source inside the wall would
discolor the surface of the vinyl siding *away* from the heat source, while
leaving the surface *toward* the heat source undisturbed.

Where is this magic discoloration on the surface of the vinyl siding you
claim? The OP's photos do not show any discoloration on the vinyl
siding.


Doesn't say much for your ability to evaluate what's likely or unlikely.

Doesn't say much for your reading comprehension or visual acuity.



Both you and the OP have got the idea so firmly fixed in your heads that a
heat source inside the wall is the only possible cause of this problem, that
neither one of you is the least bit willing to entertain any alternative
explanation.

No, we have objectively analyzed the available information

ROTFLMAO!

You probably are since you're too stupid to do anything intelligent.


and concluded
that an internal heat source is the most likely cause. The relative
location of the damage vs. the electrical boxes, combined with the
notable extra nail in that immediate area further support that
conclusion. Giving the significant risk of the likely cause, that avenue
needs to be investigated immediately.

Uh-huh. And it was this "objective" analysis that let you to conclude that the
presumed heat source discolored the side of the vinyl siding *away* from the
heat, the side exposed to free air, the side *guaranteed* to be the coolest,
while leaving undisturbed the surface of the siding with the greatest exposure
to heat.

Where is this discoloration you claim? The OP's photo
(http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/Squisher/IMG_6627.JPG) does not show any
such discoloration. If you can't differentiate a shadow from
discoloration, that's your problem.


The same "objective" analysis of the damage apparent on the successive layers,
namely, severe damage to the siding (outermost), slight damage to the Tyvek
(next inside), no damage evident on the OSB (innermost of the three visible),
also led you to conclude that the damage was caused by a heat source INterior
to the home. Right, a heat source INside the wall causes the greatest damage
on the OUTside, and the closer you get to the heat source, the less damage is
apparent.

Your analysis of the damage is seriously flawed. The damage to the
Tyvek, namely shrinkage and melting to the point of holes forming, is
significantly greater than the damage to the vinyl siding, namely
softening and sagging.


Phooey. You *began* with the assumption of an internal heat source, and you're
inventing explanations for it, in the absence of any clear evidence.

I've noted plenty of evidence to support an internal heat source, you've
not noted any evidence to back your claims and indeed you have
fabricated claims not supported by anything the OP has posted.

Pete C.

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C." wrote:

You're quite the moron aren't you? You are the only one who has ever
suggested that there would be discoloration on the vinyl siding. Vinyl
siding will soften to the point of sagging from gravity well before it
will discolor. The photos the OP posted clearly do not show any
discoloration on the siding either.

Moron? Me? No, actually, Pete, I think that would be *you* here. The photos
the OP posted VERY CLEARLY show substantial discoloration of the siding.
Here's the link that was in the original post:
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/Squisher/IMG_6627.JPG

Now go look at that for the FIRST time, Pete, since it's blindingly obvious
you've never seen it before. See the discoloration, MORON?

I've looked at it several times and it's abundantly clear that there is
no discoloration of the siding, only a change in the shadows and the
reflection angle due to the deformation. Perhaps if you clean the crud
of your monitor and or get some glasses you'll be able to see this fact.

Pete C.

dpb wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , dpb wrote:

The solvent problem I think can be discounted as being too far removed
in time

Maybe so, but it's also possible that the OP's memory of what was done when is
imperfect, and that the solvent use was actually much more recent; that's more
likely IMO than an internal heat source that doesn't cause *any* apparent
damage to the OSB, *or*, apparently, to the paint on the inside of the house.

He "forgot" this within the last two weeks?

I personally couldn't tell there was no apparent damage or not to the
OSB from the last pictures because all was shown was a fairly distant
view of the sheathing through the hole in the Tyvek so there was no way
to judge any coloration difference of that localized area vis a vis the
removed area.

Other than the possibility of the postulated arcing being almost
directly in contact w/ the inside wall of the sheathing, I agree it's
difficult to imagine there being such visible exterior damage w/o there
being any indication on the inner wall except for the fact that the
location is below the cabinet top and therefore, there presumably is a
back to the lower cabinets which is another layer of
protection/insulation/coverup.

Overall, I'm still convinced from the picture it was external, it was a
heat source and most likely somebody pushed the grill over there at some
point; perhaps while OP was out of town or making a "honey-dew" run to
the market for the forgotten items from the market or some such...

and frankly the damage pattern just doesn't have the shape for
that to have been the cause unless it were a misdirected spray gun blast
and the reported application was rubbing w/ a rag instead...

No, he said he sprayed the stain:
...

Yes, but he said he wiped the solvent on manually to clean up the
overspray (and, no, I'm _not_ searching back through the thread to find
it... )...

Only when and if OP actually finishes an investigation and reports back
will anything else possibly be learned...

True enough.

But, being usenet, it certainly can't/won't slow down conjucture,
can/will it?

--

I don't believe arcing itself generated the heat, I believe arcing
caused a fire in the wall cavity that generated the heat before it self
extinguished. I'd put 80% odds on the OP finding significant fire damage
in the wall cavity when he opens it up.

Pete C.

Chris Lewis wrote:

According to dpb :
The solvent problem I think can be discounted as being too far removed
in time and frankly the damage pattern just doesn't have the shape for
that to have been the cause unless it were a misdirected spray gun blast
and the reported application was rubbing w/ a rag instead...

While I'm by no means convinced of what the cause actually was,
the solvent was rubbed off with a rag.

I could see a solvent dissolving into the siding, and not showing
any physical effects until some time later when hit by high
temperatures because the vinyl's melt point has effectively
been reduced, and raises only slowly as the temperature forces
outgassing.

Eg: applied in the fall, doesn't show any severe effects until
full hot days in the summer, which have driven out the solvents
and the plastic rehardened.
--
Chris Lewis,

Age and Treachery will Triumph over Youth and Skill
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

The OP indicated spring '06 for the solvent and it's now summer '07.
Summer '06 apparently went by with no issues.

Pete C.

In article , dpb wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
In article , dpb wrote:

The solvent problem I think can be discounted as being too far removed
in time

Maybe so, but it's also possible that the OP's memory of what was done when
is
imperfect, and that the solvent use was actually much more recent; that's
more
likely IMO than an internal heat source that doesn't cause *any* apparent
damage to the OSB, *or*, apparently, to the paint on the inside of the house.

He "forgot" this within the last two weeks?

No, I think he might have done it *this* spring instead of last. But Chris
Lewis also posted a plausible explanation of delayed effects.

I personally couldn't tell there was no apparent damage or not to the
OSB from the last pictures because all was shown was a fairly distant
view of the sheathing through the hole in the Tyvek so there was no way
to judge any coloration difference of that localized area vis a vis the
removed area.

I based my statement of "no apparent damage" on the fact that what's visible
in the photo looks about the same as any other OSB I've ever seen. And, of
course, there may be damage that's not readily apparent, so I'm not willing to
say "no damage". Just "no apparent damage".

Other than the possibility of the postulated arcing being almost
directly in contact w/ the inside wall of the sheathing, I agree it's
difficult to imagine there being such visible exterior damage w/o there
being any indication on the inner wall except for the fact that the
location is below the cabinet top and therefore, there presumably is a
back to the lower cabinets which is another layer of
protection/insulation/coverup.

In the original photo, the center of the damaged area can be seen to be at
roughly the same height as the handle on the sliding door. In the second set
of photos, that same handle is visible at roughly the same height as the
countertop backsplash -- thus, while some of the damage is indeed below the
cabinet top, not all of it is. Nearly half of it is above as well, and the
visibly damaged area on the outside definitely extends at least a short
distance above the top of the backsplash.

Overall, I'm still convinced from the picture it was external, it was a
heat source and most likely somebody pushed the grill over there at some
point; perhaps while OP was out of town or making a "honey-dew" run to
the market for the forgotten items from the market or some such...

I'm convinced, too, that it's external. But I still think it's from the stain:
it's right there, right where it would have gotten hit from the overspray that
the OP already said happened -- and it's just about the color I'd expect it to
be, too, from that color stain being sprayed onto that color siding and then
wiped off with some organic solvent.

Look at the OP's first photo again, too -- down at the bottom, just above the
deck, you can see overspray that was *not* wiped off with Lift-Off or whatever
he used. Same color, but no warpage.

and frankly the damage pattern just doesn't have the shape for
that to have been the cause unless it were a misdirected spray gun blast
and the reported application was rubbing w/ a rag instead...

No, he said he sprayed the stain:
....
Yes, but he said he wiped the solvent on manually to clean up the
overspray (and, no, I'm _not_ searching back through the thread to find
it... )...

Right, and that's exactly what caused the damage to be in that pattern. :-)

Only when and if OP actually finishes an investigation and reports back
will anything else possibly be learned...

True enough.

But, being usenet, it certainly can't/won't slow down conjucture,
can/will it?

Not even for half a minute, my friend.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Doug Miller wrote:

In the original photo, the center of the damaged area can be seen to be at
roughly the same height as the handle on the sliding door. In the second set
of photos, that same handle is visible at roughly the same height as the
countertop backsplash -- thus, while some of the damage is indeed below the
cabinet top, not all of it is. Nearly half of it is above as well, and the
visibly damaged area on the outside definitely extends at least a short
distance above the top of the backsplash.

So suddenly OSB has the same fire rating as sheetrock? I'm sure the fire
marshal would be very surprised.

Pete C.

dpb writes:

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , "CraigT" wrote:
All right, I've been convinced by you guys to open up the wall.
My prediction of what you will find: absolutely nothing wrong.
I still think the cause is what I said the first time: solvent
exposure, either in the form of overspray from staining the deck, or
whatever was used to clean up the overspray.
Before opening up the wall, at least look at the back side of the
siding you removed. If the problem *was* a heat source inside the
wall, then the damage on the back side should be at least as bad as
the damage on the face. OTOH, if there is no (or only slight)
discoloration visible on the back side, that would be the strongest
possible indication that the source of the damage was on the outside
of the house -- with solvent exposure being IMO the most likely
culprit.

I gotta' go w/ PeteC on this mostly...the OP said the solvent/deck was
done in '06 and this damage didn't show up until within the last two
weeks -- that's pretty long incubation time for a solvent to act.

Looks like discoloration to me.
More than that, looks like the height and shape of a gas grill.
Looks like the heat rose from the grill and went to the left.
It spread out as it rose.
Move that grill up against the fence and see how well the outline
fits. Oh right, too late for that, the siding is gone.

Besides that, there's no need for name calling.

Definitely OP should find out what's going on inside the wall if only
to confirm conclusively it was all a surface damage on the outside...

From what I've seen, I wouldn't.

If we're betting/guessing, I'm still on the side of somebody pushed
the still hot grill over there sometime...

Yep.

Pete C. wrote:
dpb wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
In article , dpb wrote:

The solvent problem I think can be discounted as being too far removed
in time
Maybe so, but it's also possible that the OP's memory of what was done when is
imperfect, and that the solvent use was actually much more recent; that's more
likely IMO than an internal heat source that doesn't cause *any* apparent
damage to the OSB, *or*, apparently, to the paint on the inside of the house.
He "forgot" this within the last two weeks?

I personally couldn't tell there was no apparent damage or not to the
OSB from the last pictures because all was shown was a fairly distant
view of the sheathing through the hole in the Tyvek so there was no way
to judge any coloration difference of that localized area vis a vis the
removed area.

Other than the possibility of the postulated arcing being almost
directly in contact w/ the inside wall of the sheathing, I agree it's
difficult to imagine there being such visible exterior damage w/o there
being any indication on the inner wall except for the fact that the
location is below the cabinet top and therefore, there presumably is a
back to the lower cabinets which is another layer of
protection/insulation/coverup.

Overall, I'm still convinced from the picture it was external, it was a
heat source and most likely somebody pushed the grill over there at some
point; perhaps while OP was out of town or making a "honey-dew" run to
the market for the forgotten items from the market or some such...

and frankly the damage pattern just doesn't have the shape for
that to have been the cause unless it were a misdirected spray gun blast
and the reported application was rubbing w/ a rag instead...
No, he said he sprayed the stain:
...

Yes, but he said he wiped the solvent on manually to clean up the
overspray (and, no, I'm _not_ searching back through the thread to find
it... )...

Only when and if OP actually finishes an investigation and reports back
will anything else possibly be learned...
True enough.
But, being usenet, it certainly can't/won't slow down conjucture,
can/will it?

--

I don't believe arcing itself generated the heat, I believe arcing
caused a fire in the wall cavity that generated the heat before it self
extinguished. I'd put 80% odds on the OP finding significant fire damage
in the wall cavity when he opens it up.

I'll take that bet -- I think it's external by about 90%...

--

"Pete C." wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C." wrote:

You're quite the moron aren't you? You are the only one who has ever
suggested that there would be discoloration on the vinyl siding. Vinyl
siding will soften to the point of sagging from gravity well before it
will discolor. The photos the OP posted clearly do not show any
discoloration on the siding either.

Moron? Me? No, actually, Pete, I think that would be *you* here. The photos
the OP posted VERY CLEARLY show substantial discoloration of the siding.
Here's the link that was in the original post:
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/Squisher/IMG_6627.JPG

Now go look at that for the FIRST time, Pete, since it's blindingly obvious
you've never seen it before. See the discoloration, MORON?

I've looked at it several times and it's abundantly clear that there is
no discoloration of the siding, only a change in the shadows and the
reflection angle due to the deformation. Perhaps if you clean the crud
of your monitor and or get some glasses you'll be able to see this fact.

Pete C.

Looking again, this time on a system with a CRT monitor instead of LCD,
it appears there may be some discoloration on the vinyl siding. In this
case I'd expect to see comparable discoloration on the back side of the
siding as well. My assessment of the likely cause remains the same
however as the damage to the Tyvek is clearly more significant.

Pete C.

dpb wrote:

Pete C. wrote:
dpb wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
In article , dpb wrote:

The solvent problem I think can be discounted as being too far removed
in time
Maybe so, but it's also possible that the OP's memory of what was done when is
imperfect, and that the solvent use was actually much more recent; that's more
likely IMO than an internal heat source that doesn't cause *any* apparent
damage to the OSB, *or*, apparently, to the paint on the inside of the house.
He "forgot" this within the last two weeks?

I personally couldn't tell there was no apparent damage or not to the
OSB from the last pictures because all was shown was a fairly distant
view of the sheathing through the hole in the Tyvek so there was no way
to judge any coloration difference of that localized area vis a vis the
removed area.

Other than the possibility of the postulated arcing being almost
directly in contact w/ the inside wall of the sheathing, I agree it's
difficult to imagine there being such visible exterior damage w/o there
being any indication on the inner wall except for the fact that the
location is below the cabinet top and therefore, there presumably is a
back to the lower cabinets which is another layer of
protection/insulation/coverup.

Overall, I'm still convinced from the picture it was external, it was a
heat source and most likely somebody pushed the grill over there at some
point; perhaps while OP was out of town or making a "honey-dew" run to
the market for the forgotten items from the market or some such...

and frankly the damage pattern just doesn't have the shape for
that to have been the cause unless it were a misdirected spray gun blast
and the reported application was rubbing w/ a rag instead...
No, he said he sprayed the stain:
...

Yes, but he said he wiped the solvent on manually to clean up the
overspray (and, no, I'm _not_ searching back through the thread to find
it... )...

Only when and if OP actually finishes an investigation and reports back
will anything else possibly be learned...
True enough.
But, being usenet, it certainly can't/won't slow down conjucture,
can/will it?

--

I don't believe arcing itself generated the heat, I believe arcing
caused a fire in the wall cavity that generated the heat before it self
extinguished. I'd put 80% odds on the OP finding significant fire damage
in the wall cavity when he opens it up.

I'll take that bet -- I think it's external by about 90%...

--

Guess well have to await the OPs next response and photos to see who
wins.

Pete C.

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

*What* signs?

* More damage to the Tyvek wrap than the siding.

Have you actually looked at the photos?

* Extra nail visible in the sheathing in the suspect area.

Yep, nails start invisible fires all the time.

* Four electrical boxes surrounding the suspect area.

And yet *no* evidence of any electrical fires visible anywhere.



Look, I'm not saying that he absolutely shouldn't open up the wall -- just
saying that he should look at the back side of the vinyl siding first,
which
he does not appear to have done. Somebody asked him a couple days ago what
the
back side of it looked like; as far as I can tell, he hasn't answered that
question yet.

And I've noted that looking at the back of the siding is not likely to
show any discoloration since it was not exposed to direct flame, it was
exposed to moderate heat, heat that will deform the vinyl siding well
before it discolors it.

Still waiting for your explanation of how your magic heat source discolors the
vinyl siding on the surface *away* from the heat, but not on the surface
*toward* it...

I never made any such claim. You are the only one who ever suggested
there would be discoloration on the siding.

False. You wrote:

"Heat coming through the sheathing could very
easily build to the level required to soften and deform the vinyl siding
without discoloring the back side."

The siding is visibly discolored; no suggestion is necessary. And I was not
the first to suggest that the OP should check for discoloration on the back
side, either.


Suggest you go to your local building supply place and get a sample of
vinyl siding and a piece of OSB. Place the siding on top of the OSB in
your oven and start baking it at the lowest temp, say 150-170 degrees.
When the siding starts to sag check the back for any discoloration.

That "test" obviously doesn't even come close to replicating the conditions
you believe to exist. Here's a better one: place the siding on top of the OSB,
outdoors, and then build a wood fire underneath the OSB. When the surface of
the vinyl siding *away* from the heat source begins to discolor, examine the
surface of the siding *toward* the heat source, *and* the OSB, for signs of
damage. Go ahead -- try it. Then tell us what you find.

Try applying Tyvek and vinyl siding onto the OSB and then torch the OSB
from the back until the vinyl deforms.

OK, fine, conduct the test that way. Get back to us and let us know what you
find out.

Again, you are the only one who
has made any claims of discoloration on the vinyl siding.

Look at the OP's original photo. It's visibly discolored.




It's also been suggested to the OP that he perform a test on a scrap of
siding, to see if the stain and the solvent he used will produce similar
damage. He hasn't yet reported results of that test, either.

The solvent use in question was many months ago, and the damage to the
siding was obvious enough that it is very unlikely it went unnoticed all
those months.

Yet you don't find it unlikely at all that a heat source inside the wall would
discolor the surface of the vinyl siding *away* from the heat source, while
leaving the surface *toward* the heat source undisturbed.

Where is this magic discoloration on the surface of the vinyl siding you
claim? The OP's photos do not show any discoloration on the vinyl
siding.

Wow. You are so firmly fixated on your idea that it simply *must* be due to a
heat source inside the wall that you can't even see what's right in front of
you.

Go look at the original photo posted by the OP -- for the first time, since
it's plain you haven't seen it before -- and you'll see that discoloration.


Doesn't say much for your ability to evaluate what's likely or unlikely.

Doesn't say much for your reading comprehension or visual acuity.

Ummm... *I'm* not the one who's unable to see clearly visible discoloration on
the siding.
[snip]
Where is this discoloration you claim? The OP's photo
(http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/Squisher/IMG_6627.JPG) does not show any
such discoloration.

It certainly does. Better have your eyes checked, Petey.

If you can't differentiate a shadow from
discoloration, that's your problem.

"Shadow" ??? ROTFLMAO!


The same "objective" analysis of the damage apparent on the successive
layers,
namely, severe damage to the siding (outermost), slight damage to the Tyvek
(next inside), no damage evident on the OSB (innermost of the three visible),
also led you to conclude that the damage was caused by a heat source INterior
to the home. Right, a heat source INside the wall causes the greatest damage
on the OUTside, and the closer you get to the heat source, the less damage is
apparent.

Your analysis of the damage is seriously flawed. The damage to the
Tyvek, namely shrinkage and melting to the point of holes forming, is
significantly greater than the damage to the vinyl siding, namely
softening and sagging.


Phooey. You *began* with the assumption of an internal heat source, and you're
inventing explanations for it, in the absence of any clear evidence.

I've noted plenty of evidence to support an internal heat source,

You haven't noted any evidence at all, Pete, just a bunch of assumptions.

you've
not noted any evidence to back your claims and indeed you have
fabricated claims not supported by anything the OP has posted.

"Fabricated claims"?? You mean like noting the same discoloration that other
posters have noted as well, the same PLAINLY OBVIOUS discoloration that you
are for some reason unable to discern?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

In the original photo, the center of the damaged area can be seen to be at
roughly the same height as the handle on the sliding door. In the second set
of photos, that same handle is visible at roughly the same height as the
countertop backsplash -- thus, while some of the damage is indeed below the
cabinet top, not all of it is. Nearly half of it is above as well, and the
visibly damaged area on the outside definitely extends at least a short
distance above the top of the backsplash.

So suddenly OSB has the same fire rating as sheetrock? I'm sure the fire
marshal would be very surprised.

Where did I say that? First, you can't see things that plainly *are* there.
Now, you *are* seeing things that *aren't* there.

I retract my suggestion that you have your eyes checked. The problem seems to
be an inch or two farther back.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Dan Espen wrote:
dpb writes:

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , "CraigT" wrote:
All right, I've been convinced by you guys to open up the wall.
My prediction of what you will find: absolutely nothing wrong.
I still think the cause is what I said the first time: solvent
exposure, either in the form of overspray from staining the deck, or
whatever was used to clean up the overspray.
Before opening up the wall, at least look at the back side of the
siding you removed. If the problem *was* a heat source inside the
wall, then the damage on the back side should be at least as bad as
the damage on the face. OTOH, if there is no (or only slight)
discoloration visible on the back side, that would be the strongest
possible indication that the source of the damage was on the outside
of the house -- with solvent exposure being IMO the most likely
culprit.
I gotta' go w/ PeteC on this mostly...the OP said the solvent/deck was
done in '06 and this damage didn't show up until within the last two
weeks -- that's pretty long incubation time for a solvent to act.

Looks like discoloration to me.
More than that, looks like the height and shape of a gas grill.
Looks like the heat rose from the grill and went to the left.
It spread out as it rose.
Move that grill up against the fence and see how well the outline
fits. Oh right, too late for that, the siding is gone.

Besides that, there's no need for name calling.

Definitely OP should find out what's going on inside the wall if only
to confirm conclusively it was all a surface damage on the outside...

From what I've seen, I wouldn't.

If I were there and could see it directly, I might not either, because
then I could conclusively judge the condition of the OSB and the siding.
Lacking that, since OP isn't sure enough on his own, I can only
recommend the safest course of action which is to exclude the
possibility of Pete's hypothesis.

The possible ramifications of being wrong are too serious to recommend
otherwise imo...

If we're betting/guessing, I'm still on the side of somebody pushed
the still hot grill over there sometime...

Yep.

Or lit it over there to be closer to the door/kitchen and saw what
happened and moved it back real quick and kept their mouth shut!

Fits w/ kids very well, or even a neighbor or friend "helping out"...

--


--

I'll bet not.


s


"Pete C." wrote in message
...
I don't believe arcing itself generated the heat, I believe arcing
caused a fire in the wall cavity that generated the heat before it self
extinguished. I'd put 80% odds on the OP finding significant fire damage
in the wall cavity when he opens it up.

Pete C.

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C."
wrote:

You're quite the moron aren't you? You are the only one who has ever
suggested that there would be discoloration on the vinyl siding. Vinyl
siding will soften to the point of sagging from gravity well before it
will discolor. The photos the OP posted clearly do not show any
discoloration on the siding either.

Moron? Me? No, actually, Pete, I think that would be *you* here. The photos
the OP posted VERY CLEARLY show substantial discoloration of the siding.
Here's the link that was in the original post:
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/Squisher/IMG_6627.JPG

Now go look at that for the FIRST time, Pete, since it's blindingly obvious
you've never seen it before. See the discoloration, MORON?

I've looked at it several times and it's abundantly clear that there is
no discoloration of the siding, only a change in the shadows and the
reflection angle due to the deformation. Perhaps if you clean the crud
of your monitor and or get some glasses you'll be able to see this fact.

"Abundantly clear" only to someone who has already made up his mind to refuse
to see any evidence that contradicts his assumptions. (Perhaps you'll
recognize yourself.)

To anyone else, the discoloration is plainly obvious. Your continued denial
that any discoloration exists is astonishing.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Dan Espen wrote:

dpb writes:

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , "CraigT" wrote:
All right, I've been convinced by you guys to open up the wall.
My prediction of what you will find: absolutely nothing wrong.
I still think the cause is what I said the first time: solvent
exposure, either in the form of overspray from staining the deck, or
whatever was used to clean up the overspray.
Before opening up the wall, at least look at the back side of the
siding you removed. If the problem *was* a heat source inside the
wall, then the damage on the back side should be at least as bad as
the damage on the face. OTOH, if there is no (or only slight)
discoloration visible on the back side, that would be the strongest
possible indication that the source of the damage was on the outside
of the house -- with solvent exposure being IMO the most likely
culprit.

I gotta' go w/ PeteC on this mostly...the OP said the solvent/deck was
done in '06 and this damage didn't show up until within the last two
weeks -- that's pretty long incubation time for a solvent to act.

Looks like discoloration to me.

Yes, looking again on a CRT monitor it does look like discoloration.

More than that, looks like the height and shape of a gas grill.
Looks like the heat rose from the grill and went to the left.
It spread out as it rose.

Not buying that one. Based on the size of the outlet next to the door,
about 4" which makes that wall section about 24" inches wide, the damage
is too far back to align with a grill. Heat from a grill would be almost
entirely radiant from it's housing so a grill parked there would have
radiated heat farther towards the door. I also note that the damage
appears to continue back past the railing making radiant heat from a
grill even less likely.

Move that grill up against the fence and see how well the outline
fits. Oh right, too late for that, the siding is gone.

Besides that, there's no need for name calling.

Definitely OP should find out what's going on inside the wall if only
to confirm conclusively it was all a surface damage on the outside...

From what I've seen, I wouldn't.

Bad conclusion, particularly given the ease of inspection since the
siding is down already, and the consequences if you're wrong.


If we're betting/guessing, I'm still on the side of somebody pushed
the still hot grill over there sometime...

Yep.

We'll just have to wait for the results of inspection.

Pete C.

In article , Dan Espen wrote:
dpb writes:

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , "CraigT"
wrote:
All right, I've been convinced by you guys to open up the wall.
My prediction of what you will find: absolutely nothing wrong.
I still think the cause is what I said the first time: solvent
exposure, either in the form of overspray from staining the deck, or
whatever was used to clean up the overspray.
Before opening up the wall, at least look at the back side of the
siding you removed. If the problem *was* a heat source inside the
wall, then the damage on the back side should be at least as bad as
the damage on the face. OTOH, if there is no (or only slight)
discoloration visible on the back side, that would be the strongest
possible indication that the source of the damage was on the outside
of the house -- with solvent exposure being IMO the most likely
culprit.

I gotta' go w/ PeteC on this mostly...the OP said the solvent/deck was
done in '06 and this damage didn't show up until within the last two
weeks -- that's pretty long incubation time for a solvent to act.

Looks like discoloration to me.

No, no, there's no discoloration. That's just shadows and reflections. Ask
Pete. He'll tell you.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
"Pete C." wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C."
wrote:

You're quite the moron aren't you? You are the only one who has ever
suggested that there would be discoloration on the vinyl siding. Vinyl
siding will soften to the point of sagging from gravity well before it
will discolor. The photos the OP posted clearly do not show any
discoloration on the siding either.

Moron? Me? No, actually, Pete, I think that would be *you* here. The photos
the OP posted VERY CLEARLY show substantial discoloration of the siding.
Here's the link that was in the original post:
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/Squisher/IMG_6627.JPG

Now go look at that for the FIRST time, Pete, since it's blindingly obvious
you've never seen it before. See the discoloration, MORON?

I've looked at it several times and it's abundantly clear that there is
no discoloration of the siding, only a change in the shadows and the
reflection angle due to the deformation. Perhaps if you clean the crud
of your monitor and or get some glasses you'll be able to see this fact.

Pete C.

Looking again, this time on a system with a CRT monitor instead of LCD,
it appears there may be some discoloration on the vinyl siding.

I assume this means I'll be seeing an apology from you sometime soon?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , dpb wrote:
Pete C. wrote:
dpb wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
In article , dpb wrote:

The solvent problem I think can be discounted as being too far removed
in time
Maybe so, but it's also possible that the OP's memory of what was done when
is
imperfect, and that the solvent use was actually much more recent; that's
more
likely IMO than an internal heat source that doesn't cause *any* apparent
damage to the OSB, *or*, apparently, to the paint on the inside of the
house.
He "forgot" this within the last two weeks?

I personally couldn't tell there was no apparent damage or not to the
OSB from the last pictures because all was shown was a fairly distant
view of the sheathing through the hole in the Tyvek so there was no way
to judge any coloration difference of that localized area vis a vis the
removed area.

Other than the possibility of the postulated arcing being almost
directly in contact w/ the inside wall of the sheathing, I agree it's
difficult to imagine there being such visible exterior damage w/o there
being any indication on the inner wall except for the fact that the
location is below the cabinet top and therefore, there presumably is a
back to the lower cabinets which is another layer of
protection/insulation/coverup.

Overall, I'm still convinced from the picture it was external, it was a
heat source and most likely somebody pushed the grill over there at some
point; perhaps while OP was out of town or making a "honey-dew" run to
the market for the forgotten items from the market or some such...

and frankly the damage pattern just doesn't have the shape for
that to have been the cause unless it were a misdirected spray gun blast
and the reported application was rubbing w/ a rag instead...
No, he said he sprayed the stain:
...

Yes, but he said he wiped the solvent on manually to clean up the
overspray (and, no, I'm _not_ searching back through the thread to find
it... )...

Only when and if OP actually finishes an investigation and reports back
will anything else possibly be learned...
True enough.
But, being usenet, it certainly can't/won't slow down conjucture,
can/will it?

--

I don't believe arcing itself generated the heat, I believe arcing
caused a fire in the wall cavity that generated the heat before it self
extinguished. I'd put 80% odds on the OP finding significant fire damage
in the wall cavity when he opens it up.

I'll take that bet -- I think it's external by about 90%...

Same here.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
Dan Espen wrote:

dpb writes:

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , "CraigT"
wrote:
All right, I've been convinced by you guys to open up the wall.
My prediction of what you will find: absolutely nothing wrong.
I still think the cause is what I said the first time: solvent
exposure, either in the form of overspray from staining the deck, or
whatever was used to clean up the overspray.
Before opening up the wall, at least look at the back side of the
siding you removed. If the problem *was* a heat source inside the
wall, then the damage on the back side should be at least as bad as
the damage on the face. OTOH, if there is no (or only slight)
discoloration visible on the back side, that would be the strongest
possible indication that the source of the damage was on the outside
of the house -- with solvent exposure being IMO the most likely
culprit.

I gotta' go w/ PeteC on this mostly...the OP said the solvent/deck was
done in '06 and this damage didn't show up until within the last two
weeks -- that's pretty long incubation time for a solvent to act.

Looks like discoloration to me.

Yes, looking again on a CRT monitor it does look like discoloration.

I assume this means I'll be seeing an apology from you sometime soon?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

In the original photo, the center of the damaged area can be seen to be at
roughly the same height as the handle on the sliding door. In the second set
of photos, that same handle is visible at roughly the same height as the
countertop backsplash -- thus, while some of the damage is indeed below the
cabinet top, not all of it is. Nearly half of it is above as well, and the
visibly damaged area on the outside definitely extends at least a short
distance above the top of the backsplash.

So suddenly OSB has the same fire rating as sheetrock? I'm sure the fire
marshal would be very surprised.

Where did I say that? First, you can't see things that plainly *are* there.
Now, you *are* seeing things that *aren't* there.

So you're claiming that a fire inside the wall that transfers enough
heat through the OSB to deform the vinyl siding is also certain to
transfer enough heat through the sheetrock on the other side of the wall
to show indications on the fairly dark painted wall surface?


I retract my suggestion that you have your eyes checked. The problem seems to
be an inch or two farther back.

Have you ever seen sheetrock exposed to a fire? The amount of steam
released on the side exposed to fire which carries heat away? The
significant lag time before the opposite side of the sheetrock begins to
heat to any significant level? The fire rating given to sheetrock vs.
OSB?

Pete C.

In article ,
(Doug Miller) wrote:

In article , "Pete C."
wrote:

You're quite the moron aren't you? You are the only one who has ever
suggested that there would be discoloration on the vinyl siding. Vinyl
siding will soften to the point of sagging from gravity well before it
will discolor. The photos the OP posted clearly do not show any
discoloration on the siding either.

The photos
the OP posted VERY CLEARLY show substantial discoloration of the siding.
Here's the link that was in the original post:
http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/Squisher/IMG_6627.JPG



Thanks for re-linking that photo. Substantiates my WAG that the sun
caused this. Look at the shadow from the light fixture. Points right
towards the melted area. Could've been the glass in that fixture,
theoretically at least.

My skepticism about the barbecue is that, as others have said, it's a
hell of an unlikely place to park a barbecue. Railing in the way, right
in front of the door.

Smitty Two wrote:
....
My skepticism about the barbecue is that, as others have said, it's a
hell of an unlikely place to park a barbecue. Railing in the way, right
in front of the door.

To "park" it yes...to use it from in the kitchen w/o having to walk so
far; not such a stretch...

--

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , "Pete C." wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

*What* signs?

* More damage to the Tyvek wrap than the siding.

Have you actually looked at the photos?

A number of times.


* Extra nail visible in the sheathing in the suspect area.

Yep, nails start invisible fires all the time.

They damage wiring, create shorts and start fires with some regularity.
Indeed that is the reason for code requirements regarding stapling
wiring back from the edges of the studs and the use of metal nail
protection plates at locations where wiring passes through studs close
to the edge.


* Four electrical boxes surrounding the suspect area.

And yet *no* evidence of any electrical fires visible anywhere.

Apparently none that you are able to realize.




Look, I'm not saying that he absolutely shouldn't open up the wall -- just
saying that he should look at the back side of the vinyl siding first,
which
he does not appear to have done. Somebody asked him a couple days ago what
the
back side of it looked like; as far as I can tell, he hasn't answered that
question yet.

And I've noted that looking at the back of the siding is not likely to
show any discoloration since it was not exposed to direct flame, it was
exposed to moderate heat, heat that will deform the vinyl siding well
before it discolors it.

Still waiting for your explanation of how your magic heat source discolors the
vinyl siding on the surface *away* from the heat, but not on the surface
*toward* it...

I never made any such claim. You are the only one who ever suggested
there would be discoloration on the siding.

False. You wrote:

True. I never once claimed there was any discoloration on the siding.


"Heat coming through the sheathing could very
easily build to the level required to soften and deform the vinyl siding
without discoloring the back side."

I clearly state "soften and deform", and nowhere state "discolor".


The siding is visibly discolored; no suggestion is necessary. And I was not
the first to suggest that the OP should check for discoloration on the back
side, either.

Looking at the photo again on a system with a CRT monitor, it does
appear that there is some discoloration. In that case I would expect
comparable discoloration on the back side of the siding as well. My
assessment of the likely cause remains unchanged.



Suggest you go to your local building supply place and get a sample of
vinyl siding and a piece of OSB. Place the siding on top of the OSB in
your oven and start baking it at the lowest temp, say 150-170 degrees.
When the siding starts to sag check the back for any discoloration.

That "test" obviously doesn't even come close to replicating the conditions
you believe to exist. Here's a better one: place the siding on top of the OSB,
outdoors, and then build a wood fire underneath the OSB. When the surface of
the vinyl siding *away* from the heat source begins to discolor, examine the
surface of the siding *toward* the heat source, *and* the OSB, for signs of
damage. Go ahead -- try it. Then tell us what you find.

Try applying Tyvek and vinyl siding onto the OSB and then torch the OSB
from the back until the vinyl deforms.

OK, fine, conduct the test that way. Get back to us and let us know what you
find out.

It's not my house that is at risk of burning down based on your bad
advice. If my assessment turns out to be incorrect, the only damage is a
half hour of work removing and replacing a small piece of OSB.


Again, you are the only one who
has made any claims of discoloration on the vinyl siding.

Look at the OP's original photo. It's visibly discolored.

Not on an LCD monitor it isn't. On a good CRT it looks like it is. One
more example of why LCDs shouldn't be used for critical graphics work.





It's also been suggested to the OP that he perform a test on a scrap of
siding, to see if the stain and the solvent he used will produce similar
damage. He hasn't yet reported results of that test, either.

The solvent use in question was many months ago, and the damage to the
siding was obvious enough that it is very unlikely it went unnoticed all
those months.

Yet you don't find it unlikely at all that a heat source inside the wall would
discolor the surface of the vinyl siding *away* from the heat source, while
leaving the surface *toward* the heat source undisturbed.

Where is this magic discoloration on the surface of the vinyl siding you
claim? The OP's photos do not show any discoloration on the vinyl
siding.

Wow. You are so firmly fixated on your idea that it simply *must* be due to a
heat source inside the wall that you can't even see what's right in front of
you.

I'm fixated on the evidence that indicated an internal heat source is
likely, which includes the more significant damage to the Tyvek, and the
fact that the position of the damage to the siding would not align with
a grill being moved too close and radiating heat.

The wall segment between the railing and the door is about 24" wide
based on the 4" wide outlet. A grill is about the same or greater depth
and if positioned there would have also damaged the siding closer to the
door. The damage also appears to continue behind the railing, something
that would be very unlikely with radiant heat from a grill.


Go look at the original photo posted by the OP -- for the first time, since
it's plain you haven't seen it before -- and you'll see that discoloration.

I've seen it plenty, and on an LCD monitor it doesn't appear discolored.
On a CRT monitor it does.



Doesn't say much for your ability to evaluate what's likely or unlikely.

Doesn't say much for your reading comprehension or visual acuity.

Ummm... *I'm* not the one who's unable to see clearly visible discoloration on
the siding.
[snip]
Where is this discoloration you claim? The OP's photo
(http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/Squisher/IMG_6627.JPG) does not show any
such discoloration.

It certainly does. Better have your eyes checked, Petey.

Monitor, not eyes. It doesn't change my assessment though since the
other evidence clearly supports my conclusion and discoloration of the
siding doesn't affect that conclusion one way or another.


If you can't differentiate a shadow from
discoloration, that's your problem.

"Shadow" ??? ROTFLMAO!


The same "objective" analysis of the damage apparent on the successive
layers,
namely, severe damage to the siding (outermost), slight damage to the Tyvek
(next inside), no damage evident on the OSB (innermost of the three visible),
also led you to conclude that the damage was caused by a heat source INterior
to the home. Right, a heat source INside the wall causes the greatest damage
on the OUTside, and the closer you get to the heat source, the less damage is
apparent.

Your analysis of the damage is seriously flawed. The damage to the
Tyvek, namely shrinkage and melting to the point of holes forming, is
significantly greater than the damage to the vinyl siding, namely
softening and sagging.


Phooey. You *began* with the assumption of an internal heat source, and you're
inventing explanations for it, in the absence of any clear evidence.

I've noted plenty of evidence to support an internal heat source,

You haven't noted any evidence at all, Pete, just a bunch of assumptions.

No, I've clearly noted the evidence. Indeed the fact that the damage
continues behind the railing almost completely rules out an external
source. I raise my probability of finding fire damage within the wall to
95%.


you've
not noted any evidence to back your claims and indeed you have
fabricated claims not supported by anything the OP has posted.

"Fabricated claims"?? You mean like noting the same discoloration that other
posters have noted as well, the same PLAINLY OBVIOUS discoloration that you
are for some reason unable to discern?

Discoloration that from what we know so far tells us absolutely and
sways the analysis of the other evidence not at all. If you have
evidence that there is not comparable discoloration on the back side of
the siding, let us know, otherwise we have to base our conclusions on
the other evidence which clearly supports an internal heat source.

Pete C.