How Do I Keep from Burning Up My House After I Heat Shingles with Blowtorch?

Yeah right along with a doctor whom patient has died due unforeseen complications

and

DA's that convicted innocent an person because thats where the evidence led

A train engineer who's cars have left the track due to engine failure

Pilot who's plane has crashed due to mechanical problems

Are we now to condemn people for accidents in which their is no fault and take away their rights in this forum with popular opinion?

With all due respect, ozzb, I think you missed the point, as did the person, who gave you a GA vote. Electroman in post #3 understood it correctly.

Skeeter

"So, my question is... are roofers still allowed to vote and serve on juries?"

Just answered the question that you asked.

I find it very hard to condemn some one from speculation from news media theatrics.

As I have read that the roofers had followed policy in standing fire watch for an hour after completing the job. May be that the policy makers are the ones you want to crucify.

"So, my question is... are roofers still allowed to vote and serve on juries?"

Just answered the question that you asked. I find it very hard to condemn some one from speculation from news media theatrics. As I have read that the roofers had followed policy in standing fire watch for an hour after completing the job. May be that the policy makers are the ones you want to crucify.[i[

No, you did not answer the question I asked, but it was a rhetorical question, anyway. You posted the following...

Yeah right along with a doctor whom patient has died due unforeseen complications and DA's that convicted innocent an person because thats where the evidence led A train engineer who's cars have left the track due to engine failure Pilot who's plane has crashed due to mechanical problems Are we now to condemn people for accidents in which their is no fault and take away their rights in this forum with popular opinion?

None of your examples in support of foolish roofers logically compares with the incident that resulted in the fire. And, I seriously doubt that the roofers waited around for an hour, watching for smoke, as was reported. I'll bet that is just the story the roofers told.

Skeeter, by the sounds of ozzb's response I think he may have been one of the roofers !!!!!!

Yeah or should I have said yes to clarify yeah does answer the question are roofer still allowed to vote and serve on juries.

"None of your examples in support of foolish roofers logically compares with the incident that resulted in the fire. And, I seriously doubt that the roofers waited around for an hour, watching for smoke, as was reported. I'll bet that is just the story the roofers told.

Well they will get their day in court if necessary but with public opinion like yours maybe we should just hang all roofers. They are foolish, don't follow procedure, tell stories and we don't need any more fires.

I cannot comment on the use of a blowtorch to heat seal the shingles since I have no knowledge of the project or materials involved. Presumably the roofers followed the instructions and policies of their supervisor or employer. If that's true, perhaps this accident will result in appropriate management changes.

I suspect the roofers were being paid to apply roofing and follow orders and that was probably also reflected in their wages.

If they did that, the fault (if any) lies with whomever was in charge.

Sometimes you really do get what you pay for.

As it wasn't an unexpected event I would agree, it wasn't an accident it was more of a 'incident'...

I would have thought that word would convey the meaning a little better...?

By the way, i thought shingles was a nasty illness - what are these 'shingles'???

John

What do you call individual asphalt roof coverings in the U.K.? Let me guess... "house bonnet tar pieces"? :-)

OMG, Heating shingles, asphalt i assume, with a torch? There may have been a "studio requirement" such as must hold under 80mph induced winds several hours / days after laying the roof. I don't know. I do know that I roofed hundreds of roofs in CA during the 70's and 80's with asphalt roofing shingles. There is a layer of tar on each the 3-tab shingle sheets. These are designed to seal the roof " in time" after the nails / staples first adhere them to the roof. Never use a torch on a roof unless you are applying a relativele new product on a " flat roof" that is the rolled asphalt with a layer of tar underneath. The tar is melted by the torch and rolled out as it melts. Very simple operation. If done with common sense. Put your shoe in the torch leaves you running for the water jug!.

I believe shingles in England et al are the same as here in Australia, They are a very old form of roofing. Normally timber slabs split from logs, forming wooden tiles which are nailed to the roof ina cross hatch method similar to slate roof. They can last well over 100 years although many shingle roofs have been covered with Corrugated Iron sheet these days. You can tell when this has happened as a bare iron roof is bloody noisy when it rains whereas if therea re shingles underneath the noise is far less. Your Asphalt tiles are not used over here to my knowledge; frankly as asphalt burns I too would not be using a flame to heat them, thoughj I might use a Hot Gun or similar.

Given these guys stuck around for an hour I think it is obvious the fire was unexpected after that time and therefore an accident by your definition.

I bet they were not installing shingles, but instead a "torch-down" roof. Especially in Southern California, shingles normally seal themselves from being heated by the sun. A torch down roof, using roll material, is sealed with a roofing blow torch. You'd think a good precaution might be to hose down the roof after it has cooled for half an hour or so.

You've got my vote, ken, on the roof being flat with rolled material applied with a torch. That does make more sense than the report of a blow torch being used to apply individual shingles. Then, again, if the roofers left the roof when the chance of fire still existed, perhaps they were using the torch on shingles. :-) Somehow, my perception is that the roofers really didn't care whether or not the roof caught fire.

Wooden shingles were outlawed in London and many other English cities in 1662 after the great fire of London. The widespread use of wooden shingles was a major factor in the rapid spread of the fire. Asphalt shingles are are not generally permitted in the UK.

Errrm just a small point Chankley.

The great fire of London was after 1662 it was in 1666.

John

Asphalt shingles are are not generally permitted in the UK.

This makes no sense - since asphalt shingles, at least here in the US, have a fire rating that makes them preferable to nearly every other roofing material except slate and adobe (which tend to get heavy and expensive really fast..) If you can't use wood (understandable) and you can't use asphalt shingles, what ARE your typical roof materials in the UK?

As I mentioned somewhere else on this thread, I don't think we call them 'shingles'...

In fact I'm still not sure what a shingle is?!!

I did think it was a term used to describe the gravel put on the top of a flat roof made of overlapping layers of asphalt, which are melted into place using a large LPG torch - these are common in the UK?

But that is only for flat roof's, normally the roof is pitched and tiled.

John.

This makes no sense - since asphalt shingles, at least here in the US, have a fire rating that makes them preferable to nearly every other roofing material except slate and adobe (which tend to get heavy and expensive really fast..) If you can't use wood (understandable) and you can't use asphalt shingles, what ARE your typical roof materials in the UK?

Metal?

Consider these slightly amended phrasings:

Asphalt shingles are are not generally permitted applied in the UK.

...because they're not applicable on flat and very-low-pitched roofs?

[...and/or...]

Asphalt shingles are are not generally permitted applied (?) in the UK.

...because asphalt or mixed asphalt-fiberglass are to be are best in climates where sustained seasonal high temperatures are encountered, but to be avoided where (asphalt damage due to) perennial hard freezing is likely...

...and "glass" (no asphalt) shingles are used, instead, in "cold" climes where freezing is to be expected...?

If so, this distinction would hold true even in the US. Depending on your location, stores or distributors would stock or warehouse one or the other (possibly, but not likely, both - for "special" ordering). So, if you are accustomed to seeing "asphalt" shingles sold, you most likely live in an area where hot temps occur commonly, but low temp extremes are rare if ever. However, you might be accustomed to hearing people (mistakenly) refer to all shingles as asphalt whether asphalt or "glass" only. ....so it's always a good idea to ask or check the bundle packaging.

Of course, I could have misapprehended the statement that gave you fits; but the above is still a useful thing to know.

Almost all domestic roofing is with slate or tile. Various forms or asphalt roofing are use for flat roofs, garden sheds etc often with a grit or gravel covering. Modern industrial units tend to have metal roofs. However the typical North American asphalt shingle is virtually unheard of here. I have seen a few in the country side, but I cannot think of a single urban example. (I expect this will provoke a flood of examples!)

Oh thank you Chankley, I was beginning to think I was the only one who had never heard of these 'shingle' thingies!

John

When I was in the 5th grade my parents and I built a house ourself. The only thing we contracted out was the sheet rock. That house had a composition roof.

The next three houses we built had composition roofs as did the three appartments (by the way, if they are all built together, why are they called appartments?) we built. These were all built and roofed at various times throughout the year in the Kansas City, Mo area and it's suburbs. Some were roofed in the winter.

Not once did we use a torch to warm up the shingles. The shingles of the ones that were roofed in the colder months were stiffer to begin with but after the roof was on and with some sun exposure they all softened up and the tar strip softened up and adhered to the shingle below it.

We put some roofs on in the middle of the summer when it was very hot. Those shingles were very soft and pliable. We had to be quite careful when walking on the shingles when they were that hot so they would not get torn and also so we didn't scuff off too much sand.

In addition to putting on new roofs I have had my share of replacing roofs for other people as well as patching roofs for others. I've never used a torch and have never had a leaky roof.

So, I would say the answer is, put down the torch, pick up the hammer and get on with it.

Travis

Okay, let's lay off the guy. He obviously had a misunderstanding which led him to connect the (ineptly done and ineptly supervised) flat roof job at Universal with his own, pitched-roof re-shingling job.

The appropriate advise is: Go in peace and install your shingles. Your biggest hazard is falling off the roof...so do be careful. And, drink plenty of water.

When I saw a brief news clip of the studio fire, I was struck by the apparent ease with which the fire jumped from one building to another. My information on this is limited, but was the roof construction a factor in this?

A factor in the starting and/or propogation of fire? Or its jumping from building to building? (And are wer talking about the sound studio fire or the more recent Universal Studios set (backlot) fire?

Naturally, construction and construction materials plays a role in the ignition and spread of any fire. Weather conditions (high temperature, humidity, wind) are also an important factor...as was the case in the re-roof caused fire.

Other than weather, which was conducive to the fire's start and spread in the case of the studio fire, there is no way to know the comparative role that, say, construction or original construction materials may have played—the evidence was lost.

It would be a reasonable conjecture that worker error, either poor attention or technique (either workers or supervision) played a critical part; this, too, we can't know since since only those workers are there to witness, something they are not likely to do. According to the statements by the roofing contractor firm, all standard precautions were taken to monitor the roof after the installation. But even that was not enough (they said) to detect a latent condition...until it was too late. No doubt there will be reconsideration of procedures to prevent future occurences...perhaps having fire equipment and personnel on hand for inspection during or after work completion. Or standing by until all chance of ignition has passed.

Other than the possibility of defective workmanship, or defective new materials, it seems likely that construction form or material played a minor role (due to wood dessication that comes with aging and exposure) in the ignition event...no doubt the roof has been replaced before, probably numerous times.

If there is any detail that would answer your question better, it would probably come only by close observation of the lawsuits to come.