| Client type | Property manager, on behalf of the owner and their insurer |
|---|---|
| Building | Four-storey wood-frame residential, 48 units, constructed 2009 |
| Retainer | Determine the source and extent of water ingress; recommend remediation |
| Disciplines | Forensic engineering · Building science · Structural |
| Duration | Investigation 3 weeks · repair design 5 weeks · field review through construction |
The situation
Occupants on the top two floors reported staining and odour along exterior walls following a wind-driven rain event. A previous contractor had replaced sealant at the windows twice without resolving the complaints.
Investigation
What we did.
Visual review and moisture mapping
Interior and exterior review of the affected elevations, with moisture meter readings recorded on a unit-by-unit basis.
Thermographic survey
Infrared imaging of the affected walls under a temperature differential, identifying anomalies at the window head and roof-to-wall transition.
Invasive openings
Six exploratory openings made through cladding and sheathing, documenting the condition of the water-resistive barrier, flashing and framing.
Analysis
Assembly reviewed against the drawings of record and the applicable edition of the building code; hygrothermal modelling used to test the proposed repair assembly.
Finding
Missing head flashing, not failed sealant.
Water entered above the window openings where head flashing had been omitted and the water-resistive barrier was not lapped over the window flange. Sealant replacement had addressed a symptom at the wrong plane.
Outcome
Targeted repair over full re-clad.
Remediation was limited to the two affected elevations, with framing replacement at three locations. Sealed drawings and specifications were issued for tender, and field review confirmed installation before cladding was closed in.
2 of 4
Elevations requiring remediation, against an initial contractor recommendation to re-clad the building.
Occupied throughout
Work staged so that no unit required relocation during construction.
Cause documented
Findings supported the owner’s position in the subsequent claim against the original installer.
Replace all figures above with real, verifiable project outcomes before publication.
Similar problem?
Tell us what you are seeing and we will tell you what it takes to find the cause.