At the risk of being viewed as over reacting or over playing this issue I'd like to present some comments in response to a certain member's continual harping about the folly of a DIY's building an ICF house. He singled me out in another thread where vibrating concrete in a wall was discussed.

I spent 22 years in Quality Assurance and in contractor oversight. Contractors often exhibit serious lapses in skills, commitment, and care in doing their job. I learned early on a principle I labelled QA-QA-QA. The Questioning Approach of Quality Assurance leads to the Quintessential Answer! Case in point. I was doing an audit of a contractor who operated an ammunition plant for the US Army. In a particular process involving pressing explosives into metal grenade bodies the completed product often failed to pass ballistic testing. I asked the contractor about the process. What affect did ambient humidity have on the process. "I don't know." What affect did dwell time of the plunger have in pressing the explosive, and what was the impact of pressing speed. "I don't know." What was the affect of variation in the temperature of the grenade bodies, the explosive material, and the pressing equipment. "I don't know." My response, "Here you guys have been pounding powder for 40 years and you don't really know what it is you are doing." Visit JLConline sometime. That's a forum sponsored by the Journal of Light Construction for construction professionals. You'll see comments and photos of occasional real screw ups by licensed professionals.

I will never hesitate to ask questions of anyone about what it is they do, because even if they've been doing it for years they may not have explored or considered all aspects. When I question someone one of three results is the outcome. I learn something, or the person being questioned is prompted to modify or improve his methods, or his consideration and response substantiates the correctness of his methods. Asking questions is never derogatory or demeaning.

Now about licensing. I recognize that licensing of professionals and contractors is necessary to protect the public. When a state grants a license though, it means only three things. One, the state has determined that the licensee satisfies the criteria established to permit one to practice that trade or profession. Two,  the licensee is legally authorized to charge money for his/her services. And three, the licensee is now saddled with tremendous legal liability for the consequences of his/her actions. I had a PE license at one time but let it lapse about 30 years ago. There were two reasons. First and foremost was the legal liability associated with having it. I did not want that. Second, was the criteria I had to meet to get the license were virtually all academic. Very little, if any, real world experience played into getting it. That disillusioned me.

When the state grants a license to an individual, or company, there is no sudden imbuement of technical knowledge to the licensee, nor does it guarantee the licensee posses technical knowledge. This is much more the case with a contractor's license, where paying a fee is the primary requirement, than it is with professional licenses where a person has to pass a knowledge test. The latter does keep out the ignorant, but not always the incompetent.

Generally speaking, the single biggest advantage the licensed professional or tradesman has over the unlicensed practitioner is the legal ability to charge for his/her service. It also conveys to the public the aura of expertise.

Expertise is made up of a combination of technical competence, experience, knowledge, and skill. Any one of those can be compensated for by a greater measure of the others. The DIYs who successfully build an ICF house the first time are undoubtedly inherently long on competence and skill. Many, like me, took a lot of time gaining knowledge before building. I spent a year researching all aspects of the building process. I drew my own plans, 22 sheets compared to the usual 5 or 6 produced by a professional house designer. I built that house 2 or 3 times in my head before I started actual construction. We compensate for lack of experience by getting training and employing experienced trades people. That is why DIYers can be, and most of the time are, successful in their project.

I, for myself only, will be so brash and bold to declare that I could probably take any ICF block made, including Polycrete, and build a high quality house. A hotel, probably not. Ask my neighbor about my house. He sure wishes his stick frame house, built by a licensed professional, was even 80% as good as my ICF house, built by me, an unlicensed DIYer. I did have a licensed building contractor work with me though. That was required in order to get a loan from the bank.

I won't question your abilities or knowledge, I say you come on this site, ask questions to educate yourself, you were supported by the manufacturer and learned a lot, you are now helping spread your wealth of knowledge to others who ask the questions

There are certainly plenty of inadequate licensed professionals in the world. The point of licensing is to certify that the licensed individual has made some efffort (at least) to become educated to a minimum level of competence. Does licensing confer expertise? Of course not. Will it protect the naive from charlatans? Nope. Check my earlier posts and you will notice that I argue to hire a licensed contractor and check his references.

Regarding DIY: From its inception, the ICF industry marketed itself to DIY-ers and it has proven to be a gigantic strategic bungle. The result has been decades of horror stories about failed ICF installations that we are still trying to overcome. Mainstream builders, architects and engineers have shied away from ICF because it has been considered a fringe industry and unacceptable for "serious" projects. Some "professional" ICF installers continue to promote substantial projects on their websites that are installation disasters which are invariably exposed when you do a little digging. That having been said, certain ICF manufacturers have made great inroads with several State Governments. Polycrete has worked with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Naval Engineering Facilities Command (NAVFAC) for several years to bring wider acceptance to ICF construction in government contracting. We are now seeing the fruits of that work.

As the mainstream construction industry awakens to the benefits of ICF construction, it's critical that we not muddy the waters by propagating myths and superstitions about the basics of concrete construction. Serious professionals know when they are being BS-ed, and continuing to make statements like "internal vibration of walls is not necessary" just makes the industry look like a bunch of kooks.

Dmaceld's last comment is his most salient. He had a licensed contractor work with him on his DIY project. That's the smart way to do it.

Posted By BrucePolycrete on 04 Dec 2011 09:05 AM
There are certainly plenty of inadequate licensed professionals in the world. The point of licensing is to certify that the licensed individual has made some efffort (at least) to become educated to a minimum level of competence. Does licensing confer expertise? Of course not. Will it protect the naive from charlatans? Nope. Check my earlier posts and you will notice that I argue to hire a licensed contractor and check his references.

Regarding DIY: From its inception, the ICF industry marketed itself to DIY-ers and it has proven to be a gigantic strategic bungle. The result has been decades of horror stories about failed ICF installations that we are still trying to overcome. Mainstream builders, architects and engineers have shied away from ICF because it has been considered a fringe industry and unacceptable for "serious" projects. Some "professional" ICF installers continue to promote substantial projects on their websites that are installation disasters which are invariably exposed when you do a little digging. That having been said, certain ICF manufacturers have made great inroads with several State Governments. Polycrete has worked with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Naval Engineering Facilities Command (NAVFAC) for several years to bring wider acceptance to ICF construction in government contracting. We are now seeing the fruits of that work.

As the mainstream construction industry awakens to the benefits of ICF construction, it's critical that we not muddy the waters by propagating myths and superstitions about the basics of concrete construction. Serious professionals know when they are being BS-ed, and continuing to make statements like "internal vibration of walls is not necessary" just makes the industry look like a bunch of kooks.

Dmaceld's last comment is his most salient. He had a licensed contractor work with him on his DIY project. That's the smart way to do it.

I first began deeply researching ICF a couple of months ago, when I heard about ICF a few years ago most of the things I heard were negative comments about it. It was portrayed as a "fringe" unregulated and untested method of construction. As I revisited ICF a couple months ago, I had to really dig to find legitimate information on it. The GBT is providing a good platform.

When it comes to building my custom home, I will be honest, I am not 100% sold on ICF. My reservations are based on the lack of standards between ICF contractors. One ICF contractor will make a claim that internal vibration is not necessary and the other ICF contractor states it is mandatory. While I agree with the latter, this disunity among ICF installers scares me. One ICF contractor told me that for electric wiring inside the home, they simply cut out out the EPS and run Romex within the channel and then put the drywall on top of the EPS. THe other contractor told me that they run flexible plastic CONDUIT, run the electric wiring within that, then drywall it. I agree with the later installation method but again, this disunity among ICF contractors scares me.

Whether I build with the tried and true method of 2x6 wood frame or ICF, the jury is out. I am leaning towards ICF but I will REALLY have to get myself knowledgeable about ICF. I still don't have a definitive answer whether ICF or 2x6 framing w/Simpson ties will do better in an earthquake. Most engineers I talked to lean towards the 2x6 wood framing. Quoting the physics principle of, "The force of an earthquake on a building is directly related to its mass." The mass of an ICF structure is 10x greater than a wood frame structure.

I will continue to learn and pick peoples brains to educate myself and then I will have to make an educated decision which direction I will go.

.

Lbear,

Would it cost less to meet the code for earthquakes by using SIPS?  I have seen some SIPs tested to the point that the shake table broke before the SIP building collapsed.

Posted By Lbear on 04 Dec 2011 03:53 PM
My reservations are based on the lack of standards between ICF contractors. One ICF contractor will make a claim that internal vibration is not necessary and the other ICF contractor states it is mandatory. While I agree with the latter, this disunity among ICF installers scares me. One ICF contractor told me that for electric wiring inside the home, they simply cut out out the EPS and run Romex within the channel and then put the drywall on top of the EPS. THe other contractor told me that they run flexible plastic CONDUIT, run the electric wiring within that, then drywall it. I agree with the later installation method but again, this disunity among ICF contractors scares me.

It's not disunity at all, just a diversity of methods. Think asphalt roofing vs. steel roofing, or vinyl siding vs. Hardiplank, or asphalt driveway vs. concrete, or all 12 gauge 20 amp circuits vs. additional but less expensive 14 gauge 15 amp circuits where suitable. In construction there probably are a lot more cases of acceptable alternatives than there are absolutes. I can tell you when I was planning my house and estimated the costs of wiring with conduits vs. romex, the conduit approach was going to be 2 to 3 times more costly for material, let alone take more labor, and is much less amenable to last minute changes. In my case, the concrete contractor who did not believe vibrating was necessary for my ICF walls, except at the corners and at windows, was a guy who had probably spent 40 years placing concrete. If he is wrong, then that substantiates my point that experienced contractors don't always know it all. If he is right, then that proves my point about diversity of methods, and the methods can change depending on application. Take your pick. Keep in mind an ICF wall is a light duty use of concrete. It's not a heavy duty use like a mountain highway retaining wall. In the latter case you want to make sure the concrete sets up at the highest strength possible for the specified mix. In that case vibrating most likely is mandatory. In a residential wall, I'm not convinced it is.

Whether I build with the tried and true method of 2x6 wood frame or ICF, the jury is out. I am leaning towards ICF but I will REALLY have to get myself knowledgeable about ICF. I still don't have a definitive answer whether ICF or 2x6 framing w/Simpson ties will do better in an earthquake. Most engineers I talked to lean towards the 2x6 wood framing. Quoting the physics principle of, "The force of an earthquake on a building is directly related to its mass." The mass of an ICF structure is 10x greater than a wood frame structure.

True, the force on an ICF structure may be 10x that of what it is on a wood structure. But, what is the inherent strength of the structure to resist force? If the ICF can withstand 20x the force that a wood structure can, then in the end the ICF structure is 2 x stronger than the wood structure. You need to look at objective earthquake analyses to see how the strengths compare. Intuitively I would bet the ICF corner with all its rebar is far stronger than the nailed corner of a 2 x 6 frame. It also makes a difference how the earthquake is manifested at the ground surface. Will the ground simply move up and down? Or will it roll like a wave on water, or shift sideways back and forth, or just simply drop or rise? All of these actions will impart different directions of forces in the structure. How will each structure react to the different forces?

I've said it a number of times before, and I'll say it again. There are very few, if any, absolutes in home construction, including ICF. You just have to explore the alternatives and figure out which one fits your situation the best.

One ICF contractor will make a claim that internal vibration is not necessary and the other ICF contractor states it is mandatory. While I agree with the latter, this disunity among ICF installers scares me. One ICF contractor told me that for electric wiring inside the home, they simply cut out out the EPS and run Romex within the channel and then put the drywall on top of the EPS. THe other contractor told me that they run flexible plastic CONDUIT, run the electric wiring within that, then drywall it. I agree with the later installation method but again, this disunity among ICF contractors scares me.

No doubt, there's more than one way to skin a cat.  About the electrical, either way would work, so long as the wiring is far enough back from the surface of the DW to meet code.  If not, it needs to be run in conduit.  There's nothing magical about that.  The code clearly states that, but the method is up to you. 

Going back to the vibrate issue.  My pump truck driver says that nobody vibrates . . . except, of course, for me.  But, he also recommends adding water to the mix, which is already a pretty high slump to begin with.  I wouldn't vibrate a wall that has too high a slump, because you're asking for bows and bulges, and possibly a blowout.  If you pour at a low slump and pour in moderate lift heights, you can vibrate the crap out of the walls without issue.  Also, 6" forms have 25% less concrete than 8" forms, so you could imagine that you'll likely run into less problems with the vibrater on those walls.  Just have a couple football players with you, because humping that vibrator in and out every couple feet gets tiring real quick.  Long and short, if you run a high slump, vibrate with caution, but the pour will go a lot quicker, and you'll have a bit of energy left over.  If you absolutely want to make sure you have no voids, graveling, air trapped, etc.  pour at a lower slump and vibrate away.  You'll get your workout in for the week.

I can understand your dilemma.  Like when you are researching window bucks.  There are pro's and con's to everything.  V-bucks go in fast - pro.  Nailing trim to vinyl - con (especially if a little concrete sneaks between the v-buck and the foam).  Wood bucks are slow, can twist, warp, rot - con.  Solid surface to nail drywall, trim, windows, siding, etc - pro (big one in my book).

Dmaceld , your skill set and ability to reason sets you miles apart from the average DIY'er and the average ICF installer :-)
Your posts are always well thought out, positive, and a benefit to this board.

I have been a proponent of Installer licensing for a very long time, mainly due to the lack of support by the manufacturers to ensure quality installs.
It seems as though when an install goes wrong, the manufacturer does nothing to help the end user,and lays blame on the contractor,
 and walks away.
 
The industry as a whole suffers from the incident. 

My opinion is, if the manufacturer deems the buyer/installer qualified to buy the product,
 the manufacturer should accept some blame if things go awry.

What is your take ?

Do we really want a situation where we have to "qualify" in order to buy a product?

I'm not sure how manufacturers can be responsible for all uses of their product, both good and bad, unless they specify that you can only do it one, very specific way.

Don't we want innovation to be the American advantage?

Manufacturers DO want their products installed to their specifications or they absent responsibility for the product.

All manufacturers have their products professionally Engineered and provide tables, specifications and guidelines for the installer to use.

I believe Professional Standards would be a benefit for all of us who derive our living from this Industry.

Why should that even be an issue ?

Posted By eric monkman on 04 Dec 2011 09:14 PM
Dmaceld , your skill set and ability to reason sets you miles apart from the average DIY'er and the average ICF installer :-)
Your posts are always well thought out, positive, and a benefit to this board.

I have been a proponent of Installer licensing for a very long time, mainly due to the lack of support by the manufacturers to ensure quality installs.
It seems as though when an install goes wrong, the manufacturer does nothing to help the end user,and lays blame on the contractor,
 and walks away.
 
The industry as a whole suffers from the incident. 

My opinion is, if the manufacturer deems the buyer/installer qualified to buy the product,
 the manufacturer should accept some blame if things go awry.

What is your take ?

Thanks for the kind words. I appreciate it.

I don't know that installer licensing is required, other than the state issued contractor's license. I do believe though, there would be great benefit if the manufacturers operated a meaningful certification program, i.e., sell their product only to those contractors who have demonstrated an understanding of the manufacturers recommended installation practices. This is not to say the installer wouldn't be free to do things differently if the situation requires it. That was the case with my Daikin heat pump supplier, although the local factory distributor was the one who selected the installers they would sell to.

I bought my blocks from a Buildblock distributor/installer. I don't recall if BB would have sold the blocks directly to me or not, but I don't think so. No manufacturer should. I certainly don't agree with BrucePolycrete that blocks should never be sold to a DIY, but agree they should be sold through a distributor or installer who will provide sufficient oversight to avoid disaster. This does seem to be the predominate way most every DIY here at GBT does it. I personally would like to buy directly from the mfr if there ever is a next time, but then as you said, I'm not your average DIYer! I will say too that BB had available a very good installation manual. I printed it out and took it to Staples to have it bound, and kept it on the job site.

Holding the manufacturer liable for the installation problems isn't practical, but the mfrs should be held to absolute accountability for product quality, and for costs incurred due to poor quality. If you recall I had a significant problem with the BB corner blocks being oversize. I was not happy with the way BB handled the situation, and the quality of my installation suffered because of it. In my opinion BB should have unquestionably replaced all the oversized blocks, not just the ones that were still on the pallet, and compensated me for the time and cost involved in changing them out, even if that would have meant dismantling 50% of my stacked walls. Manufacturers would do well to be very proactive in making sure the customer is taken care of. If they run a certification problem, and have a series of problems with a particular installer or distributor, then yank the cert and stop supplying material.

Unfortunately, in this increasingly competitive world more and more manufacturers are adopting the attitude their responsibility stops at the shipping dock and everything is a commodity. I accept this as reality for most everything I buy, and seldom go back to the manufacturer for product help, but I'm different from most folks. In fact, there are times I do believe my life would be easier if I would just pay someone else to do things for me, even when I can do it, and sometimes do it better than the paid professional.

or they absent responsibility for the product.

Isn't that the status quo, then? As long as the product is installed as per specifications, why should it matter who the installer is?

This is not to say the installer wouldn't be free to do things differently if the situation requires it.

Or if he just feels a bit lazy one day? What if we have a contractor who just doesn't want to put up quite enough bracing and once in a while gets wavy walls? Are we to believe that the distributor will refuse to sell to him? Will the manufacturer blackball that contractor with all the Distributors?

ICF Hybrid could you address your reasons for not endorsing Professional Standards please ?

I'm not sure they help much or do anything. Particularly if you are talking about in conjunction with restraining trade. Some of the worst contractors I've seen have licenses and some of the best craftsmen I've seen don't. Do we really want to restrict the sale of hammers (or bricks) to people with licenses? If a DIY'er topples a brick wall, is the mfr liable?

Posted By ICFHybrid on 04 Dec 2011 10:34 PM

This is not to say the installer wouldn't be free to do things differently if the situation requires it.

Or if he just feels a bit lazy one day? What if we have a contractor who just doesn't want to put up quite enough bracing and once in a while gets wavy walls? Are we to believe that the distributor will refuse to sell to him? Will the manufacturer blackball that contractor with all the Distributors?

The problem really lies in the reluctance of state enforcement bodies to hold contractors accountable for shoddy work. My nephew-in-law is an HVAC contractor. He's the one who supplied and installed my Daikin system. Even he, as a contractor, has complained about the inability for home owners to receive compensation or corrective action from shoddy HVAC contractors. Time and again he has gone into a home to resolve a heating/cooling problem only to find the original installer did a crappy job, but the state will not provide any support in seeking restitution from the original installer.

Only when the cost of corrective action, or negative outfall, far outweighs the profit of short changing on work will contractors unhesitatingly do the job right the first time. That is if the contractor is not inherently committed to doing it right the first time because of his moral standards.

When I was at the Strategic Petroleum Reserve a contractor won the bid to build a concrete block building for electrical equipment. After about 5 or 6 courses of blocks were up the contract management engineer declared the work unacceptable due to poor workmanship. I guess it was pretty bad. He refused to take down the blocks and start over, and walked off the job. The contracting officer simply called the bonding company to let them know they had better get the building constructed one way or the other. A couple of days later the contractor was back, took down the blocks, and built the building quite nicely. Obviously, he was at risk of never being bonded again. The penalty for shoddy work was far too great for him to not do it correctly.

Unfortunately, bonding probably is not a viable tool in the average residential construction project, let alone the fact few homeowners would even know of it as a possible contract element.

To ICFHybrid
My reasons are to give credibility to the end user that their install will be done in a professional way,
and to give the install a better than average chance for success.
For those installers who have been around for a while, the threshold for licensing wouldn't be difficult.
A good credit rating would be necessary. 
There would be standard practices that "should" or "may" be adhered to , depending on the installers opinion,
and perhaps a record of installs listed, with other specialties, work locations etc.
Accredited Installers could be used by the DIY' crowd as consultant sign-offs on their works.
 
To Dmaceld,the bonding process could be downsized in that the Installer bonds to the Manufacturer say $5000.
The $5000 gets used for correction when necessary and the Manufacturer covers the rest.
A $5000 bond costs about $150. per year, no big deal.

Or the Installers Association buys an "errors and omissions" policy ?

Both of you make so many good points I can hardly address them.

The bonding thing is sorta interesting. I'm wondering how much it will raise the cost of services and block. That might be a good tradeoff for the average homeowner who can't or won't do their due diligence on something as important as hiring a contractor, but just another hit for us who work hard to find a tradesman who still cares about his work in the first place....

Posted By ICFHybrid on 04 Dec 2011 10:34 PM
Or if he just feels a bit lazy one day? What if we have a contractor who just doesn't want to put up quite enough bracing and once in a while gets wavy walls? Are we to believe that the distributor will refuse to sell to him? Will the manufacturer blackball that contractor with all the Distributors?

I would like to think the distributor has some value in this equation.   I am not in favor of direct selling (at least not yet in today's ICF world) for many of the reasons being discussed here -- and that's why I aligned with a block that only sells through distribution.    Clearly, a direct seller is going to have more problems than a seller with an distributor and installer network on the ground.    

As I put in a previous post.  I am not allowed to sell product to installers that are not trained -- we have an installer training class followed by two supervised installs required for the trained installer certificate.   I bend the rules just a little here if the do-it-yourselfer is willing to undergo on-site training with the participation of an experienced installer.  Also, if I know an installer has multiple successful installs with another block I will sell to him/her as well.  We know who the good ones are -- at least within a few hundred miles.

I have blackballed a contractor or two over the last few years.   Once, I even called one of my competitor distributors and informed them to keep a lookout for an installer that spelled trouble.   I have received similar calls from my competition.  We all want to the market to grow and no one cares more about your reputation than you do.   Regards.

I would say that ICF's should not be marketed as or to DIY. I would not necessarily say a person who feels competent should not DIY. In most cases licensing is more about collecting the fee or is used to keep non-resident contractors out. Very few jurisdictions are prepared to revoke a license so from a quality assurance point of view licensed means nothing.
I would like to see some training requirement but in some cases were this exists the manufacture or distributer gives a one hour lecture and hands out the toilet paper. If the manufacture is selling to DIY they should at least review the plans and the bar schedule and make site visits prior to any pours. While the ICF industry has seen a lot of crap and crappy installers, we have not seen dead installers incased in concrete. When that happens we will see changes! I for one don't understand how we have been so lucky not to kill or maim lots of people. I see both DIY and installers who have done many pours that have absolutely no understanding of the pressures of wet concrete and than we want to add water to the mix so we don't have to vibrate?