Yes Mr. Greentree, I am in Saskatchewan.  I heard a US comedian call us USA's attic.

Within city limits, you need to be a certified installer for any system you put in.  Even with 2 systems that are virtually identical in technical appearance and install, certification is required in each and every system.  In some of our cities, not even that is required.  Outside the city limits ... your sister could be a builder here too.

Frankly, I think that selling ICF systems to unqualified installers does SEVERE damage to the credibility of the entire ICF industry.  It gives people the impression that "anyone can install them".   

I recently tried to help a fellow who took out a permit, couldn't find anyone to install for him, so bought from a big box and installed the grade beam himself.  No inspection, wrong steel, wrong kind of system than was stated on the blueprints, and the walls waivered up and down and in and out by over an inch in places (on 24 foot long walls).  Nightmare city!  I don't think it is unfair to say that selling ICF to unqualified installers is like selling dynamite to children or surgical equipment to DIY'ers. 

We went thru similar problems with wood basements.  Anybody with a hammer and saw could put one in, with the obvious failures and problems.  I set up this province's first home inspection business about 26 years ago and saw some really bad jobs.  I recall one job in particular that the builder must have forgot a basement window, and cut it in with a chainsaw ... no headers, etc. ... just a hole for the window.  Then they poured a driveway right against the wall and when you looked down the wall ... it looked like a roller coaster ride.  For many years now, regardless of how well built a wood basement is ... most people avoid them like the plague. 

I am wondering if there is potential for DIY ICF installed homes re-sold in the future to disclose who installed these systems.  Might this be a "Must use genuine ***** car parts or warranty is void" ???  We still have that for UFFI insulation disclosure requirement around here from nearly 30 years ago.

ACI 318 and other documents have standards regarding structural acceptability of poured concrete walls and floors. Like that Bare Naked Ladies song, "its all been doooooone BEfore" ICF's should and do fall under these same standards in my opinion. Boy would I like the standards to be tighter, so I'm not infilling post tension structures that are out of plumb and level an inch in ten feet! But they pass inspection for structural requirements, as has the Sydney Opera House.
We should not worry the consumer that because a wall is wavy or out of plumb, it is deficient structurally. Rather, wavy and out of plumb-properly reinforced and poured- mainly affects the finished aesthetic properties of the structure. The problem is, ICF is unforgiving as it mirrors the finished wall surface; other than the 1/2 inch rasp factor that most forms have. As an example, framers usually set their basement walls out 4 or 4.5 inches from the poured concrete, so the 3.5 inch stud wall doesn't hit bulged portions, and drywall is affixed to the "straight" studs....But the poured wall guy has been trained to make sure the top of the wall is FLAT. And this is a big ICF tolerance to (re)review, a bane of the industry which has turned a lot of framers from wanting to work off an ICF wall....

Now as far as perfection goes, I encourage to bang away at your acceptable tolerances to better the industry. If the walls aren't straight and plumb, drywall, trim, cabinets, crown moldings and exterior finishes may suffer aesthetic repercussions, or extra fees will be incurred during the building process to attain the heightened (or just plain reasonable) aesthetic expectations.
Heightend unneccessary installation related fees are of course detrimental to the industry, so we must find better ways (ahem and yes products)to provide the "better mousetrap..." As mentioned in posts above, a consumer/installer should always establish their tolerances prior to commencement of work.

Unfortunately, from my vantage out in the sticks, I do not see much light in the tunnel as far as help from manufacturers in the way of enforcing excellent installs. It has and will remain a sales based industry, instead of a service based industry. I believe that the current marriage of the ICFA with the EPS molders associations will focus on selling lots and lots of harmless and "green" foam beads, not installing them better. But we'll see. Maybe we should lobby to throw a clause in the pending health care bill that will throw manufacturers in jail if they don't make sure that we have straight walls hahahah.

The manufacturers all have put an enormous amount of effort into tech manuals, code acceptances, and installation guides. Most of them can refer qualified installation expertise when it is requested although only one company I know of has invested in its own installation crews, overhead, and resulting liabilities; oh and profits.

So to recap,
It is up to the installer to promote their company with excellent service and quality, knowing that not every job is a good job, but confident the good jobs will come along and fit in.
It is up to the consumer to do their due diligence while choosing products and service providers. Stop just researching big screens and cell phones and car crash tests, (that's what Consumer Reports says) and start researching the biggest investment, your residence.
Manufacturers, get your butts in gear get us some product that doesn't shrink and is overall more consistent, cheaper, and delivered on time. I also think that if a manufacturer refers an installer, the manufacturer should be held partially liable for the work performed. That will make manufacturers more responsible on who they refer their leads to. In this competitive market, it seems manufacturers are schmoozing the cheapest installers to get the block sale, instead of working with those best qualified, who will generate a repeat sale and be profitable doing it.

As always in a nutshell, and in my humble opinion.
Kevin
www.icfinstall.com

Irnivek

 

That was a well articulated post Kevin.

 

As I have been told by many ICF installers throughout NA, there really is no magic formula for producing a wall that is not wavy, straight and plumb, and  meet the tolerances that have been proposed on this thread.

The issue is how can you make any money, and get any jobs by doing so..

Although I do not agree with the practice, I have spoken to several ICF manufactures and distributors who have candidly (and off the record) told me that the best ICF installs, ( and the worst) that they have ever seen, were done were by do-it yourself homeowners.

The reasons being that the amount of time and bracing required to properly install their systems, were not a factor to these  do-it yourself homeowners , but only the finished ICF product was.

All the distributors and manufactures out there, know exactly what the negative features of their respective systems are and how to compensate for them, during the installation and pouring process.

And in these good installs, that these gentlemen were referring to, the homeowners followed their instructions to the letter.

Time and the amount of bracing was no object.

 

The ICF industry is over 40 years old now.

And we still do not have guidelines and tolerances for the end user: which is the homeowner ,to gauge a good job from a bad one.

It has been a real struggle out there for many ICF manufactures. The  costs are high, the margins are razor thin, and with the green movement becoming the flavour of the month in the homebuilding industry, new ICF manufactures seem to be coming out of the woodwork every day.

All of this,  depending on what report you read, with ICF’’s only having 5 to 10 percent of the market.

As far as the ICFA goes, I believe that the majority of the board members on the ICFA repesent ICF manufactures.

That fact alone speaks for itself, as to how motivated they will be to establish guidelines and tolerances that would expose inherent weakness in their ICF systems.

Now to be fair, as a result of the new players coming on board, many of  the current ICF’s are of much better quality than they were 5 years ago.

 

Your example of how ICF is unforgiving, as it mirrors the finished wall surface which in turn leads to the finished aesthetic look of the finished product, is exactly why the ICF walls need to be straight, plum and with no waves.

 

We as an industry must leave the end user, a finished ICF wall that will not mirror the deficiencies of the ICF below it, but rather the quality of the ICF and its installation.

 

If ICF installer’s had to meet specific industry wide standards and tolerances on all there install’s, then they would only choose to  install an ICF system that will allow them to do so , and still have enough money left to make a profit on the job.

This in turn would force the ICF manufactures to either improve their ICF system or else install them themselves, as they  won’t have anyone to install their product.

 

This can only happen if industry wide guidelines and tolerances are put into place so that the end user has a gauge to measure with ,so he can choose an ICF system that will allow his installer to give him the quality job he is paying for and deserves.

As in most cases where a quaility assurance program has been put in place, it is not the manufactures and installers who already have a product and do the quailty of work necessary, that are resisting the program, but rather it is those who unable to so, or  just plain won't. 

This May help.

Anyone with questions please send me a PM, I will do my best to answer.

BTW there is a formula for obtaining good solid ICF walls, there is also an inspection proceedure.  As a building code chapter 17 inspector, and expert witness to many court cases, I can say that it is easy to inspect and there is also a checklist for such an inspection process which can eliminate a lot of issues further down the road.

Mark Ross