Masonry Magazine October 1997 Page. 33
Studies of EIFS Damage
Problems with synthetic stucco systems in the United States have been reported since the 1980s so it is really not a new phenomenon. Reports of water damage by building inspectors, architects, engineers and others appeared in Pennsylvania and Massachusetts in the late 1980s. By 1994, the problems were widespread enough that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) passed a set of standards for any HUD project on which EIFS were to be used. Using standards from the Exterior Insulation Manufacturers Association (EIMA) and the American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) as references, HUD issued "Use of Materials Bulletin (UMB) Number 101." This document includes minimum requirements for materials performance, application procedures, inspection provisions, and warranty demands. HUD also requires third party inspections of EIFS installations on their projects, and a 20-year warranty from the manufacturer. The HUD bulletin further prohibits the use of gypsum board sheathing as a substrate. In many installations on HUD properties, for example, water leakage had led to delamination or deterioration of the paper faces on the gypsum board sheathings, allowing the EIFS to detach from their structural substrates.
Numerous problems caused by water leakage in EIFS-clad homes began to surface in the Wilmington, New Hanover County, North Carolina area in 1995. A task force made up of building code officials, architects, engineers, home builders, manufacturers, installers, financiers and insurers conducted studies of some 300 homes there and found that over 90% of the homes had suffered damage from unusually high levels of moisture in the sheathing and framing behind the synthetic stucco cladding systems.
Other groups that have prepared special provisions for use of EIFS because of the problems they have experienced with them include the City of Vancouver, British Columbia (Canada), and the North Carolina Department of Insurance. The City of Vancouver amended its building code in 1995 to allow the use of EIFS only when drainage planes incorporated with the rainscreen principle were provided. The North Carolina Department of Insurance placed a moratorium on the use of EIFS until measures could be put into place to address the existing problems in North Carolina, and measures that would alleviate future problems for home owners could be implemented.
The author has seen buildings in the states of Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Pennsylvania that have experienced significant decay in the structural framing from water leakage past the EIFS. While some in the industry believe that the problems are primarily localized to the Wilmington, North Carolina area (New Hanover County), reports by others and the author's personal experience indicate that the problems are widespread.
A small amount of water contact over a long period of time can cause the same ultimate damage as a lot of water in a short period of time can. The damage may require costly repairs if left undetected for very long. While there are installations of the EIFS in which little or no damage has occurred to the structural systems behind them, there are enough problems with EIFS to suggest that every building, especially those in areas where rainfall rates are considerable, should be inspected regularly for leaks.
Who's At Fault when Problems with EIFS Occur?
Manufacturers believe that problems caused by water penetration through EIFS are the result of poor workmanship during application. Contractors and applicators argue that building owners do not maintain their EIFS properly. Building design professionals believe the problems are the result of an improper design because the EIFS have traditionally not incorporated a drainage plane or cavity behind them. Insurance companies do not want to pay for claims because the damage is not the result of a mechanical failure like a burst water pipe or a natural event such as a storm. With all of the finger pointing going on, the question of who is to remedy building owners for their problems with EIFS-clad buildings is being hotly contested in industry circles and in the courts at present.
Studies conducted by the author at Texas A&M University have found that U.S. firms have used EIFS in a different fashion from their European counterparts. In Europe, the typical substrate for EIFS has typically been masonry or concrete. Also, designers, manufacturers, contractors and installers in Europe seem to have maintained a greater respect for the possibility of water penetration and have provided drainage systems, flashings and weep holes to direct moisture from leaks back to the outside. Today, EIFS manufacturers in Europe are installing other finishes besides the typical polymer based coatings on their insulation boards. Cedar shingles, vinyl siding, aluminum siding, wood siding and other finishes are being used. In a nutshell, builders in Europe have experienced fewer problems with their EIFS because they have