PS. This is the company's web site: http://www.premiersips.com/.

Check out the situation inJuneau, Alaska, where dozens of SIPS have failed.

The failures are often traceable to poor on-site installation, but also to manufacturing faults. See especially, the engineers' perspectives in the linked piece.

Check with your insurer, too, to see their position.

To have them say that in 12 years their system was depreciated about 25% must reflect they don't expect these systems to last!!!!

They last about 50 years, about the same as OSB sheathing on a conventional roof. But if you can find a claim to the contrary in their literature, you might have a case.

They last about 50 years

That should have read: "They are, in effect, saying they last about 50 years."

In any case, I see Premier offers a limited 20-year warranty (p.8), details of which are not posted on line.

Classic case of newer trends that are all the rave not given a chance to perform or be "studied and tested" intelligently before hitting the mainstream all in the name of "going green" or "achieving higher efficiency" goals.

Something to be said about "tried and true"!

Worthy...Thank you for the reference to the problems reported on SIPS way back in 2001. It is unfortunate that when I do a search on either Bing or Google for problems that all I get in response are lots of glowing articles about how great these systems are! I now see my posting is showing up....so hopefully others are forewarned.

Note our house was NOT in Juneau, rather in a dry though sometimes frigid Montana. We wish Premier knowing of their panel and installation problems would step up for us!

peterbob....you might want to ck out greenbuildingtalk.com They have a forum there on SIPS.

Failing in SIPs roofs (btw, its structural INSULATED panels....) is typically due to moisture getting into the seams. SIPs do not create a continuous insulated plane like they suggest to people. They do have issues where the splines are in the roof, and that is typically where the failures have occured. This has been discovered to be a major condensing point for moisture since there is basically no insulation in your roof at these locations. SIPs are good for walls, however if you want to use them on roofs, I would still place exterior insulation on top to create a continuous insulation layer (thickness according to the dew point levels, approx. r12-13 for your area) to help prevent failures in the feature. Doing this makes an already expensive roof system even more expensive. As proven...a simple vented roof will always be the best option 9 times out of 10.

Izerac...thanks for the correction,,,At one time I knew these were Structural Insulated Panels, but obviously had a brain freeze...probably why I couldn't find anything on web searches.

As the years go by, seems these blocks occur more often...wonder if I am getting old?

Robin0919...thanks for reference to greenbuildingtalk

Worthy, the 20 year warranty is that they will bring you a new load of SIPS and unload them in your yard....no pun intended, but rather "worthless."

So if they're agreeing to pay 75% of the total cost of replacing the roof panels, they're actually exceeding their warranty.

The Juneau failures were a result of VERY sloppy installation with no attempt made to seal the joints.

As more SIPS homes are built there will be more cases of failures. This doesnt mean they are not an appropriate product. Traditional roofs fail all the time.

Not all SIPS have splines in the joints and indeed can be a true layer of continuous insulation. They are a great product for most vaulted ceiling situations. They have been around since the 30s and can last hundreds of years if properly installed and protected.

Very sorry for your trouble peterbog. So the failure is a result of delamination? I think your story is important for those considering this product. Please keep us posted on how everything plays out.

Dr. Lstiburek did a report for the SIPA on the Juneau situation. The report is not available gratis but SIPA has provided these conclusions from the report, blaming mostly poor on-site work and the failure of adhesives, perhaps due to climate and installation methods.

However, inthis more recent article by Lstiburek (2010), he says that SIP roofs would benefit from additional measures to vent excess moisture, such as a vented over-roof.

See also Green Building Advisors, which offerssuggestions on improving SIP roofs.

In other words, rebuilding your roof with the same SIPs that failed may not be enough to avoid future problems.

Thanks Worthy! Familiar with Joe's advice but have never read that insight article before.

This articles advice should be applied to any "hot roof" vaulted ceiling situation in cold climates not just SIPS.

Iam not aware of any SIPS roof failure resulting from the effects in the article outside of very cold climates. I personally think properly foaming/caulking/taping the seams would eliminate the need of a vented over roof but I will concede it appears to be best practice, especially for the hundreds of years lifespan.

"I personally think properly foaming/caulking/taping the seams would eliminate the need of a vented over roof but I will concede it appears to be best practice, especially for the hundreds of years lifespan. "

Problems can occur whenever field installed seaming must be used.

Any type of system that relies on field work like this is poorly conceived from the start.

It is possible to perform all sorts of work in the field, but it is NOT going to be inexpensive, eating into the 'cost savings' of the method.

Look at the 'Big Dig' in Boston.
Incorrectly installed epoxy anchoring resulted in a death when a large concrete panel fell on a car, and this job was (at least supposed to have) high QC.

There are good reasons that field applied adhesives are NOT relied on for structural support in most single family home construction.

Good QA for epoxy bonding requires EVERY BATCH to be tested.
Test articles are made as the material is used, then subject to testing.
Failures in testing require rework, an often expensive occurrence.

Good point but its one of the main reasons SIPs are so appealing. They have FAR fewer seams to detail than conventional construction.

usually it is lack of experience that causes
moisture to delaminate.
SIPS is a great product.
If I were to rebuild thats how I'd go.

best of luck.

Good positive discussion: Thanks everyone!

I obviously would not use SIPS again for a roof. There is just too much room for error. Between manufacturer's quality control that evidently has caused our SIPS to fail and finding trained individuals to ensure installation is correct. (How many of you can find your carpenter after 12 years who is sufficiently wealthy to come back and fix an installation problem under a warranty... That just isn't going to happen!)

What I am reading about the details required to ensure sealing - and what appears to be the best recommendation of leaving a space between the SIP and shingle....essentially a second roof, the cost appears to be just too much for the benefits one hopes to get.

Conventional framing and closed cell foam appears to provide most of the benefit without all the risks and appears to be much less expensive as you don't need cranes to lift SIPS, any framing carpenter can build the structure, so the only specialized requirements are in spraying the foam.

Also what can't be answered is whether the life of a SIP will be equivalent to conventional? We know there are conventionally framed roofs in place hundreds of years later. But, as we unfortunately learned, 12 years was presumed by the manufacturer to be 25% of the life, giving an expected life of less than 50 years. Who would want to buy one of these houses in 30 or 40 years?

If there is failure, the fix is TOTAL roof replacement, not to mention the inconvenience, and warranties that just provide a new SIP if it fails. (Equivalent to providing just new framing boards and insulation if your conventional roof fails, which if did occur likely would require just replacement of a small section.)

I didn't mentioned that the upstairs under the roof SIPS is a finished area, bedrooms for the home. So in addition to roof structure the entire upstairs must be redone....drywall, carpet, etc.... It is very inconvenient and costly to move out of over 1/3 of your house for a few weeks.)

I reiterate our problem is not with excess moisture. Montana is a desert....12 inches of annual moisture total...that includes both rainfall and snow. Typical humidity in the 20% range....So there is no mold, or mildew, or other nasty stuff growing just a failing roof.

The moisture problems mentioned above is from exfiltrating INTERIOR air. The warm, humid air flows through the seams to contact the cold sheathing and framing and condenses. If the installers had done a better job sealing the ceiling plane then the SIPs may not have failed. But perhaps as you suggest, moisture has nothing to do with it and its the foam to OSB bond that has failed which is what your story sounds like. Urethane foams also tend to have a stronger bond than the styrenes.