Advanced enclosure failure investigation
How to investigate a failed roof-edge or wall enclosure element with a documented method: four failure families, the standards and published numbers behind them, worked calculations, and how to verify, case-study and report the evidence.
4 lessons · about 58 min · 13 diagrams · 1 video
Version 1.0.0
Builds on these modules
Lessons
0 of 4 complete
Lesson 1 · 12 min · 12 slides · 9 questions
Advanced enclosure failure investigation: principles and terminology
Why a failed edge is more than a leak, the four families of failure, the words the standards use, who does what, and the safety and authority steps that come before anyone touches a roof.
You will be able to: Define failure, mode, mechanism and root cause, name the four failure families of metal roof-edge and wall enclosure elements, and state who investigates, where each role stops and the safety boundaries before any access.
Not startedStart →Lesson 2 · 18 min · 12 slides · 17 questions
Advanced enclosure failure investigation: materials, standards and design constraints
What ES-1 tests and what it does not, how to read a manufacturer rating, what field data show, and the numbers behind galvanic corrosion, zinc loss and thermal movement.
You will be able to: Read ES-1 and a published rating correctly, match each failure family to the material property and number that governs it, and say whether a number is the standard's, a manufacturer's, an AFS register value or a typical value.
Not startedStart →Lesson 3 · 14 min · 12 slides · 11 questions
Advanced enclosure failure investigation: methods and worked application
A nine-step method, a field evidence checklist, safety at the edge, four worked calculations with every input sourced, and how to report what you found and how sure you are.
You will be able to: Run a documented investigation from complaint to evidence-backed statement, work the thermal, zinc and rating calculations with sourced inputs and units, and report observations apart from interpretations with stated confidence.
Not startedStart →Lesson 4 · 14 min · 12 slides · 12 questions
Advanced enclosure failure investigation: defects, verification and case study
Four verification questions, correct and incorrect installation evidence, a decision flow from evidence to cause family, a documented case pattern, an illustrative scenario and how to write it up.
You will be able to: Check an AFS-made piece against its order, check an installation against the published guide, weigh substrate and load, work an illustrative case, choose corrective options tied to a cause and document the evidence for review.
Not startedStart →
Practical task
Write a job packet for this hypothetical incident: a cleated aluminum coping lifted along a windward run of a low-slope roof, and a stained interior wall below. Use only the evidence you list, label every number as standard, manufacturer, AFS register or typical, and do not decide who pays.
Hand in
- The question in one sentence, with the date, the weather and who reported it
- A records list with the gaps named: submittals, order and profile record, material, gauge and finish, mill certificate, installation guide and weather
- A marked-up detail sketch that locates every observation from one fixed reference point, with units
- An assumptions and units table, each number labelled standard, manufacturer, AFS register or typical
- A hypotheses table across the four families, with what you would expect to see and what would rule each out
- An observation, interpretation and confidence table using the words established, probable, possible or not determined
- Safety and authority notes: fall protection, written authority before opening anything, and the warranty check
Rubric
| Criterion | Meets the standard when |
|---|---|
| Question and records | The question is one precise sentence, the records list is complete and every gap is named as a finding. |
| Measurements | Every position is measured from a stated reference point and every number carries units. |
| Number ownership | Each number is labelled standard, manufacturer, AFS register or typical, and no manufacturer value is presented as code or as AFS practice. |
| Hypotheses | Each hypothesis states what would be seen if true and what would rule it out, and survivors are listed with confidence words. |
| Limits | No claim goes beyond the evidence, no one is blamed, no cost or liability is stated, and fall protection and authority are written down. |