I will discuss it with the site manager, although I don’t have the appropriate standard for it, but he will have to justify why it was executed that way.
I have now read up on it and it should be in the "Merkblatt für Unterdächer" or then under "Metallarbeiten für Dachdecker", which unfortunately are all paid.
I am also interested in the question. However, I could only find references on the internet to the "Merkblatt für Unterdächer, Unterdeckungen und Unterspannungen" by the ZVDH, which is not available for free.
He sent us an excerpt from the sampling where it states in the fine print that it is carried out according to the proven system of the house manufacturer, which has been tested for functionality by TÜV Rheinland.
That means you’re off the hook and can save yourself the costly eaves flashing.
What a layperson simply doesn’t know is that this execution is no longer up to date, and of course, no one points that out.
Without drip edge is definitely up-to-date. With the correct execution. It is still the state of the art - and nowhere strictly required.
As I said, I don't have access to the "Merkblatt für Unterdächer, Unterdeckungen und Unterspannungen" but partly you can find quotes from the leaflet online. And there it sounds as if a drip edge would be mandatory. What does a correct execution without drip edge look like?
He sent us an excerpt from the sample selection, where in the fine print it states that it is executed according to the proven system of the house manufacturer, which has been tested by TÜV Rheinland for functionality. That gets you off the hook and you can save the costly drip edge.
What a layperson simply doesn’t know is that this execution is no longer state of the art and, of course, no one points that out.