All Activity

Before our current build I’d never been involved in a pour. It was a shock, an unpleasant one. I had two really experienced guys with me and mostly helpful and knowledgeable barrel drivers. It was still daft level tough. Now I’ve been through it I’m of a mind that I’d never, ever contemplate it without experienced help.

We have planning permission for a new build and this shows the drainage design for the house. We've unearthed the pre-existing sewer connection (red dotted line) which served the demolished house and it is located in the area circled red. Thinking that the current design looks pretty sensible and we can change direction and follow the red line, putting in a long radius bend towards an i.c at the circled point roughly in that circle area where we connect to the existing pipework? I'm asking incase anyone with knowledge thinks that changing the route and instead running it under the slab more directly is any sense. From reading comments in other posts it seems the general consensus is to run drainage outside of the foundation wherever possible? The waste pipe running the depth of the building shown at the wall of the bedroom is there because of an upstairs bathroom above the plant room next to the bedroom, architect didnt think it could work running through 1st floor joists given warm roof with exposed joists on the lean to section. He said a long swept bend coming down through plant room and into slab with rodding eve at front of property might work well for this? He has suggested the SVPs in roof vent tiles. Given there is that pipe running the depth of the building, and no obvious way round that I guess I'm wondering if the whole lot could just come from back to front under the slab and then across the garden from roughly that rodding eye outside the bedroom location. Thanks for entertaining queries from an enthusiastic DIYer, in way above his head!

To revive a recently deceased thread! turns out that the system was still causing problems and so I have had it changed over to a pressurised system. one question on the install - I had assumed that there would be a tundish by the expansion vessel but there doesn’t appear to be. Is what you can see in the picture a suitable alternative?

Many would say so. I say not, as the VCL is there on each sheet, but not at the joint. You go on to say 'Traditionally', nothing, which is why I prefer working with insulation only (say foil-faced PIR), taping the foil face , then battening and hten boarding. However a few people have started to use 'fluff tapes' like Contega or Pavafix Win, over which you can plaster, so that would work, although strictly that 'bit' of the VCL is not in quite the 'right' place. I think you can get a 'tighter' VCL if you use bare boards and separate plasterbds. I rarely use foil tape - it's too variable. I prefer to use Pro Clima or similar air-tightness tapes.

I just need to make sure that the stress of the first one doesn't kill me first!

The apprentice will soon become the master. Then you'll be all geared up for the next self build, as you'll be clever as fook.

Thanks. I am going to knock one of those up tomorrow.

Osmo oil is what we used in the last job where the client wanted oak 'everything'. The pre-finished Deanta doors we fitted had some sheen to them, so there was a little difference to them and the surrounding rebated linings / architraves / skirting boards and stairs (those were all raw oak and hand-finished on site to the clients preference). Satin was the suggestion, which I think is better for the generic stuff, and the doors (with the bit of mid-sheen) seemed to steal the show which I think is right. I'd prefer people to say nice doors, vs the rest of the surrounding material looking better. Attempting exact matches will put you in an early grave, so manage your expectations here, as I did with my redonculous OCD! Once you've moved in, you'll barely give these things a second more of your brain-space.

My guy (arranged by our ground workers) came with drawings loaded into his computer, tied into GPS, then using another bit, just picked the points of one by one, even told me exactly how much higher the site was to the plan. Marked out the foundations, once foundations were done, can and marked out for the blocks. Spent an hour or so at site in total. Technology working. Check measured it all and couldn't find an issue and foundations are pretty complex, compared to anything else I've seen.

Make up a staff, with a 6' long piece of 2x2" and fix a square piece of plywood or other to the end, 150mm x 150mm as a pad to rest on the concrete. When you then rest on the surface of the wet pour, to get a level off the laser, it'll 'float' vs using, say, a bit of 2x1; this just pokes into the mix and sinks in, and is a PITA to keep still to see 'what's what'.

I've got a topcon. It was more for a visual cue when the concrete is being pumped into the trench.

Even with an excellent power floater, nothing is good enough for a domestic setting imho. Bare concrete will always be bare concrete, and as it has no shine / sheen the unevenness is masked from any untrained eye.

It's fortuitous timing, as I've literally just witnessed an MBC pour where this was used, and it went well. Went to site to collect some of my stuff and the pump truck was just setting up! I stayed for the spectacle out of curiosity more than anything (plus I am sad so like that kind of thing lol). It was quite a thin 10mm aggregate mix, quite free-flowing up until one not-so (mix but last), and then all it needed was raking out and hand placing to within 3mm with the laser, and then a 6' dapple bar to get it to settle in it's final resting place. Finish was much like an SLC, and as the chap was dappling it, another leaned over him and sprayed a Sika sealer over it; this acts like a layer of cling film to stop moisture being released too quickly. Cost-wise, MBC asked no more money for it, but they avoided having to power-float so I doubt the difference was worth any proper quibbling over. Cemex provide the goop, so maybe check in with them if you require the nerdy stuff like additives and so on. We looked it over after the pour and noted it had fibres in it. It's due to have 3-5mm of SLC / feathering compound to then accept LVT (Kardean / Amtico or some such) and I doubt this will need much attention at all after these guys did their thing. As with anything, the right guys will do a great job, cheap guys will do shit jobs, and you then have to pay to put it right. These guys made it look easy tbh.

The detail of the step footing. I understand that regs require you to have 2 * the height overlap in the horizontal plane. Correct. What I am trying to work out is how you do the step. Either form it in timber or blockwork. Would you just step up 450mm in one place and if so, how does the bricklayer tie the block courses into the vertical face of the stepped concrete? The bricklayer won’t - the sub-floor blockwork work should be built solid and tied above the step.

Yeah, I’m struggling here. two ways of doing this depending on skills of the groundworker easiest and simplest is cast the lower footing. wait. Cast the higher footing with desired overlap using shutters. Repeat as required for desired. No. Of steps and lay of the land. better would be a monolithic pour but but more demanding on skill. bricklayer doesn’t need to tie in to the step per se unless for some reason engineer says he should. If he did need to engineer would specify requirement I.e screw tie, resin helical, frame tie etc seems unlikely though

You should really hire a laser for the day tbh. Sooooooooooooooooooooooo much easier.

What have you done so far?

Yes it looks like pilling blinding as there is a pilling rig there today so good spot @Mr Punter. So they drill core drill through the blinding and then put the piles in all very neat and tidy - no mud other than what comes out of the hole!

The detail of the step footing. I understand that regs require you to have 2 * the height overlap in the horizontal plane. What I am trying to work out is how you do the step. Would you just step up 450mm in one place and if so, how does the bricklayer tie the block courses into the vertical face of the stepped concrete?

What’s the issue(s)?

I was pondering this very question this evening as I’m planning to get outside for a few days in light of the good forecast from tomorrow… have you given it a go? Any feedback?

The sectional drawing that the TA did for the split height between the garage and the house is below. So it shows a stepped footing, but the crucial detail is missing. I have learnt a valuable lesson regarding "If you pay peanuts ..." As a result, I am going to play it safe and simply pull the footings through level and just suck up the additional muck away cost, blocks and labour .. I am surprised BCO didn't say "I want to see detail as to the proposed horizontal overlap and where the step up will be placed relative to the internal cavity wall"

I will hammer the rebar into the sides or simply spray lines on the side of the trench.

I've always just drilled holes in the back on the panel frame and used u-bolts to attach panels to frames. For automatic tilting, I imagine you could set something up using a length of threaded rod and a windscreen wiper motor. Would be a fun project!

Electric fence, will keep sheep away and may shock a CH driver as well.