Leaderboard

Yes, this fitting worked for me. Between Thorfun’s thread and MortarThePoint Hep20 threads, a lot of pushfit plumbing questions are very well covered.

Just put some L brackets or bits of timber on the underside of the overhanging joists, right at the end. Screw or bolt gutter brackets to that.

Stuck my shed felt down in 2019. 2021: 1st layer was sand felt, nailed on. Second green mineral layer was stuck down with trowelled on felt adhesive. As you can see there are no nails. No lifting etc.

Ring them and ask why. And then ask them to suggest how they might solve your problem

Adhesive bond some form of external lock/latch? You're after security theatre vs actual inner Birmingham on a Friday night!

It's a while since I did anything with DMX but as far as I can remember, all colour options/moods etc are configured within the Loxone lighting controller and the controller takes care of what is output on the various output circuits (Lc1,Lc2 etc). For DMX I think it is just a case of adding the "DMX RGB and W actuator" device to your DMX extension (which itself will be configured to send DMX signals to the whitewing module) and attaching the actuator to the Lighting Controller output. The actuator type in Loxone should show up as SMA (smart actuator) in config.

that's what we did there was some discussion about it as @Pocster found removing them a pain in tight confines but @Nickfromwales said that it was all ok and so I just went ahead and did it! here's that discussion

Have looked at Larson strut for the walls? Your 225mm studs will create a thermal bridge at each strut. Which you are mitigating with external insulation. The Larson strut, uses 2 smaller studs joined together with ply or OSB. So you would have say two 4x2s, or a 3x2 and a 4x2 with a gap between, the gap maintained by several pieces of the OSB nailed to each stud. One stud is structural The other to form a depth for insulation. The thermal bridge becomes the cross section of the OSB instead of the stud. You can make a good depth of wall for insulation and could save the time and effort of external insulation as well.

Hi, As a small step towards repaying the valuable advice I have received on this forum I thought I'd share the attached document, which I hope will be useful and/or interesting to forum users. I am a planner by trade, working in local authority. My SB is on a relatively small, highly inaccessible plot neighboured by mature trees, and tightly bordered by existing houses. The plot was a 'detached' back garden of sorts that came as part of the deal (and something of an afterthought) when we bought our current house. Nobody had ever even considered the prospect that it could be a building plot, and for many years I discounted the idea myself due to the restrictions listed above. Five years ago, having outgrown our house and exhausted other options, I decided to at least try to self build on the plot. I obtained permission at the first time of asking (albeit not quickly and not without having to make a tweak or two). Everyone, without exception, from family to neighbours to building tradesmen to delivery drivers to other planners, have commented on how 'well' I've done to get permission. Some of them probably thought I'd made a mistake, or that the Council did, or that there was some old pals act involved because I am a planner myself (even though I don't work in the borough where I am building, and it really, really doesn't work that way anyway). They are all wrong. I obtained permission because I did the thing that planners spend their working lives telling others to do - I read the relevant planning policies, designed a development that was in line with them, then demonstrated as much in the application. That is what the attached statement does, it goes from global to national to regional to local policy, then explains the thought process behind my design, in that context. I cannot tell you how many architects, developers and would-be planning consultants fail to design development proposals specifically to meet planning policies, and then spend ages moaning, appealing, resubmitting, and generally wasting time. I can't promise that if you follow the thought process in my document you'll certainly get planning permission, but I hope you find it a useful insight into how a planner approached self-build, and specifically the matter of seeking planning permission on a plot that the rest of the world had discounted. Cheers 647910914_DesignandAccessStatementRedacted.pdf

This scheme is going through planning near us. https://www.cromartyhydrogenproject.co.uk/ It is an "electrolyser" plant to be build close to one of the wind farms near us. So it will take electricity from the windfarm and electrolyse that to produce "green hydrogen". So dig down and find some more details. The water will be conveyed from a pumping station at a water treatment works about 20 miles away. So that will be potable or near potable water pumped nearly 20 miles and about 400 metres up. The hydrogen produced will be taken by road transport to a number of distilleries to "decarbonose their energy supply" My thoughts: This wind farm does not have "surplus" generation, everything it generates goes to the grid. Anything taken from the wind farm for the electrolyser just means less goes to the grid for general use, which in the real world results in more fossil fuel used to generate the "lost" electricity. The water to electrolyse needs to be pumped there, So that is energy use I bet they have not thoroughly accounted for. I hope the trucks transporting the hydrogen are themselves powered by hydrogen. But the final thought, would it not just be simpler for the distilleries just to use electricity for their production? I refuse to believe electrolysing water to make hydrogen, then transporting that hydrogen by truck to then burn it can produce more power to the end use process than just using electricity from the grid. If ever there was a case of "greenwash" this has to be it? If schemes like this that are at best "creative" with the facts are allowed to proceed then we are all being conned that they are "solving" the problem.

Just using surplus wind generation that cannot be otherwise used, makes sense. But that is not what is being proposed here as far as I can see.

Are you still at the residence if so when it starts to go through you will get an another notice to display at the road side. you can also register an account with your planning council online so that for any matching postcode you get an alert. This may be different for different councils. other than that diarise that you manually check every week with the online planning of your council.

a 2 foot long 6mm drill? Good luck keeping that straight and intact...

Thank you for the reply. I like how thorough you are with your thought processes. I have found many of your threads and posts very helpful. You have a knack for creating interesting discussions. I appreciate that there are a number of variables that effect the water dynamics. My take away is that a 15mm pipe over 10m, could be tee’d and supply two standard showers simultaneously with enough hot water. But if you can, give them both there own direct feed.

Glad to see some people have found the statement useful. Something I didn't explain in my original post but which may be apparent anyway, is that once I had a good idea of my preferred design I asked myself: 'If I was the planner assessing this, and if I was being as harsh as I could reasonably be, what would be the specific grounds on which I could refuse it?' The statement is partly an exercise in anticipating those possible grounds of refusal and addressing them in advance. That is easier for me as a planner than for many others, but it's not rocket science. Look at the adopted policies and supplementary guidance on the council website, and read the planning officers report for a few applications in your area to get a feel for how those policies are applied. You'll find that you get the gist pretty quickly, even if you've never looked at a planning policy before. Its not impossible to discuss and debate your plans once they are submitted (though it is increasingly rare to get the chance), but really the idea is to make the most substantive and comprehensive case upfront. It is for the applicant to support their proposal, not for the council to tease out everything that is good about your idea. Ultimately of course, if you've designed something that obviously doesn't meet the policies then it doesn't matter how thoroughly you state your case. Equally, if you've got a design which plainly meets every criteria then you shouldn't need to sell it to the planning office. Most plans sit somewhere in the middle of those two extremes, where there is inevitably a degree of subjectivity, so put the work in to show the extent of compliance with planning policies as part and parcel of your application. You do of course get the odd stroppy or difficult planner, but not half as often as you get a stroppy or difficult applicant! However frustrated you might get, remember that there is a significant difference between making an argument and having one.

Hardly surprising with that bunch of contributors 😂😂

Brilliant thanks @Thorfun I had read quite a bit of that thread but missed that bit, probably fell asleep as it’s 23 pages in and a monster thread, very informative in places though 😀