Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/19/21 in all areas

  1. Not the underheating that is the problem, that can be cured with a bigger heater, it is the problem of just throwing the energy out the door and making the MVHR not so efficient.
    2 points
  2. After putting in an offer on our plot in November 2019 , 3 lockdowns and 2 architect's later we have today received the email to say planning application approved ? might even stop for a cheeky one on the way home Brake ground in 4 weeks , here we go, Still feeling clueless and way out of my depth ?
    1 point
  3. Hello, found my way here after searching for info on upgrading water mains as part of a family home renovation. I find it difficult to get builders/trade around for quotes and when they do turn up, they don't bother doing the quote. In 5 weeks I've had 1 quote, from the first builder that turned up, it's like pulling teeth, many can't be bothered. Not sure why. I've got planning permission, I've got drawings, I know what I want for most things. I've got a garage conversion, kitchen and bathroom refit. I'll probably have the heating upgraded too. Much be some profit there for someone. Anyway, this isn't supposed to be a rant.
    1 point
  4. It'll be fine. A good heavy snowfall one year will test your brackets! ? I'd not fix to the t&g roofing but the long edge bits as aforementioned.
    1 point
  5. Not exactly, but have designed other buildings to allow a river to overflow underneath. Build up to 1m in any material you fancy: brick/ concrete/ steel. Make a deck on it in concrete. Waterproof. Build timber house on top. Some areas will want to allow the flood under the building, others allow enclosure. Have you established that this is allowed? There is usually the 'exception' test to satisfy.
    1 point
  6. The construction type should t make any difference The foundations will be designed to cope with any flooding
    1 point
  7. Sorry, haven't logged on for a while. This is our house nearing completion on Isle of Mull. It is a steel portal and timber frame construction, 110m2 plus there is a separate double garage. There is a premium for building on the island - additional transport costs in particular. Originally permission was a 3-bedroom, 'upside-down' design whereas this is a 2-bedroom - ground floor kitchen / diner with bed 1 and shower room. Upstairs is lounge, bed 2 and bathroom. As above, it means we can live on the groundfloor only if needed - this is very much our forever home.
    1 point
  8. I don’t think there is any ambiguity in what you asked but yes it’s always better to have something in writing.
    1 point
  9. I suppose the difference in my case compared to some is that I don't want an oversized front door, or one that turns on a pivot. I can imagine that the engineering requirements for either are significant and almost certainly beyond my DIY skills, but I could have a crack at modifying a standard front door, probably by cladding it, to give it a non standard appearance. Thanks for all the discussion and ideas all.
    1 point
  10. This would be my first line of investigation mdpe pipe is not expensive - how far away - a small digger will dig an awful lot of trench in one day. I treat my own spring water with particle filters at 10 micron and then 5 micron and then UV it’s a very cheep instal as my water quality is so good already it’s more belt and braces as I rent out accommodation and it’s a requirement from council. There are grants of about £800 per household from council.
    1 point
  11. If it makes you happier, it is very unlikely that it is costing you too much. Your Engineer has studied for at least 3 years at Uni then in real life. He has done the complex maths and is insured if it goes wrong. Any so-called overdesign is usually very slight, and cheaper than the Engineer spending many more hours on reducing the steel a little. Concrete without reinforcement is weak in bending. The steel is strong in tension, and it all acts compositely. Then more steel is added the other way to hold it together ad to control cracking. I'm sure it is all needed. The polystyrene is just holding the concrete in place and you still need steel. and re Eurocode: this is generally more economical than the previous UK design codes were.
    1 point
  12. I can't disagree with that. Well I suppose I better crack on with it. Luckily there seems to be quite a pool of knowledge here.
    1 point
  13. And the boring machine broke down, and then the replacement had the wrong diameter heat in it. Held him up for a year. The Ozone treatment was elegant though, basically a vertical clear tube with an air release valve at the very top. Pressurised water was pumped though it, ozone introduced at the base, that reacted with just about everything in it, then the untreated O2 blead out the air release. All cheap parts as well. And being a clear tube, you could see the iron oxide at the base.
    1 point
  14. To be fair, i have found Thompsons waterseal does a good job, and is also breathable i believe.
    1 point
  15. Founder member Jeremy Harris @Jeremy Harris detailed all of this on his blog but that has gone from its original location, however it is available on the wayback machine! https://web.archive.org/web/20200926232400/http://www.mayfly.eu/2016/07/part-forty-two-water-treatment/ A borehole will incur mobilisation cost and a per metre element until you arrive at water. Jeremy built a DIY treatment plant, he had some specific issues to deal with (iron?) but said he found useful information on US and Australian websites. He had a number of challenges, not least incorrect recording of the borehole depth (he had gault clay I recall) which caused a lot of confusion as he believed that it was deeper than it actually was.
    1 point
  16. As @newhome states. This is how mine worked. The only caveat is that you can only claim back correctly charged VAT. So if a company that is supply and install insists on charging you 20%, you can't claim that back. You have to work with some companies to help them understand the reduced rate (5%) charge. Be aware also that if you contract a trade directly, that is not VAT registered, you will not be able to claim back the VAT on the goods they supply. Better for you to buy the goods directly, and for them to install and only charge you the labour.
    1 point
  17. I do like a bit of Roger. That gear looks good.
    1 point
  18. That’s not correct. HMRC will refund the VAT paid as long as it’s been charged at the correct rate, they don’t refund partial amounts.
    1 point
  19. Yes The procedure for making a BR application to an Approved Inspector is very similar to the application that you would make to LABC. IE you send your submission to the Approved Inspector and they will write back to you with a list of any further information that they need from you in order to satisfy BR. Once you've given them all the info that they need then they'll let you know in writing that it complies with the BR.
    1 point
  20. Sounds a fantastic location, welcome. It also sounds like you are very rural, and while there are other permissions granted around you they must be pretty spread out so you are not within a built area and are firmly in open countryside. If the post and rail is truly agricultural/equestrian type, then they can't really argue, if you weren't changing the use of the patch of land the access crosses from agricultural/equestrian to residential, they could do nothing about it, however they've included this as it adds to the picture they are painting of what they are calling a "grandiose" scheme. If you are in open countryside, then it is fair for them to be minimising the impact of your development, and if the most visible part of that development is the entrance (due to house being 200m away from the public road and mature hedge rows etc.) it is quite reasonable for them to want that to be "in keeping" with its surroundings. Our LPA would only allow a 5 bar gate. Nothing solid, nothing over 1.2m, no fancy gate posts. 12m inset in the field also seems a little excessive, yes you need provision for a car/van to pull off the road before they are stopped by your gate, but they may be happier with 6m. I can also see their issue with it being through the middle of the field, but maybe if you reduced the visual impact they'd compromise on this. Again, if it was a field entrance, on to an uncategorised road, you wouldn't need planning permission, so they couldn't actually stop a 5 bar gate being in the middle of the hedge row, however as you want it for residential use you need to reach a compromise with them.
    1 point
  21. Possibly. And the only way to test it, is to appeal. Anything - any thing at all that a Planner says to you during the application should be regarded as questionable at best , but most likely, simple hot air. The refusal statement is clear. Address those issues and the likelihood of acceptance is much higher. Compromise.
    1 point
  22. just saw this and assumed it was suitable... “Complete with high surface area coil for Heat Pump“
    1 point
  23. Wise words thank you .
    1 point
  24. Magma: I think you are right. this was implied if not stated. I really wanted GSHP principle to work. Went to a Mitsubishi demo at their HQ, and slinkies clearly worked but needed so much space. Went to industry exhibitions where the reps of borehole companies all swore that boreholes worked everywhere. Give me a quote then. In Kent???yes.. On clay? yes...but clay is not suitable! ok then you might be right. They went quiet and then changed their tune completely The moral I think was, they would do it anywhere but not target technical people who know it is silly or will test it for value. An industry expert (really top) told me that there had been lots of cowboys who lost their industry most of its credibility. I assume that the companies still around are better and honest. Also went to lots of 'sustainability' talks and GS was always mentioned as being credible, along with little wind turbines. Unfortunately lots of designers fell for it, and clients paid. The person I mostly helped in the 'affordable' development was in a 3 bed new house, and spent £2,000 a year on electric, with most going to heating the ground to 120m depth I think. The air-source replacement works fine, Just a tiny one. Can you see which I favour? Other comments are very helpful, thanks all. I will be back for advice as I have only worked on commercial and sports buildings, which are very different to domestic. My fence will also keep the bikes and footballs off the unit.
    1 point
  25. On the principles of ASHP and GSHP. I have spent a huge amount of time researching GSHP. Firstly for business as I needed to know what is best, and sustainable, for clients. Secondly because some 'affordable' housing near me had GSHP that did not work, and I was helping the shivering occupants. Included some 'off-the -record' chats with specialists. In doing this I established as follows. I had best say 'in my opinion'. ASHP works in small and large buildings. GSHP by slinky also works. It is very simple and understandable. However it needs lots of open ground. What has only recently been admitted is that it is not really ground heat. It is summer sun and air heat absorbed by the top surface, and harvested in the winter. Therefore it needs warmth on the area used. It is possible to 'run out' of heat. Reversing the flow in the summer can store heat for the winter. GSHP by borehole only works in the right ground conditions, which are rare. This was not admitted say 15 years ago, but is now. Not remotely sensible in heavy clay, or dense cold UK rock, as the surface is not rewarmed by conduction or local water movement. Boreholes freeze and need to be warmed by electric heating. It has become standard that the ground has to be reheated in the summer, for which there is a running cost. You only have to look at the numbers of contractors then and now. In a lot of cases it was installed on the basis of the grant available, rather than on sensible assessment. On the 'affordable' housing, many of the occupants have had the boreholes disconnected, and air-source installed, by either the housing association or contractor...I don't know which as I am told they are all sworn to secrecy, in case word gets out. The downside of ASHP is noise. It is possible to build a timber surround that reduces noise but allows enough air-flow.
    1 point
  26. Multiple rods to get the reading down, correctly spaced (there are guidelines)...or a copper earth tape in a long trench...or a bfo copper earth plate like an old HW cylinder run over a few times with the digger... ? Nothing to stop you combining the above. Increase the surface area of copper to earth is the key. (Dungeness power station had similar issues. They basically built it on a big metal mat).
    1 point
  27. 1 They won't work with an ASHP. 2 They won't work. 3 They will stop working. Physics wise, the thermal losses will be higher than a single cylinder. Is there enough room to 'box them in' with insulation?
    1 point
  28. 0 points
  29. I'm sure a 15mm pipe would work by 75mm is the reg. (copied in my previous post).
    0 points
  30. Down here, after heavy rain, we just let it all flow into the harbour. It rained last night. I had to explain to the Bluetits what it was.
    0 points
  31. Probably answer of the day ?
    0 points
  32. A cheque for £50 and a 1st prize BH ribbon is winging its way to you in the post
    0 points
×
×
  • Create New...