Roger440

Based on logic, yes. But no such thing seems to exsist. If it does on paper, either no one has found it, made it, or it doesnt work in practice. For me, at least, it working in practice is rather important.

That is the generally considered view. However, the usual warning is not to make it too good, as you will drop the wall temp, which "may" lead to a dew point in the exsisting wall. You dont want that. As always, this will vary wildly from house to house. And the key point is, ALL the long term risk is yours. No one will guarantee a solution that wont see the return of damp at some point. Despite the chat in this thread, no one is going to test your house and make/draw up a plan. The last point being a major consideration for me at least, when deciding what to do with my money.

I have, but it seems to be looking at a different problem, ie moisture buffering for indoor comfort/humidity etc. Im sure thats all very interesting to some, but is not the same as what im talking about, which nothing to do with "moisture buffering". But what im calling moisture "shedding". Sure, theres common factors, but its not the same thing as far as i can see. I agree the term breathable is largely pointless But really, it not that relevant is it. Yes, of course, some buildings without DPC will be fine. And? Some are not. No one is going to conduct extensive investigations into an old wall(s) to determine exactly how wet it might be at any given point in time. At different times it will be different. The fundamental problem, is there is no DPC. I note you didnt offer a practical solution to that issue. So, faced with a house that has "some" damp in the walls, you need to decide what to do. I could read some reports, like those posted, but does that help me decide what to do? No. I know, however, that if i do it in lime, it has the best chance possible of not having a problem going forward (assuming of course ive done all the obvious things to reduce moisture getting into the wall, im taken that as a given). Were i to do it in something less "breathable" then i increase the risk of a problem. I say again, i might be fine. I may be able to put foil faced PIR in front of it, and a vapour barrier over, effectively reducing moisture movement to zero. And still be fine. But it might not. So back in the real world, one has a choice to make. Unless someone else is offering to pay for rectification if there is a problem, then, when spending your own money, go with the lowest risk option. Maybe you would do different, but i cant afford doing it twice. There is no practical testing available to homeowners to allow such decisions to be made, even if one wanted too. So the default option is lime, because its the most likely to work given a damp wall. I emphasise likely. Just to add of course, is that with a moderately damp wall, it can take years, maybe decades to manifest itself, visually. So walls you "think" are ok, maybe anything but.

Im no scientist, but it remains, that stick gypsum over a damp wall, it will resist, for a while. Eventually, salts will appear on the surface, and if bad enough, the plaster will become detached from the wall. By which time the damp will be the best part of a meter up the wall. This is VERY common to see in older, non DPC houses. Stick lime plaster over the same wall, and nothing much happens to it. Yes, moisture will enter the room, but the wall will be unaffected. And it will be drier IN the wall.

I cant argue with the logic. But as i said earlier, on a house without a DPC and likely less than optimal construction, how? Aside from demolition. Theres a few million homeowers would love to know............................... In the meantime, until you come up with a PRACTICAL solution, ill work on the basis of shedding that moisture.

Yes, it will. Problem is, it always cracks, as it not very flexible and houses move. It slightly change a well known phrase, theres only 2 types of cement, cement thats cracked, and cement thats going to crack. As pointed out earlier, you can often see the damplines on rendered houses after heavy wind blown rain.

Lets be realistic, how are you going to retrofit a DPC to a house? (please dont say a chemical DPC, thats utter bollocks and nothing but a scam)Especially one of stone and rubble infill construction? Please, come back to the real world. Having the wall allowing water to evaporate faster than it gets in is how old houses with no DPC work. Sadly, of course, it didnt always work. There were no calculations to do that way back when. It was hit and miss. The really bad stuff has invariably long since gone. Short of demolition, you have to accept and work WITH it if you want a damp free house. When i did my last house, i admit i was sceptical too. But removing the inappropiate material completely fixed things. When i started the walls were so wet, the socket back boxes had corroded away (in 10 years) and if you drilled a hole in the wall it came out as a slurry. Stripped the plaster off, repointed the outside in lime to replace the cement, removed the concrete slab on mud. In a matter of weeks, it was completely dry, to the point drilling a hole in the wall at ground level produced dry brick dust. Frankly, it was quite amazing to watch over the weeks. At the new place, which is stone with much thicker walls, we uncovered the fireplace early on. It had been pointed in cement. The bottom 2 feet some of the stones were dark and wet to touch. Chipping out the motar revealed the lime behind that in places was so wet, you could push your finger into it. Its taken 6 months this time (and the outside is still painted and pointed in cement) its dried out. The motar is hard, well as hard as lime ever is, stones have all dried out. Ive only repointed a small section so far. Again, practical real world experience. Which for me wins over hypothesis.

Pretty much everything is breathable to some extent. Gypsum plaster is breathable. Just not as much as lime. If the moisture absorption into the wall from the ground exceeds the abilty of the wall to shed it, then you have a problem. Gypsum is less breathable than lime. Thats just a fact. Will it be a problem? Depends on the moisture. And that can vary hugely depending on build, materials, place etc. If you have no DPC, then lime plaster gives you the most likely good result. Will fitting gypsum give a problem in any specific setting? Who knows. At a practical level i had an issue with damp pushing the gypsum plaster off. There were other factors i dealt with to reduce likely damp in wall. But at the point of plastering i can either do lime, or gypsum. Its highly likely Lime will give me no further trouble, a higer risk of a negative outcome with gypsum. Others are free to make their own choice, but ill stick with the lime in such circumstances. As an aside, and as a result of practical experience, the ability of gypsum to breate appears to dimish very significantly when its "polished". Which, of course, it always is. I wonder if the "tests" take that into account? As you though, even if gypsum was breathable enough in a particular application, thats rather worthless if you stick a less breathable paint over it. And most modern paints are pretty impervious.

They do. Assuming not buggered up with cement. But if you move the dew point into the wall, then the wall, or just the motar if a hard stone, is going to be damp for at least a good part of the time. And a damp/wet wall is a thermal disaster. Aside from any longer term implications to the integrity. I need to repoint the outside and inside of my place. Problem is, im not skilful!!! I want to insulate too, but getting a clear answer on how much you can apply before you start creating problems in the wall itself is as clear as mud. The reality is, you wont know until after you have done it.

Theres heaps of evidence! Look up the values. Plus plenty of practical real world experience. Cornwall is overflowing with buggered up stone houses. The old stone building in Porth Leven harbour being a classic example. Cement motar perfect, stone face heavily eroded. Had the issue on my own house. Removing cement fixed it. Just repeated it again at the new place which is stone built. Cement is, for practical purposes, waterproof.

What Ian R said would be my primary concern. Insulating will reduce the temp of the wall. And increase the condensation risk in the wall. Problem is, so many variables and unknowns in an old wall like that. Including how damp, or otherwise it is.

Emphasis on "may". Doubt it though. With the best will in the world, there isnt any "body" that can idependantly enforce standards. They would need many many thousands of inspectors. That would be decades in the making, even if you could find sufficently experienced people. Which you cant, because they simply dont exist.

This ^^^^^^^ As i may have mentioned before (!), if we could actually achieve current regs, consistently, across the board, that would be a start. More regs that no one abides by is going to have no practical effect. I dont see any moves to tackle that. Though if you did, the end result would be the same, the flow of new houses would reduce to a trickle.

As identified by JohnMo, i was talking about your own solar, not the grids. Ie, your own solar panels will be at peak production when you are at peak air con demand.

Following my no electronics principle means only conventioal hard wired. Exceptional reliability proven over many decades. You are are welcome to put a bunch of poorly designed and manufacted, soon to be obsolete electronics in your house.

In theory yes. In reality, almost zero possibility. My understanding is that you cannot take action against, for example a BCO signing something off that was non compliant, even knowingly. They are protected by law. If i can, i can get sueing!

We fitted UFH to a house that was otherwise radiators with an oil boiler. Ive found it to be very succesful. Better than i could have though. I installed it up to and including the manifold which has a stat and pump on it. Then i got someone competent to connect it to my existing system. The stat on the floor is set to 40c. The UFH is buried in the slab, 120mm thick from memory. Its been discussed on here before, but digging up and relaying will likely cost a good chunk. Whilst you will have heatloss if you dont, that few £k will buy an awful lot of energy. Worth running the numbers and looking at payback. Id guess at decades, rathen than single digits in years. Especially with an overlay system, which gives you a (small) thermal break from the concrete flloor.

Yes, it is fraud. But its an easy one to do with minimal risks or consequences. Even if you get caught. Human nature sadly. Which system were you using?

I know an actual test is supposed to be done. But out in the realworld. A friend of mine had direct experience of that. They guy had no intention of doing an air test, just had a look round and asked what number he wanted on the test sheet. He was, literally, forced, to conduct the actual test. Same with electrical stuff. Need a certificate. No problem, just pay up. Just need to ask the right people. Im guessing you could earn a ton of money just sitting at home writing certificates for jobs other people are doing. Well not guessing really, because thats exactly what goes on. The chances of any comeback are near enough zero. Bizzare on the sealing strips. Never seen that. All the ones ive seen, and used, required a butyl strip applying prior to assembly. Accepted thats no doubt a tiny fraction of those you have dealt with. I shall bear that in mind if/when i do something with my barn roof. If it was built to unheated standards, then surely they would never have used (expensive) composite panels?

The panels ive seen (and used), you have to apply the sealing strip. Ive never seen them prefitted. Its common knowledge you can get an air test for a house to say any number you like. No actual testing takes place. I guess the same occurs? As ive said before, once you have a licence to sign stuff off, you can do whatever you like, limited only by your personal ethics. No ones checking, and no one is enforcing. Its a complete free for all. Like the wild west! The buildings in question were brand new. Just finished. Had we taken them, we would have been the first tennants. Would have been nice to have a warmish warehouse. Sadly, it wasnt to be, and an unheated one was selected. Mainly because the cost difference was vast.

There is no space issue. I could add another 100 panels if needed. So, you are right, cheaper to add panels. They seem to go for circa £100 a go on ebay.

Yes, looking at that, id be lucky to gain 2 hours extra generation from tracking on solely the vertical axsis. Its a south facing site with no obstruction over about a 160 degree arc. Might still add up over time tough. The mechanical side is pretty easy. Just the control of it. I did consider a manual winding handle, but thats definitely to much faff!

Sorry, may not have been clear. My intention was as per JohnMo, vertical or close too. Depending what PVGIS tells me. That angle would be fixed, but they would rotate on the vertical axsis to track the sun.

How did i miss this thread? Anyway, whilst my 4.5kw array sits on a pallet, its somewhat acedemic, but my intention was always to optimise winter performance. Which leads to the obvious question, in order to improve further, could the panels rotate to track the sun. I see you can buy such a device commercially, but it seems bonkers money, though it adjusts in both planes. I was thinking more simple like a rod between each panel with a ball joint each end with a motor to drive all the panels in one go. Thats all easy enough. Its how you control the motor to move the panels to the appropiate angle thats the difficult part? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Or is the improvement in production simply not worth the complication?

Im very aware change isnt going to happen. Apart from when a new minister has another whim, and knocks the subsidy on the head to funnel it to some other wheeze. Then the inevitable happens and all the installers disappear. Because, despite what you hope for, we all know thats what will actually happen.