Dreadnaught

I will be choosing GU10s, and fitting them with Philips Hue GU10 bulbs to provide lighting automation. The idea is that if I sell up the incoming buyer does not want (to pay for) them, I can take all the Hue bulbs with me as I leave to the next place.

The type of insulation is not specified but I had assumed it was PIR. As I understand it, the inner leaf of insulation is intended to be continuous with the insulation inside the rooflight frame, and forms a thermal break. The weight of the rooflight is supposed by a combination of the exterior box frame and the interior single free-standing piece. It took me quite some puzzling and chat with the rooflight company before I worked it out. In reality, I don't think we will follow these details too closely. Instead we will make something simpler but still much thicker than the typical upstand (including the one typically deployed by my timber-frame designer). In my case I have nine rooflights, and almost each one will require a different upstand. Quite a complex design job and probably the only part of the overall frame design that really does require 3D.

At the sole plate, for my timber frame we chose to split the sole plate in to a pair of battens, rather than a single piece of timber, so as to eliminate the cold bridge there. In my case I am having I-beam walls which will pumped full with cellulose insulation. (I'm having an insulated raft foundation.)

I am designing the upstands for my rooflights now too. Mine are from a different company but are also triple glazed and are passive-house certified. I also have a PIR roof of similar thickness. This is the upstand detail that I am following but my timber-frame designer and architect are converting it into something buildable offsite by my timber-frame manufacturer:

Not helpful to you, but I saw one other exact example of this when visiting other builds. In this case it was for patio doors from a bedroom leading on to a flat roof. In that instance, the warranty company chose to specifically carve-out the issue from the warranty cover. I think the self-builder chose to continue without any remediation of the problem and I haven't heard whether the issue has subsequently caused problems.

More generally, and not being any form of expert, I found that having a (paid) M&E adviser in the planning stage of my build has proven to be invaluable. A few hours of hourly-rate advice from an expert has impacted on so many areas, not only the choice of a heating system, but everything from penetrations through my concrete raft, to lots of other issues that had knock-on consequences elsewhere. I had picked up a great deal of knowledge by avidly reading this site (thanks everyone!) but that adviser was able to assist in unpicking all of my half-thought-through ideas and string together a coherent concept. I considered it money well spent and my architect complimented me on the approach.

I am at the stage of discharging planning conditions so I can start. It has taken almost 12-weeks and I have only just had the first one discharged (of nine). I have just sent them a two-week "deemed discharge" notice for the rest, which might focus their minds (… or might not). That's an indicator of how slow things are in my neck-of-the-woods (Cambridgeshire).

Did anyone keep a copy of this example letter above ↑. I cannot seem to access it any more and keen to prepare my own letter now.

An iron-age roundhouse on wheels maybe? And only need to comply with the static-caravan requirements. Commendable aspiration. (I remember the 1970s BBC series too).

"LoopCAD is a Windows program only". No Apple Mac support. 🙁 I wonder if there is a friendly LoopCad-user out there who could see themselves willing to help a wretched and neglected Apple Mac user? Would love to design my loops. 🙂

Off topic (sorry), what is "facing"?

@Field_of_Dreams, yes. On all of those points I turned out that it was possible for my tree specialist to draft the Method Statement to accommodate whatever I wanted. I was quite surprised and pleased. It seems almost anything is possible and, so long as you choose a good expert, he can make almost anything work. I do not know if all of the tree experts are like my one, but he was recommended to me by another self-builder as someone who would "be on my side", which I am now coming to appreciate.

Hi @Field_of_Dreams, oh yes, what in particular interests you. In general I have found that most things are possible, they just need to be framed in the right way for the council tree officer. And moreover, its all well and good to have a detailed arboricultural method statement (AMS) but I get the impression that the reality on the ground is likely to be flexible. Having said all of this, I am still waiting for the council to sign-off on my planning conditions, which includes the AMS that was drafted for me by my tree specialist.

The piles support the entire insulated raft, across the full floor area of the dwelling. There is no separate ring beam. The raft has the edges thickened, which act like a ring-beam in terms of supporting the exterior walls. And because the majority of the raft will be quite thin by the standards of concrete foundations (just 100mm for most of the raft) there will also be reinforcing cross thickening to form structural ribs in key areas. I have also specified in my build that none of the internal walls be structural, which is quite easy to do as mine is a bungalow, and gives great flexibility.

I might add that my foundation build-up will be as follows. Bottom to top: Blinding Heave protection, 220 mm, such as "Heave Stopper" or "Jablite" or "Cellcore". The thickness of the layer is dependent on the physical characteristics of the clays. PIR insulation, 200mm (100 mm for the edge thickening ("ring beam") and ribs). Also to contain various water supply pipes. Reinforced concrete. 100 mm (200 mm for the edge thickening ("ring beam") and ribs). Also to contain under-floor heating pipes. Quite a thick set of foundations. The insulation is usually EPS but I was able to choose PIR to make the build-up thinner because the insulation is not load bearing. As I have learnt, PIR would probably support the weight just fine but it has not be characterised sufficiently well that an engineer would be willing to specify it if it were load bearing (or, more to the point, his liability insurance would be willing to insure it). PIR can be only used when not load bearing, at least at present.