Nickfromwales

Nope. Just chip away the bare minimum and scope away 👍. Ideally you’d be looking to see the hot and cold inlets at best, or at the worst just a bit more info than guessing and cutting walks. I have a 2m camera too, and the end can be formed into a tight curve so you can get it to look around corners so to speak.

It’s to create a throat so a body of water is trapped and prevents gasses escaping.

I’d get a bore scope camera and have a look inside the wall before cutting anything tbh. Most electricians carry these so maybe you can pull a favour and borrow one? Just elongate the hole around the bottom of the shower valve cut out and the tiny camera head (with led light) will reach in there to see what’s actually leaking.

Can you squiggle on that drawing to show us where / which direction the joists run plz?

But the fire brigade would turn their hoses off when the fires extinguished. An unattended sprinkler system will put water into the house until you switch it off manually at the stopcock.

Push to remove it. If it fails you’re fecked whichever way. The beauty of the mist system is that it consumes very little water to do the same job, vs sprinklers, so even if you were running the bath the mist system should still function. No need for that valve afaic. I’ve tried to find the installation guidelines for the one we did but next to no signal where I am atm so my email is pants.

I fitted around 30% of a new build with Lightwave products and am very happy (mildly impressed) with the outcome. I used Quinetic previously, but was (and still am) less than overwhelmed with their basic functionality; albeit these are lightning fast for on/off reaction times, and the distances they throw a signal are very impressive. One big drawback with QT is that the dimmers don’t have a double press 0-100-0% function. It was a bit embarrassing to have to say to the end user that they have to press and hold the dimmer until they estimated to upper or lower light levels and then ‘let go’ of the switch. People at Quinetic….wakey wakey ffs.

Hi. Are you an avid DIY’er or not? The bottom outlet has the hose connected to it. Remove that first by undoing the nut. Then get a plumbing spanner/ grips and carefully undo the chrome elbow by turning it out anticlockwise. Remove the chrome disc. Now install a 1/2” male BSP plug with PTFE tape applied to the threads. Link Turn the shower to the fully on position and report what happens next. If there’s no leak then the part you removed had not been sufficiently PTFE’d when installed and it was this that was leaking. If you have a leak with the blank plug in place then you have a leak on the connection from the shower valve on the output to the outlet you just tested. This means that tiles need to come off.

Firstly, do you know if you have the privilege of deciding what this bit of kit will be replaced with? Can you interfere with a completed, certificated installation for automatic fire suppression with a bit of kit you asked people here about? I suggest (if you haven’t already but I assume not) that you look at approved devices for this application before doing anything, as this is quite a grey area imho and borderline ‘dangerous territory’. Next up, I’d choose a mist system over a sprinkler system without a second thought. A sprinkler is a dumb system with a huge appetite for indiscriminate water flow without any form of control or moderation, so you can expect significant damage to the property; long after a fire is extinguished the water will just keep on flowing……and flowing…..and flowing. (Repeat until you get home). Mist systems have “electrical components” so they become intelligent. The last system we installed was from a great company, excellent consultancy and clients were very happy with it (when they were given sufficient information to understand the difference) and how it functioned. A mist system will suppress fire for 45 mins (may differ between manufacturer or specific circumstances) and then shut off, with an assumed volume of circa 120L being injected into the dwelling, but only from the head or heads that have been activated in the immediate locality of the event. This, I am told, is the equivalent of you filling your bath to the usual level and then tipping it over. Once. That’s the “damage” by water beyond that of the fire before being extinguished. Absolute night and day better system. Hands down. As for cost, there’s very little in it if you choose well and shop around, so no argument against one at all. Consider that, for a mist system, you can run off a 15mm cold supply without issue, whereas a sprinkler will need a min 32mm cold mains (so no chance of retrofit on an existing supply) and if the local supply from the street is poor you will need tanks, pumps, and Christ-knows-what else then a mist system very soon makes more sense. What doesn’t make sense is, that for certain distances from the street, a mist system is ‘not permissible’. Ffs. They love to make this simple, don’t they 🤷‍♂️🤦‍♂️. Now, as it’s getting late, one last kick in the cock if I may. The mist system we just completed, did NOT require a PDV, as these are usually only associated with a sprinkler system, so I am sat here asking WTF?!?! AFAIC you shouldn’t need one! The cold mains should feed your mist system and then go on to the domestic stopcock and downstream plumbing system. The mist needs very little volume and flow, the whole beauty of it, so I’d be asking some questions as to why you have / need one at all. Not sure about iMist, but 2 companies I have used have NOT specified a PVD.

I guess I should have added that kicker walks need to be topped with Marmox to stop intermediate cold bridging under internal wall sole plates.

Crack on!

Every day is a school day my man If you do as I have, and have spent a lot of time around people who don't care enough to come up with an idea, then you'll sleep well tonight I assure you

Well I'll shut my mouth then, lol. The man's a legend, happy days!

@Dee is a big enough fish now, and swims confidently in these waters....

I was special order and made it to 51! Anything is possible

Because it would stop the beads fully filling maybe?

I also may be wrong, lets stay up and fight 👍 I've just never seen two exposed edges from outside over an opening, only ever the one, so assume the thermally broken one is a one-stop, kosher affair?

Old gold, and exactly how we used to do it. Lost count of how many outside taps and stopcocks I did the same way, but got a LOT wetter when it was mains pressure lol. Great vid.

That one is staying for all eternity..... 👍

And done away with the need for the tray !! The EPS is bonded to the front tray profile so that manages the runoff

We'll learn to forgive over time. But is it not easier to just use the thermally broken one?

And the blue?

Very differently from the sides, as the head needs to manage and direct any falling water to the internal face of the façade and outwards through, for eg, weep joints.

You may need to close the cavity off I expect, somehow, but as I don't have sectional drawings to comment from these are generalised bits of info from a man you've never met before on the internet. With blown full fill bonded beads, I'd have thought these would round things off nicely. Otherwise where do the beads stop during installation? As in, they'd just spew out?

You may need to close the cavity off I expect, somehow, but as I don't have sectional drawings to comment from these are generalised bits of info from a man you've never met before on the internet. With blown full fill bonded beads, I'd have thought these would round things off nicely. Otherwise where do the beads stop during installation?