Jeremy Harris

Yes, this is what I've done with one of ours, it runs through the stud wall, via a short bit of conduit, to a time switch mounted on the wall on the landing. Just make sure that there is a slope such that water cannot run along the cable to the termination point

I have a bit of a problem in my workshop, in that the dark grey, "insulated" roller door works as a very effective radiator, heating the workshop up a great deal. It faces near enough South, and gets very warm, so warm that when standing next to it inside, with the door down, it you can feel the heat being radiated from its surface. I can't change the external appearance (I had a struggle just to get approval for the door, as it is directly opposite a Grade II listed building) so whatever I do has to be inside. I don't need to open the door very often, as most of the time I use the side door. So, what I'm thinking of doing is to buy some multifoil "insulation", and make up an internal roller blind. I have some lengths of alloy tube, including some fairly big (4" diameter) stuff. There's around 300mm of so of room at the inside top of the door to take the rolled up blind. Rather than have the blind roll around the tube at the top, I'm thinking along the lines of having it rolled around the tube at the bottom, with some nylon tapes run via pulleys, so that the blind will roll itself upwards, lifting the tube as it goes (we used to have a bamboo blind that worked like this). I know that it's pretty poor insulation, in terms of thermal conductivity, but multifoil is very good at reflecting out long wavelength IR, so it is ideal for keeping radiated heat out. As the roller door isn't at all well insulated (the slats are around 20mm thick aluminium extrusions, filled with foam) and as the door is full of high conductivity thermal bridges, I'm hoping that reflecting heat back towards the door will result in it heating the door up and so increasing the outward heat flow. I can't easily seal the edges, but could add some boards either side that the multifoil blind could sit against, and if it were trapped under a batten at the top that should seal that area up OK. The questions are, firstly, will multifoil tolerate being wrapped around a tube and rolled up and down? I suspect it may do, as it's basically just alumised mylar (as used in "space blankets") with some think polymer fleece material between the layers. The second question is how best to join sections of the stuff together. I need to make up a 3m wide blind, and the widest rolls seem to be around 1.5m or 1.6m. I don't trust the sticky tape, as I doubt that it will tolerate being wrapped around a roller, so perhaps I need to look at using an overlapping multilayer approach, a bit like slates on a roof. Anyone any thoughts?

AFAIK, there are no approved IPX4 flex outlets readily available (at least I've not seen any) and you cannot legally make a non-IPX4 outlet into one by just adding sealant - it has to be tested and approved as complying with the ingress protection rating. So, the answer is to run the cable outside zone 1, to a point where you can then fit a standard outlet. With a bit of ingenuity you should be able to run the cable neatly, whilst retaining the ability to replace it. Buried conduit in the wall, that slopes down to the bath end, with the outlet plate fitted above the lowest point, would seem to be OK. You could run the conduit and cable into the rear of the plate to make a neater job. Replacing the cable would be easy enough, as heat-resistant flex is quite stiff so should poke up a bit of conduit easily enough. Looking at the regs I can't see any obvious gotchas with such an arrangement.

Thanks @PeterStarck The Secoh JDK-60 that I've just finished putting back together doesn't have the alarm light, nor does it have the switch assembly that detects that the armature is off-centre. It's the one that was supplied with the treatment plant, so is around 4 years old. Externally it looks exactly the same as the new one, except it doesn't have the small red alarm light on the top of the case. The good news is that replacing the diaphragms is pretty easy on the Secoh pump, all told it took around half an hour, and that's with me having to refer to the instructions. Overall, the pump seems to be a pretty well-made bit of kit inside. Nice quality die-cast alloy housing and parts and everything screwed together with decent quality screws. I didn't completely strip the unit down, but just removed the cover, then the valve housings on either end and unbolted the old diaphragms and fitted the new ones. Both the old diaphragms looked OK, with no obvious sign of wear, so I might just go a bit longer before replacing the ones in the new pump I've just fitted.

Thanks @Declan52, I shall give it a go. So far I'm pretty impressed with this little box, especially for the price. How they make it for around £30 I don't know, especially as it comes complete with an HDMI cable, UK power supply and remote control.

OK, I've just pulled the cover off the old pump and started to take it apart. This is a Secoh JDK-60, without the alarm switch (the newer JDK-60 I used to replace this a couple of weeks ago has an alarm light on the top, so I assume also has a switch, like the small unit I stripped a couple of years ago). First off, there is no obvious sign of diodes inside this Secoh pump, unlike the Hailea pump that I stripped previously. Secondly, the armature inside the Secoh pump does seem to be magnetic, again, unlike the Hailea pump. I can see from just looking at the top of the core unit of the Secoh JDK-60 that the two coils are directly wired in parallel, with no diodes. I'll carry on stripping it down and replacing the diaphragms, and if I spot anything else that differs from the Hailea I'll edit this post. As a word of caution, it seems that not all of these pumps work on the same principle, so generalising about them may be unwise!

The armature in the one I took apart (a smaller pump that I thought might be able to do the job) was just a bit of steel or iron. I would guess that a magnet would end up being demagnetised by the coils, as we used to have a tool de-magnetiser that was just a big coil with an open gap in the core, into which you could insert tools and then slowly pull them away to remove any residual magnetism. There were soft limit stops at either end of the one I stripped, intended to prevent the armature travelling too far and over-stressing the diaphragm as much as reduce noise, I think. There was also a switch, that would be operated if the armature moved too far off-centre, that turned off the pump. I have a feeling that the switch was there as a fail-safe in the event of the support springs breaking. EDITED: SEE POST BELOW THAT CORRECTS SOME INFO ABOUT THE SECOH PUMPS

Right, I've been playing around with the cheap Android box that @Declan52 linked to earlier, a MXQ Pro 4K. The box works fine, is pretty easy to set up, but as Declan says, the remote is pretty brutal and useless for setting things up, although it's fine for just accessing the main TV menu stuff. Plugging in a USB mouse makes the box a lot more user friendly. The graphics capability is good, which isn't surprising as the box supports 4K, and the box comes with the ability to natively sideload apps, so no need to register with Google or whoever. For some reason I struggled to get the box to sideload apps from USB, but it does recognise and allow stuff to be stored on a USB HDD. Sideloading apps from the SD card works fine, though, not really sure why that should be different to a USB stick, but it's not a problem. I sideloaded the CCTV app that came with my cameras, and it works fine, with one problem. For some reason the app forces the screen to a correctly oriented portrait "slot" in the centre of the screen, which was a bit of a nuisance. After loading Rotation Locker (locking the screen in Android Settings didn't work) and then setting Rotation Locker to force landscape mode worked OK. I think this may just be a problem with the pretty dire app that came with my cameras, though. Once I had the app loaded and working OK, I could either connect the box via WiFi to a single camera working in P2P AP mode, or I could connect via cameras connected to the LAN, either via Wifi or the Ethernet connection. P2P mode was a pain, as it messes up the real time clock, so the date and time starts off as the beginning of January 1970 every time the unit is turned on (again, something that may well be down to the pretty dire app for my cameras). Other than that the box displays camera video in 1080P just fine, with no more lag than I get when connecting directly. Image quality is good, and all the camera controls seem to work OK. One thing I need to work on is a way to automatically launch the viewing app on power on. I'm not familiar enough with Android to see how to do this yet, but I'm guessing there has to be a way. It's no real hassle to just start the app manually, though, and it keep running OK for days on end. I have a feeling that the Hikvision app may well be a lot better written than the clunky thing that came with my cheap cameras, so some of the above issues may not apply. I did load and have a go at using IVMS, but it won't pull off a camera stream without registration, and to get that I would have needed a Hikvision camera/account, AFAICS. If anyone knows how to create some sort of autostart script for Android I'd be interested. I'm sure it can be done, as that must be how the launcher app in the box is started at power on, I just don't know enough to be able to do it.

You're right, I was wrong - brain fade. The one I've already had apart (a smaller one I was playing about with) used a diode in series with each coil, and I'm guessing this is to create a crude pulse, followed by a pause when the coil is de-energised (because of the diode blocking the other half wave), that allows the armature to move back via the diaphragm springs. Without the diode in series with the coils, the armature would probably just stay at one end, rather like a contactor.

Bear in mind that some of these pumps have a diode in series with the coils, in order to reduce the operating frequency from 50 Hz to 25 Hz. This means that, depending on where the diode is, that you may get an odd resistance reading on a multimeter, and the resistance may appear to change between one multimeter and another (because the diode forward resistance will depend on the test voltage and current that the meter uses in resistance mode). I've yet to strip and check the Secoh to see if it has diodes, and if so, where they are, but it's something I need to get around to doing in the next few weeks, as I pulled it out and fitted the spare, with the intention of servicing the old one, fitting new diaphragms etc and putting that "back into stock" as a spare. When I do I'll try and remember to post the details here, for reference.

I suspect it's just a case of the natural conservatism within the construction industry, the thing we see time and time again, often holding back progress. The evidence supporting the effectiveness of mist systems seems to be both solid and very impressive. The ability of a mist system to partially wash fine smoke particles out of the air is the thing that seems most important, given that smoke inhalation, or the blockage of escape routes by smoke, seems to be a common cause of death in fires.

I think sprinklers are a very good idea, but prefer the very low water volume atomiser/mist ones, as the volume of water needed is far less, they do less damage to the house, and they are more effective at suppressing smoke, apparently. The big downside is the cost, not just the installation cost, but the ongoing servicing cost. If it wasn't for the high cost, I'd have fitted them, for sure. The installation looked to be pretty easy, but cannot be done as a DIY job, apparently, because it has to be certified. If the cost came down, together with a relaxation in the annual inspection requirements, then I think more people might be inclined to fit them. For those that are interested, when I was looking around I found a few retrofit atomiser/mist fire suppression systems that looked promising. They were aimed to protect high risk areas, like kitchens, where a water supply was already accessible (by a sink, for example) and the performance looked pretty good. The cost was still a problem though - you can buy a lot of house insurance for the cost of fitting and maintaining a sprinkler system.

I've replaced mine with one of these: https://www.wheelforwheelbarrow.co.uk/ Not cheap at around £30, but worth it for the lack of hassle.

Can you get away with calling the ditch a water course? My experience is that they don't come and check................ If challenged you could always say that every time you've looked at it there has been water in it. I've a feeling that our brook dried up in 1976, as it's fed from a series of springs a mile or so up the valley. I didn't mention this to the EA, mind.

Me too, primarily as shipping containers are pretty thin steel, around 14g IIRC. The snag with MIG is that the steel needs to be really clean, with no rust pits. If the stick welder is a good one, that can be turned right down, then with decent 16g rods it should be possible to weld a 16g patch over the hole, and the flux will make it a bit more tolerant of small rust pits. Not easy welding thin sheet with a stick welder, though. I used to do a fair bit of farm gate and pig pen door repairs, years ago, and when thin gauge tubular gates took over from heavy gauge solid steel ones I had to switch to using a MIG.

I went through much the same process. As far as the EA are concerned, then the best bet is to just do it online. There's every chance you'll be asked no questions at all, just issued with a permit to discharge within a couple of hours or so, semi-automatically. Once you have the permit to discharge that will satisfy building control. In our case I was already engaged in a fairly long debate with the EA about flood risk, which frankly was like pulling teeth. The flood people in the EA gave me the contact for the permit to discharge, and in complete contrast that was the most painless bit of bureaucracy I had to deal with for the whole build. The rules for discharging to a water course (which can be a field drain or ditch) are that it is automatically permitted (in England and Wales, not Scotland, not sure about NI) as long as the water course flows all year around. There is no definition of flow, so I would assume that as long as it's wet it's probably OK. This is the form: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/609905/LIT_6778.pdf and in my case I was given an email address to send it to, in Exeter, I think. I can dig out the email address later, once I'm back on my main PC, as it's probably the same for where you are. They emailed me back the permit within a couple of hours, with no queries. I got the feeling they treated it as a formality.

The best bet is to either cut out a rectangular section, using a thin cutting disk, to get back to solid metal,then cut a patch and weld it into the hole, or just grind back to solid metal, a fair way from the badly corroded bit, then spray it with weld-through zinc primer (comes in aerosol cans), cut a new bigger patch of steel sheet and weld it on over the top. Give the whole job a coat of decent primer and paint and it'll be as good as new.

Not heard it is right - you've stood right next to our ASHP when it's running at full chat, and have heard how little noise it makes,

There are electric ones about, like this: http://www.big-wheelbarrows.co.uk/3-sherpa-electric-wheelbarrow.htm That's a pretty big one, but I'm sure I've seen some smaller ones, I just cant seem to find the links at the moment.

Modern inverter ASHPs are very quiet indeed. Some here have visited our build and heard the ASHP running, and there is barely any noise at all outside and none whatsoever inside the house. It's no where near as noisy as an extractor fan, and defrosting is only a problem if the set up is poor - set it up properly and it doesn't need to defrost. I have written up loads on here about this, as I spent a lot of time optimising our system. What I can say is that there is a great deal of duff information around on the web about ASHPs, that I think dates back to the older non-inverter drive models. Trust me, I'm an energy-saving fanatic, and there really is no appreciable difference between a good ASHP and good GSHP running from a sealed collector loop. If anything, the GSHP will make more noise, as it has a powerful circulator on the primary. The holiday let we went to that had a water source heat pump was very noisy indeed, so noisy that we had to try and turn the heating off overnight. Our borehole water pump is a small one, as our water level is only around 4m to 6m down from the surface, and it uses around 650 W, and runs for perhaps an hour or two per day. It runs whenever a lot of water is being drawn off, so when showers are being run, etc, plus it runs for around half an hour once every two days when the filter runs through its backwash cycle. If you turn on a lawn sprinkler then the pump will run most of the time that is on. I found this out when we first laid new turf, and had to keep it damp. The same goes for things like washing the car, pressure washing the drive etc, as long as you're drawing a fair bit of water the pump will run. We have two 300 litre accumulators, that store around 150 litres of water each at around 3.5 bar, that gives us a buffer to both stop the pump cycling too often and also to provide some emergency water if the pump fails. I keep a spare pump, but it is about half a days work for me to pull the pump string out of the borehole, swap everything over, remake and test the pipe and cable connections and then drop the new string back down again, together with the couple of hours or so that it takes to disinfect the borehole afterwards and pump it clear.

When we lived in Scotland we had a pump station, as the house was at the bottom of a steep drive. It never gave any trouble in the five years we were there, and there was no spare pump, or alarm. I did lift the lid a few times to check all was well, and it looked as if changing the pump would have been an easy enough job. It was on a length of chain, so just needed pulling up, hosing down and replacing with a new one. An alarm and a spare pump kept ready to fit seems a good plan. I have a effluent spare pump and alarm on our treatment plant, as that has a pumped outlet. I can't see the point of a dual pump system, as that's like storing the spare pump in effluent all the time. I'd rather have the spare somewhere warm and dry, so you can be reasonably sure that it'll work when it's fitted.

Pump stations are used when the levels between the site foul drain invert level and the main sewer invert level are such that you can't use gravity. They also allow a smaller bore pipe to feed to the main sewer, usually 63mm MDPE, rather than the standard 110mm foul drain pipe. Cess pits are now practically forbidden for a new build; they are only allowed as a last resort, if there is no other foul drain option, simply because of the nuisance and cost associated with having them pumped out two or three times a year or more. A septic tank is the same - the Environment Agency are pushing hard (it was going to be made law, as it is in France) for all new builds that cannot physically connect to a main sewer to have to be connected to sewage treatment plant. A sewage treatment plant, unlike a septic tank, treats the effluent internally, usually via aerobic bacteria, so that the discharge is non-toxic and has a low biological oxygen demand. This makes the effluent from a treatment plant suitable for direct connection to a soakaway or a continuously flowing watercourse (with a permit to discharge). There are plans to register all septic tank installations and gradually force them all to be changed to treatment plants, because septic tank leach fields just stop working after around 10 to 15 years, causing toxic discharges to the land where the drains are located. This is a significant environmental problem in some areas, but the government have been dragging their heels over doing anything about it. I suspect that the Environment Agency, who will be consulted by the planners, will veto a cess pit connection, may well veto a septic tank, and will insist on either a mains drainage connection or a treatment plant, depending on how the treated effluent can be disposed of.

Welcome back Jim, glad you managed to find us over here! Most of the former Ebuild regulars are here now, I think.

There may well be a common law right of access along that lane, and that carries the same weight of responsibility, in terms of duty of care, as any other right of way or highway, I believe. The basic principle is that if land is accessible, then people must not be put at risk if they access it, and anyone that does create a potential risk has to take full responsibility for any consequences that may arise if the risk materialises and becomes and accident that causes death or injury. If the risk is not mitigated adequately, the person causing the accident could be deemed to be criminally negligent, and the law does not allow anyone to insure against a criminally negligent act - so we're talking potential criminal charges in the event of an accident. In terms of HS&E, then the first course of action has to be to remove the hazard. If you have to put scaffolding over this lane, then close it so that people cannot get access whilst the work is going on. That removes the major part of the risk, and also removes much of the risk of criminal negligence (but not all of it). I can give an example from one of the observation posts around a range I used to run. The observation post had a 10ft high chain link fence around, topped with a 2ft high barbed wire anti-climb overhang. Inside the fence there was a secure building, plus a 100ft high antenna mast. We were legally required to fit a horizontal barbed wire anti-climb barrier around the mast, about 10ft up, and to fit lockable steel plates over the fixed access ladder. This was because if someone climbed over the perimeter fence and then climbed up the mast, then fell off and injured themselves, we could have been found partially liable.

Pity the fog isn't knock-out gas as well......................