G and J

Would be interested to understand why this model? They also do Wi-Fi water softeners I have just seen - is that so they can message you when salt is needed?

We are currently planning to install a Charnwood Aire 3 with direct air kit. To attempt to future proof I’m going to price up converting immediately above the fireplace to 6” twinwall insulated flue. The top section will go in as early as I can and before roofing as I want the roof on and scaffold down pronto. I will be doing the instal myself as I can under building regs, no need to pay for a Hetas dude. I talked through the instal with a technical guy from a local company that I’ll use for supply and I understood I have to ventilate each void, section by section. But from what he described as long as I ventilated each section there is no need for sections to interconnect. So I’ll be putting a metal ceiling closure plate just below my cold loft, thus preserving my airtight layer. Unless of course, I’ve completely misunderstood!

Because it’s not just a battery, it’s an ac coupled battery. Imagine a box with a battery, a battery mains charger and an inverter all linked by some clever software so that spare mains can charge it and it can help run the house or export to the network. Inside the box is indeed dc connections to the battery.

The soil stack can terminate at a ridge vent. Yes it’s a penetration of the airtight layer somewhere but at least it’s not unsightly.

I suspect that if you generally leave the doors open that will take care of warming the upstairs. Apart from the fact that I like Ms Swift I wonder if there’s a formula somewhere that calculates sound transmittance as a product of (joist depth x frequency of dance steps divided by insulation density (lumps per m3) minus floor nail length to the power of weight of dancer in kg). Such a formula might indicate that Slimming World membership is more cost effective than further insulation. Or maybe you could lighten up and join in the dancing. Hope that helps. 😉

I’m guessing the AAVs are more than adequate in letting air in to prevent a vacuum be created behind a flush. But, sewers can back up and when they do air needs to be released from the sewer pipes or potties can start ‘burping’ which would not be nice. Even without a blockage I would imagine (though don’t know from direct experience) that localised raised pressure can occur in sewers. Maybe cup final half time all your neighbours go to the loo at once and all flush at the same time? Whatever the cause you want back pressure to waft harmlessly away rather than pushing stinky smells back into your lovely new home. So I’m with your architect on this one.

I put a lot of time into scoping and pricing SIPs construction vs open panel (both on site and panelised). The theoretical u value vs wall thickness is attractive, though not when cost is factored in. For our modest 150m2 build diy SIPs cost at least £20k more than open panel builds. But the hype power is huge. The worst cases SIPs added at least £65k and the sales pressure was enormous. So, @Bigdeadbadger, share for all to balance the playing field a bit. Think of it as a public service.

I like that level of complexity. I’ll have one of those please!

And I like that idea, but I want to keep the automation to v simple, off the shelf bits of kit only.

How do you make that happen? It sounds like a really good idea.

I wonder if at least 83.7% of the difficulty stems from the fact that it’s been awkward in the past and you are expecting it to be a pain. Often, I find, the more I think about something that harder it gets.

On mine I turn the spindly bit with me fingers to get it started, dead quick.

On mine it doesn’t matter. I find it easier to lay it on the floor, take up a couple of turns so the strap won’t slide out, then attach it to the job. Doing it in situ is much more fiddly.

OK. I guess I’m a Luddite. What does the filter remove? Should I feel somehow like I’m missing out?

Having had a water softener for a couple of decades I’m sold on all the internal taps, showers and cisterns being fed with softened water. It’s nicer to wash in and it reduces vastly maintenance. The exception is the kitchen tap as I’ve always felt it safer to drink and cook with unadulterated water. We had a go with filters (jug based) and they reduced the scum on tea but I wasn’t happy with the faff and the volume of plastic waste so they were ditched. I can’t see that a filter will reduce hardness, so do people have them because the taste is discernibly better? Or is it a bit of marketing hype that makes peeps feel like it’s better?

Hey! I started on SuperCalc which I believe was a forerunner of Excel. Boy, am I feeling old.

Honestly. We come up with a suggestion that saves the 43g worth of carbon involved in a 100 pack of tealights (requiring 68.469kg of carbon in the 9 AAA batteries alone) and you are quibbling. There’s no hope is there! 😉

I think maximising the solar PV is an independent decision that is now self evident in its own right, especially given the saving in slates that flush solar affords. We've had a reply from UKPN indicating that we can export 5kW, and as our roof will only hold 6.5kW of panels that sounds like a simple system with a 5kW inverter would work. Add in a ac coupled battery (with therefore it’s own inverter) and that increases my maximum theoretical export capacity and I suspect means investment into more complex control kit and time configuring, further worsening the case for a battery.

I’ve just rescanned this thread from the beginning, an interesting exercise. I’m left with the very strong impression that there are things we can do to give us the opportunity of taking advantage of weird and wonderful future electric tariffs. Slightly overprovision the UFH (closer pipe spacing), slightly oversize the heat pump, and run in the needed cables to add ac coupled batteries. That way we can add batteries and work in part day heating modes. Is there anything else we should factor in to maximise the chance of clever future tariff use?

And the giant lava lamp is a new entry at 231, failing to beat this week’s other new entry, a £9.99 set of electric candles from Blighty’s foremost style source, B&M…. IMG_2986.mov

So by accepting a bit less of a difference between FFL and the outside ground at the front of the house I can reduce the difference in level between the rear of the house and the patio. I like that idea.

Can the inner leaf be a small amount below the outer? Say a bricks worth?

Yes, so that, for instance, the rear elevation has 2 or 3 bricks visible in the plinth before the cladding, rather than a clumsy looking 6 bricks. But that would put the outer damp below the inner one and I was under the impression that they should be at the same level.

Our design has a completely flat floor throughout the ground floor, which we like. The plot slopes down a bit towards the back of the house so we have a FFL which is 150mm above ground at the front and 420mm at the back. So we have to have two steps down onto our patio if we don’t build up the patio itself, and we aren’t keen on being able to see into each neighbours’ garden. We are having a brick plinth with two bricks showing at the front with the damp proof on top of these bricks, then a bell drip and render on a block skin. If we keep the damp course at the same level throughout then we will see 6 plinth bricks which methinks will be too much. Can we leave the FFL and all associated membranes as is, but step down the damp course on the outer leaf? This in places the outer leaf damp course will be lower than the FFL.

Oh, and the 437th best visual effect is a complete lack of anything.