marmic

and how membrane is cut /folded etc? need extra? drip detail at head behind membrane? + intumescent between battens.

moving on from the supply chain does anyone have a detail please for the reveals externally? We have flat boards with windows set back midspan of insulation and doors futher back on the structural stud with compacfoam at base. Battens and timber cladding to outside. Windows and doors fixed back to internal 140mm structural studs and sealed direct to boards - or am i missing something here? should they be lined first with membrane??? I don't think so but seems to a detail thats top secret! Timber frame company leaving openings covered by membrane to avoid ingress of rain whilst waiting for windows, so this won't be opened up until window fitters ready. Windows and doors will be fully sealed with air tight and precompressed tape etc. But doing some serious head scratching here how the connection is made at the outside to avoid moisture ingress into boards. Or am I overthinking it? Timber frame company / window installer all saying 'by others' - need to get this right! Also now thinking is there any risk of condensation under extended sills? extract of drawing and image example of intent herewith.............. any thoughts appreciated please.............kr ....mextract ref pro passiv to reveals.pdf

we're not as yet in contract but we will almost certainly be using Nordica - who use Viking and Slowinscy. We have decided on the latter. Transparency with regard to the manufacturter / actual product* They will be providing a deeper base to window to ensure adequate fall on extended sill. Extract from their proposals: 1* Frame packer 30x105mm (A30*105_40_M) Length 700 mm, color: Lacquer Regarding fall on sill there's nothing in building regs! Which are supposedly there to protect us - there is lots of good stuff in there, don't get me wrong, but there is lots of daft stuff (some ridiculous) in there too as we all know. But there are simple things missing too which is just as daft! Whilst talking to numerous people/companies i discovered not unusual for extended sills to end up flat / almost flat. Which in theory complies with regs - because there isn't one! Wouldn't suprise me if some end up running backwards perhaps!! * many UK suppliers rebrand and have found resistance by some in providing info and insist they are the manufacturer when they clearly aren't, but why I have no idea as this is not a problem! (I come accross this regularly in my day job, on the other side of the fence, with competitors doing the same and buying whatever they feel like to suit their margins!). With regard to who 21deg use I have no idea as didn't get very far - they didn't want to talk and didn't even bother to respond, and IMHO no point chasing people like that as my assumption is it's not going to get any better! Assume supply only too? Their other departments were somewhat mixed, some ok, but needless to say we won't be buying anything from them! Originally thought it could be a one stop shop and they'd be super keen with potentially one point of contact to reduce my stress levels! But alas not... ASHP/MVHR/PV we're procuring through heating engineer. Compac foam easier through UK distributor!

We had shortlisted Nordan (no.1 at one point) but crossed off mainly due to not offering extended sills and not understanding (until I pointed it out) the adjustment required to maintain a fall. And wouldn't offer install, even though they were happy to recommend installer - who would have supplied the extended sills. windows would have needed to be ordered undersized - they proposed packing up with ply/similar which i wasn't happy with for obvious reasons. Shame really as otherwise ticked all the boxes and communicated well - more than I can say for numerous others! Decision almost made now and will be placing an order very soon based on supply and install with another company. Been dragging on as BCO was indicating escape windows required which would have meant increased opening dims - but once discussed further regs approval finally arrived as current design.

spoken to a couple of companies again - as assumed they clearly hadn't listened previously! People have been the biggest headache from day one on so many things - something i didnt anticipate going into this!!! One is now proposing fibre reinforced flowing concrete 75mm thick which is almost as original intent! (and I can't go any thicker). Waiting for call back from the other thanks all for comments - glad it wasnt me going mad!!

no confusion! pls see earlier responses / comments!

thanks John.........

maybe none of them listened then! frustrating as original intent was no screed with insulated precast 'slabs' ready for self leveller, but had to change as manufacturer moved the goalposts. But too late then to change the timber frame!

thank you - 75mm with fibre? just sand i assume to get around pipes?

Morning all, opinions and experience please on type / thickness of screed.....? beam and block; DPM wrapped up and over perimeter supporting walls sealed to DPC; 150-175mm PIR in 2 layers staggered joints and taped + upstands; membrane; UFH pipes; floating screed current intent is 150mm PIR + 75mm reinforced floating screed (type / spec tbc) Screed will be laid before walls and roof are on - timber frame company also building internal non load bearing stud walls straight onto screed. Reduces risk and grief! Continuous build with no option to down tools for a week or two whilst a screed goes in after roof on. Confusion and lack of trust now klcking in - screed companies quite excitable about liquid screeds and keeping to a minimum thickness and increasing insulation - which is fine. However, I'm now losing confidence as it seems the ones I had narrowed down to simply didn't listen with regard to the fact this would be open to the elements. Appreciate can't do any of the options in rain, but moving air (wind) and sunlight is unavaoidable! One has now suggested I put up a temporary roof which is bonkers! Sounding like I may need to revert to original intent? Which would be a shame as liquid screeds sound very good and also less cost! guessing I'm not the first person with this conundrum!

block and beam in + course of 140mm marmox thermoblock (have a few left over to be ebayed!) + 2 courses of 140mm coursing bricks directly above 140mm fundation blocks below beams - ready for timber frame (larsen truss) soleplates. DPC wrapped up from under beams and will be lapped and sealed over top course with DPM which will be directly on beam and block. Then 150 or 175mm PIR (2 layers joints staggered and taped) + vertical upstand sections to screed level. Membrane over, open zone UFH pipes, 50 or 75mm screed. Outer skin of block/brick just to look nice and holding 75mm extruded insulation and sub-floor vents. Also keeps 'ground' away from supporting walls. Once timber frame installed the gap over bricks and 'foundation cavity' insulation will have horizontal section of extruded polystyrene - maintaining gap to underside of larsen truss and then sealed with precompressed tape. Then timber cladding................... BCO/structural warranty company happy.........

We have decided to use Nordica, supply and install inc air tightness and weather seals (we are building to passivhaus high performance). Will be placing order very soon. They use Viking and Slowinscy. We are going for the latter with Lumis windows. Less cost and performance fine. They also communicate on a human level and clearly know what they are doing. Will update here in Autumn.......... Nordan were close at one point using an approved partner to install, but completely lost confidence - we have thick walls with the windows being set central to the insulation therefore set back - which also reduces summer sun. Our openings are flat, no cavity - they just didn't get the need to increase the base of windows to enable a fall on the extended sills. and splitting the package creates blame issues if anything goes wrong. And they don't offer extended sills - these would have had to be supplied by installer. And we didn't want ply packing window up and ordering underheight to allow for fall - which was suggested! Supply only which we had considered: Some would have been absoutely fine had we decided to do it this way. But some quite the opposite! For example, 21deg didn't even bother sendng a quote and didn't want to have a conversation. Maybe they have more than enough business anyway and can be selective? We tried talking to them about other items too inc mvhr/pv (which they did respond on) as seemed sensible reducing number of suppliers and thought they would be super keen with added value but don't think they were bothered - separate contacts for each department and seemed rather disjointed. Had the impression there wasn't in depth knowledge either. Dismissed them mainly due to disinterest on windows/doors. We also decided supply and install anyway, also for pv/mvhr. Other supply and install offers which would have been fine simply wanted way too much money. Norrsken which gets lots of mentions seemed to initially tick the boxes on the surface with supply and install and had been recommended - but once i'd dug deeper these boxes were unticked. Uncomfortable exclusions and caveats such as weather seals/air tightness. Also mistakes on quote (which they didnt correct when flagged) and insisted they were manufacturers which i found annoying - they use Viking too as we all know and were expensive in comparision to others offering - yes rebranding is common in all industries and fine, but why lie when asked!! Sales chap arrogant - I think must have worked in double glazing in the 80's! I speak honestly and only as I find.............. be careful out there!

everything on the 140mm. manufacturers response to question about gap: We’d expect a circa 10mm gap (for your yellow highlighted section) to the underside of the Larson so it wasn’t loading the brick / insulation cover. This could be closed with a compressible foam (compriband or similar). thermal bridge free - absolutely! if you've done this would appreciate seeing a detail please? for increased thickness we'll need to go down as height restriction in relation to adjacent stable block. hence wondering about beam and eps

albeit our walls are much thicker, and with timber cladding

just found this which looks reasonably sensible (actually replicating one of my thoughts but hadn't got any further!) - be interesting to see the other section with beam ends. and not sure what happens structurally at the sub-floor vents!?