PeterW

Same with B&Q Buy 5 offer Knauf Ekoroll 100mm 8.2M2 @ £13 (15 Rolls) Knauf Ekoroll 200mm 5.5M2 @ £16 (36 Rolls) = £770 or so and both in stock locally.....

"Technically" if you ensure all foil joins are done correctly, and the wall to roof join is done correctly then yes, you have an airtight build. The devil is in the detail !

Just to check - has this now started and have you got any photos ..?? May need a similar approach for my garage so would be keen to see the detail.

Standard build up of 190mm joist full fill with a rock wool product plus 40mm of PIR under the rafters gets you there and it also means you have a VCL with the foil. I plan to do 2 layers of 25mm insulation with a cross batten and counter batten which leaves a cold bridge of around 0.064% which I think I can cope with ...

OK thanks for that !

I was quoted £32k EX Vat for SIP panel roof that was 175mm panels so a uValue of 0.15...! Not surprisingly I didn't bother following it up !

Any way you can take down that wall and replace it with a stud wall..? It would seriously lighten the load and also allow a proper look at what is tied to where...

Can anyone explain why when all tools on site are "supposed" to be 110v, why finding a 110v mixer second hand is like finding hens teeth..? I can find 240v ones all day long, and also find new 240v ones for less than £150 but decent 110v ones with all the bits seem a bit rare Or does everyone just use 240v for the mixer and be done with it..??

Just seen this - at that price I'm sending him all mine now !! http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/A1-A0-LARGE-FORMAT-DRAWINGS-PRINTED-FOR-YOU-BUILDERS-PRINTER-SERVICE-NEXT-DAY-/131960394735?hash=item1eb973d3ef:g:roQAAOSwGotWlOU~

They are used for a lot of civils contracts but tend to be very deep - they are used more for temporary retaining and then have a significant concrete or steel ring beam attached to them to stabilise the tops. From recollection they have to be 2/3rds / 1/3rd below and above ground, so a 4m wall needs a 12m pile. Bizarrely saw a Movax unit from these guys earlier today !! Beast of a machine holding up the traffic on a low loader !! http://www.stuartpiling.co.uk/

Highly unlikely given the two outer walls are insulated - and internal - with 100mm rock wool and the loft sits above with over 400mm above an unventilated false ceiling. Computational fluid dynamics can show the flow in a box is not even and has significant "cold spots" where flow reduces - this is exacerbated at low flow rates so MVHR doesn't really stand much chance when it comes to ensuring a clean extract. I think there is a lot more science to this than the manufacturers and the "designers" of some of the systems want to admit to and they just don't understand it - or more likely can't make it understandable for Joe Public in a simple and effective way.

Condensation is an odd thing - RH is another. If you boil a kettle or use a shower you get a very dramatic rise in RH to the point of saturation UNLESS you are extracting the moisture at a rate that RH cannot be maintained. What normally occurs is that water vapour condenses on the first available surface and by capillary action - unless it is a sealed/tiled surface - the water is drawn into the material. Once in the material, the condensate has to evaporate which requires the latent heat to be sufficient to cause the vapourisation to happen - this is where your issues will lie as the temperature differential is not enough. As the material stays damp for a sufficient period and is usually moistened on a cyclical basis then you start to see why mould forms. Taking the points about airflow, unless you want to do a full 3D model of room and understand it's fluid dynamics then most MVHR placement is just shy of borderline guesswork ... Extracts are regularly placed over or very near to hot spots for vapour generation, and yet this may not be the most suitable place for fully extracting from the room. I have a shower that has an extractor directly above it yet due to the shape of the cubicle we still get tiny patches of black mould appear on the silicone in the top corners - the extract is doing its job but fluid dynamics tells me there is a significant slow down in air flow from extraction, and this cannot compete with the secondary air flow caused by heat rising from the hot shower - I could increase the airflow but this would still only have an effect if I had a perfectly circular shower with an extract that was the same size and the tray was perforated to allow a linear airflow from below me - I would hazard a guess that 99% of showers are actually sealed at the base so in a practical situation the laws of fluid dynamics go out of the window ..!

Why does that look like it's going to be a 3 figure per square metre price .....???

A1 to A3 is exactly 50% its easier if you mark key values on a plan anyway as then there is no ambiguity when a plan is scaled and printed.

If anyone wants to do their own research and draw their own conclusions on some of this then you could do better than start here. ... http://hope.epfl.ch/

I rate the Fischer screws and I've got the box from Screwfix that is topped up as and when it's needed. They appear on offer a lot so I tend to have a few spare boxes. I used to use Spax but they don't appear as easy to get hold of anymore and have on some of them changed to a Torx head - I get the reason why but I'm not going out and buying new screwdrivers just for one set of screws ..!

Does anyone have a decent source and price ..? Looking to retain a 6m long bank that runs from 1m to 0.5m high - will front them with stone and back fill with brick rubble etc

Got one of these and I think it's great for pilot / countersink http://www.axminster.co.uk/axminster-turbo-drill-countersink-set-of-3-717964

From memory the boulder units aren't SAP Q registered so you only get to use the lowest values rather than the SAP Q appendix

Ok as along as you only have a small space and don't need a high SAP score as far as I remember

Chlorination is the other way - shock dose the pipe at an agreed amount of chlorine at a certain ppm, wait for it to disinfect and then run it though. Wait a certain time and sample the pipe, then culture the water to see what grows. Its effectively a disinfection test

We had one A0 plan printed onto like a plastic coated paper which went on the wall in the office and then had it broken down into A3 detailed plans for which there were multiple copies. It meant that the A3 ones could be drawn on, the A1 was left as a "master" that was referred to when you needed an overall view. A1 was done by these people - think it was about £18 inc laminating http://www.studentprinting.co.uk/a1-colour-print-2-p.asp

I would go for plan 1 and see if they will let you discharge both the rainwater and treated effluent to the ditch over the road. Not sure how "legal" it is, but I would try and use a single tank for the treated effluent and rainwater and pump the whole lot as one - it would dilute the discharge and also mean you had one pump to manage. The downside would be that you would need a holding tank that could take a full rainwater surge which could be close to 2500 litres plus another 4-500 litres of effluent and twin pumps to make sure you had redundant systems.

Not sure I have any but will do a quick sketch and scan it later if that's ok ..??

If it was me I would make that bottom tee with the drain off a compression tee and then you can just line the rest up and solder out of the way.