Gus Potter

I'm going to be the devils advocate here and assume that the window installer thinks they are not to blame, they have engaged me to defend them. First I'm going to put my SE hat on. With that hat on I want to see if your house is a bit "flexible" and prone to sideways movement. @Balou can you post some full elevation photos. Now if it turns out that your building is flexible then I would, in the installers defense, start asking the SE type questions.. in other words is the building moving sideways as designed by the SE within limits and also vertically (withing limits) and causing out glazing to fail? as the glazing contractor has not accounted for the SE movement in their installation. I can't easily see how the bricks are supported over the bifold doors. Again here if defending the glazing contractor I would want to know about this and cavity tray design. I would also want to know if you have made later alterations since you moved in, have you done something that could compromise the building performance that has cuased the building to move and over stressed the glazing and this has resulted in the problems manifest. If you have not done any of the above then the glazing provider seems to be on a sticky wicket! I agree Craig. It could be that the window frames are absolutely fixed to the main frame of the house and as that moves about it's causing overstress in the windows and doors. By the sound of it the workmanship appeares shoddy, not maintaining air tighntess for example. In the round though there are so many issues it apears to me that the product could just be faulty and the installation is poor.

Hiya all. This post is intended to provide insight into UFH screeds, the build process and build tolerances.. which drives overall cost. The first part sets the narrative. The last sets out and describes what drives screed thickness. At the end of the day if you are building a new house or just extending then it is vital that you understand how each bit of the design works, how you are going to build it and the tolerances you have to apply to each element so you don't cause a later problem. On self builds few folk have the ability / time to ensure that the contractor is delivering what they say they will! To get round this we need to simplify the design so self builders / extenders can see that they are getting what they paying for, compare builders quotes. We need to build in tolerances that the builder can work to when the rain is pissing down their neck. This is real life in the building trade! With my SE hat on I want to make sure that the slab is thick enough, but buildable, so the slab could be 10-15mm high unless the Client wants to pay extra for the tighter tolerance! "But the Architect told us it would work!" It might but they may not have told you how much extra that would cost to work to a tighter tolerance! Oh no, if the slab is high that can't be as my UFH pipes won't fit! As an SE I want to control the level of the sub base, if sub base is too high the slab is too thin. Now in a stricty controlled enviroment with a traditional Clerk of works we may get this down to 10mm high on the top side, not an SE issue in the main. SE washes their hands at this point, but if they are nice guys like me they will alert you to the problem. Any more tighter tolerances than that and the Contractor will add cost. But the whole idea of self building is to cut out these middle men! The only way you do that is to keep it simple stupid! That statement is based on the what I've learnt from being in this business for 40 years! This is the art of design! See where you can save time on site, make it easily buildable, reduced Contractor risk ( so they don't inflate the price) then you can use the savings to deliver what you actually see as the end result. Many self builders just "hope for the best".. but this is the building trade and there are no friends in the desert. Once you get into this mind set then you are in a good position to "sell yourself " to builders. If you make it simple then the risk to them is less and the price will likely go down. If you take the time to understand what you want to build and how it is going to be executed then you are in a strong position. Your reward will be that you open up the field for the more builders to compete for the work not least. At some point you will find a builder that says, I want this job and can see how I'm going to make a profit as I can see that is is not diffucult and carries less risk. Now I've had a few Clients over the years. If you are smart enough to be able to think about extending / self building and have some funds then you are not daft. My role is to give you the information that you need to make an informed descision. If your advisors are not doing this then you need to ask why. Yes, this post is about screed thickness but it's actually about what is below that drives the equation. I design insulated rafts, a passive raft is just a nuance! have done so for decades, but always having in mind what we need to put on top of the structural slab. The tolerance on a structural slab or just the supporting floor is, having done lots of insulated build raft designs, is about 10mm plus or minus on a good day! I shite you not this is a good day! If you have beam and block then these have a pre camber and that inroduces another aspect. If you assume a flat screed at nomimal 40mm thick then you are likely on a hiding to nothing. DO NOT DO THIS SCREED AT 40mm. Its complete bonkers! Now I know that there are many folk on BH that advocate thin screeds, but my own view is that they may have only done one or two projects at most, some may have done more but have never checked or just put their heads in the sand and never admit they cocked it up! In summary my main gripe is: 1/ That there is a total lack of design coordination and this results in extra cost as many contractors and designers as covering their arses. There is this perception that what you are putting the screed on is going to be flat and level.. that is cloud cuchoo land! Any Architect that wants to dish out advice needs to have practical experience and an understanding of what the SE is doing, the complete process and the tolerances every trade is normally expected to work within...otherwise they are a potential liability. 2/ There are far too many folk poncing about on screed thickness without understanding what they are laying it on, structural slabs have a wide tolerance as do beam and block. 3/ You can use the likes of "Loop cad" as much as you like but in the heat of battle some UFH pipes may have to cross over one another. There is an old saying you can plan for war, but as soon as the war starts the plans go out the window, this happens from time to time when building stuff. That is why I'm advocating for the simple stupid,it at least give you a fighting chance. Please folk try and think about cutting yourself some slack, the tighter the tolerances you ask for the higher the cost.. in reality, I see it so many times unless you make it simple you'll end up paying for something that never gets delivered. Best to pay for something that is achievable, even if you need to make compromises? Good design always involves compromising to get the best overall outcome. This is often missed by novice self builders, its not a bad thing to have that enthusiasm.. what is bad is if they then chuck their money down the drain by not beaing able to recognise that design is about balance / the trade off.

Good approach, your efforts will reap rewarded. It's a very tricky detail. You have to balance cleaning with over hang, how you detail out the membrane under the roof cladding, if the gutters are long do you need or not an expansion gutter detail, the fall in the gutter, often over looked! The detail might look good at the gutter high end but what about the low end? Sometimes if I'm discussing gutters in the North of Scotland, Wales where we get iced snow that can rip pretty much any gutter off, but it does not snow that much often enough to warrant snow guards, we just set the gutters a bit lower, so from time to time the rains running down the roof over shoots. Design is about achieving the best compromise at times.

There is a discprecancy here. Go back and check what parmeters the Larsen truss designer was given. Ask; how do the Larsen trusses cope with the wind load. Larsen truss design is a bit of an art, it's a lot of fun mind and massively elegant, the wind loads get applied in a different way compared with a standard timber frame. The detail you show indicates that the outer and inner flange of the Larsen truss are restrained. It seems that your are on the face of it committed, but if there is an error then no point in compounding this. If I was you I would be confirming in writing to your Architect that a 40 mm screed is achievable, buildable at reasonable cost and it is going to remain serviceable ( i.e) not cause problems with the flooring. I've dabbled with this over the years and I feel that you tolerances are too tight and you are in for a nasty shock At least you'll end up paying for something that does not get delivered on site. My suggestion is that you get together with your Architect.. find out just how much they know about what is deliverable in reality. Give them a way to save face and see if you can change the levels. Bite the bullet now as later it will likely get worse. Well it will be a disater if what you are laying on is 5 - 10mm high? so now the pipe cover will be a bit of a joke. As an SE I'm very careful to set buildable tolerance limits. Ask your Architect how they are going to account for the variation in level and flatness of what you are laying on. In summary you take your chances! As an SE I'm not that fussed if your UFH does not work so well. With my desinger hat on I think this is vital to get it right, even if you have to go back and review the potential desing flaws which I think are there. It does not have to to result in a big falling out!

This says lots in two sentences! It's well worth considering as written by a construction professional with decades of experience. This is great advice. To go into a little detail. If you are a builder and building things, like a self build project / extensions etc for Clients and employing or sub contracting then there three types of insurance that I want you to demonstrate and evidence to me (on behalf of my Client) that you hold. If you as a Client have a mortgage then your lender has in interest, thus you as a Client should make contact with your lender. It can be a bind but to tick all the boxes this is what you should do. 1/ The builder needs to hold Public liability insurance. This is actually quite cheep to obtain for a small builder as the policy terms are really restrictive. It basically covers them for saying leaving a barrow on a public foot path and for some drastic event where no other policy kicks into place. I have this type of cover as an SE, its cheep cf my professional indemnity insurance but if I damage someones BMW with my ladder it could be a sore one. 2/ The next one up is employers liability insurance. This is serious as if you don't protect your employees then you can go to jail.. this is a statutory requirement. So you have to check that when the builder presents this and the extent of thier cover it makes some sense. Even if they say, I only employ my wife and, all the rest are sub contractors you need to do enough due dilligence to say.. can you demonstrate that your sub contractors who may employ ten people are also sufficiently insured. It sounds over the score at first glance but if there is an accident on site the HSE may take a different view! The moral stand point makes it own case. Cost wise employers liability is not massivley expensive unless you have black marks against your past performance and have systems in place to stop folk getting hurt on site. 3/ In terms of cost the last bit a contractor needs is contracts works insurance. This covers most of the things that a Contractor might make a complete pigs ear of and they do from time to time they do. One simple one is say on a house extension; the plumber makes a temporary connection, it fails and floods the house. At the other end they may not follow the SE design, SE pitches up and says.. you need to take that back down and rebuild. Now in context. Before I reinvented myself as an SE I was a Contractor, employed people. There was occasion where I and my employess made a mess, got it wrong. I paid to fix it as that comes with the job. But if I had made too much of a mess then I would have had to pass this onto my contracts works insurer. The key bit here is that contracts works insurance is expensive. Many builders have policies that are written "in aggregate". This means that if they cock up on more than one job at a time then their policy may not pay out the amount you expect. So to sum up. It's worth just asking a few questions.

Plus 1 to that. Once you take into account the build sequence then agree second option is more practicable. I know you have just asked about the inside but can you just check the weathering detail on the outside? This is a critical detail for longevity. Ask your Architect if they know whether the Larsen truss has been designed so both the inside and outside flanges require structural support. @Dunc Does your cladding require ventilation behind, always worth checking the fire protection detail around doors , windows and at the wall head if this is the case.

The FMB is a trade association, by subscription. Make of that what you like. This is good you have seen other work, but check that was not for a relative. Check Face book and other social media for suspicious connections. Don't assume all builders are there to rip you off, many are good honest hard working folk. Just browse and if there is a rat you'll likely smell it. A fatal mistake here is to fall under the builders "charm".. you like them but don't want to uncover bad news. Be brave and grasp the nettle. You don't have to tell them you have checked them out! If you struggle on social media then get say your kids , nieces and nephews etc to check this stuff for you, they will do it in a fraction of the time! Do more due dilligence. Check companies house if they are limited. See what other links the directors have. If not limited then this can be an advantage. If something goes horribly wrong then sometimes you can chase the builders own personal assets. Check to see where they live, go to the land registry and see if they own the home (in Scotland this cost me £3.00) and how big their mortgage is. Check to see if they hold it in joint names. You can't chase easily (and nor would you probalby I hope) if the house is in joint names and you end up putting a family out their home. If vat registered then you can check their registration. If not vat registered then you need to ask them why. If their turnover is that low then how do they build houses? Once you have done this kind of due dilligence then you need to sort out a contract that is fair to all parties. To finish on a light note. I have posted this kind of stuff before. Last year a Client engaged me and told me they had followed my advice and done the full due dilligence on myself! I thought... well at least I passed and if you want to dish it out then expect the same in return!

Agree, your statement is however cleverly worded, what you say is generally accepted as correct. But you are making a straw man arguement. Have you explored the potential of the Rosebank oil field? That is because we keep shutting them down. Have a look at what Ineos have been doing for many years in Fife Scotland. One reason it did well in the past was because it used sweet Brent crude oil from the north sea, more plastic and base chemicals, less heavy crud ( the crap) that is expensive to get rid of. No it won't in the grand scheme of things, anyway if we make the tax system attractive it's the oil and gas companies that will fund it. If we give them the same security as we seem to hand out willy nilly to the wind folk this should be welcome. It's accepted that to develop say the Rosebank field will take 10 - 15 years. Again here you are making the straw man argument. Even the development will create well paying jobs in the UK. It has less nasty stuff in it that is bad for the environment. I'm not saying this is not achievable, but it will be very much less achievable over say 30 years if we don't develop and maintain our oil and gas industry and collect taxes to fund it. As an Engineer I think you are economically naive. There is a reason for this. Brent crude is what we call a sweet oil, it has lots more useful and valuable compenents and less rubbish in it. That is why you often see it as the bench mark oil price. We have down the list a bit WTI (West Texas Intermediate) which sells for less. Then you have the stuff the Middle east sell. Again you are making a straw arguement as you are comparing apples with oranges. We have some of the best and most valuable oil off the shores of the UK. Again you just can't see the woods for the trees, mention Reform and some folk just can handle it. Is that the best you can do? But see that gas.. it does not magically come out the sea bed ready for use. It needs processed and use made of the other components. If you really are worried about the environment then we should be spending money developing our own access to sweet crude oils just 80 miles off our shores. We take them and process them responsibly. So please can you dispense with your straw man arguments as while some may fall for that type of deflection I won't.

Hang on here before you chuck in the towel. It's quite usual to find no membrane or bituminous felt under an old slate / clay tiled roof. Can you post some photos so we can have a look at what you have from the inside and the outside. In a new build yes, but when we are considering old buildings and upgrading it can actually be an advantage. The old traditional roofer ( 100 years ago) did not have access to felts and membranes so they gave their slates / tiles more head lap. We can use this to our advantage at times as the roof is really drafty, every cloud has a silver lining!

Agree a bit of air can cause havoc. One way to purge this is to shut off the other loops and open the air vent. You'll need a bucket and a few towels to catch the water. Give it a good go and don't forget to top up the inhibitor once you have finished.

Ok that is settled. First paragraph. The UK oil and gas energy resource is not "fininite" in terms of the next 50 years. There is plenty! It's just that the UK tax system makes it less attractive to extract. If we use our own resource that satisfies and mitigates your point of despot regimes, blatent abuse of human rights. Cut off their money! That is why we need to be relying on the West of Scotland oil and gas fields and fracking. Schiehallion, Loyal, and Foinaven fields. This gives us national energy security in the short to medium term and delivers well paying jobs and income taxes etc from that. . The money we get from this can then be used to drive towards zero carbon emissions. If we just import oil and gas we are paying the Arabs instead, for no benefit to ourselves. You have to remember that us Brits are great innovators, we can't do that if we have no cash! Unfortunatly we have the Greens in Scotland who don't know what a woman is, so we have much doubt about their ability to make evidenced based decisions on the oil and gas industry which impact on all of the UK. You see they can control this through the planning system not least! One of my pals is an SE who is working on this, the actual design of the rigs and how you extract oil and gas in deep water and then get it to shore. It's also to do with the quality of the oil. Much of the oil from the Middle east is a bit crap to say the least and really churns out some nasty stuff during the refining process. Ok, fair enough. But this is a typical response from lefties, mention Reform and you are far right. I mention them as an Engineer. Tice and Farage have said in their speaches that they recognise that they don't have the strength and depth within their party to run the country. But they have said that they will second people from indusrty, Engineers, Doctors to support them where they are weak. Take some time and listen to some of their speaches before you come back for a second time and ask me for evidence. In the round though I think we are of the same mind. Here you make a good pragmatic conclusion. Lastly is ok to disagree!

There you go, how easy was that! Ok to kick this off what is your opinion on nett zero? Here is roughly what I think in broad scoool terms, call it that for now. 1/ The world is an unfavourable place. We are actually lucky in the UK that we have not had a war that has really threatened out soil since 1945. I'm an SE but was trained primarily as Civil Engineer, we have a duty to the public to secure our infra structure for the next at least 50 years and dams above cities for 100- 200 years. 2/ Nett zero in the UK serves to destabalise our economy and reduces our ability to innovate. 3/ You have got yourself into a funk because I mentioned Reform!

I'm not sure if I want to engage with you as I get the feeling you are not technically minded. If you want to use abbreviations then use your abbreviation, put in brackets what that means so the rest of the folk on BH can understand and easily follow the discussion. Do that first, plain English is required at all times. To wet your apetite for discussion I'll make my case as an Engineer who has a Civic responsibility, you might find that interesting?

I think you made the right descision to step away from this. However the seller may sort it out and come back to you. At the end of the day they took your offer seriously. You wanted to by the place / fell in love with it? They have two or maybe more choices, realistic ones are: 1/ Wait for someone daft to by it. 2/ Smell the coffee, sort it out and do a deal with you. They may well come back to you as if they thought you were not serious they would have binned you earlier as a purchaser. Technically yes. But this is what we call an accidental load case. If we designed everything based on this accidental case then the cost of building would become excessive.

Perhaps read more widely.