Carrerahill

OK - attempt No. 2! You will need at a minimum 140mm block with piers every 2-3m - so worst case 252 blocks for basic wall plus about another 120 block for 14 piers so £372 for block - £372 laid ton of sand and 10 cement £80-100. Found - digging this will be the biggest cost - £1000.00 - £200-500 for a concrete depending on hand mix or trucked in. I think 3K sounds fair actually. £1500 will be materials. 3-5 days work.

That ain't a garden wall! Back to the drawing board! Single skin 100mm block - no chance.

He said a garden wall. You said above ground so I assumed you had something. 28m of found for that size of wall - depends, excavator or hand dug - found may cost you £1000.00

25.2m^2. 252 x 100mm Blocks @ 85-90p = £226.80 (maybe £252 for 140's) £1 a block laid £252 Some brickies will want £2 a block (go jump) and some will take less - my brickie was £300 for 400 blocks laid absolutely perfectly! £478.80

Arrow HT50 Hammer Tacker. This is the only stapler I ever see the pro's with - and have one myself, far easier and better than the lever handle type designed for teachers to put paintings up in the classroom. https://www.orbitalfasteners.co.uk/en/products/arrow-ht50-hammer-tacker-arrht50p?utm_medium=google_shopping&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=google_shopping&gclid=Cj0KCQjwov3nBRDFARIsANgsdoFtxgl_pvZdPNQmb8U3M-Fh1d5TpZaSY6E7FQk6RB0YQ65gNBO7c9kaAsKQEALw_wcB

Wall plate would be the timber a wall is built upon, ledger board or runner board. From the structural engineer sitting opposite me: I would use M16 threaded, M12 is a bit small. C24 on that span is overkill and not worth it, C16 will be more than adequate. Bricks assuming not crumbling and poor will be of better quality than today's - they are also bigger so you can get a better depth. I would either sort the wall out so it can be done properly or remove some of it, level it, put in a wall plate and sit the joists over the wall. You may opt to put some forms in a pour a concrete pad along it to level it all - although 4 nails would probably hold it, it could fail under heavy load or a sudden impact etc. and it's not about situation now, it's about what happens in 10-20 years when something maybe gets damp or rots. Do this bit right. You are over thinking a 6m^2 domestic floor - the calcs seem off. A sleeper wall mid span for 2.1m is totally unnecessary. Can you post a sketch showing the section across the span - so it shows where the joists will sit - with some rough dim's on it.

Yeah I did try to use them actually, but in the end I just built it to the BC approved spec: "47x195 C16 timber runner bolted to wall at 600mm centres with RAWL M16 R-KF2 stud fixings. Rafters fixed to runner with pair of Expament framing anchors with all holes nailed." I ended up using Simpson A35 framing anchors. The rafters are also skew nailed with 90mm SS nails top and sides. I was actually going to get hangers but none of the local merchants sold the sloped hanger that I would have needed and most of then had never heard of them, is this a regional thing? The roof is not actually finished as there is to be more framework to the underside and as part of it I am going to add some structure to support the rafters a little more.

The lintel is not the issue, it is the bearing surface, you could use a solid piece of titanium but the fact is you are still trying to support a >1200mm span on a 100mm piece of the existing wall. Even with a concrete pad-stone it is not a large bearing surface. One option may be for you to move the whole opening left a bit and have a stub of wall (properly cut into the existing wall) built to give you the required bearing surface without needing to eat into the party wall, another option would be a vertical steel. Of course these two only work if there is a supporting wall lower down that you can build on. These are a bit excessive for your needs but give you an idea. If you take a hammer and hit the edge of concrete what happens? Move it in about 50mm and try again - same principle.

The engineering consultancy my wife works for is running and project managing an EU wide cladding test program - in fact, it is her project. Many testing companies are backing out and stating rather trivial details as the reason, it would appear that they are all aware that really any cladding made with anything other than a cementitious base or metal is going to fail. All these cladding products use plastic or cover plastic and I mean that in the widest sense, foams, plastics everything. Cladding for aesthetic reasons is going to be OK but if the purpose is energy conservation then really it is not a fire safe product. They are also looking at the environmental impact of the stuff and the CO2 and nasty chemicals involved may actually cause more environmental damage than burning a bit of extra gas or electricity to keep the building warm/cool especially as we enter a new era of clean power. I don't think we have used coal for over 3 weeks now. So do we stop filling our houses with horrible chemicals and plastics and just use a bit more energy and stick to good quality natural material based insulation?

OK this is what I have done. You will recognise the connector from above links and images, mine is just modded a bit! So the spigot connector: Then removed seal from the spigot connector as this was NEVER in a million years going to fit: The finished product, I will leave it till tonight like this then make good the hole in the wall after I am happy it is leak free. The foil tape is where the 40mm waste will connect in in which will serve the bathrooms off to the left.

Yes that is is the original cast pipe coming out the ground (now inside my house as it's in the extension). As for the Screwfix part you link to: Yes and no, see my original post I go through it all but the spigot with seal is too big on those, so as a component it is not the right one for the job. However, it all works now and that is what I used with the rubber seal removed so the plastic is just sleeved into the cast pipe with a big bead of quality sealant around the conical section which is now sitting on the cut face of the cast. I also smeared a little on the face of the spigot just too help gum it all up - in reality there should never be water trying to go up the joint, but if there was a blockage then it could be that this section ends up sitting full of water so I needed to know I had a good seal. All my 40mm stuff just arrived so I can now go and do the rest of the bathroom wastes. 2 mins and I will post an image.

Well in my case the cast is 101.6mm and the PVC is obviously 110mm. They didn't have anything (and they had tonnes) that would fit nicely around my cast pipe - but then again, I am led to believe it is an odd size...

The existing lintel will not reduce the load on the new lintel it potentially will actually increase the load. The dead load and any imposed loads (if it supports any floor joists etc.) of the masonry above the existing lintel is being supported at two points in the existing wall this then creates a greater point load at the bearing surfaces, if you then transfer this down onto the new lintel you are actually going to create a higher point load right in the centre - weakest point - than if you just bricked up to the old lintel. What I would do is support the wall at about 3 points (depending on width of opening) 1 about 2 courses above the new lintel position and directly under the LHS of the old lintel, then another further left and above the proposed new lintel the third would be under the old lintel too just to take the weight of the wall above well. Then remove the wall to create your opening, and fit the new lintel, then build brick up under the old lintel well, with a good mortar bed pushed in hard so the old lintel effectively just becomes a long brick and is fully supported. The old lintels load becomes fully supported full length.

Hmmm, when do you need it, I should be up near Taynuilt in the next month...

I tried those too - the one I tried was basically a parallel sided thing (that one is to go over the OD of clay which is much bigger than 4inch) it was a good fit on the 110mm PVC but had an even bigger gap around the cast - if the Timesaver was going to wrinkle up this boy was going to look like a bloomin' Accordion!

Yeah, I told the merchant exactly what I needed to do. Whatever way we look at it, it was wrong. Not quite sure, if I could pick the brain of a older plumber I am sure we could fathom it out, the B&Q guy is older and was a plumber, he did comment the pipe I brought in had an oddly thick wall to it. I need to return to the merchants today, to get some 45° elbows and return the Timesaver so I will see if there are any older looking plumbers about and ask them.

Yes that is the one I used in the end with the seal removed, it looked like this: https://www.screwfix.com/p/mcalpine-dc1-bl-drain-connector-black-110mm/4255V?kpid=4255V&ds_kid=92700030947645247&ds_rl=1241687&ds_rl=1245250&ds_rl=1249404&ds_rl=1245250&ds_rl=1249481&ds_rl=1249799&gclid=CjwKEAjwlujnBRDl2teOp_veulQSJAC5bHgtNgsJa_j73r8AJsmdBOfcqXuYEuyfUda-fOod_FQsAxoCQXzw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds The description does say 110mm cast - that is then correct for a true 4" cast iron pipe, but the pipe here is 4inch OD - I wonder, did they mess with imperial pipe sizes? Was it mean to be more like 100mm or something? Anyway, it is in and working now, the 40mm should arrive today and I can connect into a boss I fitted for the basin and bath.

Long story short, but as part of the house extension I needed to renew a cast soil stack and tie in some other basins and showers and things into a new single PVC pipe to create a single drop for all upstairs waste which let's me box the pipe in behind kitchen cabinets in the new kitchen. I had everything sitting there to do the job and as my wife was away last night I decided it was a good day to cut the old stack down and replace it. Everything was going seriously well, when the house was built the brickies must just leave 3 bricks missing in each leaf of the cavity wall so that the plumber can then run in his soil pipe, then it looks like they just stuffed some bricks in the hole and the roughcaster simply roughcast over it all as when I started tapping around with my hammer it just sort of fell in! Which meant I ended up with a cracking space to work in, I was even able to vacuum out the lead cavity tray and clean it all up a bit! So within about 5 minutes of going up the ladder I had the bricks all out and the bricks from the inner leaf out and I could literally see the pan connector. This was going to make it all rather simple! So 9" angle grinder out and the stack is down, with lots of care taken to get a good level cut about 1' from the oversite concrete. Then it was time to fit the Timesaver, for those of you who have never heard or seen one: https://www.wolseley.co.uk/product/saint-gobain-gt01-pipe-coupling-100mm/ This was sold to me (£25) as the bee's knee's, the "boy for the job", "the thing all the plumber use", "I have sold these for 30 years and that's the puppy" - so feeling rather confident I bought that and went to fit it... Errr: Photo is not crystal clear but that is a fairly reasonable air-gap around most of the pipe, doing what I do for a living and hobbies I am used to small tolerances, things that just look right and create good seals - this did not fill me with confidence at all and for the money you sort of expect a neat fit. I Googled and it looks like no one has ever used one and made a YouTube video or forum post. I went to the plumbers merchant and spoke to the owner who rang up a plumber for me, I spoke to him and he said that they do wrinkle up a bit on tightening and don't always look neat - just tighten it down. None of this filled me with confidence either. I decided to give it a go, so with a new piece of PVC pipe on the factory clean cut end I made the joint, sort of difficult as the PVC pipe wanted to slide over the cast (it was almost a perfect fit, not that I would, but it was so tempting to cover the outside of the cast pipe in sealant and just sleeve the PVC pipe over it) so I manged to line it all up, got the centre lip which acts like a stop to sit right on the end of the PVC pipe then lined it all up and tightened down the collars. Looked OK - seal was sitting fairly square under the collars, felt solid. So I went and got the hose. Hose on, water pouring out from the underside of the Timesaver - I knew it, there was no way that thing could work. So I took it all apart and went to B&Q (now 20:15) with a piece of my cast pipe and I got hold of a guy in there who I know was a plumber and very knowledgeable, he was a little perplexed by it all but he, as always, was prepared to find a solution. Now if you Google PVC into Cast Iron, two options are at the top of the page, the spigot type McAlpine connector which pushes into the cast then has a standard PVC coupling on top to take the pipe and the flexible rubber type with two jubilee clips. However, if you look at the McAlpine connector it says 110mm cast iron pipe - my cast iron pipe is exactly 4" OD - or about 102mm. So the push in part with the seal wouldn't even look at the pipe I had! The B&Q guy then pulled the rubber seal off the spigot connector and it slid into the cast pipe absolutely perfectly. So we both agreed that as the spigot was sleeved into the cast by about 60mm on a vertical section of pipe it should work fine, I also added a big bead of silicon round the top of the cast pipe so when the spigot bottomed out it sat down on and made a good seal. So it appears that I have an odd size cast iron pipe, so the Timesaver, flexible connector nor the McAlpine were ever going to fit! I am worried that this is a bodge, I hate things not being correct, but I know in soil and underground drainage things are a bit Heath Robinson looking sometimes. At the end of the day the thing I bought was to do the job I needed, the only difference being the seal that came with it was not used and through a tight fit and bead of silicon I think it will be good. The only issue I see is if there was ever a blockage and the pipe started to back up, in theory it should never leak, in theory it didn't even need the silicon. But, as bad as it is, I am tempted to build some shuttering around it and pour in concrete over the whole joint so that the whole lot is encased. That will make me happier as this is going to be under a suspended timber floor with probably no access. Anyone else come across this sort of thing?

Where are you? If you arrange it with them I will collect it and post it to you...

So I take it you have been told the landing windows needs to be a means of escape, if not, then as it is not a habitable room does it need to be? If the glazing is over 800mm it need not be toughened, as for escape route, if this is a proposed escape route on a plan as approved or requested by BC then yes it needs to be between 800 and 1100mm above F.F.L - if your rough opening is 790mm then you are going to be more like 850mm by the time you finish with the sill and the frame of the window. If there was any doubt at all, I would simply raise the whole lot 10mm then start and order a window 10mm shorter than originally planned. I would very much doubt BC are going to measure it if it looks right. Is this a new build? Does the landing window open onto a roof? If so then the regs are 600-1100mm.

It needs to be Borosilicate or Ceramic glass. Call D&N Glass in Glasgow - I know they advertise it and I have worked with them before.

I love these "electrical engineer architects"... Speak to DNO, if you end up generating so much electricity that you need to export over 100A then this cable is the least of your worries.

Go to the manufacturers website and if they have BIM objects they will list them under downloads. If a product warrants a BIM object existing for it and the manufacturer offer them (MK, Marley etc. do), then ultimately yes that is how it works. When we do M&E drawings, often ducts, conduit, HVAC units and cable tray, pipes and things like that can be drawn within say a ceiling void accurately so that we can ensure it will all fit! To be honest, it's a bit of a pest. For a house I wouldn't waste my time and I doubt sketchup could cope - we are doing it on Autodesk products like Revit and even then there is the "super-computer" to handle the big drawings like entire floors of office blocks etc.

I did PP and BW applications simultaneously for speed - we were certain PP would be fine with it so were happy that changes would not be needed and in the end PP and BC arrived almost the same day. As said in my post just above this one, but written after the post I am now replying to, PP want to know how the thing will look, that includes finishes. Renders and woods and tiles and slates and downpipes etc. So you have PP? If so what does it detail for the buildings finished look? Render is it? So now you just need to pick an acceptable wall construction that is finished in render and apply to BC to for approval

PP is what it will look like and the impact it will have on the surrounding area, PP really only concerns themselves with the external appearance - that is PP in a nutshell. Alongside PP you also need your approved construction detail which will be approved by BC - they want to know how you are going to build it right down to the size and type of nail you will use to nail the ceiling joist to the wall plate - I am not kidding! What BC expect is a set of relevant drawings and details showing how you will build your building - you can't just say - "I will build a render finished building" and build it however you choose - it's really there to ensure buildings are built properly and with good thermal values, fire safety etc. It may also impact the rest of your house, in my case I need to add smoke alarms to other rooms and a fire escape window to the old kitchen. So for my extension there is a fairly simple drawing showing the extension and make up of the wall in plan, where windows and doors will go, where pipes, electrical will go, where fire-stops will go, etc. Then there is a standard wall detail which is a written section that basically says: "19mm render on 100mm block with 50mm cavity then reflective breathable membrane onto 12mm OSB on 125x45mm studs @ 600mm centres, insulated between with 100mm PIR then plaster-boarded with foil backed 12.5mm PB." There was also a typical TF wall detail drawn which shows window opening/lintel details etc. So you need to work out a wall construction, then detail it and that is what BC will approve (or not).