craig

He has a couple of cracking builds in the pipeline and done a few crackers in the past.

Yes, specialises in para 55 builds.

Richard Hawkes, we were responsible for the certification ?

Whoever told you that is talking nonsense, you can use any product you want that meets the requirements and has 3rd party certification. If you can't prove the values, you will be penalised.

Respectfully I disagree with you and just because you have ran the house through the software, it doesn't mean it is a PH or better. All the PHPP is telling you, is from the data you have entered is that it either passes or fails. Where's the proof to show the as built details, thermal bridging evidence supplied and so forth. I don't doubt for a second that it will be built well and may pass an actual certification process. How do you know? Because the PHPP says it is?

Yes, very nice house and family to boot.

Spot on. I've seen, I've read, I've been involved with projects that are planned as PH, built as PH and failed. Every bit of data entered into PHPP, on site checks, air tests performed and so forth. It's not as easy as you think @JSHarris to achieve the standard. Only one house I know has achieved certification, that was not planned as PH and was tested and certified after it was built.

You'll always have your naysayers but facts are facts and the simple fact is, PassivHaus buildings have been proven to work as designed and in the real world. Our most recent entry in the Passive House Plus magazine is one example, one we did the entire feasibility study, certification, tool box talk etc. on. In my view the certificate isn't exactly necessary but you may always live with the question "is it really Passiv Standard". The standard has certainly moved building efficiency and building standards forward dramatically, unfortunately not all builders grasp the concept. Even when building towards the standard.

From memory triple can give you 44db + with the right glazing. Double glazing can perform better than triple, it's down to the glazing and space the sound has to travel. It's also down to numerous other factors around the glazing and how the sash is sealed around the frame (how many gaskets) and how it is installed. No point in sound proof glazing if the window and installation are not up to the job as well. You should be able to get the details from the supplier.

It comes down to numerous factors and is hard to tell without seeing the quotes. However, Internorm are a high end Austrian product and a lot of differences exist between the two. With Internorm, it also depends on which retailer you have had a quote from. Prices vary between retailers. Look at the supply price excluding fitting, is it comparable or £4K / £10k different - possible the end figure including installation may have been used when comparing figures?

@Triassic it comes down to several factors / powder coating will generally be 70/30 split of matt and gloss. RAL paint is usually a different mixture not sure exactly.

Well done, looks a great property and the colour on the windows works well with the brick, not to long before moving in now For me, after doing thousands of quotes/orders in whites and greys. It's a joy to see someone use different colours for the windows. I've personally had many orders with different colours over the years, in particular, Pink RAL 4003, Olive Green RAL 6003, White Aluminium RAL 9006 and others but few and far between. It's usually grey or white. I like to see a little bit of adventure with colours. RAL 4003 actually looks really good against a white render. I've done a few doors with the frame being RAL 7016 and the door sash being in the red RAL colour range & they look stunning - in my view, don't be feared to mix and match colours if you can get away with it. The frame can be a different colour from the sash - I would urge people to consider different colours. The problem is, RAL 7016 tends to work so well with so many different finishes.

Compacfoam will do the job.

Advice? I can offer opinion as it's down to personal preference at the end of the day. Performance - generally speaking uPVC performs better than timber/ timber alu. You can clad uPVC in Aluminium and you can foil inside/outside. Timber can be lacquered in many different finishes, different timber types etc. and colours externally with any RAL colour and that applies to internally as well. Not a lot like uPVC, I don't mind it, as long as the majority of the system is recycled. The parts you can see, tend to be new. uPVC can and does bring artificial light into a room, it can brighten up a small room. Using uPVC you'll need strengthening in the frame, which is usually obtained by steel tube inserts. Some profile suppliers use glass fibre inserts to stop thermal bridging within the frame. At the end of the day it's two fold, preference and budget and thirdly in your case. What the conservation officer allows. Personally, timber aluminium but if budget didn't allow, I'd have no concerns using uPVC. As long as the hinges are concealed, I don't have much of an issue either way.

Open plan is all the rage these days ?

Best people to go to in my view. google magicman

Oh I agree Jack but order checks shouldn't just be about the window order, sizes, handles, finish etc. This should involve the supplier checking and detailing the sections and ensuring the installers know how and where items are fitted. There is no excuse for a poor installation.

When I raise the actual order, I don't sign it off until we have went through item by item and clarified everything. That the client agrees and they have signed it off. If they haven't agreed, I'm not sending it to production. No paper trail, no production. You can't help things being ignored, that's just incompetence.

There is no reason why they can't and get it right. We are not perfect either but it's why checks and signs offs are in place. I personally don't order anything until I and the responsible person for ordering has checked everything and signed off. We explicitly advise, ask if you don't know before signing anything.

He's a character alright but a great guy, straight talking and no nonsense. Does a great job and knows what he wants to do and achieve and by when.

Hope everything goes well, better it happened now than find out further down the line when not a lot can be done about it.

We read a few of the sites ourselves, our focus is to all but our appeal tends to be with the self builders / one off builders. We find the topics / posts extremely useful and think supplier / client interaction, should be encouraged more.

Yes, we have numerous projects with non certified windows. You'll find a lot of suppliers will use the non certified product. For Instance, Internorm tend not to use the certified product because the certified product costs about 25% more (at least that used to be the case, I would need to double check if they have had any of the standard systems certified). Certification is a marketing tool, it does also make the certification process a little easier but only just. You don't need and are not required to use any certified product on a Passive build. You just need to prove the product you are using, does what is claimed. You do this by 3rd party certifications, which the supplier should be able to supply. They will generally be supplied with thermal calcs as well. Its important that these values are available at a very early stage, so that these can be entered into the PHPP. If not available, the certifier will generally use standard values advised by the supplier/manufacturer and apply a penalty until the values/certificates are available. I would also say that the shell of any build is not one to skimp on, the shell is what brings the savings. The bells and whistles are things which can be added/tweaked further down the years if need be. Difficult/costly to alter the shell later - I personally wouldn't advise skimping on windows but I'm biased in that view.

The ground level expands out to the back but doesn't impact the windows above. The windows at the front side are bricked up, the windows further back are not going to be impacted by the building so won't be bricked up. However, the light etc. to those windows will certainly be impacted.

It's a generalisation I appreciate that, not all architects are and will be the same. However, the amount of drawings we receive and request from architects, are scaled drawings without a window schedule and without measurements for the windows being suplied. How and why? if you don't pay attention and something goes wrong, who's at fault? If you do pay attention and something does go wrong, that can happen but what I mean by paying attention is that it reduces "or should" reduce the chances of something going wrong. Of course it would be, I wouldn't blame the architect for that either but I bet that's a deviation from the approved plans with or without consent from BC. I appreciate that and sorry to hear that happened. We are not all perfect, by a long shot and mistakes do happen. Mistakes can be avoidable though. I bet the supplier, installers didn't look at the details supplied which resulted in the problems encountered?