Oz07

@JohnMo did I mention hot tub or has something gone haywire with the forum? Anyway I'm all for hot tub and aircon and whatever else people want to use energy for. Knock yourself out as far as I'm concerned would love to be sitting in a hot tub right now.

I just don't agree with charging high users more per unit. The price is the price. Why punish people for using more? Let's just focus on energy abundance. Improve the generation capacity. Same story with water really, increase supply or storage. Countries with reasonable energy prices can afford to desalinate.

Why? That is terrible. Is it so the pipe is joined outside the building? I've had pipes join under a building before probably isn't best practice but when you see something like this it hurts your eyes. In my case the stub stack coming up might have been accessible to rod a blockage thru so maybe thats why was ok. If you do want it going into that manhole it can be done but just take a long swing into the 90 deg connection of the manhole. You want to be forming a slow bend in connections so the waste is already flowing around.

Without wanting to get in to a slagging match why would you want to punish high energy users? Surely the attitude should be I want us as a country to produce as much energy, reliably and as cheaply as possible (plus cleanly if that bothers you). It just seems such a backwards way of thinking to me and feels like it's why we're in the position we are.

Hasn't there been issues here before mixing business interests with forum advice? I know thats not where you're coming from with it but I seem to remember some aggro previously.

Beware the tool less change does start to play up after a few years i scratch around with a screw in the hole then tap and blow the dust out seems to sort it. I'm running 2 atm. One for rubbish dusty work and a new one for cutting timber.

They have sensible energy prices unlike here. Even in Australia its not unheard of for them to have aircon in their garage or tool shed. Another quirk i find they seem to be able to build a lot more custom things. It appears to me they can stick build with timber over there and as long as they follow local codes they're good to go. I feel like over here we need to involve a structural engineer for every thing unless its an approved detail.

Thought they were a bodgers tool before I bought one. Great bits of kit.

Would it be possible to cool the accumulator in any way?

I don't think there are any regs for insulating cold water pipes in domestic dwelling. I've certainly seen plenty of un insulated pipes in my time. Are you looking to claim from the plumber? I don't think they problem is avoidable if you have a tank in the house at room temperature regardless what you do with the pipes.

I don't know why you think I'm personally attacking you. I'm just giving valid criticism of what often happens on the forum lately. Someone will start a topic saying let's discuss A or B then C gets bought up. Again I can understand why in some cases but this topic didn't really warrant it. Also I think its disingenuous to say 75mm of insulation over a poor b&b floor is crap. These systems have 150mm between the beams then either 75 or 150 over the top. They can hit or better the 2022 u values of .13 for floors. I dont think .13 is crap by any stretch of the imagination. With this project im not going to start agonising for weeks trying to improve u levels by a certain percentage. It sends you mad. I'd much rather accept a certain running cost to the house and focus my efforts elsewhere. Again sorry if I offended you the forum has changed a lot since the earlier days. I also believe ai does have a place for answering quick queries. There is no guarantee but the same can be said with anonymous strangers on forums.

A good benefit is reduced dig out compared to normal b&b with closer matching ground levels. Think you can get the difference between ground level outside and under slab to around 300mm

75 on top would be 225 in total with the 150 between beams. I think you can up the spec of the top sheet to achieve .08 u value according to the websites. But again we are proving my point here. The thread wasn't set up to debate whether beam and block is good or not. Just what appears to me the glaring cold bridge in one of the options above compared to the standard way these 'warm' b&b floors usually work.

Its not that bold. A normal ground bearing floor is susceptible to heave, suspended one less so. I have trees very close to proposed house. Better to plan for the worst. I started the thread as I was interested in the difference between the cold bridges on the 2 different systems. I wasn't really looking for a discussion on whether to use ground bearing or suspended floor. This always happens on this forum. I can see why it has quietened down with ai.

Also certain trees mean deeper foundations which mean suspended floor is the better option incase of heave.

The system is designed by manufacturer. That bottom one is the finished article excluding dpm. Literally finished floor slab. On top of concrete beams which bear onto walls which touch the ground and are exposed to outside air. Of course you can potentially mitigate with insulation on top but who knows if then complies with bba cert. At least the top system has a nice chunky 75mm sheet on top of beams before concrete

I did ground bearing last place but got some apple trees im lopping so think gonna play safe with suspended

I think you guys are missing what im saying. The bottom photo is how that system is finished. As in the slab sits directly on top of those beams which bear directly on top of the masonry at the walls. So an unmitigated cold bridge. The top system has the underside of the beams exposed but has a 75mm (or thicker) sheet of insulation over the whole top so no unmitigated cold bridge. It just seems a massive own goal to me but perhaps I don't understand cold bridges correctly?

Browsing these recently and most manufacturers have a panel which fits between the beams and one which goes over the top. Like this. But then I see a manufacturer who does it with the insulation underneath and in-between and i think you end up with cold bridges where the beam bears onto the supporting wall. Have they allowed for this in their u values? I suppose you could mitigate with a sheet over the top but just seems a massive design error to me. Is it that the bridges are inconsequential on a large floor or do others agree? I'm just trying to guess why they would design like this?

Do people really mesh internally? Id be interested to know if blockwork or plaster cracked. Can you hack some off below skirting line?

This reads like AI. Usually the beams are bowed upwards and you use SCC for the floating concrete top with insulation in-between. The concrete levels the surface out so its thinner in the middle, thicker at the edges. Has the floor moved since the concrete was poured? Do you mean you surveyed a 5x5m square, seems a big room but 500mm square seems to small to judge anything.

Join facebook group like bricklaying jobs in xxx area. You can be very strict in your wording of the post which should filter out a lot of shit. Then your getting people who are actively looking for a start rather than begging people who are booked up. I know its better to use a reccomend trade but not all good guys are always busy. You will get some finishing on a job looking for their next start. Especially with the way new build sites are slowing down. You can afford to pay better than the barrons.

Like these charcoal blocks. Basically as @Russell griffiths says finish slab inline with internal wall

I've stopped mine short before and used kerb units on edge for the final bit. I don't think it matters massively

What about below slab and insulation in flexible duct/conduit. Id imagine the ground under a floorslab doesn't get as cold as the ground outside your house ie below patio