SimonD

Hmmm, GBS wanted about £8k to install mine! I know this company has a great reputation but I went elsewhere as my experience of finalising an order was very underwhelming and they seemed disinterested in my custom.

If you can, wait until autumn to install those board on boards. You'll get less problems with the heat and sun and give the timber time to aclimatise over the winter and spring. In terms of the cracks, you're better off looking at an exterior wood filler, like Liberon Wood Filler HTH

Yes you can. The detailing obviously needs to change somewhat as you need to fix the battens through the wood fibre into the timber frame/masonry wall. Having a rainscreen outside the wood fibre insulation is recommended now in several parts of Europe to protect against wind-driven rain. I have to say, next time I use wood fibre I would swap out the direct thin coat render for a rain screen. Much better insurance long term, I believe. HTH.

I've got a few glulam lintels but my construction is hybrid masonry and timber so not entirely encased in masonry, just sitting on it. I designed the lintels to be visible. There are a few places that will sell you beams cut to length. With the company I used I just sent them details of the openings together with drawings and asked them for equivalent glulam, it was no problem design wise. However, they were more expensive that steel lintels and a lot more expensive than concrete ones. Span wise mine are about 2.5m.

Do you know the size of the hob and oven? A high output induction hob can get you up to nearly 12kWand a double oven over 4kW. More usually it's around 7kW for the hob on a 32amp spur, but some even come with a 13amp plug. Do you have a friendly sparky to get a second opinion?

I simply do not know where to begin commenting on that white paper. Just looking at the number of caveats and get out clauses, not to mention the rowing back on certain proposals, GHG which died as a farse, then the promise of banning gas boilers in new houses has been rewritten to a promise to 'consult' on the idea. Almost every substantive proposal has something like, if cost effective and practical, or if parliament has the time. Oh and then there's a very comprehensive promise to maintain expenditure, maintenance and development of the gas network to transport gas. The investment cited is a piffle compared to what is really going to be required, but the excuse in the white paper is that the cost will essentially be pushed to the private sector and public, all smoothed over with a platitude that their role in promoting competition will reduce cost. There is no significant investment here by the government. There are some glimmers of sense mixed in the waffle, like they recognise the power distribution networks will need to be significantly modified in light of renewables, but only a minor note that policy and network costs form a significant proportion of cost to customers and that this cost is going to rise. Not much mention of changing network policy to actually further promote transition of energy, something that is holding things back right now and which favours the old boys of fossil fuels. And when it comes to housing, we're still years behind where we perhaps could have been if the government hadn't decided to scrap the zero carbon homes policy that was due to come into force in 2016. At least they're honest in saying they have no idea where things will be and that they are relying heavily on technology that doesn't exist yet, or that has yet to be developed at sufficient scale, which means massive risk. All I can find myself able to give them dues for is publishing a white paper that does seem to acknowledge they're aware they might actually need to do something.? Okay, taking a deep breath, rant over ?

Just make sure that these larger rads get sized to the correct Delta T for your future heating system. It's now quite common for manufacturers to provide output data for low temp systems, at 40 & 30 Delta T. If you are planning ASHP at some time in the future, then for efficiency you could need radiators up to double the size and you need to design the heating system according to different flow rates more suitable for the heat pump. There's lots to do to make it work that mostly isn't communicated by installers looking to sell a unit with water tank. Even if you insulate, make sure you take all the necessary airtightness steps - a leaky well insulated house just isn't worth the effort or cost. One thing you can do is design your heating system for a heat pump but buy a low temperatue boiler to use until heat pump prices come down. Predicting how things are going to go in the near term re net-zero heating is nigh on impossible as the government seem to have no proper plan in place to make it happen, nor have they even begun to cost it all out and budget for it. The most important thing I'd like to suggest is that you live in the house for a year before settling on your decision. This will give you the chance to get rid of draughts and sort airtightness, then insulate. You'll then have a much better feel and knowledge of house the house behaves (and costs), making it easier to come to a well informed decision. By then there might even be a new government grant scheme in place. Who knows.

IIRC Building regs calls for either concrete or inert layer. I've ended up with both - concrete where I had excess pumped for foundations and inert where I just couldn't find the energy to do a lean mix myself. BC happy with both.

Wow, okay, so lots for me to digest here! Much appreciated. One question that does immediately arise from both or your comments, @markocosic and @Nickfromwales is gravity fed DHW. In your views, have I overlooked this as a valid option? At least this decouples DHW from cold mains feed and can be supplemented by pump/s where necessary? Thanks.

Clearly I need to do a bit more research to understand the MIs specifiying non-modulating boiler as the preference for a well functioning thermal store. It does take me a little bit by surprise. My limited understanding is that modulation has primarily been introduced to reduce boiler cycling, which is the main source of inefficiency in the boiler. I can only surmise that the thermal store as part of the system helps to reduce cycling. Aligned to this I guess is the question about how much the modulating boiler would actually add to this system efficiency wise as I suspect that looking at designing CH return temps to ensure the boiler is condensing may yield similar, if not better, results overall. For me, the biggest concern around this is over-sizing the boiler as seems to be a common affliction here in the UK and will significantly affect energy consumption and efficiency of the system. From reading a number of threads on various forums, it does seem like thermal store v unvented is a bit like marmite. Lots of passion either way. In our last place we had an unvented system installed. The installer was an idiot who didn't seem to understand even the fundamentals of unvented systems, so we embarked on a period of rectifying the problems. The original install was worse than the gravity vented system we replaced, and once all resolved, it just about performed as the gravity system. The only benefit we saw was when showering without anything else drawing off water (should have just put a pump in). This was even with 22mm mains supply and above required pressure. No, I didn't skimp on any part of the UCV install rectification - it cost me a packet in the end - much of it down the drain. I don't necessarily think that UVC is simpler than the thermal store approach and I don't have to have G3 or get it serviced every year, or have a G3 in when something goes wrong. Yes, I know there are some claimed disadvantages to thermal stores such as standing loss, and draw off temperature reduction but from what I can see, the standing losses apply just as well to UVC and the thermal store manufacturers provide pretty good data to estimate the temperature loss in relation to draw off volume. I agree, but I've now run a couple of calculators from manufacturers both of which suggest 210l thanks for our house. It's interesting that the stores I've identified only go up to 250l for my planned configuration. I appreciate this suggestion, but again I've now read multiple manuals and articles by different thermal store manufacturers, all of which recommend draw off temps of around 50 - 52 but one even as high as 55. 48 is not much below this, and I can obviously adjust down to this no problem. ? Thanks, will do TBH, I'd prefer to avoid anything like this that contravenes the regs. I'd be happy to look at a buffer tank if we do have a problem before the mains upgrade.

There was an article on this in one of the nationals during lockdown telling everyone they'd laid their decking the wrong way up/wrong way down; it's as @Onoff says, grooves go down.

Thanks, will be avoiding 22mm feeds. I perhaps should have elaborated further on the figures I gave earlier. It's an existing property and currently the only tap that can provide a good indication of flow is teed off from the incoming main inside the house, running about 20 meters to an outside tap on the side of the garage. Only tap available internally gives a rubbish flow. In addition, our main is 15mm lead pipe which we know is at least 25m to the road. When I get round to doing the landscaping, I'm going to be digging up a row of hedges and when I do this I'm probably going to upgrade the mains as it currently runs more or less under the hedges. This should improve our flow rates. (I know that I should do this now but budget wise it really has to wait). The measured 22l/min is not far off the theoretical 27l/min I anticipate a 15mm main can deliver (at current pressure), but may I've got that wrong? I'm not expecting 18-19l right right but want a DHW system that's capable of it. I'm aware of the variations in both DCW and DHW temps and the relationship between these and flow rates from combi boilers, but the blended calc figures are very helpful, thanks. Blended output of the thermal store I've identified is set to 50 degrees C at manufacture but is adjustable. The figures for volume of DHW delivery by the thermal store are calculated at 43 degrees C. I think I've now arrived at an initial configuration for boiler and thermal store. Noting @PeterW's comment about heat exchanger, I've found an indirect store from Advance Appliances using coil heat exhangers. It's also one of the better performing from a heat loss perspective. Looking at boilers, Baxi 800 is at the top of my list right now as it fits the MIs for the Advance thermal store: non-modulating, 24kW if I settle on 210l cylinder. It's also IPX5D so can be installed fine in the bathroom including zone 2. As an aside from the DHW, my only concern relates to the boiler heat output. I recognise I've got to look at things differently when using a thermal store, but with my house heat loss calcs calling for 7kW, I'm wondering whether at 24kW I won't be over sized and this might cost me? (The 24kW is recommended by Advance for recovery rate on the 210l tank).

Here you have hit the nail on the head. I'm designing, and ultimately I'm liable, yet I have some high standards to obtain that don't involve too much compromise! ? SWMBO requires ready and instant access to hot water at the kitchen sink and basins for regular use (I do too as in our last place hot water supply to the kitchen sink was terrible, you could go and have a cup of tea waiting). I've also got to ensure we can run 2 showers, a bath, the washing machine and dishwasher simultaneously, together with the odd basin without a drop in flow or temperature and it's got to recover immediately so anyone left waiting in the queue for any of those facilities doesn't have to wait. I'm sure these requirements aren't too unusual...are they? ? Joking aside, I'm looking for a comfort/environmental/efficiency balance. Capex/Opex is again a balance here, however, right now the Capex required for ASHP on this project is too high, even after self install over MCS/RHI route. We're a family of four and we do get through a lot of hot water. Fabric energy efficiency is relatively good with a calculated required heat input of just over 7kW plus DHW. From a water use perspective, I'm looking to reduce dead-leg wastage as far as possible, while also reducing overall volume of water consumption. I will be fitting flow reducers to outlets, especially the showers (x3). With our respective routines there's likely to be simultaneous use of 2 showers on a relatively regular basis, but it's mostly going to be like one shower plus washing machine and dishwasher and maybe a basin. Bath will be used daily, twice daily 2 or 3 times a week, but filling time isn't a priority and it's unlikey to affect showering. By my reckoning a DHW flow capability of up to 18 - 19 l/m is going to service us fine. I've been investigating options today and changed my mind about the system configuration. I've identified 2 potential spaces where I could fit in a cylinder, both spaces resolving the potential dead-legs and avoiding hot water recirculation. One of them is right in the middle of the house and can be integrated into an airing cupboard, which my wife has said she'd really like. If I installed a 210l thermal store here, I could go either heat only or system boiler rather than combi. This way I'd also retain the backup of immersion heater. As for future proofing, I'm a little cynical here. I've worked in the tech industry since the mid 90s and don't think you can really 'future proof' any development. I'm making the decision based upon now and will review in 7 - 10 years, or if things move really fast, maybe even 5 years. If we're still here..otherwise it'll be a different project ☺️

Thanks for the suggestions, and makes a lot of sense. Interestingly, Emmeti make a suggestion to run HRC through their manifolds and simply t-ing off to the individual outlets from there. I'm not sure if this is the best of both worlds, or the worst. They also recommend max 12m 15mm pipe from manifold to outlet. Having measured a little more, if I run the supply pipe diagonally across the house (just about possible as I have a service void under the ceiling joists), I can get a run from boiler to kitchen sink and ensuite shower down to about 17m.

Haha, yes, I thought it might be a bit over the top! Yes, the Alpha FlowSmart has a secondary return, or as they call it a secondary circulation coil as it simply reheats the return through the thermal store and feeds it back into the DHW flow. However, I've just had some feedback on Alpha suggesting I'd be better looking elsewhere, which, in terms of storage combi, takes me down the route of either Vaillant or Veissman (although the current thread on here about Veissman doesn't fill me with great confidence) so I'll be checking HRC capability of both these. I ideally I would install the boiler centrally in the house in utility room. The problem is that the most favourable wall for the flue terminal would come out under a bridge and too close to it. It also has both door and windows too close. Another choice is to try and route it across or around the ceiling of the master bedroom and out an alternative wall - this would give a flue terminal that is under the required regs for distance to neighbours boundary and fence, but the neighbour is troublesome - my wife's reminded me that any plume is gonna cause complaints - a 45 degree diverter might work, but if it touches his fence in any way, I'm in trouble ? Thanks, I'll have to look at redisigning for HRC but I do think that if I can get the boiler in the utility, that would be best..

To me what you've just said represents part of the problem with the skewed logic abound in this field. We don't have the required facilities to capture carbon, to produce the hydrogen, nor do we have the necessary infrastructure to fully electrify our world. I found it interesting to read some of the extensive research done in Norway, investigating the many untapped sources of biogass available, and it's not just waste. I was also fascinated to find the various technogologies that have been developed to refine biogas, even self contained modular systems that start small at a farm yet can be easily be scaled up for larger facilities. It would be quite surprising if a company such as Ecotricity were to be investing in something that's a pure dudd. Now it may be using grass from otherwise unproductive agricultural land, but there are many other sources such as farming and industry. If the waste from agriculture that is currently killing our rivers were to be utilised otherwise, perhaps those very industrial farms could find themselve self-energising their activities. Just a thought Pure speculation, I know, but when I looked, I couldn't find a lot of research on potential in the UK, simply current figures.

I don't believe that to be the argument either, but it does come across that way, not only in the popular press and forums, but also in a fair number of papers investigating feasibility of certain future pathways - much of this is of course down to the academic requirements of such papers, but it does tend to narrow down the debate, in my view anyway. However, if you do look at the CCC 6th budget, it ain't exactly well diversified in terms of options. For home heating it's heat pumps, hydrogen, biomass, oil and gas. Biomass has already proven itself to be unsustainable so I wouldn't be surprised if that drops off the radar in a few years time. In terms of electricity generation, yes wind and solar power play a significant role, indeed windpower is planned to be the backbone. However, the strategy also relies on carbon capture technology and the ability to burn hydrogen in gas powered plants. In fact, hydrogen plays a major role in most scenarios. I certainly hope it does ? I agree, yet for me this actually gets overlooked. You'd expect that as part of the necessary shift to alternative technologies, there would be a phase change that may not use ideal scenarios, but takes us in the right direction, rather than looking for the silver bullet right now. I think that this tendency of thinking is actually preventing some of the structural change required to make faster positive steps that might be more innovative. The problem is also not always technological, it's social, cultural and psychological. Agreed, there just needs to be a balanced, well informed, debate about it.

As is fairly typical my architect 'forgot' to put much thought into the aspect of plumbing in our house. I've been thinking about is for ages trying to find a good solution, but I'd like to ask for some input here, please. It's really about the DHW distribution. My problem is that the DHW demand is from two opposite ends of the house. At one end I have the main family bathroom with a bath and then a guest bathroom with shower. At the other end of the house I have an ensuite to the master bedroom, a utility room and kitchen above. The current plan is to install an Alpha E-tec boiler with heat recovery unit and thermal store within, or next to the family bathroom. This is partly to do with incoming main at this very corner of the house. If it's relevant, I have 7 bar standing and 3.5 bar dynamic mains pressure, 22 l/m flow rate. This is one of the reasons I'm using the Alpha heat store as it can take up to 5bar mains pressure and I can use everything I've got in terms of flow (DHW flow rate on boiler is up to 19 l/m). Its setup is also more compact than system boiler with water tank (something which the architect overlooked in his designs - and I also mistakenly overlooked at the time too!) The initial sketchup of the DHW distribution was to run to a manifold which sits within the utility room and then distribute from there (at this location the manifold is more or less central in the house). The problem I've got is that this creates relatively long total runs bringing DHW back to the family and guest bathrooms. However, I'd obviously then end up with a very long DHW run from boiler to kitchen sink too. For example, in terms of meterage, I'll have 22mm or larger DHW to manifold which could be about 16m if not longer, then 15mm pipe back again to bathroom for each fitting, another approximately 16m each. The kitchen supply would only be about 4m beyond the 16m 22mm to manifold. Having thought about this, I'm not convinced this is very good due to the long runs, so I'm wondering which way is best to get around it. I've got a space problem where I'm looking to install the boiler. 2 things I'm considering are 1. Whether it's better to install a manifold at the boiler to split the supplies to each side of the house and then use distribution manifolds to each of the relevant rooms once it gets there. I'm tempted to also put in a solitary 10mm plastic run directly to the kitchen sink from the boiler location, again to reduce hot water wait time and wastage. 2. To scrub the planned single boiler and instead install two smaller combi boilers at each end of the house - is this a crazy idea? (price wise, it's actually pretty much equal to installing the full Alpha kit and would save me money in terms of manifolds). Boiler labour cost of installation is free here for me, so not part of the equation. From a heating perspective, this could actually work quite well as I'd use each boiler for the main house zones. Any thoughts and advice?

I haven't watched the video but I'm suspecting it's a bit of a Roger's rant! Regardless of the arguments re efficiency/inefficiency, I suspect that there will be a gas distribution network in place for a long time to come and that this will be used for some kind of hydrogen/naturual gas/biogas mixture. I find it interesting that biogas hasn't played much part in the debate about future heating. Norway, however, has recently voted in parliament to add biogas as a third option in line with electricity and hydrogen. In its recent newsletter, Ecotricity mention its biogas project near Reading and how it wants to UK government to re-think its future energy strategy. For me the argument shouldn't be an either/or focus on a single heating strategy - these are all doomed to failure eventually because it inevitably puts too much pressure on a single resource. I think it should be a diversified strategy that includes all options depending on suitability. Thus you'd get heat pumps in some locations, geothermal in others (like some areas in Cornwall), biogass somewhere else, etc. In some areas of housing, district heating could be a very sensible option that uses shared, large scale heatpumps together with solar etc. - think village energy cooperative, using an unused field, or even the local football and cricket pitches. For me there's just too much narrow thinking on solving the problem. I also have to say that I get quite worried about some tendencies toward heat pump evangelism that doesn't really deal with the real world drawbacks of these systems, nor the practicalities of large scale implementation. They're neither a panacea, nor are the entirely as environmentally benevolent as they're made out to be. In many studies heatpumps come out quite low when it comes to overall environmental impact, even if they're favourable in terms of GHG impact.

Agreed, it is on the weighty side. However, with some technique, it's not much of a problem. I build it up all on my own and have built three lift platforms no problem. The trick is to lift the heavy bits - the standards and the timber boards - in stages. With high platforms, I've sometimes used my little elephant hoist to help out too.

+1 to that. I bought my Kwikstage refurbished and bought some of the 'tower' wheels. Flexibility is incredible. Wouldn't do a build without it.

Yeah, you see I've not had a problem with that. I've just fitted about 116 m2 of cladding all nailed on 25 x 50 battens. This install did have 47 x 47 battens behind, but I don't think it's any different from clouting slate tiles onto 25mm battens on a roof.

Does it half!

Try Cuprinol 5 Star treatment - it's pretty toxic, water based and simply soaks into the wood with a clear finish. I've used it a lot to soak ends of joists going into walls. However, I have to say that I much prefer using the Wykabor I referenced above, but when needs must.

As I understand it, the Boron impedes the digestive system of the insects so they can't digest their food - the wood. It's only mildy toxic for humans. Mildly irritant to skin and eys, but in high concentrations is dangerous in pregnancy apparently. How and why it's also works as a fungicide I'm not entirely sure.