garrymartin

Just check that one or both of the 47mm or 63mm are not nominal dimensions if you are asking for something to be cut/planed to your exact parameters. 47mm is usually a nominal dimension on C24 and would be more like 45mm "in real life", for example. If the existing rafters are 47mm or 63mm wide nominal, then you are probably looking at getting a 47mm x 200mm or 63mm x 100mm (or 150mm, or 200mm, etc.) C24 and ripping the boards down on a suitable table saw. Just call up any local C24 suppliers and ask if they are able to rip the boards to your dimensions. Plenty of suppliers and sawmills in Staffordshire depending on your exact location and whether you want delivery or are collecting.

Exactly why the "gap" where our American-style fridge freezer goes is oversized. When I looked at all the different sizes from different manufacturers, and even different models from the same manufacturer, it was a nightmare. Something like a hob with those sort of tolerances in stone? No way.

Andrew Jones AKA - The VATman

I've no experience of the boards, but if you have 600 mm centres in your roof, then the gap to be filled will be less than 600mm and you'll have to cut a small amount from the width of every board.

I'll go first... Mains cables - Doncaster Cables are really good. Earthsure? Ask your electrician. Some love it, some hate it! You might find LZSH versions of T&E with a sheathed CPC, but they may not be accredited for use in the UK. Plenty of LZSH without a sheathed CPC. Prysmian cable is really good too. I'd be happy with either. For a single residential, low-rise property, the price uplift for LSZH is difficult for some to justify, but it may be important to you. I'd rather invest the difference in much better, interlinked smoke and heat alarms... From an interference perspective, this separation of data and mains cabling comes mainly from commercial installations. Unless you run your CAT6 UTP parallel to the cable for your induction hob for tens of metres, you're very unlikely to have an issue. Now, from an electrical safety perspective, don't run low-voltage and mains cabling in the same conduit, and don't have them feed into the same accessory box. Any damage to the mains cabling could end up with mains voltage on your low-voltage cable runs, so keep them separate. Where it is possible, in a parallel run, keep them at least 50mm apart. But other than that, just don't worry about it. Crossing at 90 degrees is perfectly fine. Whilst you could therefore use something like your image (assuming they are physically separated boxes) I've never really liked the aesthetic and lack of control over the gap between the data plate and the 230v mains socket. I'd always use separate back boxes. My back boxes of choice are Appleby metal back boxes and plastic cavity / dry-lining boxes, or Selectric or Niglon if looking for fire-rated metal cavity boxes.

I hate these sort of answers, but it very much depends on the frames you'll be putting in for those doors, to which you would then need to add 2-3mm clearance each side and at the top, and a bottom gap depending on flooring etc. If you've looked at some doors you like, see if the vendor also provides doorsets for them that you would be happy with, and then they should be able to provide you with the structural opening sizes. For example, the link below is JELD-WEN ReadyFIT guidance. https://www.jeld-wen.co.uk/getmedia/03ec61f5-3ec5-4be4-8e78-d5b1abd44743/readyfit-structural-and-clear-opening-sizes.pdf.aspx

Your PS suspicion is correct, as has been observed by @Russell griffiths and @Nickfromwales - the panel should have gone to the floor. Fixing/changing this is by far the best option. Then, when it comes to what to do with the skirting, knowing the type and the profile would help with regard to how best to finish it. Is it a square profile?

It's a bath filler.

Not the best photo, but I can't find anything better - this is push-fit (Flomasta I think) 22mm x 3/4" BSP male in the iBox. Worked really well.

Click is a Scolmore brand https://scolmore.com/products/type-a-c-usb-sockets

Yes, USB-C generally charges much faster than USB-A, although it really depends on what you are charging, the cable you are using, and the capability of whatever sits beyond the actual port. Some USB-C ports with Power Delivery (PD) can pump out 240W compared to a USB-A port rated at 2.4A pushing out just 12W.

@-rick- has some great advice there, and I would echo every comment, especially those related to making an electrician's job just a little more difficult! Connector types and abilities have changed greatly in a relatively short space of time, so you don't want something that might be obsolete in a couple of years, or not as performant as you'd like. I'd also add that cables and connectors are more prone to damage when they come out of a socket at a 90-degree angle, and it's also difficult to push furniture back against them (as an example). I'd much prefer a plug-in adapter where the cable exits at 180-degrees below the outlet. Hope I've explained that correctly! Like in this image...

It's in Part B somewhere, but I think it's 100mm not 150mm. You can also meet the requirement by having the floor slope away from the threshold, so it isn't mandatory. It's something to do with preventing diesel/petrol spills migrating from the garage into the house. EDIT - I decided to find it... Section 5.7

Spot on. Passivhaus is only of near-equal cost parity if the building was designed to be Passivhaus from the beginning, including principles of form factor. If someone has designed a home, and then tries to make it Passivhaus, then you are almost in retrofit territory, which of course costs more. I think you can do one-offs too at significantly less than 30% increase in costs, but as above, you need to design from the outset. The garage door is a great example earlier in this thread. It looks like the architect/designer didn't consider this at the outset, and possibly made the fire *and* airtightness barrier/boundary the same, causing the requirement for an airtight and thermally efficient fire door, which was very costly. Separating those elements (fire/airtight) at the design stage may have resulted in signficantly less cost. It may not have been possible given site or design constraints, but just one example.

It very much depends on form-factor (easier to make savings on apartment blocks than one-off detached houses), but it is nowhere near 30%, and in some cases has been shown to deliver savings. And of course it also depends on whether you are certifying or just building to the same standards. This article https://www.coldwellsbuild.com/journal/are-passivhaus-homes-more-expensive-to-build has some better links, including to an Exeter City Council report showing how they have continued to reduce costs over the years - "Due to Exeter’s long-term commitment to Passivhaus they have developed unique expertise and experience which has enabled them to refine their delivery models and processes to drive down the cost of Passivhaus. This is reflected in the reduction in the cost premium for Passivhaus from 20 per cent in 2009 to 4 per cent cost saving, pre-covid for apartments up to 4 storeys based on the cost plans against Building Regulation compliant low-rise apartments." https://www.local.gov.uk/case-studies/exeter-city-council-passivhaus-exeter