garrymartin

Not an expert in this area, and I may have failed to use the correct conversion factors from the BTU/h/ft² used in the article. Regardless, it seems clear that tied to rebar is better for in-slab UFH than pinned to the insulation from a performance perspective.

Apologies for updating a couple of older topics but if you're like me and have been diligently combing through old threads for nuggets of wisdom, the following might be helpful. Short version, out of three scenarios (pipes at 19mm centres below surface of slab, at 50mm centres below surface of slab, and pinned to the insulation); the pipes at 19mm give the best performance, but obviously very close to the surface (~79.2 W/m²) the pipes at 50mm showed a small decrease in performance against those at 19mm (~75.1 W/m²) the pipes pinned to the insulation showed a much larger performance hit (~56.2 W/m²) So when considering in-slab UFH and choosing between tied to rebar or pinned to the insulation, tied to the rebar will win from a performance perspective every time. Longer version, in Imperial measurements (US-based author) https://www.pmengineer.com/ext/resources/PME/2019/July/014-017-pme-0719_siggy.pdf

Apologies for updating a couple of older topics but if you're like me and have been diligently combing through old threads for nuggets of wisdom, the following might be helpful. Short version, out of three scenarios (pipes at 19mm centres below surface of slab, at 50mm centres below surface of slab, and pinned to the insulation); the pipes at 19mm give the best performance, but obviously very close to the surface (~79.2 W/m²) the pipes at 50mm showed a small decrease in performance against those at 19mm (~75.1 W/m²) the pipes pinned to the insulation showed a much larger performance hit (~56.2 W/m²) So when considering in-slab UFH and choosing between tied to rebar or pinned to the insulation, tied to the rebar will win from a performance perspective every time. Longer version, in Imperial measurements (US-based author) https://www.pmengineer.com/ext/resources/PME/2019/July/014-017-pme-0719_siggy.pdf

I'm not aware that they require a particular fitting or are specific to a particular terminal or manufacturer. Here's an example of a filter change in a Zehdner terminal to give you an idea...

Many people use G3/G4 conical filters in their MVHR extracts - not just in the kitchen to catch grease but also in bathrooms to catch lint etc. from towels. These filters are readily available online but you will need to ensure you're still meeting your airflow requirements when fitted. Example - https://www.paulheatrecovery.co.uk/product/filter-cone-125/

Either will work at a push, but the male leaves the threads exposed within the box which makes pulling cable more difficult and prone to damage. Female is best.

Open source home automation software - https://www.home-assistant.io/

See comments above, but also check out for some information on how the charging structure for connections changed from the 1st April 2023 and the differences between reinforcement assets (things the DNO pay for) and extension assets (your connection that you pay for).

If that was in relation to reducing their fixed costs, I didn't in any way assume that would lead to any of them tendering lower prices... 😉

BCIS do a quarterly outlook. Although material prices were negative in 2023-2024, they're likely to rise this year given the tension in the Middle East and how that affects shipping routes. Work output has been down over the last two years which likely reinforces some of the commentary above with regard to companies reducing their fixed costs where they can. https://bcis.co.uk/news/bcis-construction-industry-forecast/

Are the walls already done? i.e. will the ceiling plasterboard be supported by the wall plasterboard at the perimeter (wall butted up to ceiling) or are the walls already in (and hence ceiling boards butted up to wall boards)?

Spot on. And that can change over time too as the occupants age. I've also read somewhere that the air quality and lack of draughts in Passivhaus generally means the temperature can be lower than in a BR-compliant house and still feel the same.

I guess it depends whether it is the "highway" or an "access road" that they front...

I presume some other Local Authorities may be the same, but mine states the following - "Installed gates must be set back a minimum distance of 5.0 metres from the back of the highway and gates must open inwards only. The set back distance of 5.0 metres also applies to sliding gates".

Sounds like you already know what you're doing! The problem with the router bit with bearing is that the cut on the bead will follow the contours of the plaster, including all the little bumps you tend to get at the edges of things like doorways - especially when the frame is below the level of the plaster. Best option in this situation if this is the only tool available to you is to place a known flat piece of material onto the plaster and change the bearing diameter on the cutter to take into account the thickness of that material or you'll be doing lots of filling! Another option, and the one I'd personally go for if you have a saw table or know someone who does is to figure out your highest plaster point around the frame, and then cut off a piece to add to the frame that matches that width/thickness on the table saw. That way you can adjust for each door and you won't need to try to get a router into awkward spaces. The other thing I've done in the past is to "relieve" the back of the architrave - so take out some material on the architrave back that is against the plastered wall so that the piece against the frame lies flat. This method only works for small variations between the plaster and the frame though.

Tikkurila Anti-Reflex for white ceilings. Johnstone's TRADE paints - Aqua Guard Durable Water Based Satin for white woodwork, Acrylic Durable Eggshell or Acrylic Durable Matt for walls, or Perfect Matt if you have a wall surface that's far from perfect!

Also, if you're doing irrigation in the garden and the supply pressure is high, you may need another PRV on the outside connection for that dedicated purpose... "Water from the mains supply will typically sit between 3-4 bars of pressure which is too high for most irrigation systems, usually only needing around 1.5 bar. If used with mains pressure, irrigation systems can be much more costly to run, resulting in less efficiency in water distribution and even cause a burst in the system. To get around this, installers should ensure PRVs are installed alongside isolation valves to better regulate the pressure released from the tap."

Found the reference for the second PRV I think - it came from some guidance from @Nickfromwales on G3 certifiable UVC installs in new builds.

From what I've read, I see little to no disadvantage (aside from the small extra cost for 32mm pipe and fittings over 25mm) to installing 32mm MDPE from the meter to the dwelling even if the meter connection needs to drop down to 25mm. Indeed, there are several advantages including reducing pressure loss over longer distances. At least in my area, the standing charge appears to be the same, and even in areas where it isn't, we're talking £2-3 per year difference from what I can see.

Thanks @JohnMo - I originally had "32mm external MDPE, into Plasson stop tap, convert to copper, double-check non-return valve, drain valve, (PRV if >5 bar), external taps (with isolating valves and non-return valves), PRV, then 28mm..." So the PRV came after the external taps. I removed it because I'd at some point I added the (PRV if >5 bar) and assumed it was a duplicate, but perhaps it's both? Is there a reason to keep the external taps under 5 bar pressure?

You can sort of get the same result without actually directing the work... 😉 But I get your point. Regulation 16 is clear that "(3) A domestic client who controls the way in which any construction work is carried out by a person at work must comply with the requirements of this Part so far as they relate to matters within the client’s control." so Part 4 requirements will pretty much always be in scope, but only the stuff I can realistically be expected to control - I'm comfortable with that. At the end of the day, much of this is common sense - doing what is reasonably practicable is all you can realistically be expected to do. The most important thing for me will be contracting with organisations/people that understand *their* responsibilities with regard to CDM and H&S in general.

This is what I have in my notes; 32mm external MDPE, into Plasson stop tap, convert to copper, double-check non-return valve, drain valve, (PRV if >5 bar), external taps (with isolating valves and non-return valves), then 28mm copper on to all the internal feeds (UVC, hot manifold, HRC manifold, etc.) EDIT - just found a question I still haven't resolved; should PRV come *after* feed for external taps? Maybe someone else can advise on that one and I can update my notes with the answer! 😉

Agreed. I wasn't implying you don't need to follow H&S guidance, merely that if it hasn't been notified, it may not need to be. My own plan (when my appeal is allowed...) is to notify via F-10 regardless (I can't really see a downside) but then ensure I try to remain as a Domestic Client throughout - i.e. I don't tell people how to do the work, I contract them to deliver an agreed outcome. The common sense guidance is then more about a few key principles and H&S chats over a cup of tea than it is about reams of guidance and procedures.

That's very interesting. Have you assumed you should count your [and SWMBO] time in the 500 days or have you seen specific guidance for that? My understanding was that as self-builders, we are not ‘at work’ in the meaning of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, so our time would not be included in the 500 days.

The magic wording in planning is usually "new or intensified" although rather frustratingly, "intensified" isn't defined in law so is subject to some interpretation. So even if the access was "existing", its use would be very infrequent access for farm machinery. If then used to access a dwelling, I'm pretty sure the local Highways department would see that as intensification and would want to see adherence to their design standards and would at that point indicate whether they see it as a "drive" for direct frontage access or an "access road". I found my local Highways department to be reasonable about general advice, but unwilling to be drawn into definitive statements outside of formal pre-application advice, and even then, with no guarantee that their response to a planning application would be consistent. But having said that, I do think you'll need to bite the bullet and ask their advice.