ProDave

Some help with my flashings please. This is the Velux EDW flashing for a standard GGL roof window. The bottom piece of the flashing joins to the two sides correctly and easily. However I cannot get the top piece to join to the sides. First picture shows the top of the left hand side piece of the flashing. It clearly has the top of the bit facing you deliberately bent over. This is the same on both side pieces. It must be bent over for a reason. But if you try and slot the top piece onto the sides pieces, it simply won't go, because this bent over piece is in the way: I could make it fit together by using a pair of pliers and straightening out that bent over piece. But I should not have to do that, it is bent over for a reason. What am I doing wrong? The instructions are useless, just a few pictures with little details.

Why not? They band a static caravan as band A for council tax. A Yurt could be the same.

Lovely, expensive, village, we got married there in 1995. We lived not far from there in Drayton St Leonard (somewhat more downmarket and cheaper)

Nice view of Hoy. Just watch that at a certain time of day, the sun may shine on your PC screen (like about the time the photo was taken). Do you have a blind on the window? Your soul destroying layout has the benefit of putting the PC in the shade. Would it not make more sense to keep the PC that side, but move it out from the end wall so your seating position lines up with the window still to get the view?

Hi and welcome to the forum. I wonder which village? I used to live not far from there, before we moved north somewhat 15 years ago.

Yes, but my point is, you do that and get a tailored solution in a new house, and building control come along and fail it. Or would they agree to depart from building regs if they could clearly see it met the users needs?

What interested me in in this weeks GD, is the design the actual user came up with for his wet room, did not look to me to meet Scottish Building regs for an "accessible bathroom" with regards to activity spaces and circulation spaces. Clearly it DOES meed his needs and enables him to get from his chair to the various appliances so it suggests to me, building regs requirements that are imposed on us, may not be that well thought out and may not be what a disabled user actually needs.

There are 2 tides in each (approximately) 24 hour period, so it will in fact only take 6 hours to raise the mass, but it will do that twice a day. You should be able to extract power on both the up and the down "stroke" as well. So the maths simply becomes how much energy does it take to raise and lower it x metres twice, and that is how much energy you can get in a day. x being the tide height which varies here between 5 metres and 3 metres. You would need to know the average tidal range for your location to work out the average energy.

Glad to have been of help, it was just lucky I have the identical manifold.

But I had thought if it never moved then after a while it could gain a lawful development and be demounted from the trailer?

Then it will stay on a trailer then, which may never move. If it was not on a trailer it would need PP as it would not be permitted development.

That is exactly the same manifold as I have (mine came from someone on ebay) So on the blending valve, the pipe coming in from the bottom is the flow and the pipe exiting to the left is the return. I changed my IBO pumps for WILO (because the IBO ones were far too noisy) so I don't have one to hand for a direct comparison, but the flow of the pump (it has an arrow on the body) should be upwards. I don't think it is a blending valve issue as even if the valve is not asking for any heat, it should just recirculate, so I wonder if you have the pump the wrong way up?

If the land IS domestic curtilage of a not yet finished house?

Sounds like a lazy installer. One that was fitted to a house I wired 2 years ago (HP installed by local renewables company) they were too lazy to bother connecting the "call for heat" contact from the UFH manifold. You would have to read the manual, but there are a pair of call for heat input terminals to connect to, and you probably have to change a software setting to make it look at that input.

Just out of interest, if one parked a trailer mounted radio tower on one's land and it never moved, how many years does that have to be there before you can get a lawful development certificate?

Can you post a picture of the manifold and it's blending valve arrangement?

Has it EVER worked properly? If not it sounds to me like flow and return to the manifold may be connected backwards.

Assuming there is a house under there? SWMBO would not live in it. Imagine how many spiders there would be.

That will just be argued he was being eco friendly and re planted what he felled.

I don't have any conduit dies. This was bought by my father who was a plumber, and I have not done steel conduit since my apprenticeship.

I frequently come across burned out switches. The usual culprits are 20A switches or worse, FCU's used to switch an immersion heater. One I did recently the switch had burned out to the point of making a black hole in the front plate and inside the mechanism had completely crumbled to bits, but the plastic back box it was in was not even charred. I suppose this is what we must expect of the organisation that decided the "solution" to CU fires was to put the CU in a steel box. I always argued the solution should have been to take a long hard look at WHY CU fires happen and try to improve design, like go back to the old fashioned idea of 2 screws on all terminals, and mandate that if you are going to use cage clamp terminals, you design them such that it is physically impossible to put the busbar finger the wrong side of the cage clamp. But no, we have not changed the design to stop a fire, just done something to try and contain it. And soon you will have to fit one of these expensive devices to detect the fault. What is the betting these AFDD devices will still have a cage clamp terminal that has nothing to stop you inserting the cable or busbar on the wrong side?

That is less clear as he probably argued because the trees were there, he put it on the only clear spot, which just happened to be out of sight of the track. so probably "less" deliberately hiding it than stacking a pile of straw bales around it.

Don't forget though, it was ruled that deliberately hiding a building does not then allow you to claim the 4 years use. Remember the case of the guy that built a castle hidden behind a stack of straw bales, then tried to claim a certificate of lawful development. It was ruled that because he deliberately concealed the building that period of use did not count.

I have the "set of 3" 15mm, 22mm and 28mm plus in a box the old imperial ones. I also have a third set that I have never looked at, those dies are aluminium not steel, no idea what they are for.

This "sustainable" thing is interesting. Up here about all you have to do to get PP in the countryside, is be in an established settlement. If they denied PP up here because there were no pavements, streetlights or public busses, then there would be no houses built at all here. We have no pavements, no street lights and a 3 mile walk to the nearest bus stop. The cycle ride into town is okay, but it's uphill all the way back.