saveasteading

Which is why we are buying 2 weeks work of wood at a time, at most. Costing a bit more but saving this costly chore. @Gus Potterhas been our SE on this as he bought into the fairly radical concept with enthusiasm rather than horror. I'll post a pic of how the timber will prop the steel, when we get that high. Another of the pragmatic decisions was that the purlins were also undersize. We planned to add steel to strengthen them, ( id done this before) but the steel erector wasn't buying into it so we bought new Z rails. To his credit the guy stripped and fitted new (just shy of 50) in 2 days. @Gus Potterthat is a requirement. The shed must be proven to be redundant yet also still viable for its original use. This prevents farmers building new barns to use just to sell old ones at a premium. Seems fair to me. In our case it clearly hadn't been used for grain for years. But that use meant it had more strength than most, and no slurry. It's much easier, probably much the same cost and much quicker to build new, but not permitted. I suspect that most buyers are not aware it needs strengthening, perhaps even of foundations, and get a nasty shock.

I'm the opposite as I can do more for longer if I vary the tasks. However the result is far less satisfying to me or impressive to others. And the scoring off of a list is very satisying....so do what Nestor says if you can and otherwise maybe add a column of 90% finished. Or more task lines including Start to..... @Nestor that is the only BH message I have ever seen that has made my mouth water.... the Malt is calling me. Speyside of course.

More info please on the dimensions and materials of the joists, and of the floorboards. Also the centres of the joists. Approximate will do. Is it deflecting worryingly or simply uncomfortably? As a guess do you think it is perhaps a few mm or more than that? Presumably the bounce is greatest at mid span of the joists. Can you test that please, as it should be much less nearer to the ends. I had this in an old house, and it would have been bouncing for centuries, but is no longer what we expect and we had to get building regs on it for some reason I can't recall. So the answer was to replace the floorboards with structural ply fixed with lots of nails (but it could be screws, which would make it removable.) This turns the composite result into a series of T beams, where the plywood acts as a flange on top of the joists, and is massively stiffer. Floor boards do not do this. It is a calculatable thing. and needs lots of fixings. From memory we had ring-shank nails at 100mm centres. We should cherish old structures, but replacing the boards is usually acceptable. This is not difficult to do, but I'd advise getting professional (Structural Engineer) input as it isn't reversible without damage, and there may be other issues. This may also aid selling-on as a good Surveyor may notice it and want proof of the integrity.

The map is interesting. So the other pylons we see are for relatively low current? Unfortunately there are proposals to take huge pylons (Blue line presumably) from north of Inverness , and right across the Grampians to feed the South. There appears to be a survey to let the locals decide which route they prefer, without 'none of the above' being an option. Those that know the area will also know that pylons would be a huge disfigurement. Hence my proposal for a very big electric meter at Inverness, and the monies* going to Highland DC and the other affected regions, and another at the border. Ditto any region being exploited. It is a natural resource, as are the fields, oceans, whisky, oil, gas and beauty. * High enough to be proper recompense and significant in evaluating the feasibility.

And trees don't fall on them. And more resistant to sabotage. Somebody else might know about any operational effects from being in the air or ground. Not so easy over mountains obviously. BUT. I had fibre fitted in an hour by pole to house catenary. Through the ground would have been a 30m trench. That was obv much cheaper... so my hunch is that pylons can be cheapest.

Yes. Why do you ask? I originally planned that for economy, not wrapping. Because I once got a massive discount for doing this ( much more than the BM anticipated because it was one thing with one margin and no goubke handling) . But the prices I got this time were only about 20p/m better. So went for the convenience of not storing this massive amount, and the option to modify the design. And whole packs of 4 timber sections would have been excessive. In simple terms, a steel barn structure conversion with a timber build inside. Radical perhaps and something to do to ourselves and prob wouldn't to a paying client. The slab is very substantial so sole plates go straight on it. Barns are designed to just stand up, with no factors of safety. So it needed strengthening even without adding floor beams. The geometry is all over the place too. The advantage over steel is that timber is easy to adapt and the skills are available. My career has been steel based, but always looking at options. Ground floor stud complete. Joists going in then a single floor deck.. and repeat.

Try a cold chisel or an old screwdriver. I reckon they will bash in a few mm... so it is soft as far as grinding is concerned.

You can grind it but the fibres will show.

Let's go back a step. Are we looking at the surface of a concrete slab (lots of big stones in it) or a screed? Are you simply looking to get it smooth enough for covering with resin, as prev response? 1. I'm guessing that the surface is a few mm of surface "fat" in jargon. That is probably quite soft. Have you tried scratching or abrading it? If so, it will grind off very readily. You do not want a heavy duty grinder that can smooth the concrete with stones in it. 2. The fibres will look ugly but won't affect the surface you put over it. 3. Unless the resin is very hard and inflexible it should flex if necessary, but the crazing is almost certainly static now. Ask the resin supplier. How thick will the resin be?

Works well except in very damp environment when there is no cause of evaporation.

I did this in a BM once and the yard man complained we were taking the good stuff and leaving the rubbish. We've had masses of 10 x 2 delivered and it is beautifully dry. It will have been wrapped from Finland to the BM then straight to us.

There won't be any free water in this by now unless it's getting wet from rain or other source. Even if there was some dampness it won't get through the dpm and insulation.

Agreed. Of 80 lengths of 6 x 2, we took wet in an earlier batch, we sent back 40. I had wrongly assumed that the vacuum treatment would have collapsed and filled open pores with the treatment chemical. BUT someone suggests that was the case with old, oil-based treatment but no longer. The 40 rejected were up to 50mm bend over 6m. They will sell them to less critical builders. Cutting into 3m will make most passable. I once needed some 2 x 2 in a hurry so accepted the dregs from a merchant. One had a complete 90° twist over 4.8m.

So it is a panel rather than a slab that can be routed etc. Eg a profiled or cut edge would lose tha pattern? A panel for a builder rather than needing stone mason skills? So cheaper?

Yes. Depending on the building, plastic can sometimes simply look wrong. I dont know why, but metal gutters don't seem to fail or need maintenance. I suspect plastic twists in heat and cold, and so opens joints and sometimes goes out of line and level. Or maybe plastic is too easy to fit ( bending to suit less than perfect allignment) and isn't done so well. If you want black and it isn't a main feature then use plastic.