saveasteading

For anyone generally interested in steel, especially contractors. My business was mostly big steel buildings, mostly portal frame. The frames were supplied in red oxide as standard. They did not need paint other than touch-up or an optional decoratively. A finished coat at the works was not wise as chains etc damage it. Clients recognised it as ' cheap red oxide' and often chose that it needed full over- painting. Then our supplier began to offer grey oxide. This became our norm, and scraped bits were touched up after construction in the same paint. Nobody ever said it was unacceptable. However, for simple beams as above, red oxide is never questioned.

No need to do anything, but touching up in red oxide will look better and avoid anybody questioning it. If there is the slightest chance of dampness on ,say, padstones then some blackjack locally might be worthwhile. Steel needs a lot of dampness combined with oxygen, to rust. A tip for appearance. Do any red oxide as local rectangles rather than splodges. If you need any proof I can find photos of the columns on our project that were exposed to the weather for 30 odd years. Rust looks worse than it is, because the steel expands a lot when oxidising. I'm assuming it will be out of sight. On balance, touch up in red oxide. Then decide whether to stick there ot paint it all in red oxide.

Well done @BTC Builder I'd love to hear how the vat goes.

I disagree. Unless you mean as a template. Lots can go wrong so thinking each stage through is important. Access, tools , workwear. Mostly, what might go wrong once x piece is taken out or over a weekend.

It didn't seem to be a personal issue fortunately. They would want this concluded promptly too, having seen your determination. I've dealt with umbrage. Not prepared to back down and accept they were mistaken / my interpretation was valid. To the extent once of finding a different reason why it was acceptable. Probably a £20k decision Determination is my method. And research. Research and determination And being right. Etc Well done @Mr Punter.Punter. I'd love to hear how the vat goes.

Here's an offcut from a 6 x 2. As is my wont I rescued this from the waste pile and asked why it wasn't kept for noggins. Because of the big split. So I'll ask for the opinion of anyone who is interested. My decision won't change. @ab12 you first?

It of course helps flow if it slopes gown to the outlet but it is tricky to do znc can look untidy. In drizzle the water barely dribbles off a small roof and may even stream back towards the wall, so a clear projection is needed. In a storm, the parabola could be quite a long and flat one. In your drawing above I'd like to see a deeper gutter that is higher so that the water always lands inside. The cheap outlets are a round hole in the bottom. The water flows in like a wier, ie only a few mm deep. The classy ones have a curved outlet, almost a hopper, and flow is very much faster. The price reflects the science and performance, but the dear ones are also sturdier. Btw for a high gutter, I don't allow leaf catchers in the outlet because they need clearing. I catch the leaves at the bottom.

I'm interested. The regs show ever bigger areas where permeability is poor. On sand they don't seem to acknowledge that the water won't reach the end. So in our case we used perforated pipes heading different directions to spread it.... phase 2 and 3 extensions to the zone, the drawings and calcs got us the approval, but are 'yet' to go in.

Normally perhaps but it shouldn't be. It is hydraulics. The manufacturers publish flow rates. The number, position and quality of outlets makes a huge difference. As does shoddy fitting that isn't level. The rainfall data is in the building regs but it is wise to allow for the recent increase in continental type downpours. I ask myself what if... There is an exceptional storm The gutter is dirty There is a blockage Where does the water go harmkessly? Ask away.

Hang on. I know what you mean. But if you are using energy to get rid of energy that isn't an efficient multiplying of energy in/ energy out. Is that still the normal terminology for chill-stores etc? Presumably this was solar gain heat but it wasn't so hot outside.

Yes that would be, but slinky types are actually getting heat from summer warming and not the earth's warmth... so solar really. Is your sand glacial esker? The only ground I've known where soakaways had to be designed to run more slowly. (Except chalk which can be a problem)

Explain please why it is wet? I can think of pressure relief valve on a hot tank, but would tundish that if necessary. We have not designed ours plant room at all, so this is timely.

If only we could store that for next winter. Actually it us the one thing that is useful about slinky ground source. Warm the earth for later. Where you live, above 22C is getting too hot for most people. I was travelling in 32C yesterday and ok with it. We get used to it.

And AI might not find that crucial information. I guess the likeliest problem would be that trawling could as equally find outdated or false information, as factual. Yesterday planning a complex journey, AI told me to change trains to platform 1, (stairs and a bridge) instead of platform 3 which was 5m away. But fortunately we asked a person. A useful lesson. Somewhere there was a totally wrong bit of info it found. Now to find what material and colour of carpet she wants, given the reduced choice when considering open textures. AI response: "Your wife will ' know it when she sees it', and this may involve visits and repeat visits, to many retailers". Well yes, but thick carpet over underlay will reduce the effect dramatically.

Unless you are dozing it, use the term dismantle and it may help.

Exactly the same logic. They are generally in compression from the floor above, or just supporting cupboards, but the strength thing is the same: there is plenty if hollowing the regulations.

We all use inches on conversation for convenience. But these dims don't exist. The sizes are sold as advertised in mm. I phone the B M and ask for 20 lengths of 4.8m of 6x2. They don't ask if I mean 145 x 45. For heavy structural timber it will come in sawn finish. When dressed to avoid splinters it reduces in size but not a lot. There was a time when most timbers went through a bending machine which translated approximately to strength. Then this was samples, then by sight of grain and knots. Now we just sort of trust it. But C16 and C24 are visibly different. I would think that an average timber selected at random then tested for deflection and to failure, would exceed the rated strength by a distance because of various factors of safety which combine. And then we allow safety factors in the design loading.

Tiles will be best overall in cost/performance terms.

1mm gap in our weatherboard seems to be enough. Which reminds me I didn't fill over last year's. I can see the point, as a direct batten contact will hold water, then algae and moss. Fine if you want to see it revert to nature as some Architects have been heard to say to justify "eco" products. All these ledges would need a lot of cleaning otherwise. @Alan Ambrose what type of timber? The £1700 would be a lot in comparison with pine, but not with more exotic types.

It won't open for me. Anyway, between us we have found a few interpretations. Authorities can't make up their own rules so these are their interpretation and could be argued with. I haven't done the important thing of looking at the actual regulations. It's the sort of issue that tempts one to just do it, which is generally a bad premise. By which I mean that the OP intends to make sensible improvements but what if the bco refuses or demands something else? And yet, it would be possible to cause harm and that should be controlled.

Another thought. You can buy netting again a BM. We havd some blue kicking around. I think it is to keep debris contained. It's not expensive. Debris netting,: that's it. You could lay this across the joists, tucking down the sides and stapling. Then any wool material would stay put permanently.

I don't think that's right. RdSAP is for older buildings with no drawings or tests. That isn't what is being discussed, unless I'm misinterpreting. from the briefest look at the method, it is for where drawings are not available. Even then there will be different efforts made. The £100 fee guy won't want to put any thought into it, but the thorough one can. With that logic a passivhaus wouldn't get a better sap than others.

I think we could easily argue against this being required improvement to regs. 1. Not 25% of the thermal envelope. 2. The concrete slab below is part of the thermal envelope, not this raised floor. It's a good idea to do it though.

I'd be very interested if you can spare the time and trauma. You could save many another person these issues. Was uours standing seam? Horrible to detail hence I never used it. We had steel standing seam as an option in brochures, because ig was expected, but it was easy to talk clients out of it. In my opinion, a lot of Architects propose it based on looks, and some perfect looking pictures in brochures. And zinc... traditional material that weathers to dull, and they think looks like on a church or Georgian roof. I.e looks nice in theory. But these are a skin onto board, and font oilcan: not spanning as standing seam.

Most need detailed and workable drawings, as are not designers. Some mayy have links to manufacturers who may assist. And some who will not designers will at least advise on foreseeable issues. Who is going to decide the fundamental issue of what principles to work to? Metal, profiled metal, fibreglass/membrane or whatever?