saveasteading

Certainly not, it is very helpful. Beware growing plants over it. It will catch the wind, and you don't want pigeons or any drippy plant above your car.

No I'm assuming it is, or is similar to, a pump mix, so has a plasticiser or super-plasticiser and small aggregate. From further reading it looks to me as if we are talking about the same sort of mix but with different terminology. I'm surprised it can include fibres as they tend to clump and make the concrete very sticky to handle, but maybe with the plasticiser and very prompt use, that is overcome. I'm guessing now, but would also expect that it is easier with small and rounded gravel than with crushed quarry stone. I'm pretty sure it will not be self -levelling which brings us back to the original question. Do you have any info on the relative cost and any disadvantages?

Renovation/conversion usually includes lots of surprises.

Yes. reinforced across the pipe, perhaps with a gap to emphasise the absence of loading on the pipe. Or you could use a steel plate instead or as well. That would be nice and thin as well. It isn't in the reg's as such because it is becoming an Engineered solution. The bco may accept it without an Engineer's proposal, if they are confident enough to see that it is obviously a sensible solution. I'm thinking, concrete surround the pipe while you are at it.

That's the moral to the tale. To which add the onsite management. Was it a fairly standard ( off the shelf) geometry? Bravo.

Agreed that is my choice too IF you have the falls. It is going to have car loading which is considerable. So I'd say you bridge it completely, with concrete downstands (tiny footings) on both sides and a reinforced slab over it. The mesh shouldn't be plonked in but laid at mid height. Thus the load doesn't bear on the pipe. It may need a smart drawing and explanation to show the bco but the work can be diy. I've only installed pumped mains twice and on a larger scale. It was compulsory to have 2 pumps and the cost was huge.

That's a good size. It will catch and hold a big downpour, which is important in a dry spell. Depending on cost and space available, consider 2 smaller tanks. I'm planning one now, and it will only be for garden watering. So I can't see a problem using a redundant plastic oil tank.... they are free from any heating plumber or on Facebook. The oil traces will be insignificant.

There is no hate. It's basically that a pump mix is being described as self compacting when it's simply very runny: a pump mix. The raking and tamping are compacting it enough, but a poker brings out trapped airand moves the mix through any reinforcement and into corners... which is what compaction is. But a pump is a beast to handle so not diy or for beginners. Poker not easy either. Maybe we have different standards but my 'level' is very level and I want it smooth, and the quality controlled ( no added water) and properly formed contraction joints. If it is to have a further construction of screed and insulation over it then a diy job may suffice.

Great to see a rainwater tank. What capacity? How will the water be used? You can put a catchpit just before the tank and it will catch all the dirt. I put one in before a 10m3 tank and it never needed attention in the 15 years I had ownership. Catch the leaves before they get on the system. 100mm pipe has to stay. Aco can feed into it.

it's a bit of a gimmick I think. But it is a genuine option ..at a cost. Its good to be tested by new options so I'm interested. I would want a concrete slab of some sort I think. Ground moves and stones will follow it. 50 to 100 stone base with 10 to 25mm sand blinding ( the lesser if you can get the stone really flat and smooth) polythene 100mm concrete, maybe with steel mesh. 150mm PIR insulation with polythene over and pipes fixed to the surface 50mm screed PIR is a lot better U value I think. Due to diminishing returns, using foamglass instead of stone under the concrete is excessive. That's 360 to 425 but I'd want to know more. Maybe you can increase the insulation. You can likely dig some more ground out but that's a different question.

It's so important that i would always attend when this was happening on our projects, even with proven expert slab contractors. There is so much that can go wrong and the effects can be drastic. The OP appears to have a designed slab by an SE, as a raft over insulation. so there will be reinforcement to fix accurately @lizzieuk1. If the SE says no then it means no. There is another unknown of course in the weather, when pouring in the open. Rain, wind, baking sun... all problems. and then at 6pm a cat or fox will always walk over it. I think we are all trying to gently say... diy what you can but not the slab, and beware that many contractors think they can do it, but don't know a lot. Are you having underfloor heating?

. Manage? You mean you get some labourers and control them? But they're telling you to get this magic concrete? For diy you could deliberately lay the concrete 25mm or so low. Then get a professional to screed later. but beware, level control is a skill in itself. Is there reinforcement?

I've maybe missed it but does this need planning permission? And then there is building control as it will be a habitation.

Yes that but spread over 2 pages. Plan, show that it's accessible and not inconveniencing anyone. That's what they want to know. The objectives are to get rubbish away. So how do you fill it on a wet Tuesday night. How do you get it roadside and how do you stop it ending up in the road etc. If you haven't a solution then you need to find one. If you have, present it.

It's because this is a made up term. Your contractor wants an easy life and isn't skilled at floating concrete, and doesn't know that it's difficult and a real skill. You must do what your SE says or otherwise agrees to. The big danger here is that this contactor wants a plasticised mix thinking that will magically settle to dead level and compact itself. My concern is their competence and then they'll add more water to make it even sloppier. The concrete won't be level, will be reduces strength and crack a lot.

Standing seam is great for large areas as the middle is easy. The edges are difficult, so it isn't great for small areas. Standing seam is industrial cladding pretending to be lead. I don't mind seeing screws and saving 1/3 or more.

Something robust there are all sorts from very squidgy to almost solid.

The job is more in control with a hard floor . The downside would be if you damaged it by impact or scratching s screed, or putting a screw through the ufh pipes. Drying isn't an issue. It doesn't take long and most of the hardening is chemical. That all changes if doing it before the weatherproof structure.

It's been an interesting detour. But back to the early responses. My hunch is still that 3 phase would be the less complex "go to", rather than very clever, but complex, inverters from single ph to dc then to 3 ph which must carry some cost and increased fault risk.

@BenB all the above is right and sensible. If you have gas, stick with gas. Ufh on an uninsulated floor is throwing heat away. Modern rads will be much better than what you are taking out.

It looks as if we have a club of three at present, and some others dithering or not committing.

1mm thick stainless. Cut a radius line and lap the edges and rivet together for a cone. Then turn down the edges.

25mm could be added top or bottom. Gives an overlap too. Thermal mass is another conversation, but often used to justify over-designed slabs. Eps about £50/m3 pir £80/m3, grout £400/m3

I'd say that using steel 2mm or thicker won't be noisy. For a cone, cut a segment from a circle and reweld and that won't be noisy either. Is a downturn going to help? Maybe just turning with pliers will do it in crinkly fashion.

They aren't obliged to report the test run or do a best of three or whatever.