saveasteading

If you use weatherboard or t and g it shrinks and distorts. If very well seasoned that can be minimal, but the slightest gap looks bad. Hit and miss needs regular gaps and quite wide, to make variable shrinkage a small proportion of the gap, hence not noticeable. A black membrane behind battens is effective and perhaps paint the battens black too. Using big overlaps work too but is expensive. I've tried all these, once having to strip and redo. No problem ever with insects in the ventilated gap. They do however love pir which they excavate to make a nest, but that shouldn't be accessible.

Fibre additive is good value and good for anticrack. Will then need a few sawcuts (later discussion). Steel mesh is more advisable if you think there may be some inferior sub base as it can bridge the problem a bit. Otherwise fibre is good. Only for horses? No vehicles? Strength isn't an issue, but quality is as it should not have cracks. So a standard c30mix, with fibre and plasticiser. Absolutely don't add water to the mix supplied. If the base is flat and hard then 100mm minimum thickness will suffice. But if its a rough hardcore allow 150mm. Then there are drainage slopes to consider. Laying concrete is a skill. With fibres it is also harder work. Re strength again.. would a horse fall through the stone base? No. So it won't fall through, or break, the concrete above it even without steel or fibre.

BRE was privatised. Then it changed from being a national service to a business. They introduced air testing but only they could do the tests. Then along came epc and it was again very restricted. I met loads of their staff on both occasions. They were nice pr people with no tech knowledge. So we can only assume that back at hq they don't know a lot either. I was so constantly critical but few people accepted that BRE could be wrong, so I passed one of their exams.....which they charged a lot for. Multiple choice., mostly obvious. 4 hours study as compared to the many days they suggested.

It is always thus. I see things on old projects that still bug me, but nobody else ever noticed or notices, because they aren't looking. Hypnotism must be the answer.

We designed and built our own office building, thinking of it for value, comfort, future proofing, running cost and also as an advert for sustainable design. That all worked because we got awards for it, but not necessarily the right things were appreciated. It was rated D, 15 years ago (which was considered great at the time). We had it reassessed last year and it got a good B without any modification. Most of that was because ashp is now 'good', whereas then it was 'bad', such was the knowledge level at BRE. I assume a lot has been improved but equivalent nonsense is still likely to be in the box.

So long ago...and it was always vague anyway. We weren't cheating, simply trying to avoid nonsensical penalties within said black box. It also allowed us to design a building that we knew would pass, tweak insulation if necessary, and avoid shocks at the end. Our EPC assessor would discuss these things with us, and we could share our disdain, but they were very strict and professional: I think there are other types available. Solar panels to the roof that our client would fit...later. Boilers were rated wrongly...we reckoned they had inverted the adjustment factors from worst to best. Air source heating was assumed to be used for cooling in summer whether likely or not, greatly damaging the electricity use figure (which was considered to be bad energy by BRE at the time) Very dubious assessment of solar gain. If I remember more I'll come back.

That's correct. My business got the software when it was a brand new thing, and we played around with it. The only way to understand it was to do dozens of variations on each project. Some tick boxes were beyond anyone's understanding or logic and BRE were not at all keen to engage in discussion. In so doing we revealed lots of inconsistencies, but also the easy fixes and bad ideas for a good rating. For example some choices which everyone would think were an obvious good idea, might make the epc worse, so we simply didn't show it. It was interesting but not worth the annual cost' once we had established the principles.

They would fit none or all, so that should be OK.

SFS is the manufacturer, 18mm the length. The cladder can get them from any good specialist supplier ( cladding or fixing.

I'm assuming that the clips are steel, for strength, and the screw tightens steel to steel. The steel screw to aluminium ridge contact will be miniscule but without a washer it might get wet. A tiny washer would be ideal. A squidge of silicon would help but not long term.

If they're cutting corners, try to check if the compression strip is installed. Just push a tape or pencil up the gap.

As well as being stainless, I'd think they should be self-tapping with a fairly large diameter or chunky thread. I'm surprised the manufacturer doesn't specify it. Also, check the centres these clips should be at. This detail is very vulnerable to wind and I'd expect fixings at 300cc or so if you don't want it to disappear some windy night.

If If electricity is about 30p / kWh, that's a 70p shower reducing to 10p. Not allowing pipe losses. All -ish. 2 showers x 365. So a useful £400 ish per annum. Cost saving might still be a hard sell unless these become standard and cheap. I saw this launched by a young (red haired?) chap at a Pas de Calais Chamber of Commerce exhibition. Maybe the same chap.

Sustainable drainage has to be planning led, but also seen through to completion. It depends on location but is vital in flood prone areas. Maybe that is included in 'neighbour issues' if it includes all downstream areas outside the local authority.

I saw this idea at a trade show in France about 15 years ago. It was a copper fabrication where the incoming cold was warmed by the waste. It was early days so I don't know if it succeeded. But it's likely to have been patented if it was deemed a new idea. My issues were location, access, extra plumbing and payback period. With a 2 minute shower I doubt if it has merit. With a 30 minute one perhaps.

Success. Got a clone charger and 2 batteries on amazon. Nails with gas from screwfix using £10 voucher. There were no instructions,so i couldnt get anything to happen. Youtube College showed how the gas tube is activated. The first attempt resulted in a waste of gas: easy the second time. Then it simply worked. POOM. So now it is worth investing in a storage case.

You could try simply telling them that sort of thing. Theyve given you the headings, so you could address each in turn, giving them something to tick. Any real numbers would be good. Your council may well have published some of their aims. One such might be called the drainage hierarchy... so if your rainwater is going elsewhere than drains or ditches, or being slowed, then you tell them what you are doing.

I say I'm questionning. Others may say cynical. At a self righteous presentation by one of the very big contractors, we were being told we must all be zero waste, like them. I dared ask what happens to stuff that can't be reused or recycled . After much waffle, eventually I got an admission that what they really mean is that they don't have any waste among what can be recycled. The rest is recategorised and omitted from analysis. Cabin rubbish is not construction waste. Mastic tubes and old tarpaulins can be burnt for energy. Someone takes it away and gives them a receipt stating its going to be cared for. They didn't mind declaring zero waste, and their clients accepted that. That company will equally have standard answers about other aspects of sustainability. The planners don't have resources to challenge it.

I actually agree that the planners require this, as at least it makes people think. The problem might be that planners are not technical people and don't necessarily understand the difference between the green-wash they are subjected to, and reality. So I agree that you try to find a previous successful write-up and adapt if to your circumstances. I'm especially pleased re water use. That is a big issue that is mostly being ignored but is sortable. Add sustainable drainage if that applies.

Time for a chat with your architect I think. You need them to accept what you have established, or prove otherwise. Also for a clear understanding that you want expertise, not bad info from sales pitches they have heard. That applies to the rest of the project too, for example insulation and airtightness. Looking forward to hearing of your progress.

Ask them to guarantee the performance. Ie who pays to replace it if it doesn't work properly? The ambient temperature of the rock drops as the heat is drawn from it. At some stage it may freeze, and then your system reverses to thaw it. Hence they need 200m, which will cost you many tens of thousands. We aren't telling you what you want to hear, i know. The great thing about buildhub is that most people stay quiet if they don't know about a subject. But between us we are more likely to know than are most architects. I'd love to know what your advisers are saying about air source not being suitable. Get comparitive quotes for air source.

They don't normally work properly at all. Is the rock hot? Otherwise you are taking heat out of the rock, but it can't replace it quickly and you run out of energy. Near me, a development with 12 borehole systems 90m into clay has had at least 4 replaced by air source, because they weren't working. All agreements to replace were private, so there may be more. There used to be a lot of cowboys in ground source. Most have gone, and so those left are perhaps giving you great advice. Anybody near you with GSHP so you ca see how well it works? what guarantees will you get? what happens if it doesn't work well Trench type is actually air source. The ground warms in the summer from the sun and air, and stores it for winter. you only need 1m or so. A borehole needs the heat to be replenished from hot rock, or from water flowing past, eg in sand or fissured rock. That's what we'd expect. For a 200m2 house you'd probably pay about £10,000 for the ashp and internal gubbins (excluding the plumbing around the house which applies to any system). I'm guessing the gshp will be many times that cost. ??? there is no limit to the energy available in the air. Unless you are in the arctic Id expect air source to be a better bet.

I realise I wasn't clear. I mean write now with a brief statement of your position and why withholding. Also write a draft of your whole argument. Who instructed who and why and then the process. That is an exercise to clarify your own thoughts and strength of argument.

To which add legal costs, another SE for the continuation of the project and dealing with bco. I'm not saying just to pay it, because I don't know the circumstances. But you must write to say what your complaint is and why you blame them. If you are right, a boss may step in to resolve it. Writing that letter will clarify your argument....it's basically what you might end up reading to a court.

We ate now done with the heavy work and have some gently used equipment for sale. 1. These structural jacking posts are vastly superior to acrow props. They have a hydraulic jack so can be used gently and precisely to support or even lift joists etc. No more bashing the screw with a hammer. Equally importantly they release gently. They were barely used as I instructed their pirchase to support a very dodgy area of the old building, but we knocked it down instead. Very suitable for self builders. I would not have bought them for a commercial project as they would have disappeared. 2. Plasterboard hoist. For lifting and holding plasterboard up to 16ft, into place until fixed. Can deliver between Inverness and Gloucester A9 and M6 / M5 when passing in a couple of weeks.