saveasteading

BUT I happen to know of at least one Architect school that criticised practical design. "This is a chance to experiment, design whatever you like, it is up to the Engineers to make it work." That of course was from a lecturer, who perhaps didn't do well in practise. I know this because I was asked to advise by a student. I advised that columns should line up through the storeys, and the roof needed drainage....philistine me! I lost the project a few marks.

I'm a Civil Engineer, but mostly as contractor. I loved working with Architects and other Engineers to optimise a project. To look good, to be brilliant value, but mostly to keep the weather out. I told them where the money could be saved, without cutting corners, they called me a philistine, then we worked something out. Please don't criticise any profession so wildly, as there are better and worse in all walks of life. But you must choose according to their skills. Some Architects are very practical, while some are 3d artists. You didn't choose Hadid or Gehry if budget was an issue in the slightest. You didnt choose me if you wanted a temple to yourself / city/ business. My view is generally that my job was to keep people and their goods, safe and dry for the next 50 to 100 years. Add a bit for looks. Budget? Working to a budget is not necessarily the same as getting best value....that is where specialist contractors come in.

I'm sure they can do whatever they like. Ours was very precisely linked to mains water used...and as it was an office there was mostly wc use, plus outside tap. Mains water to kitchens and to barely used shower. Also, as no rainwater went to mains drains, (unless via wc) , there was another discount. There was an attenuation requirement too, but we used all soakaway and lagoon, so no crates required.

Agreed most or all of the above. I put a 10m3 harvester in for our own office...no client wanted one but we would test it. 100% of roof water into tank. Double the suggested size. It never ran out of water. The big bonus was that sewage charge was based on water use, so also tiny. And small water pipe in reduced rates. Saving apparently huge. Environmental benefig big too...less water bought and disposed of. But I have no idea the electric cost for the pump. The pump broke down and polypipe weren't interested. Got a repair eventually. Pump broke down again. Leased the building and tenant not interested so harvester sits unused as an expensive manhole. Moral....I might do one for myself, but wouldn't recommend it. But rainwater butts are simple and good as are soakaways and ponds.

I have seen exactly the opposite stated...provide no hindrance to smoke travelling upwards.

Provide the bco with a written explanation of your proposal and how it complies with the basics of the regulation and, if it makes sense, they are likely to accept it. It goes in their file as cover too. Given how far a glowing ember can tumble I think it is a serious concern...and we must not assume that a future user will have the sense that is required. I would like an ember catching edgeto the hearth if there was a carpet.

If in doubt go back to the short bit in green. You may then have to explain the logic and low risk of your proposal.

Late comment. The concrete cracks are fairly standard, unless you have ultra specialist design and contractor Concrete shrinks. If it can't move freely it cracks. If your crack repair looks untidy you could plant a hardwood threshhold over it.

Absolutely not. Air flow through the building shifts more moisture than a typical machine. I have seen people getting them in when there is static water and what is needed is brooms and buckets.

Well done. I'm guessing that it isn't a roddable backdrop, just a few bends to fiddle the slope. Having recently made a few, I was surprised how easy it was in plastic. Therefore also surprised why it is so often bodged.

Perhaps not. But it isn't to be preferred and could be a problem. I would guess that a porous stratum in the ground (or an old drain, or a void created by a root) has created a path for rainwater. Then somehow it gets through the mortar...it wouldn't need much gap. Letting it out on the downhill side is easy, using an airbrick. But I wouldn't want it flowing through so would want to catch it at source and divert.

Taken in Spain, 2 minutes later a man was fixing sale stickers at 1 or 2 € less. These are good quality too. Worth filling the car? No.

I would rather pay the spanish vat and live with it. Not many spanish retailers will know or want the hassle of selling vat free and doing the paperwork. There are very good spanish fires such as bronpi, half the uk price. But buy for €500, ship for £200, pay uk tax.. barely worth it. I thought of putting a "used" one in the car instead of 48 bottles of wine, but they don't have direct air intakes. There is import duty on anything over £300, (?) as well as vat. From what i read, people are getting taxed on household fixtures and equipment....both directions, and most (under the radar) van services have packed in. It was always the case that uk costs were much higher, and crossing the water allowed a mark-up. But now we are abroad, it is on a different level. Other examples. Roca wc set €120, or in uk £170. Hansgrohe shower mixer €110, uk £160. Vat included. But you can't claim the vat back in the uk unless it has been paid in uk, for obvious reasons. So, on balance, not worth it.

How long do you think would the drip take to fill a mug? Obv you need to stop the leak. Meantimd perhaps you can divert it to drip into a bucket.

Pipes should not be encased in concrete, but have either a gap or a protective layer around them (usually polystyrene so it can crush). Then when the building moves it doesn't break the pipe. This is in the buildong regulations. Your designer should be giving you all the detail. Maybe your groundworker is great and can read a drawing and do sums....but you can't count on it as many have had no training and simply go downhill using a spirit level with the bubble out of the lines. Your design mighg require more precision than that.

Water finds the easiest route, and under your tiles doesn't sound like it. Have you seen the leak? Where from and how fast? You should advise your insurers immediately, even if trying to resolve it yourself. Then you are covered if it is bad. They may send an inspector or ask you to see how it goes....their decision.

I don't know this product. All I can contribute is that I was inspired to try to use similar products, but couldn't ever get near it being best value. If you can find a good joiner, stick built is cheapest and easy enough to seal and insulate.. Ours is really good, but airtightness is clearly not taught at college. So we are watching that. I can't see why these eps products are not more competitive...so maybe this is the one. The website doesn't mention cost at all, which doesn't bode well. I predict that their salesman will avoid any discussion of cost....so please keep us informed...I'd be happy for you if I am wrong.

Interesting. Sounds better than 100%.

Changing some of it would help. Although the restriction would still be there, the turbulence and resistance elsewhere would reduce. Also ensuring slow and smooth bends helps a lot whatever the size.

Larch is a conifer but deciduous. Scots Pine, Juniper and Yew are native conifers.

Relax. You havent been cheated. A hiab capable of doing that lift would be much more expensive. The hiab used is unlikely to have the strength or reach to lift onto the roof. Also, the delivery company are not contractors so the driver won't have the skills or insurance to do it. Best take the realistic view that the delivery cost was low, using the best and cheapest vehicle for the job, so you have not been overcharged. Really, you have not lost out or been treated badly. Can I point you towards risk assessments? If the hiab was going to lift onto the roof, then you should have previously discussed the process with them in some detail. As you now should do for the hoisting.

Welcome. Passive house priciples are great, but there are diminishing returns. Hence most on here, as you, say ---ish. Build quality is the main thing. There is so much on this site...get delving. Searching on Google seems to work better than the bh search itself....eg search for " buildhub passivhaus" or whatever the spelling is. And please tell us more about your intentions.

You don't need much off it for it to fit either square or diagonally. Is there an easy bit such as a housing, or feet?

Or of the structure itself. The problem first, then the solution. Farm buildings have no safety factor. Occupied buildings of course have a factor to allow for freak weather, bad workmanship etc., with people being valued above tractors or animals. Therefore I can promise you that the farmer who built this did not put in, of pay for, any more concrete or steel than necessary. Therefore the steel and foundations will not be sufficient for a house. Enlarging the foundations and strengthening the frame is expensive. The answer is to find a good and pragmatic SE who can find alternatives. For example, building an additional steel column for each portal frame, on a new foundation internally is very much cheaper than attengthening what is there. They can be on the lines of new internal walls. As to insulation. If the steel structure is completely contained within your new insulated envelope, then that is best. There will be some heat loss through the steel into the foundations, but not a lot. A subject for later.

1. A to d. It might run down the wall and erode it, cause salts to emerge, reduce insulation, cause mould. Ditto to windows. 2. Likely to splash up the wall leading to b- d 3. Might erode the ground 4. Constantly wet ground more likely to settle differentially. 5. Unpleasant on visitors' heads 6. Noisy. All that being said, it is not unheard of, compensated by oversailing eaves and a gravel drain to catch it.