saveasteading

The BCO may not have noticed that it is structural. Their job is not to do 100% check. What does the stud wall sit on?

The 'right' computer programme is expensive. However it is simply a spreadsheet that iterates the rainfall possibilities and then the volume required is the worst case. A cheaper alternative is available online, or you can even make your own, but they may not be accepted unless you have the credentials yourself. Using the recognised programme shows the Building inspector that the information is likely to be accurate. However, garbage in/garbage out apples, and I have seen proposals that are simply wrong. By all means, do your own assessment for comfort, and to pre-consider the most practical solution., but I think you need expert presentation. BTW in some areas of mass house building but where the drainage is inadequate, building inspectors are forced to agree lower standards for rainwater.

I meant who decided to propose 9mm in the first place? The building inspector only has an overview and has not necessarily approved this element. As there is no wind then that is a major element removed. The lining is still helping to stop buckling or domino-ing. Other than that, we don't know your construction in any detail so can't say much more.

If this has been formally designed, then the sheathing material and fixings should have been specified already.

That will be up to the Officer. If the Architect has 'winged it' with calculations, you should ask him to resolve it and within his fee. It is not just a matter of ticking it off, as it does have to work. It does need to be right as nobody wants overflow, especially from the treatment tank however clean it is supposed to be. On the matter of being an appropriate person, who knows?. I have the qualifications but am not registered in Scotland, and our Warrant application was responded to that we needed a registered SE for the structure. However my drainage proposal appears to have been accepted.....as they have no further questions. So yes post it here. Perhaps privately tell one or more correspondents of any concerns you have , as this page is public,

Of course some of us are still interested. Thanks. Thanks for this. It is not easy reading, and I have had to read some of the recommendations more than once. Only 2 buildings in UK and one in Ireland, but the variation of circumstances might be informative....I have only read the intro properly. I like it as I think it is mostly good news for our project, I think. But the Executive Summary is perhaps all we need to know. (My Executive Executive Summary is...keep the rain out, but let it evaporate back out if it does get in.) Here it is, if interested.....mostly seems obvious (or accurate). In general, the following conclusions and recommendations can be derived about the hygrothermal performance from the measurement and simulation results in the present case study report:  The thinner the existing wall, the lower is the possible damage-risk free thermal resistance resp. thickness of the added insulation system. A thin wall increases the condensation risk and the impact of driving rain on the construction.  The lower the driving rain load (driving rain protection of façade or low driving rain load at the specific location), the more insulation systems are possible to use.  The dryer and warmer the indoor air, the more insulation systems are possible to use. Especially the performance of capillary active systems (aka. condensate-tolerating systems) improves as these show a strong interaction with the indoor climate. Opposed to this, the behaviour of vapour-tight insulation systems (aka. condensate-preventing systems) (e.g. VIP) is only marginally depending on indoor climate conditions.  A humidification potential from one side of the construction (e.g. moist indoor air or driving rain) requires an equivalent drying potential on, at least, the opposite side of the construction. This could be provided with a condensate-tolerating internal insulation system or avoided with a reduction of the moisture load (improved driving rain protection).  The higher the built-in moisture, the higher is the required drying potential of the construction. Insulation systems with a high build-in moisture should therefore at the best be vapour-open and capillary active.  The more vapour tight the insulation systems are, the more caution should be paid on proper workmanship at constructive details, connection jointing etc.

That was always the case. We had 22t deliveries of steel, regularly, and needed 2 copies to reach us (us and bank). Sometimes the driver would have ours and 2 or 3 spares simply because they had not been asked for along the way. Other times he had only one left because they got taken at each side of the channel, by ferry and by customs. I would think that the ferry operator and UK customs would take one each every time. Make sure it starts the journey with all 6 or you may run out on the wrong side of the channel. Beware of unofficial 'arrangements' across borders. We tried to get holoriib type shuttering from France as it was 1/3 cheaper....until someone told them it was for UK and suddenly they couldn't do it any more. In other words be sure you don't turn up with a lorry and find that there aren't any bricks after all, especially with a major manufacturer who can control the market. Have you tried a brick factor? They will take a commission but may remove the risk, or have an alternative supplier.

Car batteries, when replaced through being 'worn out' , get taken to big sheds which do exactly this and store power from power stations through the night. Don't batteries 'wear out' in a predictable number of cycles? And they cost what....£5 to £10k? I am guessing that a car battery is more expensive to replace than one in a box in the plant room.

I once went to the local TP with an urgent need for drain pipe fittings, lots of them. They were reluctant to give me a price , but eventually quoted about £15 each less 10%. I knew the price at TS was about £5. They weren't best pleased that I knew and then admitted that they were being squeezed out of a lot of business by their own joint owner. They must have made enough of these £10 additions from the local builders to justify the policy. Benchmarx bottom of the range used to overlap with Wickes top of the range kitchens. I don't know the current situation. You all get the 10% discount from Wickes I trust.

To all interested parties, these reference documents from SimonD are excellent and I recommend some study . Have now started on this one and even the introduction shows that they are a good balance of academic and practical. https://www.changeworks.org.uk/sites/default/files/Solid_Wall_Insulation_in_Scotland.pdf the first page starts thus: Solid walls perform thermally better than current energy modelling assumes (i.e. they have lower U-values when measured in situ). This means that the potential financial and CO2 savings from SWI are often less than predicted – the implications of this could be considerable. Then it goes into the conflicting subjects discussed above..... one of .the main lessons seems to be how different constructions and exposures will perform. Everyone is correct, and now we have to juggle the relevant factors. Again from the document: More research is needed into the impact of SWI in increasing risk of moisture and condensation, and how this differs with different types of insulation, property construction and location I wish I had found these docs a year ago...................I found other good ones but these are ideal. I am now thinking that referring to these documents should be helpful in convincing the Building Officer of the chosen construction methods, where no standard exists.

Agreed . There are gaps at all PIR joints and the panels are likely to joggle a bit in windy conditions. Sticky tape will likely lose its stick over years, Plastic sheet can harden and crack...I know it shouldn't in the dark, warm conditions but I've seen enough inappropriate plastic failure to doubt quality.. We are doing much the same and I am planning on investing in a reinforced aluminised membrane. that will need tape over joints too, but at some stage we have to say 'enough' the scrim will keep the membrane intact, and is also easier to handle. Under £1/m2 I recall with some shopping around.

They can't if you can show that 100 suffices. who does the calculations?

I think you need a professional. (Drainage is a particular skill....lots of people can work out pipe sizes, but getting the best solution for you is cost related too.) I am, and drainage is a speciality, but I would not give more advice without seeing the site circumstances, and then the advice is likely to be as above. Percolation test, (diy is fine for feasibility) and also get a quote for mains connection and the drain to it. It is sometimes cheaper to pump sewage, even downhill, when the distance is long. This is because the pipe is much smaller diameter and can wind around the driveway etc and to the final connection, without manholes. I thought the small area of land was the main problem but now see you have more. Poor percolation is a challenge, and may not be feasible at all for soakaway, esp as you already have the rainwater to deal with.....but it may work. In theory the stuff coming out of the treatment tank can be nearly clean....think about combining with rainwater after treatment, but that needs advice too. If your rainwater lagoon was to overflow, where would it go?

I have heard this said before, but a 100dia pipe can go at 1:80 and that makes a huge difference to the depths of the pipes and the digester tank. I think 1:40 is perhaps deliberately conservative in case of imprecision.

Firstly apologies to all re my typing above. I pushed send as my dinner was arriving. A big practical suggestion above, that we must take seriously is the initial drying of the walls. They are wetter inside than out where the roof holes are not yet sorted. so we need the roof on asap, then the summer can do its best and we delay inner lining and vapour and esp moisture barriers. There was 4 inches of snow on Friday.....proper weather. Absolutely stunning scenery.......as seen by daughter's photos as I am somewhere warmer. For general interest, we await SE report to attach to our Warrant response. I am not on the Scottish database and my reports and designs don't count until they endorse them. Slightly nervous about what they will require, but so far most of my suggestions have been accepted on the drafts we have seen. I will redraw my current proposal, and perhaps will think differently while doing that, and submit for marking.

Now if Nod was to ask the rep to visit ProDave to see the issue, and report back on why that won't be a problem on 200 houses.....and sort the issue at the same time, then there are lots of winners.

Quote this to Austria, with no names, if Nod permits. I am nervous about using renders that work in central Europe/ the Alps as it is a very different weather.

The head office people would probably be very concerned to hear about this problem with uk weather, and the adverse publicity in a specialist public forum. Perhaps give them a link in with you expression of disappointment .

Thanks again to everyone for this information. The dcouments recomended are eccellent, and emphasise the many aspects to be considered, and the many approaches to resoilution. the https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/eehb-insulating-solid-walls/heag081-solid-walls/ document is amodelof clear layout and explanation...I think i habve to print this and mark up all the applicable issues. I note among the many suggestions are the two close to my own (and some of your) current thoughts. Bighouseproblems.....my apologies if my input seems to be hijacking your original post, but it seems to apply to both of us, with differences of course in materials and probably ground conditions.

I like the porch. It is such an unrecognised means of retaining heat in the house. It is rather large, but so is the house. You could retain visitors in it if they fall between the 'go-away' and please come in' categories. Yes it is expensive but this sort of house needs some 'wow' from outside and this is it. A trick of architectural design is that a building is usually favourably noted for one thing....and that may be a colour or the main front feature. You will feel good every time you see it.

No it isn't, as we want to retain the character. Strangely there are very few constraints from the planning permission, but it is our desire to maintain the appearance as much as possible. The eaves don't overhang at all, with just the slates reaching the existing and future gutters. There is so much useful and admirably pragmatic information above that I will review it tomorrow without the beer at my side. The referenced documents will take a little longer. Just one follow-up query to lob back for now. The cavity fill rockwool detail. In what way is this fundamentally different to our situation? Brick skin in the Rockwool standard detail, as compared to existing masonry. Full fill cavity batt, touching the outer and inner skin. Applies to both. Block inner wall as compared to stud wall filled with insulation, but new build to probably have vapour barrier and airtight barrier. Plaster finish as compared to plasterboard finish. ((I have liked and specified full-fill insulation for many years, mainly because it is idiot-proof. (Bricky cannot leave empty drinks cans in the void because it messes with the 'bond' of the insulating slabs. Bricky can't drop snots of mortar into the void and bridge the cavity). Perhaps it is my combination of designer /contractor as I am surprised that it isn't more widely used.)) I have realised in doing this, that many people in the industry don't know about the product and assume that there has to be an air-gap, whereas the wholepoint is that there is no air-gap, no air circulating, and no dampness crossing. And to tick off 2 things that occurred re previous messages. 1. risk of the dampness freezing in the outer wall because it will be cold....It has been exposed to the weather, in and out, for 20 years, and was a draughty shed for 120 years before that. 2. Salts forming.....again it has been there for 140 years and any salts will be long gone. Admission Dew-point......Not something I fully understand, in the context of where is the moisture coming from, where will it go, and is that a problem? More thought and study required. I will return after study. Perhaps together we will resolve the issue for ever. The 'Buildhub' solution.

Yes Simon has sent some very relevant references. Your suggestions to date would suggest that nearly all farm buildings are incorrectly converted, and the architects and building inspector's are wrong too. I am analytical, and need proof so if you have any, I'd be grateful

I'm grateful for this and previous links. Other than this, everything I have read suggests an inner timber structure, containing insulation, and wrapped with vapour/airtight barrier. I can't see how the above extracts allow this standard industry construction, of full-fill cavity insulation. attached picture. This statement is rather shocking. Where does it come from? I think 600mm of 3 core masonry is reckoned to provide 0.6 in itself. Thinking while typing..... if there is no air gap, then there can be no evaporation. .

And an internal. There are 4 wings like this and an inner courtyard. This shows the hole in the roof where grain was heave in.

As you ask... Until this last year I knew very little about stone buildings, but rather a lot about modern buildings. I expected to find readymade reports with the obvious solution for converting a stone farm building into residential. No, there are many expert reports, and any number of firmly held views, but they vary considerably. My findings include. Lime mortar is essential for breathing as well as for allowing movement. Not a problem. Granite is brilliant at not absorbing any rain, so most rain runs off. ditto not absorbing general dampness. Dense sandstone almost as good. The 600mm wall construction includes a central core of rubble which is 40% lime mortar, and this helps control dampness and heat loss. The insulating effect of a thick masonry wall is very much better than the standard formulae allow. Problem dampness in such buildings fizzles out at about 1m above ground level. (All the above dependent on good lime mortar and drainage.) Conflicting views include: To keep the moisture out of the building, add a 1m layer of bitumen tanking to the inside of the wall. (Aberdeenshire references). OR don't do such a silly thing, as it keeps your wall damp, Encourage inward air movement through multiple holes in the wall base, venting through cavity to eaves. (Argyll references, incl Bldg control) OR Don't do this as you are losing all the insulation benefit of the masonry, and bringing damp outside air to the inside. Use warm batten method, as all the evaporation will be outwards. OR Don't do this as it is better to have an air gap and air flow. BUT the latter will encourage evaporation inwards to the warmer void, which would otherwise permeate outwards. And there is more. The conflicting 'solutions' lead me to believe that I am as right as anybody else. Right now there is a decent roof except for a few holes and farm access points, so water gets in and the inside of the wall (stone) is wet in areas. (I am ignoring the areas of major damage through neglect, that we will rebuild in timber). There are also 5 cart entrances and the weather whips through them. Gutters need repair as do areas of the wall. When repaired, the rain will mostly be carried well away. Driving rain seems to be uncommon, but may wet one wall at a time. Most of course will run to ground, which happens to be ultra-permeable. No rising damp, even if such a thing exists (see other discussions). Some damp will soak into the mortar joints (after passing through the external lime mortar parging) ( 2% of the face area??). It won't go very far in but would eventually reach the core where there is the 40% mortar to act as a holding area. Then it will be drawn outwards again as the face dampness evaporates, or downwards towards the permeable ground. Will much of that then travel through the inner skin? I don't think so. A picture for interest.