saveasteading

The one that won't eat your plants is mythical...shame. Slow worms are your friends. I found 2 in the compost heap last week.....the strangest thing was that they didn't react at all to being exposed. I think the bean plants will need some physical protection when small. I put metal grilles around them for a week or so....bits of shelving/expamet/ dead barbecue grilles...

It won't be much less however good the ground is, and I can't comment without a lot more information, so I think accept this. I have argued myself for a thinner slab, but there is little chance of the BCO accepting it without research that would cost more than the saving.* The screed will be dead flat on top (well +/- a few mm). Getting the PIR dead level is less likely. 50mm seems thin to me, and I think you must take the advice of the installers/suppliers. Your Engineer will advise on stability, and I expect will not be concerned. Again , circumstances re important. No it will not feel bouncy. Although thin, the screed is hard and spreads your load over a bigger area of the PIR. Thicker screed spreads it a lot further. The PIR is surprisingly strong ...try putting a board on it and see if it moves when stood/ jumped on. * I am currently pressing to substitute fibre crack reinforcement for the specified steel mesh, which will save a lot of money...but there is resistance.

They should be visible in a week, then ready to plant out 2 weeks later. The sooner any robust plant is in the ground, the sooner they grow fast and you get your beans. The slugs will be mustering now in anticipation, hence a bit of stem height is good, and clear away any nice stones they might be breeding under. Worth putting down a few old bricks that they might hide under in the daytime. I lifted an old tile yesterday when preparing the bean bed, and found 20 slugs.. Do you get rabbits? 50 is a lot, but they are easy to find homes for.

As PeterW. BUT it is always worth asking for several quotes. Some scaffolders charge mostly as if it was a hire..ie how many weeks. Others charge mostly based on the work involved. And all variations in-between. Never accept a per m or m2 price, as the method of measurement can be unclear, or they make it bigger and charge more.

You can replace joists like for like if they are performing as joists, ie only supporting their own narrow area of floor. BUT you cannot have that size of timber supporting joists that run the other direction. Could you sketch or describe in detail what you have, including where the bolted joints are? My hunch is as above, that you will need an rsj or a wall....but send us the info to make sure.

I was thinking of something more primitive but easier to build. Timber as the the 2 flanges, then rectangles of plywood on the sides , both sides but poss staggered. As it doesn't have to be terribly strong, it doesn't need to be I form. If I could do a drawing as well as SteamyTea then I would.

I was very unclear here. I meant expose the wall just locally for a metre, perhaps 600 wide digging-out, then backfilling with the new construction, and the existing wall strength will not be compromised. Then do the middle.

And what under the PIR?

I'm not so sure. the CLS and 2 x 2 used to come ready prepared from Russia so that won't be happening. A local Highland sawmill told me they couldn't compete with these prices so they only did bigger timbers and specials. From a quick look at Wickes (because the prices are real time) I calculate that 2 x 2 is £1,400/m3 inc vat , and CLS 38 x 63 is £828/m3...a huge difference, and the CLS principle stands. Another local sawmill is quoting everything in C16 as £430 +VAT, but I suspect the website is behind the times. That is 2 x 2 up to 8 x 2.

That is the one. we have 140mm x 50 mm timber stud in the current plan. so using 50 x 50 twice is only going to save 1/3 of the timber, now I think about it, with a lot of work. But CLS is lots cheaper / m3 than the bigger stuff.. Another thought...the stud assembly will be enclosed in vapour and moisture barrier, so no risk of rot or worm, and untreated timber should be ok.

Other points arising, and forgive me repeating some answers. PIR is twice the price and twice as good, so in this case use PIR for better insulation or less excavation. 50 screed is not enough. It will vary from 40 to 60 and is likely to break. Exposing the walls and foundations should not be an issue for a 20thC building but needs an Engineer's say-so not BCO. If the house is old with very shallow footings then it is an issue however. Do it gently. If necessary do it in short runs, say 1m and infill with the stone and concrete as you go. Lots of bitty work but resolves that issue if necessary

That is 2 of us think that then. I cant see what the bottom slab is meant to be doing other than provide a prepared and clean surface. So why 150mm? I am in the middle of a 'discussion' on this with our Engineer (I am not on the Scottish register). He is insisting on A193 mesh s well, and resisting my proposal to use fibre mesh for crack control (which is still over the top but not costing a lot)

There is the answer. Underground storage tanks without the rwh gubbins in them are not terribly expensive (I have found one we are obliged to install to store 10,000 litres for fire fighting. About £1,000 for underground spec, plus the works.) For garden use only, that or smaller, will collect all the water in a big storm and then a very simple pump can be used to water the garden/wash car. being underground it is much easier to collect all the water from all the rwp, albeit involving more drainage runs too.

I have noticed that some electricians can 'read' a building and forecast where a problem is, and can also use some very complex testing kit. Others have a bag of screwdrivers, and don't / can't do as above, and don't really understand electricity. Dare I say, it is shocking.

We are the same. With the price of timber likely to keep rising I have an idea.....but it might be silly....so here goes. Someone on the forum showed a type of timber frame, named after the inventor, made of small timbers connected by ply plates, a bit like a fabricated joist. If we were to make our own, probably in a former, then we could use this for the inner liner. It would use less timber, we could buy the cheapest £/m3 which is CLS etc, and also break the cold bridge through the timbers themselves. Also replaces timber with more insulation in the void. More labour of course, so perhaps only for a diy job. Also for very large quantities the price can get much better. I once bought a whole bundle of 2 x 2. (6m3). As it was straight from the docks and no handling at the depot, the price plummeted. We can call it the Buildhub Stud Method. Comments?

If you look at the inside of your stove glass you will prob see a string gasket making the seal to the metal. It obviously has to be fireproof. That is the material I meant. It was just a thought, and presumably you have another solution if proceeding. Good luck, it isn't easy but the above advice is good. The cone might not have enough flexibility but we must hope.

Building Inspectors are very wary on this, post Grenfell. One who used to take a pragmatic or common sense view told me that this was no longer an option. Hence very difficult to prove any build-up that isn't exactly the same as a tested system with certification.

That depends on the quality of the treatment. Having built in a pressure chamber system to a timber works, I studied this in action. It seems to me that if the timber is treated in a powerful autoclave tank, where a proper vacuum is created (and not rushed) , then the chemicals get right into the pores. Meanwhile I think poorer treatments are little more than surface treatment. But the cut ends need some more however good the process was.

If you had installed just one, would it have been in that room?

One more thing. Some of the rwh manufacturers include or suggest a 'leaf diverter' which skims 10% of the water away from the surface with leaves etc and dumps it. This seems like a lot of waste and defeating the object. The same can be achieved by having the rwps go through a grille, or insert a filter in line. My solution was a catch-pit where the silt and leaves were caught, but in real life the muck was insignificant. As SimonR, the backup from the manufacturer was appalling. My supplier has dropped out of the rwh market, fortunately.

Yes but.... If you are only catching half the roof, then the solution is barrels. If you can catch all the water without extensive drainage revisions then it becomes more useful because twice the size of tank is only about 30% dearer. For a retrofit I doubt if it is viable commercially, and could probably prove it is not viable sustainably either. Agree with all NickfromWales says. Proof: I designed and built our own office block with all such considerations in mind. all rainwater collected from the 500m2 roof, through a stilling chamber then to a very big rwh. It was sized so that it would catch all the rain from a big downpour. (ie twice the usual recommended size). then overflow to soakaways and a lagoon. I predicted a 12 year payback, but it was better than that. Because no rainwater went into the sewers there was a big reduction in rates. PLUS because the sewage charge is based on the amount of water used, that cost was very low too. From checking the water bill, i appeared that the tank was only empty for perhaps 2 weeks of the summer. With that in mind the payback looked more like 8 years. However. 1. the pump broke down and cost a lot to fix 2. No idea of the electric cost for pumping 3. the pump broke down again.. 4. It is an office so a high proportion of flushing water compared to potable. At home I have inserted a weir into a gutter to guide most rain to the downpipe with the barrel) On another project where aesthetics were not an issue, I designed a surface rwh using 3 IBCs linked together...capital cost £50. For a house 1 would do, but very ugly and bulky. Summary: Newbuild, designed to suit, and my eagerness to be seen to care. commercially just about viable sustainability...yes a good thing in our case. Ugly newbuild with space..use IBC Retrofit? Unlikely to be viable so convert all down pipes to accept barrels, and connect several if you want to collect it all. If you want, you can divert the overflow to the garden rather than drains. Catch all the rainwater if possible, and you can get your rates reduced,

Predrill, and use self-tapping screws (concrete or steel specific) or plugs. https://www.bgs.ac.uk/datasets/radon-data-indicative-atlas-of-radon/ is the simplest, and there is a link to buy a certificate for your postcode. £5.

Welcome. There are lots of us with interest and/or knowledge in this subject. Ask away. 1400 ft altitude is a very long way up. So you are -3C compared to sea level simply through altitude. You don't need to tell where you are ( and perhaps best not to) , but an overview will be good with your first questions.

Yes. Often described as a Hilti gun. They go straight into steel or concrete with no pilot. Very nasty kick back as you might expect, and needs attention and strength. The only real life issue is in going into extra hard concrete, or extra-strength steel (or too weak a material that just breaks). There are different lengths of nails and different explosive levels too, so check for that. The guns can be hired. I seldom use them where there is any other option, especially as screws are so good these days.

There is no complete section drawing but the details are attached. It is stick built as a Glulam ridge beam, with props and a couple of structural cross-walls. There are complex corners to tie the replacement into the existing, which are A frames, with ties at about 1/3 up. But if we can sort the simple frames out, then the rest will follow. We were happy to have tied frames but the Engineer insisted this would be better value. Cost is clearly not their thing and so far they have agreed to most of our proposed revisions, saving £15k to date. That is not really a saving though: it is avoiding un-necessary cost, and now I want to do the same with this. Of course the joiner would likely love this bracket as it is very easy for him, hence asking for help now before he is shown this ridge detail.