saveasteading

The 'small bit' is 1m long as the ties are quite high (hence the walls displacing in the first place). It might be the solution though, if we cut the ties off close to the rafters, losing 2 x 300mm, then try to get the stubs off on the ground, salvaging most of the wood. This tool looks 'the business'.

OK done that. It is a bit of a rant unfortunately, and calling surveyors idiots isn't measured or encouraging. However, I am perfectly happy to hear advice that shows we do not need to spend money and time on the low level tanking currently intended. btw we got this idea / solution from a blog elsewhere, for a similar farm steading. I considered the bottom metre being tanked as reasonable (an extension of the dpm) and the wall can still breathe outwards and will be unsealed for the remainder of the wall height. However the drawing I copied doesn't show tanking either, so perhaps this is not proven. Our walls are currently wetter inside than out, as the air and wind evaporate water on the outer faces. When the gutters are repaired the wetness will reduce and only driving rain will wet the walls, and obviously will run down an make the bottoms wetter. Rising damp is impossible as our footings are on porous sand. Advice also welcome on ventilating the wall. The cross section I coped here shows ventilation through the wall, to pass up the new void between stone and new inner lining. That will suck a lot of heat out of the building so seems unwise. But I know from another Buildhub member that there are cases of Officers insisting on this.

The wall is 600mm thick granite, so any form of dpc is out of the question. I will look at your references with interest.

Old fashioned, lever the tails up, knock them through and claw hammer/nail bar? With the twist on them, does the levering/mole grips work?

Can't do that as we had the whole roof sprayed, and I don't fancy the fumes. Not as bad as tanalised by a long way but too risky I feel. I forgot some old floor boards had been sprayed before removal, and put some on a wood-burner.....despite them being ultra dry and porous with worm holes, they didn't burn well at all and made a lot of smoke. The timbers are the right size to try slicing in half, and can then be used as our wall studs. There is some worm but really not significant and now treated. What shape they will take when split we don't know yet. Failing that they will form the terraced garden. Re. cutting with a sabre saw.... having tried similar with a multi-tool I found it was slow and burnet a lot of blades. A disc-cutter that could fit on a sabre saw would do the trick, but doesn't seem to exist, That is the issue I think. The approved design method is driven by tradition and evidence rather than calculation. As it is designed for use by non-Engineers (or Engineers who don't do calculations any longer) , the consultants will never have handled the document, and so revert to what they can calculate....it is costing us a lot and would be much worse if I couldn't argue some points which 'may be justifiable'.

That's good then. I came across a really interesting paper on rising damp in stone buildings. It basically says that damp rises to about 1m, and to live with that and line the inside. Not always possible (or easy) though. So we will be applying a bitumen liner 1m up from dpc .

It is simplistic to assume that forces go at 45 degrees, but it is a sensible assumption. If the base shown here was 150 thick then it would also be narrower, so less strength both ways. If it was built the same width as the wall then the forces would act on a smaller area of ground, and may settle. There are many assumptions in building, and most are based on common sense and the experience of centuries. If the Engineer says 750 wide then by all means ask why, but then do it....there are many good reasons....loads, ground conditions, ground strength. If you pay your Engineer more, then he may allow time to reanalyse and may save you a little concrete. Or if you do a more extensive ground survey. A little extra concrete (£100 worth?) is probably the optimum.

Agreed. There are so many optional ways to get RICS (including auctioneers, estate managers, estate agent) that you must ensure that building construction is their speciality.

That's a new one. 'Compacting issues", so some of the 200mm of concrete levels nicely but some won't? Concrete moves when shovelled, but it contains lots of stones and is not easy to level. For precision the price goes up a great deal, and for ultra precision they have to grind the top off again.....and it is usually unnecessary. What look like flat slabs in retail warehouses are up and down just like yours, but nobody notices other than the racking installers (who adjust for it). It is not a bowling rink so shouldn't matter. It is remarkable that we are all still reinventing how to build a house, but we are. I agree with drawing your situation to scale, starting with floor finishes and working down.

But still use blocks on top, to get air flow and also allow adjustment for precise height. I am not one to overdesign, but then I could design the timber spans. In your case it is much simpler to use extra blocks, laid flat , which are going to cost you £4 each or so x 20. option 1 then. Option 2 is just wrong I think as you show the blocks under every 4th joist, and the others allowed to deflect.

Unfortunately we are having to remove a section of building and replace (I wouldn't, and think they can be fixed, but have not prevailed, mostly because we can't get builders or designers to do tricky stuff.) So 40 tied trusses have to come down. The wood is good apart from a few ends, and can be reused for roof or inner walls. Any tips on how to get 50 year old twist nail connections undone? Either up in the air if the demo people will consider it, or on the ground once chain-sawn apart. 2 twist nails per joint, right through 2 x 45mm, and 30mm extra length bent back. For the interest of anyone....interested. I calculated the design using the Scottish Government 'how to do it' guidance for 'non-Engineers'. Tied trusses with ridge plates, and some shear walls. The local Engineer we are now required to engage is specifying Ridge beams (big) and props, and no ties: I guess because they never have to use the simpler, standard method. Then another ridge beam and some steel beams to support the ridge beam!

Yes they do or they lose money. If it takes only a day to look at an enquiry, then visit site, then calculate and write out a quotation then they are doing well. That is a day at say £250 which is cheap for someone who can do all that. win one if four. A bigger business has estimators and admin for which they add a percentage (5%). A smaller business perhaps doesn't think that way, but one way or another it has to be paid for. The new-start business doesn't do this and so has a £1,000 advantage, for first job only.

It is included in the overhead, along with admin, accounts, insurances etc. Every client pays it. There comes a time as a specialist contractor when you don't agree to do every tender sent to you, want to know how many are tendering, and need some element of trust that you are not being used as a 'check price', or to get free ideas. I am not commenting on the original question re roof cost by saying this, as I haven't looked at it. Major house developers make 25% profit, to shareholders, after other bonuses are paid. Big contractors claim to only make 2-3%, but perhaps that is 5% now, but have big overheads. Probably coming to 25%, but that is on a higher cost as they are using subcontractors with margins included. A reasonable mark-up for a small builder is 20% to cover everything.

I don't think they do, or not the realistic amount anyway, and so the game starts of building waste, plant, overheads etc into the rates, and showing a profit you think the client will accept. A game and a waste of time and resources. Then if the client compares rates they may not make sense. It is even worse on bigger jobs where the client has a QS who has to justify their fee, and existence.

I did not at first recognise your picture of a flattened woodland. (looked like foreground to the picture above it). I never thought of Angus as a windy area. Good luck with your repairs. Not easy at that height, and probably needs a replacement ridge section for aesthetics and because the protective coatings will be damaged.

I was surprised how many mature pines fell over, that had been through many storms before. Mostly along with the roots but some just snapped in the trunk. The power of nature is amazing, and scary. With that may I give one little piece of advice re metal cladding fixings, that I often see not to be done. At all exposed edges, eaves, ridge, corners, and especially at the corners of the roof, the wind force can be many times worse than in the central areas. this is partly to do with swirling and partly because the load is not spread to adjacent areas. (Varying gusts of wind are surprisingly small in area). So at all these exposed areas of cladding and to flashings, make sure that there are extra fixings, at least double, from sheet to purlin/batten and also plenty fixing for the support to the structure.

Correct, if the ceiling is plasterboard. For information only, the heavier a beam gets, the less protection it needs (heated perimeter/area) to the extent that ultra chunky columns might not need any protection....I have done such.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOh. I am repeating the wise (and crucial) advice from above. If you don't understand the reason, I suggest looking into it as it is a fundamental part of building knowledge. (Unfortunately, many plumbers and electricians don't know this either (or perhaps don't care), and damage the buildings they work on).

The screed should have done all its shrinking in a month, and there will be multiple cracks, perhaps invisible. Across doors will have cracks and it is fairly likely tiles may crack there later. So i would either fit a strip at each door or keep tiles in case any replacement needed. Looks great if whole tiles run through. Looks awful if they crack.

The steel fails at about 350deg, at which stage the stair is gone, and so are you. If you can fully protect the exposed sides with plasterboard, and infill the inner web by pushing in rockwool, then only the inner edges of the flanges are exposed, and that may suffice. But squeezing in a skinny board will def then do it. In reality protecting what you can see will prob be enough to protect the building from collapse.

Does that not draw air through it (vent to flue) constantly, chilling the fire when it is off, so a cold steel box in the room ?

They do quality at the right price. but they also have very tired ex-holiday units round the back cheap: but need a lot of work. Worth asking.

I can't see any reason for a treatment tank to be so far away (soakaway, yes as it could undermine the foundations), so would be worth negotiating if it was too tight.

It is difficult. There are programs to calculate it, but it is basically, simply the iteration of different rainfall possibilities against outflow, and how much is left to store. If you can handle the logic then you can do it yourself. If not then you may not get the right answer by buying a program. You will probably end up buying the exensive crates anyway, so might as well get their free design, with the benefit that bco will accept it. You can sometimes save by reducing the crates volume by using natural storage, eg ponds, swales, even barrels.

Stuff the stub ends with old polythene bags and wrap another tight over the end. Tie a bright coloured rope to the end of the pipe (the cheap blue stuff is ideal) and lead it to the surface with a fair amount of spare. Tie the rope to a peg, but even if the peg comes out the pipe end is findable, clean and not filled with muck. Yes, first if you can, if you have a proper design, but perhaps not if it is going to driven over a lot or another service will cut across it. Or not if there is any doubt on where drains will exit the building. Because it doesn't take much error for a digger to damage the building.