saveasteading

Gus, as always has great advice and background info. As I was building streel buildings for 35 years I can add a bit to this. On occasions we were asked to adapt existing structures for modern use, or even to relocate a dismantled building. We either declined or quoted for all new, and then won the work as new. I did estimate both ways once and new-build was far cheaper, and a much better product. It only works for being another agricultural building. The factors of safety for populated use add about 30% to the loads that the building is ready to support, so it can take thick snow on the roof, and hurricanes. I had never heard of a commercial steel building falling down. But I asked a farmer, and he said there were often reports in the farming press of collapses, especially in the winter. As there were no humans involved, it goes unreported elsewhere. So these buildings you are looking at are no use except as precedents for planning permission. It would be cheaper to take it all away and start anew, but you cant because of planning rules. Therefore you have to retain the steel, add extra frames to make it strong enough and underpin the existing frames. Being a cynical sort, I assumed most people were getting away with using the existing structure, so asked a building inspector. 'Absolutely not, it has to done properly'. Perhaps the reason we don't hear is that the owners just have to keep spending, and don't tell us about it. This is entirely a commercial statement, reminding you to allow plenty of build cost, while others may not.

Breathe the country air!

Thanks. But still probably not the best way to do it, with lots of long runs to get to the area it is wanted. There could be rooms with 4 or 5 sets of pipes running straight through. I am guessing it gets horrible to handle in long runs.

Like this? This appears to be up to 35dia, which I guess would be needed, so something like 80mm incl wrapping. This would then need to be in the wall (warm side) rather than the screed. not so easy! Probably worth contriving more insulation than this.

You need a general builder who can do the whole thing. You need building regulations. First though you need a Structural Engineer (SE in short on this site) Planning permission may apply in certain circumstances, eg a listed building, or a protected area. Engineer first. Someone who has done this recently can advise, but I would say allow minimum £3,000 +VAT. Depends on size, nature of the work and where you are, so could be more. Of course if it not a structural wall then it is all easier. What do you hear when you tap it? Hollow or solid? What do you hit if you try to put a hole in it? SE would tell you if it was not structural, and if it still needs Building Control.

And where do they send it? They used to have an area at the council tips for it, then buried it in clay. Now it gets lorried up and taken away at about £3,000 per load. The council will not take a large quantity, only sundry domestic amounts, as this avoids it going in with the rubbish and endangering the refuse staff. Even doing it yourself, which is legal, requires a sealed skip and disposable clothing, then gets taken away and a very large fee for disposal. Even farmers are supposed to do it properly these days.....never trust a pile of earth on a farm......

Do we need 2 systems to heat this building? Imagine if you will, a building that is approx 22m by 22m with a courtyard in the middle. the wings are about 6m wide including the very thick walls. From what I have read, UFH loops are 50m at most. therefore to get to the opposite side of the building and back is 44m, and there is only 6m left to heat any area. Should we therefore look at a single plant room, but a long feeder to a second manifold (or more) at the opposite end? Or might we as well use a second, smaller ASHP with its own kit adjacent? There is scope all round for the external appliance. Better in the daylight than the shade too, I expect. The gross internal floor area, including some upper level, is about 400m2, and I am thinking this will need 15kVA, but am no expert. Assume thermal insulation to about the Scottish target for conversions, and there will be two woodburners. This is early days, but may affect room layout. More info upon request.

Every farm that is a real working one has several old cars. what's the point of having land then paying to dispose of stuff? Just remember to allow for the cost of a complete new building, as what is there has no (or tiny) value, and there is asbestos cladding to remove and dispose of to Peterborough.

Aah. proper archaeology. Better investigate further I feel. If it was possible to do the project without any holes in the ground it would help. but drains!

Archaeological features can be astounding or mundane. If it was a Roman villa then your project stands still for years, at your expense. However, most investigations that I have had to allow on site have simply been looking for old trenches/field boundaries and tracks. This delays the work, especially excavation, and they make you pay for their investigations (£2k or so) But then they go away and you are usually allowed to do what you like. What are your features? I am sympathetic to understanding our history. What annoys me is that planners ask archaeologists if they have any comments, and they then require an investigation for which you pay them.

Agreed. Mistakes happen and it is sometimes reasonable to find a solution that does not inconvenience the builder. However, this is either a deliberate bodge, hoping to get away with it and never mind the consequences to you, or ignorant of building practices to the extent of worrying about other matters too. For the sake of amicable conclusion to the project, it needs SE and/or BCO to instruct that it is done again. I suggest make a list of the worries expressed above and summarise it to the SE, who works for you. It is not unreasonable to include future squeaking and maintenance, and even worry, in the list. And would the SE warrant for 10 years please against these minor issues as well as failure?

What a god point. I once took a surplus huge joist to the mill and had it ripped into 2 useful sizes, and it bent and twisted dramatically. The same principle will apply to yours.

Quite right. A higher number would have been even more satisfactory.

How do they allocate the finished articles? Branded differently?

Photo always helpful. Along the boundary is probably the most useful.

You don't have to worry about SE or BI being mates of the builder. As a Chartered Surveyor once told me, the only professions that are sworn to honesty and the good of humanity are Doctors and Civil Engineers. Your SE is probably also a CE as that is the overall profession before specialising. The usual accusation against Engineers is of over-design, but that is usually by builders who don't know the theory, and are not insured for the decisions. Anyway he is hardly going to have done that or admit to it. Joists are designed for strength (safety) and deflection (comfort). Might be worth asking if this solution leaves you unaffected. Just make sure that any pragmatic solution doesn't cause any other adverse result. eg putting in electrics and plumbing through double joists. Can anyone think of any more? Clearly not, and the bodge was cheaper, quicker and easier, and they hoped not noticed. Are the cut tops level and straight now? Therefore are the boards sitting neatly or perched on small areas of joists?

Congratulations, that is a very good figure. If he had measured the loft then you would have had a greater surface area, with which to divide the same air loss, so it would have been even better. I would chat it through with them before they issue a certificate, just in case I have it the wrong way round. Speaking only for commercial properties I found this, which probably apply in the main: The calculation is done in a black box which has the algorithm in it, riddled with inaccuracies, approximations and errors of understanding. My company once got the programme so that we could play around with it (which the powers that be don't like) therefore we found anomalies to play with. This was not being bad, as the programme didn't acknowledge lots of good things. For example there were glitches in insulation thicknesses, so it was better to enter smaller amounts than the actual used, on one occasion. On the full printout we always had an allowance for the electricity used for air-conditioning, even when there was none and could never be any. That may not apply to your situation, but you can be sure that the system is highly flawed. For example, as you say, it is clearly stupid to have a small wind turbine but they still give points for having one. Years have passed since that craze was proven to be stupid, but they have not bothered to change the formula. Actually I think they don't understand. I have met these people who set up the system, and then passed their exam which required knowing the expected answers, not the reality. Isn't your result good enough though? I always thought 3 was good (on large commercial). 94 is an A pass.

I have an uninsulated steel flue rising through an entirely masonry structure, which was closed off with mortar. The concern was therefore not to burn anything in the wardrobe it passed through. I made a box-out of plasterboard, using metal stud for framing, then surrounded it with 50mm rockwool batt then stuffed the box it hard full with more rockwool. As it easily accessible I have often checked the temperature of the boxing and it is never more than slightly warm, even though about 1.5m from the stove at full belt.. Therefore it seems that you could stuff the gap with rockwool or similar, as long as it is the fireproof grade. To be sure, you could get the rockwool material that is sold as fire blanket. It has wire mesh on it, which may help or hinder. Please research further though, as all circumstances are different. There are fire-block expanding foams, but I do not think they are suitable. They are for on-off fires to prevent spread for a limited time, not for regular heat.

Unless things have changed, they don't give big discounts to the public, so that the professional installer can hide some margin. There used to be 2 different price lists, then discounts for quantity. Therefore make it clear, subtly/ quietly, that you need a trade discount.

And another with Armitage :Contour 21+ WC Pans include new, improved rimless technology and a hydrophylic, smooth glaze with anti-microbial properties.

It was news to me so I googled and but here is the evidence with Duravit product Available Variations : Without Hygiene Glaze - 2003090000 With Hygiene Glaze - 2003092000

If we imagine ourselves as bacteria inside a septic tank. Done that? Do you think the green liquid would help or hinder our wellbeing? Check the small print first. A lot of these chemicals have some sort of bleach in them, or what is the point.

I went to a presentation of this a few years ago, endorsed by local building control.... ie they provided the room and Actis provided sandwiches and perhaps more. There was some discussion about whether it performs as suggested, as the method of testing may not be realistic. (forgotten now, but does 'closed box testing' mean anything? I know from a major supplier of whole buildings that they have severe reservations about multilayer as a principle, as do I...I mean obviously it works, but how well? I always saw it as a remedy to pin inside a cold loft. It seems to depend on the air gaps to allow the reflective surfaces to be allowed for in the calculations. (The plasterboard companies no longer say that foil backing helps insulation.) But the honeycomb system Actis Hybris seemed a sensible idea that clearly will work and will seal between the rafters. Another BUT....it seems that you need the Hybris and then the multilayer, so this is going to get seriously expensive isn't it? £10/m2 + £15/m2? Ajn....410mm being 18 " c/c less a 2" rafter...as we have. Can you be more specific? 400 cut from 1200 falls out of a 410mm space or leaves gaps? And the reality is that spaces vary, especially with twisting of rafters, so can be 400 to 415 in the same section.

Once satisfied that you are really keen, but holding on to your expectations, it would be well worth speaking to a planning consultant. A very local one who specialises in this sort of work, as they will know the policy and the council's interpretation, and also precedents. You would probably need their skills to get permission later. This will have a cost, but is much better than ending up as long term owners of a very expensive barn.

Is that concrete under the main brickwork? If so then it looks to me just like a slightly bodged pier footing. As if they had forgotten the pier, scraped a bit of earth out and put concrete in it. If not that then a bit worse, a bit of masonry in the hole on a bit of an angle then spare bricks then the proper wall. Poss just a skin of bricks against the main wall until up past the concrete. Prob ok to tidy it up, and infill with concrete under it, 'vibrated' in well with a bit of 2x2. BI can look and prob agree to that or other pragmatic solution.