saveasteading

@SteveG40 Interesting and thanks for reporting. Who specified it? Do you still have any leaflets from back the I'm cautious about any of their products. Very skilfully written blurbs with few real life test results. I went to a tech presentation at the local bco, of this honeycomb stuff and was immediately surprised and impressed with the concept. Interestingly though they wouldn't take questions and comments about the other products. In my opinion they did not target the industry with the multifoil stuff, only homeowners. The same later became the case with honeycomb. And it's expensive. I have never seen them at construction exhibitions but have at self builder ones. 20mm gap seems still to be specified. Complain to them by email. Upset not angry, and asking for a solution. Tell them you want their comments before taking advice from the industry. BTW . IMHO multifoils or bubblewrap may have their place to line sheds or attics. The honeycomb idea is good but it shouldn't fall apart. If anyone has positive comments I'd love to hear.

Is there a good reason why the Graf pump isn't within the tank? It's just an air pump like in an aquarium. We used a Marsh and it just needed an electric feed. Seems less hassle at end of pump life too.

Are you sure it isn't type 3? I've seldom used it, but know it isnt 'single size' and does have small aggregate in it. The supplier can adjust the mix within gradings to suit what they have. I've recently been surprised by the look of a ballast delivery... it seemed not to half much middle-sized stone.

Apart from this specific case. It's a good idea to record the boundaries with any clear feature, pegs or posts, and take photos. File the pictures away and after a period of time they become definitive in law.

By coincidence or this discussion is being watched: Next day, I got a Facebook ad from a local plant hire chain, selling machines off at 3 to 7 years. Full maintenance schedule, and hours were lower than I had expected. About half the new price and will be good for diy (ie careful) use. A lot of money still.

The only "dodge" would be if one of your contractors included it. But they'd probably charge you some other way, and liability for any design errors would be complex. Digging a hole is probably doable, but you've got more important matters to concentrate on.

People can get very touchy about boundaries. I think it is a territorial instinct. But if it ever got legal you only have to have made "reasonable efforts".

What is the problem? Is it breaking up?

Yes they have the power. Who designed this? Would you swear that it is a watercourse? Would something horrible happen if a similar drought recurred and it was your outlet? Would a drainage field be feasible? I repeat my point. Talk to the designer. If that is non-productive then talk to the bco.... watercourse or drainage field?

You've engaged professionals for your design. Get their decision on the resolution to this. If you're happy with it, get it in writing and carry on. Assuming they have proper PI insurance (you should already have details of it) then they are liable.

The bco is not an utter expert on the subject and won't have the qualifications or insurance for this decision. So will probably wants a piece of paper for the files. Unless it's obviously OK. Ask them in casual manner .... is there anything you need more detail on?

Rain the day after is a good thing. I'm still gobsmacked. 250mm of slab with 2 layers of reinforcement! I'm trying to think where I've done that other than upper floors with big clear spans. Is that what some kit system requires?

Impressive but may I suggest that is not a normal house? 1. I've built factories to 10m racking and 5t forklifts that are very much lighter construction. 2.What was the plan if it was wet or windy?

Which do you prefer? Which one would give way? I've worked with both. Personally... as a business I much preferred to start a job at risk. The English way.Building notice. My risk. But I think lots of errors and costs occur this way, and the bco doesn't see them all. The Scottish method ensures better quality and integrated design. Then to water. Scottish water is generally much better quality so why reduce this standard? Why would the English system improve standards? The system likes it as is. Agriculture/ development. * It would cost a lot to improve policing by returning investment and control to the E A etc. * I would prefer much higher standards on new development and them to pay for sewage treatment works improvement. Zero rain to leave the site.

The waste companies can do rather well out of mixed skips. I've been to one where they tip the contents under cover and sort it. 30% air is a bonus. At the end they have it all sorted for mostly reuse. 10% then goes for burying or burning. Figures very approximate. @nod. Ever had the skip driver complain you had packed it too heavy? Good job say I.

When it is expensive to remove, then reuse or different methods will be thought about.

NB. If that was 150mm thick, then the concrete itself will cost 60m3 x £120. £7K ish. So the 4k is obv for labour. Did it include all the kit? What else was extra? Did they cut contraction joints next day? Remember that if it rains you have a problem.

Yes. And so much simpler and you keep control. I've been responsible for hundreds of industrial floors, and would not dream of it for domestic situations.

It is B, but turning it up against the wall is good. Just make sure it is below the gravel for appearances.

A new burner should not emit too much heat to the sides, or through an insulated flue. If it's an old burner then it won't meet regulations so I will be careful not to encourage misuse. Eg insulated flue, chimney liner, air intake. I didn't know what SBR was but looked it up. Does the brickwork need coating or protecting? Is the SBR to be a coating or a mortar additive?

And you employ them? Seriously though. Every construction project should have a waste minimisation plan. Most involved have some vague understanding that throwing away a brick or the end of a timber stud is waste. Putting that good brick, or is it hundreds? in a 'rubble only' skip is then regarded as good. Very few designers give it a thought, leaving it to others. Recycling can be an excuse instead of not wasting material in the first place.l

That's OK if there is a slab under it, which takes the weight of thd gravel, and if the tank is tied down.

If you are insulating then screeding over the top , then the slab can be very ordinary in finish and level control. And thickness. The screed sorts it all out. @flanagaj can we go back a bit? Where are you on programme, floor construction logic? Who told you to go for power float? As you see above, people have tried and had to grind and fill, which defeats the object of a 'finished' surface

It occurred to me that this would be the best source. They will get rid as soon as call-outs become too frequent and hirers complain. They might be fine for a while with careful / caring use. Where do they offload (pun was not intended) them? Eg car leasers send to auction at 3 years, likewise main dealer trade-ins..

OK I've had a very quick read. If, if, if. If all waste at the lowest rate was charged at the highest rate. That doesn't appear to actually be anyone's proposal, just a "what if" option. If any designers could design with waste in mind..... well some of us do and always have done. AND it was even part of uni training. Eg a motorway is designed with a cut/fill balance. No earth goes off site. By raising of lowering finished levels, widening banks, crushing rock etc. Contractors are usually better than consultants at it because it's their money and they understand reality. Ceiling heights. How much timber is wasted off a 2.4m or 3.6m or 4.8m or 6m balk? Choose to suit. Changing heights or spans can make a huge difference. Etc. Any Architects on here want to contribute? Self builders of course don't waste much on site, but may be stuck with an over-design. I may add more about skips and waste handlers later.