saveasteading

Might even be normal pb. I don't have the books to hand. But it isn't much advertised and barely worth proving or arguing.

He either doesn't know a little about floors....his mastermind subject. Or that membrane makes it easier for him, taking out any blips in the screed. I like that.

You are right to minimise excavation. I'm struggling to see what the problem is....standard building construction should be sufficient. Except "where the man is". If that area is against the house wall then it needs tanking and an unusually high dpc. But keep that raised area away from the wall and it is simpler.

I read the regs as the beam needs 30 minutes protection. That isn't onerous and some beams have that inherently. It's not something to dabble with. The rules are clear. It gets complex with the weight of beam and exposure, and the house geometry, so isn't for us to calculate on here. Anyway, It sounds as if the beam is above the pb ceiling. That is fire protection. Fire can't reach the beam....beam can't melt. But it is easy to encase the steel. Bang timber noggins between the flanges and screw pb over. It doesn't have to be pretty. Or buy some fancy clips and rails if it does. Speak to the bco.

If I could find my wbb ( wee black book) then I would have it. M2 of brick or block per m3 mortar, then into bags and tonnes. What someone told me pre-internet, with my own factor against it. It must be on the Interweb surely.

Do you mean the conversion of the dry materials compared to the mixed volume?

I worry that you are getting such bad advice. What else don't they know? Correct. Screed shrinks and cracks. It does not expand, yet people in the industry don't understand this basic fact. @Post and beam What are you doing and who is doing it?

I believe they were not available before or after today. That and the Aldi canned Scottish tap water.

I will confess to giving it a second look. De walt do radios pretending to be site esentials. Pies should be hot.

De Walt 20V site oven announced today.

Not really. Especially if it is partial depth. What I'd do is a lump of eps, about 100 x 100. Fix it to the threshold wall at floor level. Your concrete pour will fill under it, giving you continuity. You will have a 100mm void for your brackets. Draw this to scale and check you can get the fixings in.

Really? Ask for a thermal loss calculation or estimate. Instinct tells me this is de minimus. I would rather lose 10p worth of heat there per annum than have a loose door. If playing that game, use skinny fixings into plastic plugs. Easy. You can build a timber shutter there from stud and plywood. Then remove it and put in local concrete to whatever level you choose. It's about 3 shovels worth, hand mixed. You have total control of fixing the bracket, and precision. An old fashioned way is a lump of eps. Then you rake it out or, naughtilly, use petrol. I'm more worried about groundworkers next to a nice door. Bumping , splashing. They might even barrow or pump through the open door. Take the risk out of it. Door later.

I wouldn't want the door in place before the concrete pour. It will likely be damaged. So I think I favour keeping the slab low at that point. Same height as the block, or a little lower, perhaps 100 or so wide? You could chance remembering to keep it low by hand finishing, or put a shutter there, my recommendation. Then the bracket bolts down to really solid concrete.

I found 2 kinks in the supposedly perfect pipes. Easily sorted.

Spirit levels work, and remain useful thereafter. If you go that direction, ask more more advice.

Keep testing us and the norms.

I like b and b and have used it a lot. For buildings. This doesn't need it. In fact it's a bad idea i think, in practice and cost. As above. Fill and pave with a slope away from the house. Or gravel, or a mixture.

About 12°C?

Their sheds are good as sheds. This is a shed with some insulation, fixed in and out for their convenience. The void is a flaw, with some words to try to explain it away. I don't even see it as a basis for any proper building use. " helps maintain room temperature, unlike rockwool". What garbage. They might get a solicitor's letter on that.

It's a fridge in a cupboard. The fridge expels heat, so warms up the cubboard. Otoh, how often does it have to work hard? Buy bottle of wine af 18°. Cool it to 16°. A bigger issue is your room heat warming the cupboard. So 3g and an insulated , sealed door. It's good to dicuss trivia sometimes to test logic. More importantly 22° is far too warm for a room. Can't be healthy for you or the planet. You would get used to 18° very quickly.

OK. Just to close then my opinion is that Suds is vital in reducing floods , and fairly straight forward to achieve.

Want to start it as a new thread? I've got a long answer stewing.

I know. I meant what you suggest, but I'd want to be confident it will really work properly when completed. Otherwise it could wash out and threaten the building and/or rush off and add to flooding. I've noticed over the years that many builders are contemptuous of suds. Perhaps some of them just don't understand drainage. Also that many designers see it as a tick box and don't understand water. I've discussed in detail with planners in a seminar. They were happy to agree that Suds is technical and not their skillset. Thus the tickbox is what they want. BCO likewise might not be expert.

@Andehh Thanks for the closure summary. Would you have any advice for anyone considering a similar project? OR what might you do differently another time?

Money mostly. The Mohr the merrier (CE joke). Much better to control the water. Not just write some stuff that satisfies the planners, but that respects reality, works and has a safety factor. That's probably a pond or swale in effect, with added green roof / water butts/ drainage field that the planners have been taught is good.