saveasteading

The Scottish and English guidelines are almost identical, but not quite. If one doesn't suit then use the other and you should be ok. BUT if you can't make it work by numbers then use logic. Where does water go now? AND if in trouble, go back to page 1. 'the Regulation' . Paraphrased It will say that " water must be disposed of to cause no trouble or flooding or whatever. Using the following guidelines will satisfy the requirement." It does not preclude other solutions. BTW the issue with percolation being too fast is that it can create sinkholes. That happens with Kentish (etc) chalk. It will not happen with glacial moraine, which is just short of being sandstone until disturbed. Too slow and a solution is to spread it over a lot of area, in different directions rather than a 'field' then with an overflow to a lagoon, where the head of water helps and wind will evaporate a fair amount. The numbers still won't work but the reality usually will.

I've said on here before...I have seen PIR floating.....not an experience you want or worth saving 50p/m2 for.

US post boxes have a flag that sticks up. Not so much fun as wires and lights perhaps?

For a transport company in the grottiest estate you can imagine, we had to tick a box for the LA. The ground was a bombsite dump, and any hole would result in rotting clothes and dead dogs. No holes and minimise the cost were the targets. Behind the garage was out of sight. So we bought 5 IBCs and placed the end one under a big downpipe, then linked them by tank connecting pipes. In theory they filled buckets at the end tap for slungeing out sick from bus floors. Overflow was from a higher outlet and so it could have reduced flooding too, if that had been an issue. Payback? At today's prices that might cost £500 all-up. What are 5 buckets of water a day worth?

Perhaps too complex in the existing tank, but the principle is good. You need a small manhole before the tank for maintenance, so make it a bit bigger and as a catching, ie in and out at the top. I then got our non bricklaying worker to build a brick wall across. The low quality mortar filtered the water after it had settled, but otherwise build it properly with a gap at mid height. After 2 years there was about 1mm of silt in the inlet side and negligible on thd outlet side. Do you need to waterproof the inside? An old tank is likely to be cracked and leaky, but these cracks would be fairly obvious. It's not for drinking water so bitumen paint should do.

In the office I mentioned, the water went to 6 x wc. It never looked any different to mains water and most occupants didn't know it was from rain. It was untreated other than leaf filtering and a settlement chamber.

Apologies, I mean the logic. For a new build or major conversion, there isnt much more work in getting great airtightness than decent. For extensions it has less benefit, and for refurbs it will be more difficult.

I'd say that would be wrong. Lack of airtightness is lack of control. Once you have good airtightness you can adjust and control the ventilation.....if you need to. I'm very pleased that everyone who has MVHR is happy. So they should be or something is far wrong. But I'm happy with everything I've done without it. None seem stuffy and occupants have never complained. I think there is enough fresh air brought in to replace extracted air (kitchen/wc) or when people move around / use the door. Any input on this from others? Do you have a stuffy home and wish you had mvhr? What a good idea. Why is that not standard? And dog or cabbage smells.

Do tell. How do you unsnap an aluminium trim without damage? I forgot to say that these were big panes, and I should have had a hop-up and/ or a helper.

I have twice put in rwh. One for my own offices another for a client. 2. Wasn't deemed a great success as the client didn't buy into it. It may have saved them money but they wouldn't have admitted it. 1. Was a huge success. 10m3 for 1000m2 of offices. I would do the same every time for commercial use because...lots of toilets plus garden watering/ caf wash. There was very little potable water (5%?) used. PLUS the sewage cost is based on the potable water used. By using a very big tank (twice the recommended size) and every drop from the roof going into it, it never ran dry. Overflow to soakaways then a lagoon. Against this argument is the cost of electricity and maintenance. The pump broke and had to be replaced every 3 years or so. Payback 5 years, and got awards. BUT for a house the numbers change. 90% potable? The double plumbing is quite a cost, and a smaller tank is not proportionally cheaper. So for our latest barn conversion we intend 3m3 in and for the garden. This will be a basic water tank taking half the roof water. Barrels at downpipes elsewhere. Currently I'm planning no electrics just a twee hand pump, but with easy use of a basic pump when needed for quantity or distance. For the garden the other water saver is lots of soakaways, not too deep, and a "no dig" regime with home composting and mulch. Don't forget to keep the leaves out of the tank. It's easier than the suppliers of fancy kit imply.

I would not recommend this. It is heavy and fiddly, requring an acquired touch. I think i scratched the snap-in beads the first time. Broke the new glass once, on a screw....and got better in time. Only because i ciuldng find s fitter on short notice. I wouldn't do it through choice.

New build is so much easier.

I had that size replaced last year. It was around£200. You don't need to research thicknesses etc, the fitter will visit and assess without commitment You won't want it recurring so the fitter should look for a likely cause...often a protruding screw or an absence of tolerance between glass and frame.

I will have said before: I worked "with" an architect once where the best quote for his design was double the client's stated budget. He designed what he thought it should be. I redesigned and built to the budget...more modest but functional. He said to me about another project with a similar issue that " the client will always find more money". I turned it down. Ask her how she knows it is to your budget, and for fun, who pays if it goes over.

It has become a discussion about rainwater. Can someone split this out? I am for and against. Circumstances. I've still lots to learn from advocates about mvhr which I've never used. And experience of RwH if anyone interested.

I don't understand. These are trickle fans expelling air, and in come draughts to replace it. Thus heat loss? "Something like dmev " could be natural vents like wc fans and trickle vents.???? It's good to hear that my ' do nothing' principle is actually scientific and has a name. I've got a degree including 'Building Science" so I just need some hokum explanation and the bco should accept it. DNAVS. Decentralised Naturally aspirated ventilation system. Seriously. We always have high ceilings if we can contrive it. That helps reduce stuffyness.

My thoughts are only for upstairs. I know people say you don't need it, but that would be a risk and psychologically, not controllable. So UFH in screed on GF certainlyfor cost and function. First floor ufh would require a secondary floor so the cost is higher and carpets unsuitable. Rads are ugly and use wall space. Hence skirtings may be viable on all counts. It shouldn't need to be the same area as ufh either because of heat transfer through aluminium compared to concrete.

Interesting. My payback assessment was for interest as I didn't believe some claims of it being just a few years. If that was untrue, then what about the comfort claims? It's mostly, though, that I've never felt a building of mine was stuffy, or had any adverse client comment, even with a very large population and a good airtightness score. I've spent my career in challenging newer fads. e.g. I never installed wind turbines even when they were all the rage and scored BREeam points. But was a user of SUDS.before it was fashionable. Thus I need convincing. What made you put MVHR at the top?

We aren't testing the steading. 'Reasonably practicable' applies for conversions. I way its a shame as I think it will be a very god score, notwithstanding the very high external wall and roof areas (central courtyard) and the stone external walls retained to 3/4 of it. I didn't know this about being too airtight. It seems o be 5 not 3. BUT don't we seal and close the vents before testing, then open them for real life? Will this need 2 tests? Lower air infiltration rates, of less that 5m3/h.m2 @ 50 Pa, may give rise to problems with internal air quality and condensation unless this is addressed through planned ventilation.

I am a sceptic on mvhr. This may be because the early iterations (or some) were clearly flawed, with poor heat transfer and some short circuiting of the air. Or was it hat the reps didn't understand their products? Has anyone done a proven comparison of a control v mvhr house? I did a quick, theoretical assessment once and made it that mvhr would payback in 12 years, after including the power input.

They cancel out to some extent. How thick was it? The current family project will have 350m2 of UFH with screed. 350m2 x 60mm = 21m3. I fancy avoiding paying £350/m3 for the material, but would be nervous about the self levelling and time involved. I've used fibre and love it, but never less than 125mm thick and with power floating. How did you level it? Screed board then a trowel? Did you use the triffid-like level control things?

1.56 is ok and multiple times better than a commercial new house (they do one up for a test and ignore the others and give them all the pass score). It is not the screws. it will be at corners and ends of boards. Plasterboard will help, not make it worse. You could put some mastic under the boards near these corners etc. You have fans in the wc and kitchen...a 110mm hole direct to outside. We all do. But they suck the air from draghy windows/ under doors which you have nearly sealed. Relax.

Most domestic floors are far from level, but you wouldn't notice unless trying to play marbles on a hard floor finish*. Your skirtings are like a straight edge so are emphasising the gap. Unless you know otherwise about the rest of the room. It is an easy job, and the better products are self levelling. a general builder can do it. so you are looking at a half hour for just that corner, or 2 hours for the whole room. * that is a good test, or a golf or other hard ball. Im interested in the skirting. It looks quite expensive at £40/m plus the plumbing but I don't know if the whole room needs it. Any info please?

Yes it works. make sure it sticks by applying PVA first. I even used it on an ancient tongue and groove floor once and it was fine. It was a 2 part, vinyl based product which has some flexibility. Just in that corner and zero to about 10mm? easy enough.

Absolutely fine, and about a third of the cost per m3. Also a cost advantage in labour when the area is quite small. such as an extension. The downside is that it isn't so easy to lay to a very thin layer of say 60mm, and won't find its way tight to every surface of the UFH pipes. It's also very bold to do that so early, in the open, as the weather and oncoming trades will do their best to damage the surface. @HughF what thickness is that? What mix of concrete and did it have plasticiser? If you have stuck vinyl straight onto that, then you've done remarkably well with the finishing.... and controlled the weather and workers well.