Zoot's Extention- GO!

[jamiehamy]

3 minutes ago, zoothorn said:

 

This is incorrect. There will be sloping ceiling on the LHS only.

I've reviewed again the picture on your truss. There will be no sloping ceiling. 

 

If you disagree with me, then draw up the truss you've pictured and draw for us how this will sit on the walls. You'll find then that there is no sloping ceiling. It's a near impossibility. You yours builder is crap, then maybe you'll have a tiny section about a handswidth. Other than that, it's going to be a simple square/rectangular room. 

 

Start with the premise I'm right and your wrong, not the other way about. 

 

 

[zoothorn]

9 minutes ago, jamiehamy said:

The drawing is competely wrong and misleading. You should bin it and let the builder finish and never look at that drawing again. That's not being snipey - I'm completely serious. I know you do t accept this but the root cause of many of your issues is that drawing. It's not fit for purpose in any shape or form other than a general overview of the aspiration.

 

Why? my builder keeps commenting on how good it is. If you give me a specific reason as to anything incorrect on it, one line as an eg, I'm happy to bin it. Just because its hand drawn is not a reason though.

 

Why can't you answer my two concurring 4200mm figures Q instead tho? its a simple Q for any of you, but instead of answering it you seem to be getting angry & just getting at me instead.. its not making me think I'm wrong is it.

 

Proove me wrong. I want any of you to. If you do I am very happy.. as I do have extra ceiling height than the RHS wall top, I do have a slope section here. I will be hugely grateful I swear it.

 

 

[jamiehamy]

Prove me wrong. see

[Big Jimbo]

4 minutes ago, jamiehamy said:

I've reviewed again the picture on your truss. There will be no sloping ceiling. 

 

If you disagree with me, then draw up the truss you've pictured and draw for us how this will sit on the walls. You'll find then that there is no sloping ceiling. It's a near impossibility. You yours builder is crap, then maybe you'll have a tiny section about a handswidth. Other than that, it's going to be a simple square/rectangular room. 

 

Start with the premise I'm right and your wrong, not the other way about. 

 

 

If his measurements are right ???? you are right Jamie. About a handwidth at most, and square on the other side. Door opening in to his existing room and a couple of steps down (within the 450mm wall space) down to the floor of the new room.

[PeterW]

6 minutes ago, zoothorn said:

my builder keeps commenting on how good it is. If you give me a specific reason as to anything incorrect on it, one line as an eg, I'm happy to bin it.

It’s wrong, mine is right. Mine shows how the trusses are designed to work. 
 

I’ve drawn what you’re getting. You’ve drawn what you thought you were getting 
 

now please bin the picture. 

[zoothorn]

2 minutes ago, jamiehamy said:

I've reviewed again the picture on your truss. There will be no sloping ceiling. 

 

If you disagree with me, then draw up the truss you've pictured and draw for us how this will sit on the walls. You'll find then that there is no sloping ceiling. It's a near impossibility. You yours builder is crap, then maybe you'll have a tiny section about a handswidth. Other than that, it's going to be a simple square/rectangular room. 

 

Start with the premise I'm right and your wrong, not the other way about. 

 

 

 Jamie thank for just sticking with me. Starting with premise you're right.. is impossible, as I fundamentally cannot agree with "there will be no sloping ceiling". There clearly must be, if there's a notch on the outer beam a good 50cm away from the cross beam. If the notch designates where it meets the outside of the LHS wall, it then angles inwards 50cm.. then the ceiling starts.

 

Would you disagree with this?

 

On the left hand wall top at 2100mm there has to be something

[zoothorn]

4 minutes ago, jamiehamy said:

Prove me wrong. see

 

Where is the notch? [edit I see it RHS of the croos beam).

 

Erm.. but you got the truss the wrong way round. I said its too heavy to lift around & cannot reverse the drawing or photo.

 

And you have two walls equal heights. Mine are 2.1m & 2.3m. Rather easy to proove this wrong on many aspects, but thanks for trying. I'm afraid its just full of assumptions.

 

 

One notch made, not two. Why do you think? because the notch marries with the lower LHS wall.. no notch on opposite side.. & further evidence this side of cross beam rests upon the wall top, & that I am right: & this equates to no additional ceiling height.

 

One slope LHS near door, notch side of truss. No slope RHS, but 90* here (this bit you have sort of correct).

Really appreciated though, honestly.

Edited November 2, 2019 by zoothorn

[jamiehamy]

1 minute ago, zoothorn said:

 

Where is the notch?

If you can't see if then stop wasting our time buddy. 

[jamiehamy]

[jamiehamy]

On the drawing I've marked 'not to scale' that the wall heads are at different heights. 

[zoothorn]

7 minutes ago, jamiehamy said:

If you can't see if then stop wasting our time buddy. 

 

Try not to get angry. I just didn't see it because its on the wrong side & pretty small jamie.

 

The assumption seems to be the truss is orientated the same as the drawing. Its not. I said this. I cannot lift it, or reverse the photo of it, or the drawing. The notch should be quite clear to marry with the lower wall LHS. If it went on the higher RHS the ceiling would be a slope of 15*!

 

Can someone proove just this: that I do have a sloped ceiling RHS & not a 90* direct off the top of the wall. Just this.

[PeterW]

28 minutes ago, zoothorn said:

 Jamie thank for just sticking with me. Starting with premise you're right.. is impossible, as I fundamentally cannot agree with "there will be no sloping ceiling". There clearly must be, if there's a notch on the outer beam a good 50cm away from the cross beam. If the notch designates where it meets the outside of the LHS wall, it then angles inwards 50cm.. then the ceiling starts.

 

Would you disagree with this?

 

On the left hand wall top at 2100mm there has to be something

LOOK AT THIS THAT I POSTED..!!!

 

[jamiehamy]

1 minute ago, zoothorn said:

 

Try not to get angry. I just didn't see it because its on the wrong side & pretty small jamie.

 

The assumption seems to be the truss is orientated the same as the drawing. Its not. I said this. I cannot lift it, or reverse the photo of it, or the drawing. The notch should be quite clear to marry with the lower wall LHS. If it went on the higher RHS the ceiling would be a slope of 15*!

 

Can someone proove just this: that I do have a sloped ceiling RHS & not a 90* direct off the top of the wall. Just this.

The fact it's the wrong way round is competely irrelevant here, for reasons that are obvious. 

 

I've already stated, as has BigJim that there may be a small section of sloped ceiling. You can even see that in my drawing, but rather than have a daft tiny sloped bit I've elected to batten it out and ensure 90degrees.

 

However if it's really important to have a sloped ceiling of 100mm, then yes, that's an option. 

 

I do kindly suggest that changing your attitude to problems, including your neighbours, may be helpful. The fact you refused point blank to start on the premise 'someone else is right' about this problem speaks volumes. I didn't at that point ask you to accept I was right, I asked you to look at the problem from the point of view that I was right. 

 

This is a community, with real people, people who care and try to help all comers. But if you don't play ball, especially given your serious lack of technical understanding, then you'll eventually find no-one responds to your posts. 

 

 

 

 

[jamiehamy]

1 minute ago, PeterW said:

LOOK AT THIS THAT I POSTED..!!!

 

Mine can be disregarded totally, this is spot on in every way. 

[zoothorn]

2 minutes ago, jamiehamy said:

On the drawing I've marked 'not to scale' that the wall heads are at different heights. 

 

Ok, so your drawing is opposite to the plan which is confusing.. but now I understand. Thanks its a useful sketch, & I can refer to it as correct, as it further confirms that I am indeed right. But can you reverse it please?

 

We agree then. This is exactly how I have been continually suggesting the roof will go. This shows a slope one side. And no slope the other.

 

This is A) does not giving me any additional ceiling the very collared roof idea was meant to (relative to the highest 2.3m wall top)

 

it B) does not follow the plan (which I will shout to the hills IS accurate & precise)

 

it C) therefore pushes the ceiling approx 200mm lower, so the discrepency between this room's ceiling point -and the adjacent master bed's ceiling height- is 200mm off kilter, from 2060mm from existing masterbed floor.. down to a ver annoying/ low 1860mm.

 

it D) makes the door frame between these two rooms & step within the wall as a compromise, problematic, & low/ & distinctly incorrect (I spent 6 months getting this right).

 

it E) pushes the floor of ipper room down 20mm

 

it F) pushes the lower room down 200mm

 

it G) makes me have to pay a fkn digger day to skim offv driveway 6" & feather the ground right down a good 200mm+ to the dpc level (awful).

 

it H) makes my balcony 200mm lower.

 

 

-----------

 

Now, Jamie do you understand any of these A-H issues? ALL arte a direct result of this upper ceiling H too low. And can you at least consider why this might be, that ALL has followed-on, from this innitial wretched cross beam that has been made 20cm too low down-?

[Big Jimbo]

5 minutes ago, jamiehamy said:

Mine can be disregarded totally, this is spot on in every way. 

Bang....Spot on. Case closed.

[zoothorn]

6 minutes ago, PeterW said:

LOOK AT THIS THAT I POSTED..!!!

 

 I didn't have any notification of this reply Peter. Please don't assume I just flit over it.

 

Its great. Its correct. It has NO slope RHS. Its orientated correctly too. Thanks.

 

So why if your sketch concurs with me.. do you still not seem to agree???? this sketch is exactly what Ive been saying all along; you must have agrred with me to have made it....

 

... so why oh why oh why... would you not say so?

 

bizarre.

[zoothorn]

Just now, Big Jimbo said:

Bang....Spot on. Case closed.

 

So you agree with me then. How strange is this.

 

Case closed?? it would be if the plan was the same!! it would be if I had the additional 20cm ceiling H a collared ceiling was meant to give me, which this sketch clearly shows is awol. etc etc.

[PeterW]

2 minutes ago, zoothorn said:

Now, Jamie do you understand any of these A-H issues? ALL arte a direct result of this upper ceiling H too low. And can you at least consider why this might be, that ALL has followed-on, from this innitial wretched cross beam that has been made 20cm too low down-?

No - yet again you’re wrong ....

 

This is because it all started 350mm too low, and you drew a collar truss that you thought could be manufactured and what has been made is correct. Lifting it 200mm would mean the top rafters would need to be deeper and it wouldn’t fit under the existing roof. 
 

The centre offset is because the extension is not central to the back of the house. To fix that, they have done the correct thing, and dropped one side to make it work otherwise the ridges wouldn’t line up, and it would look shite ... 

 

So, your builder and the timber frame company have both done a pretty good job of fixing this. 
 

Suggesting to your builder on Monday morning he is wrong and you’ve lost 200mm And want it back may well result in you finding a length of 200x50 (or 8x2...) inserted where the sun doesn’t shine ... 

 

 

[jamiehamy]

8 minutes ago, zoothorn said:

 

Ok, so your drawing is opposite to the plan which is confusing.. but now I understand. Thanks its a useful sketch, & I can refer to it as correct, as it further confirms that I am indeed right. But can you reverse it please?

 

We agree then. This is exactly how I have been continually suggesting the roof will go. This shows a slope one side. And no slope the other.

 

This is A) does not giving me any additional ceiling the very collared roof idea was meant to (relative to the highest 2.3m wall top)

 

it B) does not follow the plan (which I will shout to the hills IS accurate & precise)

 

it C) therefore pushes the ceiling approx 200mm lower, so the discrepency between this room's ceiling point -and the adjacent master bed's ceiling height- is 200mm off kilter, from 2060mm from existing masterbed floor.. down to a ver annoying/ low 1860mm.

 

it D) makes the door frame between these two rooms & step within the wall as a compromise, problematic, & low/ & distinctly incorrect (I spent 6 months getting this right).

 

it E) pushes the floor of ipper room down 20mm

 

it F) pushes the lower room down 200mm

 

it G) makes me have to pay a fkn digger day to skim offv driveway 6" & feather the ground right down a good 200mm+ to the dpc level (awful).

 

it H) makes my balcony 200mm lower.

 

 

-----------

 

Now, Jamie do you understand any of these A-H issues? ALL arte a direct result of this upper ceiling H too low. And can you at least consider why this might be, that ALL has followed-on, from this innitial wretched cross beam that has been made 20cm too low down-?

Ceiling height is 2300 less the plasterboard and floor covered. . No idea why you fixated on the slope. 

[zoothorn]

@PeterW

 

can you see your sketch is different to my plan on the RHS above your 2300 squiggle?

 

just forget if you think its drawn badly, or whatever.. can you just answer this Q.

[Big Jimbo]

Builders have done a great job working with Zoot the hoots fag packet drawing. They have given him the ceiling height he wanted in the upstairs room, and a reasonable working height in the workshop underneath. to give him these heights they had to dig deeper into the ground. Basically they have taken his crap drawing, and made it work. They have done him a favour, as they could have chucked it back at him, and told him to get some proper drawings done. I think the builder deserves a cup of tea, and a doughnut. A jammy one, not one of those cheap ones with a hole in the middle.

[PeterW]

9 minutes ago, zoothorn said:

Its great. Its correct. It has NO slope RHS. Its orientated correctly too. Thanks.

But you’re saying this doesn’t have the correct ceiling height when you are now saying it does ..??!!

 

Look at the other one - this shows the steps down and I think it’s fine - builder has sorted the “problem” that doesn’t really exist. 
 

TBH if you had started at correct floor level then you would be screwed by now anyway as the rooms would both be 2.1m or less. 
 

 

[Simplysimon]

is the 'fag packet' sketch with the collared truss the working drawing?

[Big Jimbo]

Just now, Simplysimon said:

is the 'fag packet' sketch with the collared truss the working drawing?

Thats the drawing that needs to be filed in the bin...Pronto