Building regulations part O, should be called part Ohhhhhhh .

[Big Jimbo]

As i am waiting for the structural engineer to do some calculations for my new house, i thought i would have a read of the new building regs part O. Blinking heck. Has anybody else had a look ?

You have to do a hell of a lot of work. I spent the whole of yesterday (from 8am till 9pm) having a go at doing all the various calculation required. Basically part O is about limiting solar gain.

You can do your part O calculations by either a "Simplifed Method" of "Dynamic modelling". Now me being a bit simple (dont all shout at once) thought i would have a go at the simplified method. At this point i should point out that it aint simple so dont be fooled.

The first thing you have to do is work out which room has the most glazing, and what direction it faces. This will give your your values that you have to meet based on the direction that this most glazed area faces.

You then have to work out your total glazed area in relation to your total floor area. When you do this you should take away the frame for each window, so you cant just use your brickwork opening sizes. So you need to decide who you are going to buy your windows from and stick with them ? Even though they double the price by the time you actually look to purchase.

Then you have to work out your free area, so you need to know the angle that your window will open to, and the unrestricted size of your opening.

Once you have done all that, or at the same time you had better make sure that you have all the relevant windows for escape etc.

When you have done all that, and added in extra opening windows for ventilation you might just about be ready to tick that part o box, and crack a beer.

At that point you will find out that there are several other bits to the building regs, and that you have fallen foul to most of them.

Your upstairs windows are to low, and people might fall out.

The handles to your windows are to high, so don't comply to disabled bits of the building regs.

You have worked out the opening angle of your windows to ensure that you can get enough free ventilation, but they open to far and people might fall out.

You have worked out that opening your windows at night for ventilation does not meet the security aspect of your property, but if you only open them on vent you are not getting enough ventilation.

Then your head starts to spin.

Window. Top hung. no danger, people might fall out, but atleast short people will be able to reach the handles.

Child restrictors. No the fire bit does not like them, because people struggle to open them to escape.

No windows. Live like @pocster in an underground cave.

No. natural light requirement not met. No escape. No ventilation.

Then, at that point you realise that you have gone mad, and eaten far to many choc bars to keep you going.

Then you start to think, who wrote all these building reg things.

Then you drink more, eat more choc, forget that you need the toilet. smoke more, and more. You start to think that you have failed. Not only at part O, but in life !

This isn't Yaz. In fact the only way is down. You start to sink further into your own twisted mind.

You decide it's time for bed.........

 

In the morning (now) you realise that all the different parts of the building regulations have been put together by different bodies. Various experts in there field no doubt. You also realise that most bits conflict with other bits. and that everytime a new bit is introduced it makes it even harder to comply, and that more experts will be required in order to get you over the line.

You decide that if you ever get voted in as PM you are going to make all the people concerned, get together, and write One set of rules for building, that have no conflict with any of the other parts. We are getting to the point where it will be impossible to comply with building regs without loads of expensive experts. Within 20 years the portion of your budget to build that is required for your building regs will make all buildings even more expensive and out of reach.

 

You again start to think about how simple you are, and wonder if there is anything good on the telly to watch this morning. That and worry that you have smoked all the fags, and eaten all the choc.

[George]

Make a conservative assumption and use the brickwork opening.

 

But yes... this is why people pay architects to do this. It's the same with structural engineers and Part A (which is a dumbed down version of the British Standard and only refers to traditional brick and block structures). The detail is tricky and needs technical expertise and experience - else a lot of time and chocolate.

[Dave Jones]

your right its a mountain of paperwork. Same as the new EPC regs where the builder has to document key junctions and provide evidence, geo tagged or no EPC.

 

I paid the guy who did our SAP to do ours. More wasted cash .....

[SteamyTea]

You have nicely highlighted what I have been saying about British rules and regulations.

For every rule that states you must do something, there is another one that says you cannot do it.

[Canski]

My SAP company charge £200 for the simplified method and £900 extra for the Dynamic Thermal Modelling. Saves my brain and leaves less in the pot for the ever increasing ecologists bill. In my opinion both a pile of codswallop but what do I know.

[Big Jimbo]

So basically another grand then. However, you will get a load of bits of computer printed paper, with loads of stuff that you don't understand. You will pass it on to building control, who won't understand it either, and prob are not paid enough to spend the time looking at it anyway.

So, seriously, i spent the whole bloody day making sure i was calculating all the right things, with some complicated maths (for me) I plan on fitting HVMR, so i will ban the opening of windows ever.  As Dizzie would say "Bonkers"

[Big Jimbo]

I might have ago at doing my own Heat calcs next.......Lots of fags but need to stock up on choc.

[Big Jimbo]

Another thing. Windows that are upstairs according to part O have to be 1100mm from the floor. If they are below that they have to have guarding. To comply with the escape portion of Part B, you can't have the opening section above  1100mm.  Good luck to us all getting them at exactly 1100mm to comply with both part. Who the fudge allowed the bods writing part O to have anything to do with stating how high from the floor your windows are allowed to be. Bloody Madness, and stupid.  I have decided that i shall put my windows in at normal level, because i would like my grandchildren to be able to make use of an escape route incase of a fire. If and when Building control tell me that my windows are to low, i will have several pieces of mdf ready to nail across the reveal to satisfy the stupid part O regulation that my opening must not be lower that 1100mm.

We paid for this utter shite to be written with our taxes, and you can bet the twats that wrote it were on consultancy fees of a couple of grand minimum each per day. Tossers.

[SteamyTea]

Seems from what people are saying on here, Part O should really be in Part M.

[Big Jimbo]

@SteamyTea I think part O should hav ebeen filed in PartB, ie; in the bin.

[dnb]

I feel more and more that one of the wise old folk (now retired) at my work had exactly the right idea. When he was presented with any form to fill in or technical submission he would make absolutely sure that EVERY box was completed. Even if the answer in it were total junk. He would submit said paperwork and then continue with life safe in the knowledge that nobody else would dare send anything back in case he demonstrated that they didn't understand his answer...

 

Turns out this works 9 times out of 10. 😉

 

[saveasteading]

9 minutes ago, dnb said:

Turns out this works 9 times out of 10. 😉

My grandfather also did this in the civil service, and used a green fountain pen.

The amount of forms subsequently reduced.

[Big Jimbo]

Both of the above are very much how banking in the 80's worked. We all know where that ended up.

[dnb]

1 minute ago, Big Jimbo said:

Both of the above are very much how banking in the 80's worked. We all know where that ended up.

 

True! I just about remember those days (wasn't very old back then).  But having a requirement specification document set that is so full of contradictions and needless complications (and apparently no requirement prescidence or hierachy) you can't make headway is just about as useless because it allows industries of charlatans to spring up that just add cost without providing value. As another colleage often said (of some of our more talkative staff) BS will baffle brains all day long.