Builder Vs Structural engineer....

[Tomwithaloft]

Hi All,

I'm new to the forums but have a problem I'm hoping to get some opinions on, many thanks if you can help.

I'm in the process of repairing the damage left by an old owner of my house (removed structural walls downstairs etc etc) in the process am adding a dormer conversion.

I have had plans drawn up by an architect that he says are suitable for building regs - and should be good enough for a competent builder to work from.

I have had calcs done by an engineer with 30+ years experience and a builder who has worked locally for some time adding conversions in the terraced houses around me.

I'm still in the building regs stage and have an appointment inspector working with me.

My problems have arrisen when my builders have questioned some of the engineers plans. I feel the questions are justified as these were mainly asking for some clarification on certain points.

My engineer has taken this badly and has ultimately refused to continue. Leaving me with in a huge hole.

The builder has asked if an additional steel is needed in the new loft floor to take the weight of pitched side roof into the gable walls. This is not currently shown on the plans and my builder is stating that this is a usual element of a conversion and is there to stop all the weight of the house being passed to the new steel we have to add in the open plan lounge ceiling.

Although I do not have my plans handy, this is an image I've taken from another post that explains the steel he is reffering to.

After a chat, I get the impression that the inspectors are happy to pass plans aslong as a qualified engineer has signed off the drawings without going over the plans in detail, is this correct?

Currently I have a builder who is confused by the engineers plans, an engineer who is refusing to communicate in any meaningful manner and a regulations inspector who is keen to progress.

I'm not sure if I need to spend additional money on a new set of plans being drawn up by another engineer or to continue with the plans I have even though they seem different from a 'normal' job.

Hope this makes sense. Appolgies if not as building is not my first language.

Cheers all

Tom

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

You need to post copies of your SE's drawings.

 

[Notch7]

It sounds like you have a most competent, conscientious builder.

Surely the builder asking for clarification is not unreasonable?

 

[Tomwithaloft]

I must admit the builder has been great - not sure that a builder asking to add MORE steels is very normal.

its worth pointing out that I'm not questioning the competence of the builder or engineer, I'm just stuck in the middle of conflicting information and its a very difficult situation. It may turn out that both are correct but the builder feels without qualifying a couple of the engineers decisions its risky to continue.

I have attached the original drawings AND the revision - which reduced the size of the lower steel (to a 152x152vc) and joists (to 152x50) so as to fit in the ceiling void and not impact the original window frames. The smaller steel had 'webs' added and the smaller joists were strengthened via a 12mm ply stress skin.

My builder is questioning two things:

1 - The need for beam 4 - he feels this seems over the top OR, if needed, what the reasoning is. Again he's happy to take the lead from the engineer but would like to know why.

2 - The lack of a steel in/on the loft floor joists to take the weight of the remaining pitched roof and stop it transferring its weight through to the now smaller steel in the lounge ceiling. He is concerned that all the weight of the house is bearing onto that one steel.

I know its hard to answer without seeing the house etc but any advise you could offer about where I go from here would be great.

Cheers

Tom



ORIGINAL CALCS:

REVISION A: