Search results

Doesn't look like anything particularly serious - maybe a too-short bearing of the lintel over the window putting additional stress on the edge of the brickwork. It would be better if you could show a pic from further back so that we could see the context.

125 x 65 or 150 x 75.

RHS is unnecessarly expensive for that sort of loading - a channel '[' section would be just as effective and cheaper. Timber is also perfectly OK, depending on what maximum deflection you can put up with; 2 or possibly 3 piece of C24 screwed together, depending on the load. It's not just the...

Past experience. If its a conventional roof, half the distance up to the first purlin won't be much. The critical factor here would be deflection under live load, though that could be reduced by using a thicker guage.

If it was well-screwed to the timber to avoid twisting, I reckon a 120 x 120 angle could span 3m or so. Its only holding part of a ceiling and half the roof up to the purlin. {assuming its not a truss-roof).

Use a steel angle directly under the wall plate.

Cutting a hole one brick wide x two bricks high at the base would not affect the wall. Just drill the mortar joints out instead of hacking it away

Depends how big your cat flap needs to be.

Whichever system it is, it looks a darn-sight more substantial than skimpy modern timber trusses.

The only sure way is to show a plan - it needs to show all ground floor walls.

Would that not cause problems with damp rising from the ground (assumng it has no dpc, which it shouldn't) or does the coating let it breathe?

can you post a plan of the house? Eg from Rightmove, with address etc removed. When considering wind load, the SE should consider the ground floor as a whole, rather than an isolated part.

The lateral load issue is concerned with wind load on the outer wall of the house. Has he done any calcs to justify this 600 mm wall, or has he just pulled the figure out of his back passage - I suspect the latter? If lateral stabilty is an issue - and in 9 cases out of 10 it isn't - there are...

Do you really believe he'll be"overloaded" or "stressed"doing a steel beam calc? Or is it a subtle play on words?

Frankly, this is complete nonsense. The load at each end of the beam is only 21.6 kN. If you've got normal brickwork, a 215 x 100 padstone on each skin would be more than adequate. In fact, if you had a 150 bearing length, and the brickwork was ordinary commons, you wouldn't need a padstone at...

Has the se told you what the actual loading is on the beams, and why it is absolutely, unquestionably imperative that the padstone bridges the cavity?? He should at least explain to you why. 2.2m is a very short span and its hard to see how such a span could be loaded - in a domestic setting -...

Why do the majority of SEs bolt the beams together? Its a waste of time and money and pointless.

How wide is the cavity; and would the steel beams sit vertically over the brick skins? If the beams are only spanning 2.2m they wont be carrying much load so presumably you wouldnt need such large padstones. It isn't necessary to bridge the cavity either - why not have 2 separate padstones, one...

By brick mesh do you mean the coils of expanded metal lath? If so, it serves no useul purpose as regards strengthening the blockwork. But it will eventually give you rust stains down the walls, even with galvanised.

Aerated concrete block is well-known for shrinkage cracking. Generally not necessarily an indication of anything more serious.