Search results

9.5 mm plasterboard would do. Easier/iighter to fix than 12.5.

I know it seems counter-intuitive but the weight on the cantilevered part will not bear down on the window as much as it might appear. This is because the weight on the longer span causes the 2.4m part to deflect downwards. This causes an upward 'hogging' moment over garage/hall wall, which in...

If your plan drawing is to scale as regards the supported and unsupported lengths, the load at the end of the cantilevered part may well be zero.?

Correct - the quantity of heat lost via the glazing will be far greater than that through the metal bridging. But the point is that that small area of bridging will attract condensation bringing localised dampness and possible mould growth.

Yes, as long as the span and loading aren't too great because angles can of course twist.

How would you insulate effectively inside the section? The top and bottom flanges will still be cold bridges. More generally, many inexperienced SEs specify these (expensive) box sections in these situations. They do it because the outer skin pressing down on the projecting bottom plate causes...

1. On the wall issue your builder is correct; 'aac' blocks crack verrtically, and also don't have good adhesion to mortar. Losing 2" is a good tade off for a better job. 2. For the roof, again go for a traditional 'cut' roof. Probably cheaper than ordering trusses as well - depending on your...

On that advice, two problems spring to mind: 1. cold- bridging causing condensation, damp and ultimately mould spores on the inner face of the bridging padstones and 2. Possibility of rain penetration across the cavity. Email your SE on these points, but don't hold your breath waiting for a...

Your SE should have detailed this for you. As you have no 'nib', presumably you are using a spreader? (you can cut one from a length of 140 x 100 concrete lintel). What length the spreader needs to be depends on the load the beam is supporting and the compressive strength of the materials of...

You need to post a few pics - hard to understand what's going on.

What you are proposing would be a recipe for disaster - don't attempt it. Water vapour will get through the inevitable gaps in the ceiling (water vapour is very penetrative and there's always plenty in a kitchen), will rise up through the gaps between the PIR and rafters, then condense on the...

Cut an 8" long by 0.25" deep notch each side of the plumber's cut-out. Get some 30 x 5 steel straps from the builder's merchants (or B&Q/ Wickes etc). They are pre-drilled with lots of holes. Cut appropriate lengths of strip and screw down with three 50mm x 5 or 6mm screws each side of the...

The 203 beam you're considering would fine as long as you don't load the floor up with cylinder blocks and gearboxes. What would you use as posts? 100 x 100 box section maybe?

If you're using the ceiling for light storage, I can't see why you can't sit the UB on the existing single-skin walls. If the loads are not too heavy, you can dispense with padstones and set the beam on steel plates as spreaders - this could avoid messy cutting out of brickwork. If you tell...

Absolutely not a problem. The reduced bearing length plus chamfer could easily be shown to work.

I've often wondered why - if an amendment is 'non-material' - it should need an application?

Out of level by that much not an issue. Neither is 80mm bearing - chimney loads are actually quite small, relatively speaking, due to the bonding of the brickwork. Nice splices btw. Hopefully they supplied the correct grade of bolts?

As the extension seems to be over 6m long and beyond the rear wall, that would not be p.d and would need planning permission..

As it looks horizontal and unless my ageing eyes are deceiving me, that's not a chase, its a partial demolition.

:LOL: