loft conversion _without_ strengthening roof?!?

So the moral of the story is to go to a Newsgroup for advice because if you ask for professional advice and don't take it then your insurance may be void!

I thank you.

Reply to
Ash
Loading thread data ...

Bit of advice

either offer some useful, practical advice or f*ck off

uk.d-i-y really doesn't suffer people with wankish attitudes like yours

put up or shut up and f*ck off, you won't last long in here

Reply to
geoff

There is if a new build or conversion. Cost me loadsa money to raise the ceiling height when extending an existing attic room.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Would that be like the structural engineer who insisted on having continuous joists from front to back here only supported at the ends? Requiring timber brought in from miles away - 10 x 4" 30ft long? Until the local BS insisted they were supported in the middle because of deflection? And the same structural engineer who supplied three pages of drawings for padstones?

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

No. There are standard ways of doing most jobs. I'm willing to bet you don't start from zero when working on a property similar to a type you know. You'll rely on experience.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

As an engineer (like you), and as someone who has actually built a loft conversion themselves (like you?), I am probably better qualified than most to offer guidance.

Regarding my comments above, firstly: "there may be no requirement for strengthening the roof structure". I said this to highlight that strengthening the roof structure may not be required, so is not in itself something to get worried about without further information about exactly what has been done and how.

Are you suggesting that there *always* will be a requirement? If not then we are in agreement it would seem. If so then I would have to doubt

*your* knowledge of the subject.

For a simple loft conversion that stays within the envelope of the existing roof, and where that roof is of traditional joinery construction (i.e. not trussed) there will be little need of structural changes to the roof space in many cases. You may need to double the joists either side of a roof window. You can rely on LABC advice here, or do the calculations. You are generally adding relatively little loading by way of insulating and lining the space.

If you start adding dormers, removing purlins, or converting a hipped roof to gable wall then obviously the situation in different, as would be the case if you have a "forest of matchsticks" style trussed roof.

Moving on to the floor; I said "however there will be one for strengthening the floor".

It would be very rare to find a loft floor that was capable of taking a loading of 1kN/m^2 or 0.8kN/m of distributed linear joist loading (400mm ctc) without additional strengthening.

Reply to
John Rumm

Nothing wrong with giving advice, you just need to exercise a little common sense when deciding what to do with that advice. Without people freely giving of their time to advice, this group would be much the poorer.

One of the advantages of corresponding with a group such as this over many years (rather than leaping in from the dark brandishing one's willy[1]), is that you get to know the backgrounds of the regular posters. You learn which are building inspectors, builders, and engineers etc in real life, and what projects they have successfully undertaken. You also get to see lots of advice on a wide range of topics exchanged. Some of those topics you may know nothing about, while others may be within your domain of expertise. You can hence learn which advice is likely to be good, which is a handy pointer that needs following up elsewhere, and which is likely to be doubtful.

If you genuinely have useful information to give (rather than "go find an 'expert' and pay them), why not contribute some of it? We have a wiki site full of articles; perhaps you would like to author some on the structural aspects of loft conversions?

[1] Alas we see if from time to time, names pop up with much hot air and bluster, then disappear a couple of days later to never be seen again.
Reply to
John Rumm

Don't give out any, then.

Owain

Reply to
Owain

You are a trainee Steve Firth AICMFP.

Reply to
brass monkey

Shouldn't that be a trainee Steve Firth MIstructE? ;-)

Owain

Reply to
Owain

Or, MIcamelshagginginthesaharaE

Reply to
brass monkey

Structural advice is within the remit of this group. Whether people think its a good idea to give or take such advice on unseen structures is another matter, but nonetheless structral questions are certainly discussed here. This includes BR compliant and at times non-compliant approaches. This is far from a Black & Decker owning shelf fitting group.

'Experts' of whatever type are welcome to share their input here, but it does get questioned like any other. This is definitely not a group of people that play the child and leave all that to daddy, so unbacked- up claims of expertise count for little here. If you want to discuss your opinions, great, if you want to just say 'always speak to mommy first' then this probably isn't your kind of group. Enough of us here know that just because someone formally qulififed says so doesnt make it so, and some of us can outdesign them in our own specialist areas. And the range of specialist knowledge here is surprisingly wide.

NT

Reply to
NT

It certainly used to be the case but I think you will find that the minimum height requirement was restricted to stairs several years ago.

FWIW my downstairs headroom is just 6 feet under the beams which doesn't much bother me as I am not that tall. The only real problem is lighting. With the ceiling at just 6 inches higher choice of light fittings is extremely restricted.

The clearance on the stairs is however another matter. I have long since learnt to duck on the way down as the clearance is about a foot down on modern regulations and, as the offending structure is a main floor beam, there is no easy way round other than repositioning the stairs which would be a major operation.

Reply to
Roger Chapman

No, if you knew what you were talking about, it would be MIStructE

Reply to
Roof

What was the structural engineers terms of appointment? Was an architect involved? Why didn't you tell the structural engineer in the first place that he could use an intermediate support if it made the design any easier. Was the structural engineer chartered? What fee did you pay him?

More importantly, and to keep it on topic, what was the advice you got from your 'resident experts' when you posted the query on this newsgroup?

Reply to
Roof

Geoff, presumably you just got back from the pub?

It may come as some surprise to you, but I don't need your advice. I don't need to 'put up or shut up' either. Since you given such a warm welcome, I think I'll hand around a bit longer.

What time is it now...about 8.40am. What time are you back down the pub, then?

Reply to
Roof

I think your fundamental problem is in misinterpreting the status of a newsgroup! It is not the source of definitive advice for any problem. It is akin to going down the pub and having a chat with some mates and anyone else who happens to be stood at the bar. Presumably in such circumstance, you would feel you had the wit to make a fair judgement. The great benefit of such diverse views, is in obtaining a range of opinion, which may include 'I employed such and such a professional and he both misinformed me and charged me a fortune for the privilege.' It does happen you know. If anyone is stupid enough to take as gospel, anything some anonymous individual quotes on the Internet, then they are destined for a fall.

Andy C

Reply to
Andy Cap

Right - I'm talking round about '90.

On a new build? Wouldn't that make it difficult to sell? I notice that youngsters are getting taller. I'm 6 ft, and as a lad was taller than most. Not anymore.

Seems weird not to have a minimum ceiling height these days considering all the other regs?

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Yes. He chose the firm having used them before.

I wasn't asked. Had I been I'd have told him he could bear off the *very* over engineered support between the two ground floor rooms which had been made into one.

I've no idea. He belonged to a firm of structural engineers. Who I assume were qualified since my qualified architect used them.

Told them to get stuffed and sue me. Thought about suing them.

Happened before this group existed. Wish it had - as I know I'd have got good advice here. You're a newbie here. Stick around before making instant judgements.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

I think it was Mr Bryer in an earlier discussion who noted that headroom predated the post-war Building Regulations and was so people didn't get asphyxiated from gas lights

As a 6'-er myself I do note that a lot of modern properties are claustrophobic. But it does make painting the ceiling easier when I don't have to stand on anything.

Owain

Reply to
Owain

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.