Thread: Rumpus Renovation

It used to be that for raking ceilings, 2/3 of the floor area had to be over 2400 ceiling height, and walls were to be minimum 1500. But I think they stuffed around with it some years ago. I don't know about alcoves/bay windows or the like, but I think that they're approved at the discretion of your council. Bathrooms and laundries are minimum 2100.

Does anyone have a current copy of the code?

Originally Posted by thebuildingsurv

Dont need light to a non habitable room and only ventilation when its a shower toilet laundry etc.

HSL technology uses rooftop collectors — four-foot-wide mirrored dishes — that track the sun with the help of GPS chips. The collectors focus the sunlight onto 127 optical fibers, bundled into a single chord as wide as a quarter.

The fibers — which can be thought of as flexible light pipes — are connected to hybrid light fixtures that have special diffusing rods that spread out the light in all directions. One collector powers about eight hybrid light fixtures — which can illuminate about 10,000 square feet.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7287168/

Oak Ridge Laboratories
Sunlight Direct

OLEDs are an interesting breakthrough as well:

If the device can be mass-manufactured cheaply - a realistic expectation, according to Thompson - interior lighting could look vastly different in the future. Almost any surface in a home, whether flat or curved, could become a light source: walls, curtains, ceilings, cabinets or tables.

Since OLEDs are transparent when turned off, the devices could even be installed as windows or skylights to mimic the feel of natural light after dark - or to serve as the ultimate inconspicuous flat-panel television.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-hef041006.php

Then there's light tube technology that's been around for a while. The main problem is the size of the tube, and eliminating losses over distances and around corners.
I saw an item on a science program of a different technology that naturally converted most of the light spectrum, to be transferred by cable, but a narrow range of the spectrum had to be reproduced artificially using electricity. The same program also showed an extremely efficient 'light tube' technology that could transfer light to the inside of tall buildings. The system didn't need to track the sun, and used small straight tubes and focusing mirrors, but I can't find it on the net. Of course it would be limited by the amount of light that strikes the collection area.

Our downstairs ceiling height is only 2200mm, and we have been given the OK for habitable rooms - good thing too as that is where some of our bedrooms are!

you have to have 5%available wall space used for ventilation, and 10% used for natural light. This can be windows, glass doors etc etc.

That is where our certifier came in - we had to present an "acceptable alternative solution" report showing that the lowered ceiling height was in no way going to present a danger or loss of usability of the area.

When the rooms were built, apparently you could have an area designated "rumpus/entertainment" with the lower ceiling height OK, but bedrooms had to be 2400mm or greater.

Just reporting in with some feedback.

Had the termite guy out, who said it was possible to protect against termites with a reticulation system - one lot of retic on the inside under the infill slab, and another around the exterior. The guy recomended Termidore as the far superior product to use.

Aparantly our bricks do not have holes in them so the termites cannot crawn up through any brick holes, however there is some risk up through the middle of the double brick piers (where the 4 bricks of each course meet in the middle).

NOW ONTO THE NEXT PROBLEM ....

WHAT ABOUT RISING DAMP? Can anyone advise if this will be an issue given that there is a strip footing and infill slab.

We had a builder out the other day, who said that if we lower the outside ground level to about 200mm below the inside ground we won't have an issue. He also suggested painting the outside brick with a clear waterproofing agent on the southern wall (the one that cops the rain the worst). The new infill slab will have a moisture barrier underneath.

This (sealing the outside bricks with a waterproofing agent) contradicts other posts I have seen which say that bricks need to be able to breathe, particularly if there is no damp proof course, and water could be coming up through the footings and lower courses of bricks.

Don't know who to believe ... help!!

frog_hopper

I still think you should get Termimesh to have a look. It's a little exy up front but it's a permanent barrier and doesn't need chemicals. In a way I can understand pest managers recommending reticulation systems, because it's an ongoing source of income - not having a shot at them - that's the service they provide. However, you have a potential opportunity to put in a physical barrier while you're pouring the new slab, so I think it would be a good idea to check it out and it wont cost you anything to ask the question.

Sorry, can't help with the rising damp question.

Originally Posted by frog_hopper

We had a builder out the other day, who said that if we lower the outside ground level to about 200mm below the inside ground we won't have an issue. He also suggested painting the outside brick with a clear waterproofing agent on the southern wall (the one that cops the rain the worst). The new infill slab will have a moisture barrier underneath.

Just be careful with excavation near an existing footing.

Originally Posted by silentC

I still think you should get Termimesh to have a look.

what is it with you and Termimesh?
frog-hopper has had a (i hope) professional pest manager inspect the property and offered his advice , but yet you still try to push this product.
As for physical barriers, there is numerous products out there now.

As with ongoing service, i would think termimesh would need inspecting every 12 months for warrenty purposes as well.

If you can install Kordon, it is the best alternative. It costs about $17.50 per l/m, but it will be money well spent. The biggest problem is that it doesn't suit every situation so it may not be suitable here.

what is it with you and Termimesh?

I used it in my place. It comes with a 10 year frame warranty. Of course you should have annual inspections, that goes without saying, regardless of what method you use

The point is that chemical-based treatments require regular top up, do they not? A physical barrier combined with annual inspections is as good if not better in my opinion.

As for professional pest managers, I have yet to have one recommend anything other than chemical treatment or bait stations. Do you really think that a guy who makes his living selling chemical treatments is going to recommend a product that does away with the need for them?

But obviously you can't install kordon or termimesh in a lot of existing situations, right? So if you're building from scratch, you have an opportunity to do things properly. If all you needed was chemicals, why does the BCA require us to put in pier caps and ant capping? All I'm suggesting is that NOW is the time to get someone (and I suggested Termimesh because I have used it) to see whether a physical barrier is feasible in this situation. Unless you want to give the advice that it wont be over the internet without going around and looking at the job.

So what is it with you and chemicals?

I agree i think phisical barriers better than chemicals, however if there is existing brickwork it would be difficult to install one into an existing building without cutting out the mortar.

Yes the engaged piers will be the stumbling block and chances are that a chemical barrier is the only option. Still, it doesn't hurt to have all the facts before deciding, does it?

this was your quote

In a way I can understand pest managers recommending reticulation systems, because it's an ongoing source of income

you were refering that the pest manager is offering a retic system because he will make money on regular services.

Yet installing Termimesh or any other physical barrier will require annual inspections anyway.

The point is that chemical-based treatments require regular top up, do they not? A physical barrier combined with annual inspections is as good if not better in my opinion.

everyones entitled to an opinion

As for professional pest managers, I have yet to have one recommend anything other than chemical treatment or bait stations. Do you really think that a guy who makes his living selling chemical treatments is going to recommend a product that does away with the need for them?

are we talking about pre or post construction now?
Discussing treatments often depend on different situations



Most pest managers install both chemical and physical barriers , i dont see any problems there.

If all you needed was chemicals, why does the BCA require us to put in pier caps and ant capping?

to impede termite activity

Unless you want to give the advice that it wont be over the internet without going around and looking at the job.

Frog-hopper has already had someone come out and to have a look, see his above post

My query was why you keep pushing the product , Termimesh.
Thank-you for telling me it is because you had it installed to your home and you are probably happy with it , i would assume.
Thats good.

So what is it with you and chemicals?

termites

i dont want to get into a debate about chemicals and physical barriers, because i install both and it is not what this thread is about.

I'll probably get pulled up for digressing from the original thread but - Bugsy, for a new construction would you have a leaning towards a physical or a chemical barrier.

Originally Posted by ausdesign

I'll probably get pulled up for digressing from the original thread but - Bugsy, for a new construction would you have a leaning towards a physical or a chemical barrier.

i must edit my previous post.

"I have installed both types of termite protection."
I no longer do pre-construction treatments.
Its my personal decision not to work directly with the building industry.

if you want to talk about it more maybe a PM would be appropriate as i think we have hijacked this thread enough

sorry frog_hopper