Mesh and skim steel beams

[europa]

In my loft conversion, builders have set the steels a little on the low side. And bottom of joists and beams are not flush - see pic. To avoid losing me any more headroom on first floor, they have suggested fixing plasterboards between beams (flush with joists), painting beams with intumescent paint and then meshing, and, finally, skimming over everything.

Apart from whether building control will allow it, my main concern is the likelihood of the skim cracking at the joints with the plasterboards. The architect thinks it'll be ok, but a friend (who happens to be an architect too) thinks there's a good chance of cracking and that, ideally, they should plasterboard across the beams, with spacers fixed to joists. But, obviously, that will cost me head height. I'm already under 2.3m!

What do you guys think?

 

[Jgreenplastering]

I think they f**k*d up!
It will def crack if you don't board over it.
Although you've not got much head height I'd be more inclined to pack it out that extra bit to get over it or id make it into a little bulk head so your still get the maximum height everywhere else and then lower that by putting 2 batten parallel to the beam and boarding it. Your only sacrificing that section then.
No one is 2.3 meters so although it might not seem right your not gonna hit your head realistically are you?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[europa]

Thanks, as i feared. Unfortunately, bulkhead would look ugly i think. You're of course right tho about not hitting my head lol. But the annoying thing is spec was 2.3m finished, and i clearly told them that had to be the minimum.

 

[Danny]

I think I would batten out over the joists and then run the board over the steel... not the end of the world.

 

[dsdave]

Use fire liner boards over RSJ

 

[europa]

Thanks, everyone.
@dsdave: you say to use fire liner boards over the RSJs. But if normal plasterboard is used over joists, wouldn't i get cracking risk at the fireboard/plasterboard joints too? I'm pretty sure builders will prefer to use intumescent paint on steels (to save money) anyway.

 

[stuart23]

My beams was spec'd a layer of plasterboard and a layer of fibreboard. I too had your problem but I got the builders to raise it. I lost the height because the noodles they had supporting the wall were too thick so they replaced with thinner ones

 

[flynnyman]

Usually double boarded and unless it's above the stairs you might get away with it being slightly less than 2.3 but if your BC is keen they might not pass it.

 

[jet]

With osb boarding above presume roof height
nitemare are some loft conversions with the steel beam being xyz
Thus You can not nudge it up if your at your max roof height /ie ridge ...
If he had put larger joist in you would never of known for the 20mm or so .. just pack down & enjoy your loft conversion

 

[Dropsalot]

Thanks, everyone.
@dsdave: you say to use fire liner boards over the RSJs. But if normal plasterboard is used over joists, wouldn't i get cracking risk at the fireboard/plasterboard joints too? I'm pretty sure builders will prefer to use intumescent paint on steels (to save money) anyway.

Fire line the lot, scrim and plaster, overall it will look better flat, remember the builder is only going to be there until the job is done, you have to look at it forever.

 

[Danny]

remember the builder is only going to be there until the job is done, you have to look at it forever.

Good point that

 

[zolco]

You got a great builder and architect there, would you pass on their number, I always liked working with pros

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[europa]

@jet: think you've got the wrong end of the stick. it's not the loft ceiling, but rather the first-floor ceiling. as it stands, i'm looking at 2.32 in loft and 2.26/7 on first floor. builders knew first floor was more important, hence my annoyance.

@Dropsalot, very good point - thanks.

@zolco, lmao! they are 'discussing options' now. but i don't think there's any viable option (that i can accept) other than to raise the beams and board over.

 

[jet]

@jet: think you've got the wrong end of the stick. it's not the loft ceiling, but rather the first-floor ceiling. as it stands, i'm looking at 2.32 in loft and 2.26/7 on first floor. builders knew first floor was more important, hence my annoyance.

Ahhh gotcha saw the osb & presumed that

As much as it's a pain for your builder
Only way is then to lift steel
You get height what you want , he looses some time
Sure you both can get it sorted

 

[Dropsalot]

If you are adamant, then the steel has gotta be moved.

You will have to negotiate with the builder & architect, mention payments or lack of them and this could go two ways, he does it or he walks, either might leave a bit of atmosphere.
However, you are the client, if you have made certain conditions then you would expect the builder to have allowed for this on his price, and to have made time.
You will have to make it clear that you wish to resolve this amicably, and then there is the question of who covers the costs.......
All the best.

 

[flynnyman]

Head height is the main issues in loft conversions aswell as insulation so to get it wrong is unforgivable, it needs sorting. If it's an issue that will fail the whole build then it needs sorting and without higher inhabit I can't see any other way unless they lower the floor below by planing a couple of inches off the timbers

 

[europa]

Thanks again, everyone. The architect has told the construction company to come up with a suggestion. So i'm awaiting their response.
@flynnyman, it wouldn't actually surprise me if they suggest lowering the floor below. I have 6" joists there, so it may be feasible to shave a bit off. Whether it's a good idea, however, is another issue altogether!

 

[zolco]

Thanks again, everyone. The architect has told the construction company to come up with a suggestion. So i'm awaiting their response.
@flynnyman, it wouldn't actually surprise me if they suggest lowering the floor below. I have 6" joists there, so it may be feasible to shave a bit off. Whether it's a good idea, however, is another issue altogether!

Did the builder had detailed plans?

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[europa]

Did the builder had detailed plans

Yes, she (and that's not a typo lol) had drawings and a schedule of works specifying the finished height on the first floor. Before installing the beams, she drew a line on the first-floor walls at the 2.3m level (and said my ceiling would not be lower than that). I told her that had to be the absolute minimum, and that i would rather have a few cms more (and scarifice a little in loft instead).

 

[Danny]

Head height is always issues in lofts... ours is OK. .. a bit low but not the end of the world and looks pucker

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[Danny]

4 massive velux windows in the same room makes it damp hot

Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk

 

[Dropsalot]

Thanks again, everyone. The architect has told the construction company to come up with a suggestion. So i'm awaiting their response.
@flynnyman, it wouldn't actually surprise me if they suggest lowering the floor below. I have 6" joists there, so it may be feasible to shave a bit off. Whether it's a good idea, however, is another issue altogether!

You may be able to shave some off the joists, but if it were my house any joists shaved would have to be strengthened somehow.

 

[Dropsalot]

@imago might be able to help.

 

[flynnyman]

Thanks again, everyone. The architect has told the construction company to come up with a suggestion. So i'm awaiting their response.
@flynnyman, it wouldn't actually surprise me if they suggest lowering the floor below. I have 6" joists there, so it may be feasible to shave a bit off. Whether it's a good idea, however, is another issue altogether!

Can't think what floor your on but there may be an issue with the top step if there are any. You could strengthen the joists by running timbers along the sides of them but again adding more weight.

 

[zolco]

Yes, she (and that's not a typo lol) had drawings and a schedule of works specifying the finished height on the first floor. Before installing the beams, she drew a line on the first-floor walls at the 2.3m level (and said my ceiling would not be lower than that). I told her that had to be the absolute minimum, and that i would rather have a few cms more (and scarifice a little in loft instead).

I'd f**k the builder off then not being able to read it. Don't think it's your problem especially if you paying your architect to project manage. Let them 2 work it out between themselves from their own pocket

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[europa]

Just a quick update: builders argued it was too difficult to raise the steels (as it would affect a lot of other stuff, which it would of course do), and architect didn't want to insist, so that idea was dropped. Builders then suggested they instead attempt to "lose the height in the plaster". By that i understand they meant: put 12.5,mm board on joists, 9.5 on steels, and lose the 10mm difference by feathering the plaster. I fear that's not a good idea either, as, 1, i'd still have joints adjacent to beams that could eventually crack, and, 2, i assume i wouldn't have a nice straight corner line at the wall junctions.

 

[Dropsalot]

If I am not mistaken steel should be fireproofed to comply with regs, this can be 2x layers of 12.5 board or fireline board, others here will keep you right.
You will have to quiz the architect about this. Then you will know the worst, and can make a considered decision. As has been mentioned, costs and the resulting arguments might sour this build for you, but you are the client!

 

[algeeman]

I think I would batten out over the joists and then run the board over the steel... not the end of the world.

We had to metal board and skim 20 beams @ 10m high off a scissor lift !!!!
All rounded up into a point.
.....job was suppose to look like the inside of a ship.
Horrible awkard job.
Looked nice when it was complete.

 

[europa]

Yeh, they need to be fireproofed, but an easy way around that is to use intumescent paint.

Rather than 'feather the plaster', i'm inclined to tell them to either batten out joists and (single) board over everything, or board joists and then board again over everything. Either way will lose me 12.5mm, but better safe than sorry.

 

[Jgreenplastering]

Just a quick update: builders argued it was too difficult to raise the steels (as it would affect a lot of other stuff, which it would of course do), and architect didn't want to insist, so that idea was dropped. Builders then suggested they instead attempt to "lose the height in the plaster". By that i understand they meant: put 12.5,mm board on joists, 9.5 on steels, and lose the 10mm difference by feathering the plaster. I fear that's not a good idea either, as, 1, i'd still have joints adjacent to beams that could eventually crack, and, 2, i assume i wouldn't have a nice straight corner line at the wall junctions.

Did they give a reason why they f**k*d up in the first place?
Have you got in writing the required minimum height?
If so why the f**k up?

Tbh If your gonna blend it your still bringing the ceiling lower than you want it even if it's a little bit and it will look s**t so you'd be better off dropping the lot to the steel height and have a nice looking straight surface.
I'd then tell the builder to compensate you for the f**k up and for saving them the hassle/cost of not moving them where they should be.

I'm guessing they've carried on work above which would be why it's now even more hassle to put them where they should be!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[europa]

Did they give a reason why they f**k*d up in the first place?
Have you got in writing the required minimum height?
If so why the f**k up?

Tbh If your gonna blend it your still bringing the ceiling lower than you want it even if it's a little bit and it will look s**t so you'd be better off dropping the lot to the steel height and have a nice looking straight surface.
I'd then tell the builder to compensate you for the f**k up and for saving them the hassle/cost of not moving them where they should be.

I'm guessing they've carried on work above which would be why it's now even more hassle to put them where they should be!

Yes, 2.3m was in the spec, but the drawings are not great and they are arguing that the schedule of works only stated floor to ceiling 2.3m as opposed to floor to ceiling finished 2.3m! They refuse to admit any mistake has been made. Yes, they are being a-holes, but my architect is proving pretty useless when it comes to the crunch, as if she wants the whole thing to just disappear into thin air! Unfortunately, she's the contract administrator, so only she can insist they put it right. Builders are even saying i must pay if they have to shave/change the floor joists!

End of the day, i'll end up with around 2.27/8 if they board over so it's not the end of the world. The whole thing has caused massive friction and, whilst i can stick to my guns, they'll just hit me on the cost of additionals - they're already doing that and there's still three/four months of work left!

 

[Dropsalot]

Yes, 2.3m was in the spec, but the drawings are not great and they are arguing that the schedule of works only stated floor to ceiling 2.3m as opposed to floor to ceiling finished 2.3m! They refuse to admit any mistake has been made. Yes, they are being a-holes, but my architect is proving pretty useless when it comes to the crunch, as if she wants the whole thing to just disappear into thin air! Unfortunately, she's the contract administrator, so only she can insist they put it right. Builders are even saying i must pay if they have to shave/change the floor joists!

End of the day, i'll end up with around 2.27/8 if they board over so it's not the end of the world. The whole thing has caused massive friction and, whilst i can stick to my guns, they'll just hit me on the cost of additionals - they're already doing that and there's still three/four months of work left!

Don't want to say this, but.....well you know. The architect has made a mistake if the drawings are unclear. The danger you face now is that the relationships are strained. As you mention, extras are going to cost you now. Get round a table, get a resolution, get the builder& architect to meet you in the middle re cost. If you can't or one party won't be reasonable, you'll have to go to court, and that will knacker any deadline you might have.
All the best.

 

[Danny]

I would stop works until it is resolved... you are paying the bill and it either right or it is wrong... no middle ground... blending never works long term... paint the beam and then board of the the lot... all one level... its not what you wanted but its the best long term solution. But you need to get the team working with you not against you

 

[zolco]

Get an another architect, pay him well to mediate between the 3 parties if you wish to resolve this issue. Personally I wouldn't be too concerned about 20-30mm as long as BC is happy.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[flynnyman]

If height is not an issue ie above stairs don't worry about it, most of the extras I used to charge on lofts were usually electrics, nicer doors, skirts and architraves, there isn't much else.