PS: does anyone have a digital copy of BS 5534 they could... 'make
available for download'?
Thanks.
I gather its too shallow to be watertight, but you can put a
watertight layer underneath the slate to allow its use at any angle.
Fibre cement sheet makes a good durable sarking.
NT
Check your local library website - you may find that library membership
includes online subscriptions. For example, miine includes the online OED,
Times Digital Archive, Groves music and art online and BSI reports.
The relevant part of BS 5534 is
5.3.4.3 Roof pitch
The recommended roof pitch and minimum head-laps for double-lap, natural,
fibre-cement and other artificial slates, nail-fixed or hook-fixed, should
be obtained from Table 4 and Table 5. The roof pitch should be not less than
20°.
We had a low angle slate roof on a bit of our house. Didn't work, people
couldn't make it work. Gave up, had the entire thing rebuilt with a proper
roof.
If at all possible go for a more sensible angle. This is asking for
trouble (though it CAN work)
Hmmm. That doesn't sound like what he's specified. The spec mentions
an underlay of 'Tyvek Supro'.
You're lucky!
My council libraries dont provide them at all - you have to go to the
National Library.
They have to retrieve the hard copy from off-site location. I'm
trapped in the stone-age apparently.
Problem is it is an extension of an existing roof - the existing is a
cruddy felt construction and will get replaced.
I the pitch of the roof could be steepened by taking one or two rows
of bricks off the top of the wall to at least achieve 20degs...
If it were my roof and I couldn't make it more than 16.8deg I would
increase the overlap of the slates.
mark
Surely, within limits, what matters is the overlap? The greater the
overlap the more shallow the roof can be made.
--
Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (L)
http://www.ukradioamateur.co.uk
Do you not think fibre cement sarking would be cheaper than 50% more
slate? It would also look conventional.
The other problem with adjusting slates from 2 layers to 3 (cant think
how better to explain it) is that it changes their angle for the
worse.
NT
They words here are "within limits".
Even with greater than 50% overlap, you won't get a watertight slate
roof shallower than 20 degrees.
Given a certain windspeed, what matters is how high the water can be
driven. if its more than the rise of a tile, it will climb up the tile.
The uber flat roof stuff is laid with interlocking joints I seem to remember
I think I'll be ensuring that the pitch is at least 20degrees by
raising the high end of the roof further up the wall of the main
building (it's a lean-to). At that pitch at least there will be
specified acceptable head-laps etc given in BS5534. You'd think it
specifies a minimum pitch for a reason, and upping the headlap by a
'finger in the air' amount at lower pitches has no guarantee of
success. I looked at the interlocking 'slates' such as Redlands
Cambrian, but if plain real slate is possible, it'd be preferable,
since it looks better. Apparently the interlocking joints on these
single-lap systems work like miniature gutters which direct water down
onto the lower course of slates.
The architect has been saying things like 'I think 17 is within the
tolerances' and 'remember the underlay membrane is a second line of
defence' both of which I think are... well, he's not a roofing
contractor.
I couldnt find anything about using fibre cement sarking on the
internet - is the idea that the roof would be waterproof even with no
slates, making the slate decorative?
This thread is quite interesting since we've just been having an exactly
similar conversation with our architect, who has drawn a roof at 22
degrees inclination and has specified it as a flat roof with slates for
decoration.
I emailed Marley and they sent me a "Below Pitch" spec which describes
laying sarking, two layers of felt, and a membrane under a normal slate
roof at these kinds of angles. It's a bit belt-and-braces but sounds
like the correct thing to be doing.
I haven't had a roofing contractor's opinion yet on it.
Yes. The slate also has one more function: its the robust layer, it
stops falling objects breaking the fibre cement. So it takes both
layers working together to provide all the required functions for a
long lived functional roof.
NT
We had a new single-storey extension roofed with slate at 20 degrees
about ten years ago, and despite being in an exposed location in a wet
part of the country, it hasn't given any trouble at all.
We were constrained by the height of the first-floor windowsills, and in
order to get as much as 20 degrees slope and still have adequate
headroom at the low end of the roof, we sloped the floor. It's about
three inches lower at the far end, which in practice is virtually
unnoticeable.
--
Mike Barnes
I'm not a roofing contractor but that roofing system is clearly designed
to makes the slates, or tiles, redundant.
> We had a new single-storey extension roofed with slate at 20 degrees
> about ten years ago, and despite being in an exposed location in a wet
> part of the country, it hasn't given any trouble at all.
Good to know.
My experience of that was that after a while the felt goes.
And a costly strip and redo is in order.
The other option seems to be to use a modern plastic tanking membrane,
hot welded at the joints, rather than felt. But it's unclear whether
most contractors would be familiar with this approach, or what the cost
implications are.
I think the crappy extension I had failed after about 15-18 years.
It was really the last straw that broke the camels back.
With water coming in in several places, the overhead cable that stopped
the roof pitch being decent was undergrounded, the house was demolished,
and proper angles used.. ;-)
> We were constrained by the height of the first-floor windowsills, and in
> order to get as much as 20 degrees slope and still have adequate
> headroom at the low end of the roof, we sloped the floor. It's about
> three inches lower at the far end, which in practice is virtually
> unnoticeable.
>
Thats generally why this is done. I have to say I had a bloody valley
join with an existing roof, and they are buggers. If its a leanto or bow
window type thing, there isn't the huge volume of water in on spot.
If you have interlocking machine made tiles, then its not so bad. The
water can't drive around the interlock easily.
But I still say unless there are overriding reasons to have a low pitch,
don't. And know what you are getting into.
The slate would provide pretty good UV protection for the felt though,
so the felt should last longer.
Oh, absolutely.
But a slate roof at the right pitch should last much longer.
Sounds like someone did it wrong. If you use fibre cement sarking,
overlapping at any joints, the felt etc isn't even needed. The slates
act as a windbreak, so there is much less tendency for water to be
driven up the sarking overlaps than occurs with the slates. I've
experience of such a roof with no felt or membrane, and no trouble at
all.
NT