Page 1 of 1
Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 9:12 pm
by newbuyer17
I'm laying out a patio and am unsure how much of a slope I should give the flag stones?
On the setout page it implies 1:80 for block paving, but 1:60 for tarmac?
What would it be for a flagstone patio where I'd like it as level as possible for tables etc but still want it to drain. 1:60 sounds quite a lot to me, but maybe it wouldn't be noticeable.
Thanks
Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 10:03 pm
by Tony McC
Depends on the flagstones, but 1:60 is a good minimum figure.
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 7:00 am
by newbuyer17
Its looking like its going to be these.
http://www.stonemarket.co.uk/yorkstone/yorkstone-riven-paving
So I should maybe go steeper than 1:60? I'm happy to do what is best without the slope being too noticable.
Thanks
P.S. Any comments on the choice of slabs - are these OK?
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 10:12 am
by Rich H
Technically they're fine. Aesthetically it's your choice. Given the minimal price difference, there are very few moulded varieties that I would choose over natural stone, and this isn't one of them. But, like I said, it's a subjective choice. You don't need to be steeper than 1:60 with them, at least.
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 12:47 pm
by newbuyer17
Cheers. The more I think about it though the more 1:60 seems a lot. It'd mean a dining table being 2cm lower at one end. Is it not really noticable in practice?
As for the slabs, I'm doing patio on a budget. Therefore these slabs are already better than the peak ones I'd originally planned on getting. Plus, as a first time attempt they should hopefully be easier to lay with common thickness.
Cheers
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 4:10 pm
by Rich H
1:60 isn't a lot and won't be noticeable. The important thing is to avoid water holding up on the paving. The greater the 'texture', the greater the gradient required. If you lay them to a lesser fall, the water will still drain off enough that there isn't puddling (if you are careful with the laying) but it will mean that algae and moss can take hold more easily, requiring more maintenance and increasing slip risk.
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 9:17 pm
by Tony McC
No matter how much you've thought about it, Newbuyer, those in the trade have been thinking about it a helluva lot longer and 1:60 is widely accepted as a reasonable minimal fall for a patio. If you choose to lay to a flatter fall, don't whinge to us when it ponds!
Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 10:52 pm
by lutonlagerlout
those green patios you see?
they are the ones that ppl thought best to lay level
on a 1200 level its only 20mm of fall to attain 1:60
so a 4.8 m patio has 20 times 4 = 80 mm of fall or 3 inches in old money
totally unnoticeable
LLL
Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 8:16 am
by newbuyer17
OK, thanks guys. Just checking as it seemed a lot to me, but as you say you are the experience professionals so I'm happy to follow your advice.
Thanks