I guess so, there’s 3m high bedroom & 2 tiled bathrooms above. Dug out the SE report and he’s based it on c16, with sistered c24 (confirmed), I guess as worst case scenario. I’ll pop SE report (based upon verbal and photographic evidence) below: Joist check 1: Span = 4400mm + bearing = 4450mm 190x44C16 + 150x44C24 @ 400mm c/c with the standard floor build up (not bathroom) has a selfweight of approx. 0.83kPa Under standard domestic floor loading (1.5kPa or 2kN point load) Joists are working at 78% of their structural capacity The main 44mm wide C16 joists require a supported length at bearing of 47mm Their deflection will be approx. 20mm. This is greater than the recommended limit of 14mm. No structural failure, just a serviceability failure (excessive deflection) Joist check 2: Span = 4400mm + bearing = 4450mm 190x44C16 + 150x44C24 @ 400mm c/c with the standard bathroom floor build up has a selfweight of approx. 1.07kPa Under standard domestic floor loading (1.5kPa or 2kN point load) Joists are working at 84% of their structural capacity The main 44mm wide C16 joists require a supported length at bearing of 52mm Their deflection will be approx. 22mm. This is greater than the recommended limit of 14mm. No structural failure, just a serviceability failure (excessive deflection) Lintel check: Span = 2882 + bearing = 2950mm 2No. 224x50 Supporting one end of the 4.4m floor span (not bathroom) & 3.3m of plasterboarded stud wall lining above. Assuming C16+, timbers are working at 97.5% of structural capacity and 98% of deflection. They require 90mm bearing at supports. No structural failure, assuming C16+.
Ah!! different prob altogether, I have been working on the assumption that what we had was existing 195 x 47 c24 joists and they were within regs. Ignore everything I have said