alternative to the step

[g-scaff]

I showed similar videos last december, but hopefully these new ones answer some, if not all, of the previous questions. Obviously the videos are still not at the "sales pitch quality" but I would appreciate any feedback, positive or negative, on whether they explain fully how the system works
this video shows how to erect from the lift below using the "upfront"
upfront 1 001 - YouTube
this video shows how you remove the "upfront" once you are on the lift
IMG 0039 - YouTube
this video shows how to strike from the working lift using the "upfront"
IMG 0041 - YouTube
and this shows how to lower the "upfront" once your down from the lift
IMG 0042 - YouTube
and finally this video shows how to erect a length of handrail more than 20ft [40ft shown]
IMG 0046 - YouTube

 

[phil181]

I showed similar videos last december, but hopefully these new ones answer some, if not all, of the previous questions. Obviously the videos are still not at the "sales pitch quality" but I would appreciate any feedback, positive or negative, on whether they explain fully how the system works
this video shows how to erect from the lift below using the "upfront"
upfront 1 001 - YouTube
this video shows how you remove the "upfront" once you are on the lift
IMG 0039 - YouTube
this video shows how to strike from the working lift using the "upfront"
IMG 0041 - YouTube
and this shows how to lower the "upfront" once your down from the lift
IMG 0042 - YouTube
and finally this video shows how to erect a length of handrail more than 20ft [40ft shown]
IMG 0046 - YouTube

It's quite well thought out.

However, it would probably only suit a street gang erecting a fairly small run. To run in 100' of lift in one hit you'd need 12 'upfronts'.

Secondly, thin moving parts on equipment do not last 5 minutes in any scaffolding enviroment. They would get easily bent, clogged with concrete and other crap, or weighed in for scrap.

Lastly, striking when you've got an unboarded lift below you only works when the doubles are still in position from the erect - Which on an independent that's been up for a while and modified several times, is highly unlikely...

 

[SWIFTY]

How much does it cost?

 

[dico]

gescaff mate the idears there and you must of worked hard to get were your at with the idear but i still can not believe were doing this in 2012 i wish you all the best mate and i hope you get the reconition you deserve but to think that things have come to this iam not knocking the product just what is happenning to the scaffold game

 

[g-scaff]

It's quite well thought out.

However, it would probably only suit a street gang erecting a fairly small run. To run in 100' of lift in one hit you'd need 12 'upfronts'.

Secondly, thin moving parts on equipment do not last 5 minutes in any scaffolding enviroment. They would get easily bent, clogged with concrete and other crap, or weighed in for scrap.

Lastly, striking when you've got an unboarded lift below you only works when the doubles are still in position from the erect - Which on an independent that's been up for a while and modified several times, is highly unlikely...

phil thanks for your comments. let me reply to all 3. 1] 6 Upfronts needed for a 100 ft stretch, 1 at the start and every 20ft after that works. 2] apart from the handle [12mm rod] the inner and outer tubes have the same wall thickness as a scaffold tube. 3] thats down to a learning process, and with time hopefully will become second nature to leave the fittings in place, possibly put them on, initially upside down, to at least make the scaffolders think why .

---------- Post added at 07:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:20 PM ----------

How much does it cost?

swifty, nothing is finalised, but in the region of £40 / £50.
i know you need more of these than you would the steps, but productivity does increase. the director on the firm i work for estimates the step has slowed the scaffolders by upto 30%, and having seen a demonstration of the "upfront" thinks that figure could fall to 10%

 

[steveo south east]

I think thats a good idea and should do well against the market rivals. Personally i wouldn't buy it, But I would use it.
Good effort gscaff

 

[phil181]

phil thanks for your comments. let me reply to all 3. 1] 6 Upfronts needed for a 100 ft stretch, 1 at the start and every 20ft after that works. 2] apart from the handle [12mm rod] the inner and outer tubes have the same wall thickness as a scaffold tube. 3] thats down to a learning process, and with time hopefully will become second nature to leave the fittings in place, possibly put them on, initially upside down, to at least make the scaffolders think why .

---------- Post added at 07:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:20 PM ----------

Fair comment mate I didn't watch all of the videos.

I still think you'd need 8 for a 100' run, as you need 2 for the stop-ends...

 

[aom]

G-Scaff, not sure exactly how many e-mails I have lost over the last couple of weeks due to this fandango new office 365 thing from BT but it's the bain of my life at the moment and did not receive anything from you.

From the links posted I would say it looks like a good piece of kit but wouldn't replace our step on the longer runs. That toing and froing would send me totally scatty although in practice it probably isn't that bad. A long run on a high job and to be honest I reckon most would go back to old habits unless they were being watched.

As Phil has already noted, the likely hood of these doubles still being in place for the strip is highly unlikely but I suppose it would hardly break the bank to go round and fit them again unless it was unboarded and then you would have another issue to deal with.

I take it with the design you don't need hemps in place to use it?

That is where I see the main advantage of your design, a 13 foot tower is a nightmare to build using the step, B-Safe have a daft design for it using wee hemps but to be honest when you are used with banging in a 21 your not going to change for an 8 on a 6 lift job. I could see it being used on jobs like that and would maybe have a couple of sets for that purpose only depending on cost, unless of course you could fit a swivel instead of a double to allow a better or easier lift on the longer runs.

My opinion for what it's worth, good luck with it.

 

[Anto]

I think it looks great,, may not suit every industry where scaffolding is involved... but quite possibly in pharmaceuticals, and power stations where independents are required.. I hope it works out for you,

 

[g-scaff]

Fair comment mate I didn't watch all of the videos.

I still think you'd need 8 for a 100' run, as you need 2 for the stop-ends...

I stand corrected, you would require 2 extra for the stop ends. works out you need 8 also on a 40 x 40 house.

---------- Post added at 08:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:11 PM ----------

gescaff mate the idears there and you must of worked hard to get were your at with the idear but i still can not believe were doing this in 2012 i wish you all the best mate and i hope you get the reconition you deserve but to think that things have come to this iam not knocking the product just what is happenning to the scaffold game

dico, being a scaffolder i also hate the step, which has helped me perservere with this idea when the funds were low

 

[joebag]

I like it mate,had loads of experience with bsafe and main things wrong were if ur tubes have any ***** on they won't slide,remembering which one to lock off and leave loose,the wands were fiddly as **** and the weight all of a sudden when it released,

the main problem for me was if you had an opening for a ladder,the tube you used would become redundant and even without an opening the bsafe rail would have to have the top handrail installed just underneath it,then took off and installed as lower handrail,

with your system your temp handrail immeadiately becomes permanent so no double handling,two things though,have you tried joining the long with swivs so it's not back and forth to raise and could you attach puncheons with lightweight gates so access is installed straight away,

last thing blokes I know hate leaving a grand of bsafe on every wagon,so what's your price to trade

 

[g-scaff]

G-Scaff, not sure exactly how many e-mails I have lost over the last couple of weeks due to this fandango new office 365 thing from BT but it's the bain of my life at the moment and did not receive anything from you.

From the links posted I would say it looks like a good piece of kit but wouldn't replace our step on the longer runs. That toing and froing would send me totally scatty although in practice it probably isn't that bad. A long run on a high job and to be honest I reckon most would go back to old habits unless they were being watched.

As Phil has already noted, the likely hood of these doubles still being in place for the strip is highly unlikely but I suppose it would hardly break the bank to go round and fit them again unless it was unboarded and then you would have another issue to deal with.

I take it with the design you don't need hemps in place to use it?

That is where I see the main advantage of your design, a 13 foot tower is a nightmare to build using the step, B-Safe have a daft design for it using wee hemps but to be honest when you are used with banging in a 21 your not going to change for an 8 on a 6 lift job. I could see it being used on jobs like that and would maybe have a couple of sets for that purpose only depending on cost, unless of course you could fit a swivel instead of a double to allow a better or easier lift on the longer runs.

My opinion for what it's worth, good luck with it.

thanks for the reply and good luck with the new office set up.
That toing and froing was needed to show that the system works with only one man in attendance. On any other lift , other than the base, your handrails would be put in place before you braced
further clarification to what i replied to phil, if the lifts below are boarded when striking, replacing doubles would be easy, if they were not boarded, then surely they would still be in place
you are correct, all you need is a ledger to hook onto and a handrail to fix to. however , if your scarfs dont work out, there will be a need to hemp over the handrail, once your on the lift
not shown on the video is the possibility to use swivels as a fixing point to a standard instead of fixing to the unnecessary handrails on the base lift

 

[aom]

Fair points, when do I get it for a field test?:idea:

 

[g-scaff]

I like it mate,had loads of experience with bsafe and main things wrong were if ur tubes have any ***** on they won't slide,remembering which one to lock off and leave loose,the wands were fiddly as **** and the weight all of a sudden when it released,

the main problem for me was if you had an opening for a ladder,the tube you used would become redundant and even without an opening the bsafe rail would have to have the top handrail installed just underneath it,then took off and installed as lower handrail,

with your system your temp handrail immeadiately becomes permanent so no double handling,two things though,have you tried joining the long with swivs so it's not back and forth to raise and could you attach puncheons with lightweight gates so access is installed straight away,

last thing blokes I know hate leaving a grand of bsafe on every wagon,so what's your price to trade

joe ,thanks for your observations and comments, especially
"with your system your temp handrail immeadiately becomes permanent so no double handling". in reply to your last 2 comments, no i have not tried the swivels, but then again i have not found it to laborious the way it is shown, remembering the braces would only be in place on the base lift.
also regarding the lightweight gate, this has not been tried, but would imagine that it would be best to fix afterwards. personnally , we have not had a problem with this so far.
finally , can i refer you back to my reply to swifty regarding the price

 

[stleger]

if i was 14 lifts up on a windy day , i think id prefer this to the step

 

[g-scaff]

Fair points, when do I get it for a field test?:idea:

good try, but not in a position to be giving them away. take the plunge and treat yourself to a few. remember you will get more production per man per day and then you have to factor in how much happier your lads will be not climbing about on the steps, therefore increasing productivity even further. finally they have to be safer than the step. what price do you possibly put on a mans life? :laugh:

 

[Flinty]

I agree with Dico first and foremost, why we have this in the first place is beyond me.

But this is good, you've patented it right? As a site scaffolder my worries would be that brickies being dirty scabs will get muck on it wherever I stack it and effectively ruin it, and general wear and tear may also ruin it. For long runs I'd simply get the AGR in place then use a sliding guardrail to do the rest, 1 would do for testing.

But that's the problem, while I would happily test this for you to give you a site workers feedback, a letter from the top in May stated workers will be fined for not using the step. We are not allowed to use any other method. I'm sorry mate, I wish I could help you here

 

[aom]

good try, but not in a position to be giving them away. take the plunge and treat yourself to a few. remember you will get more production per man per day and then you have to factor in how much happier your lads will be not climbing about on the steps, therefore increasing productivity even further. finally they have to be safer than the step. what price do you possibly put on a mans life? :laugh:

Food for thought g-scaff although we are using the step fairly successfully with the only real problem being the hemps on a 6 leg tower. One other advantage of the step is we use both tube and system and it works for both systems although admittedly we do have to hemp off it some times but it's easy enough with a 3m standard. That been said I think you will find a market for this but convincing them in enough numbers will be your new challenge.

 

[g-scaff]

I agree with Dico first and foremost, why we have this in the first place is beyond me.

But this is good, you've patented it right? As a site scaffolder my worries would be that brickies being dirty scabs will get muck on it wherever I stack it and effectively ruin it, and general wear and tear may also ruin it. For long runs I'd simply get the AGR in place then use a sliding guardrail to do the rest, 1 would do for testing.

But that's the problem, while I would happily test this for you to give you a site workers feedback, a letter from the top in May stated workers will be fined for not using the step. We are not allowed to use any other method. I'm sorry mate, I wish I could help you here

flinty, thanks for your comments, maybe you could mention it to the powers that be, as an alternative to the step, not forgetting to mention the increase they would achieve in productivity. :idea:
ps get in amongst any brickie goes anywhere near them:laugh:

 

[dico]

its not everybodys cup of tea thats the step aswell but would love a scaffolder to get the patent rather than the coffee and biscuit brigade!!! rather your swimming pool get heated gerscaff than the present company