How feckin much???

don't know about this fitting,is it two half pieces of a double welded together?.
wouldn't fancy a hanger or such with these fitings,as would we be reliant on the integrity of the weld itself.
a lot of legislation with this fitting maybe.
 
In reality any company working on housing, shopfronts and general light access work might find these fittings over engineered and costly for the type of scaffolds they are supplying. Although a small number in stock for selective works (eg H/D loading bays) would possibly be a worthwhile move.
 
Nice idea, and hope there's a market for them. Dont think they will be as versatile as a mills.
 
Im going to ask Santa Klawz for the Data sheet…

There is nothing new under the Sun, same idea as Mills 90 sprung steel…

Why did they not forge the whole fittings body in a oner ???…weld must be inherent week point ???

do the klawz have a micro chip tracker at that price :eek:
 
New fitting

These new doubles will do what is explained in the promotion /sales pitch , when using Sgb ready lock transom sin a run and you have to go around a bay these fittings are used to move the standard out buy about an inch from the ledger . If you use a normal double its only about half an inch . I don't think they are going to be used as a mills double .
 
agree, the Mills were streets better, just saying that you can get trainee to ledger somewhat similar to Millsiz, but, I mentioned earlier post, Mills were sprung steel and in my humble view better than dropped forge…

Millsiz V Klawz = Millsiz every time…just my personal opinion...
 
Be good of we could set up a 2 squads
Mills V Klawz ,,,,,8x8 tower up and down one lift ?
I bit to old to compete myself, But could be in the Millsiz corner man
Just a sunday afternoon tea break pipe dream ,
 
Although credit needs to be given to the development of these, I cant see the benefit outweighing the cost!
 
Ellon941 said:
Although credit needs to be given to the development of these, I cant see the benefit outweighing the cost!
Click to expand...
Hi Ellon...
Quality of component parts has always been a point for discussion, there is a case for benefit outweighing the cost, however, from a Technical Authority point of view the Data sheet for the klaws boasts a 30 Kg rating, this maybe a point of concern when Designing a Scaffold Structure to its optimum, Designers may Calculate on 30 Kg optimum, I know that their safety factors engineered into the Structure, the 30 Kg is a unique selling point and in part a selling tool…

As for the welded joints, as we know as a rule of thumb 1 inch of weld will hold 1t, however, still a week point susceptible to large stress load and if not full protected will impinging on the integrity of the the weld during its cyclic service, I not saying it a bad coupler, its about an educated choice and horses for courses...
 
18 months to develop and test apparently.?????:wondering:
30 kn loading. upgraded calcs in bracing.?????
 
Garry, with so much class A and class B doubles already in use we will always design a the lowest factor (class A) as it is likely there will be an unknown mix.
I get the idea, but cant see it taking off big time. Just use a set on the transom, job done!
 
Ellon941 said:
Garry, with so much class A and class B doubles already in use we will always design a the lowest factor (class A) as it is likely there will be an unknown mix.
I get the idea, but cant see it taking off big time. Just use a set on the transom, job done!
Click to expand...

I concur T…safety factors apply…the proof test must have been taken to the Max, perhaps not to the point of distraction, however, for the uninitiated it may appear that Klaws will provide more frictional force than alternative couplers in the Market Place…

Aye, my thoughts were if one uses Calcs at (class A) why would you require the Klaws rating ???
 
I thought these fitting were introduced to omit ledger bracing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom