S
southernpoofter
Guest
garry, not all of us can afford the outlay of system- if we all thought that way then t&f would be dead and buried, i think thats the whole idea and the amount of time its taken to try and produce and then implement tg20 to bring us in line with current eu regs , but you show me a eu country that complety adheres to eu regs,
T&F is inherently british and would be an economic disaster to go all out and phase it away,with that in mind all the extra cost for design etc has to be taken by the main contractor.
its going to be interesting to see the nasc re-write on tg20, and then how much it slows down their bid for world domination with the main contractors as the peeny starts to drop with the main contractors that how much its gonna cost the industry to implement the nasc as "THE" guidence which they will eventually hope the hse bring in as law
---------- Post added at 08:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:43 PM ----------
desighn is vain of my life at the moment as a company ,we're to big to be small and too small to be big.
most of the time i can get away with a generic such as the ones i sent u, but recently its taken more time than the client is prepared to wait so we end up in a kind of virtual scaffold between me erecting it ,photo of it and email it to desighner to turn into dwg- but the costs and time involved as well as implementing sg4 have seen my profit margins fall by as much as 30% on some contracts
Garry Adams
Well-known member
SF
I merely introduced the Load Bearing Coupler because a Single Coupler is categorized as a positional Coupler, the fulcrum on the node point the inside ledger and the transom is subject to a down ward force all be it only .75Kn, however, to mitigate against over loading and or a shock load applied to the inside boards it may prove prudent to apply load bearing couplers to the outside ledger and transom node point---I do not wish to be pedantic, however, the TG : 2008 and Design Calculations started the critical calculations...
I merely introduced the Load Bearing Coupler because a Single Coupler is categorized as a positional Coupler, the fulcrum on the node point the inside ledger and the transom is subject to a down ward force all be it only .75Kn, however, to mitigate against over loading and or a shock load applied to the inside boards it may prove prudent to apply load bearing couplers to the outside ledger and transom node point---I do not wish to be pedantic, however, the TG : 2008 and Design Calculations started the critical calculations...
S
southernpoofter
Guest
fully agree garry, the design calc are only part of it, i think my designers worries were more with the ability of the inside ledgers compression ratio on a larger bay in excess of 2m than the overhang at the end of the 3 inside brds to potential uplift to the outside legerline and in turn the failure of a non loadbearing fitting - it was his conclusion to lower the bay to a max of 1.8m & additional transoms, i dont know where the aberdeens came from alister lolo- but agreed it's a lot more work than one would like but the other option is to revert to 2 inside brds with full returns to both sides of the stack -and with time & motion which would proberbly be more time consuming and therefore not as cost effective as a straight run of approx 12-14m
S
southernpoofter
Guest
lolo @ alister.... how'd u mean we gonna have to remove the thread?
S
southernpoofter
Guest
lolo pmsl lolo where u think we are hadrians wall fell well before the berlin wall lolo
where did you find it,somewhere you wernt ment to be lookin
where did you find it,somewhere you wernt ment to be lookin
Alan Reade
Well-known member
Morning AOM
Talk to Bill Ferguson at Scaftec, top end Engineer (Glasgow Based but I think he has a guy in Aberdeen Stewart Campbell)
---------- Post added at 01:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:52 AM ----------
I have in the past had a lot to do with extending transoms. Van Thiel do a 3 board extender and I think it will take quite a high load.
Remember this will not ovecome the ledger problem or the uplift problem.
copperknackers
Well-known member
Alister
used the van thiel extenders at the last place i worked and never had a problem with the the loading on the 3 inside boards, 5 trannies per fleet, and we worked for people like carillion, BAM, kiers and such. The 3 boards we only in until the brickwork came up through the lift. If there was any cladding or insulation to do on the job they would work on the 3 inside boards in front of the brickies, then as the brickwork progressed past the lift, we'd lose the 3 board so that the brickies would be working from 2 inside boards and 2 board hop ups. If that makes sense?!? I'll find out the loading on them today and post it tonight for ya.
He who Dares Wins
Well-known member
Three inside boards max for Light duty ( painting scaffolds ) and two inside boards max for anything more load bearing. The regs here in Australia is two board overhang on ledger or transom ( putlog here ) any more than two will require picking up .
Extra transoms as Daz's pointed out is the way to go for more than three boards.
Extra transoms as Daz's pointed out is the way to go for more than three boards.
I was doing a roof edge protection job this morning and as part of the job we had to build a 13" ladder tower and just for a wee experiment I put 3 inside boards on it coming off a 5 board deck. When I went up to stand on it I felt like that wee Tom Daly on the diving board.
I know Scafftec very well Alan but find it hard to get them interested in the smaller stuff, they are very good at what they do and therefore very busy.
If the extendas don't solve the problem off uplift on the outside ledger what is the point off them and does that mean you still need a design to use them at that distance?
I know Scafftec very well Alan but find it hard to get them interested in the smaller stuff, they are very good at what they do and therefore very busy.
If the extendas don't solve the problem off uplift on the outside ledger what is the point off them and does that mean you still need a design to use them at that distance?
Alan Reade
Well-known member
The extenders do solve the uplift issue through the transom unit as it has a coupler both ends (van thiel has load bearing couplers, I had some made and welded singles in place of the wedge couplers) the uplift force on the ledger would be less than the dowanward force induced by the imposed load on the main deck unit and is not normally a problem. The accumulated uplift at a standard joint may be an issue depending on where the joint falls and how many cantilerer working lifts you have. The spring board effect has always been an issue hence the norm would be to undersling and spur, this is however not always possible. As I was told as a trainee if it dont flex it will break, the answer is dont stand so close to the end of the cantilever LOL
regards
Alan
regards
Alan
MURPHY111
Member
I think you all need to get out more often
marra watson
Moderator
You can buy the 3 board extendas not surer from which name they can be bourght but i know for a fat they were used on bovis and lendlease jobs on the olyumpics and am sure it was for reason that copper nakers has stated thast brickies dropped down from 2 - 3 boards once other trades had done there bit so if they were used on there any were should accept them tbh but ya never no
Alan Reade
Well-known member
I converted a lot of odd length tube to sliding (extending) transoms whilst I was at Bow I think Trad bought most of them. A very good product if you can get hold of them.
marra watson
Moderator
I we got a few propper extendars with like you say the wedge some have onyl 1 some have 2 wedges and are a night mare to get with 2 wedges in yav to leave the ledger loose to get both wedges in lol and some our gaffer has nocked up with the frames fomr sunday market stores that hold the canpoy on them if you get me just 1,000's of 5 ft with those slid in work fine lol
E
essex
Guest
you give it all you have been on massive jobs earning loads of money, and looking at your profile have nearly every ticket going, bu you think it is ok to have 3 inside boards without a standard or a spur, you must be a bigger slashing prick then i thought!
Last edited: