System?

AOM.....from my experiance here in the States, Systems is the only way to go. Almost no scaffold company in America uses just Tube and Clamp(fitting)
we have all sytems as well swivel clamps, right angles and every size tube there is, but i've been on jobs at oil refineries that had upwards of 2,000 different scaffold in some pretty tight places and we almost never have to use T&F, and if we do its a combination of System and T&F. It's not like a customer says "hey i need to get to that pipe and make a weld" and we say "well that space is to tight for our scaffold material" we get every scaffold to fit.....And of all the Systems i've used the Pin-lock, Sure lock Layher (whatever u wanna call it) has always been the best. Drop the pin in the ring and give it 1 tap w/ a hammer and its done. **** Cuplok, that **** is barely ahead of T&F in erection and dismantle times and it does horrible things to the elbow from beating the **** out of the cups w/ your hammer.
 
for simple straight lines, system is excellent..lift shafts and risers are a breeze...but start getting imaginative with it and your fcuked... the spanner will be coming out along with good old tubes and fittings to fix a problem... fat brickies love the stuff so they dont have to lift their fat legs over ledger braces.
 
Assessment part 2

what the waiting time after your portfolio has been sent back to assessment date.Or how the fuk do i post a new thread here so confusing this forum is
 
At SGB we had a general rule that Cuplok was good for existing buildings and T&F for new builds due to the tie patterns / flexibility of each system. Cuplok was inflexible with ties so needed an exisitng facade to make it work better. T&F is more flexible with tying rules.

Unfortunately most of the estimators priced all jobs in Cuplok with its better productivity rates then we lost our pants on the job when they tried to make a square peg fit a round hole.

If it came down to Layher v. Cuplok then I would go Layher as it is more flexible with ties and they are doing more deelopment. The problem with system though is they have developed a billion components for every scenario and naturally you don't buy all those bits to have them lying around 11 months a year. So everyone thinks system is in-flexible as they only have the basic components.
 
IDH said:
At SGB we had a general rule that Cuplok was good for existing buildings and T&F for new builds due to the tie patterns / flexibility of each system. Cuplok was inflexible with ties so needed an exisitng facade to make it work better. T&F is more flexible with tying rules.

Unfortunately most of the estimators priced all jobs in Cuplok with its better productivity rates then we lost our pants on the job when they tried to make a square peg fit a round hole.

If it came down to Layher v. Cuplok then I would go Layher as it is more flexible with ties and they are doing more deelopment. The problem with system though is they have developed a billion components for every scenario and naturally you don't buy all those bits to have them lying around 11 months a year. So everyone thinks system is in-flexible as they only have the basic components.
Click to expand...

Couldn't they have fixed the cuplok ties progressively with the new build?
 
I agree that layher is more flexible but as you said there are a lot of components, layher has more than cuplock because of this I think cuplock would be quicker but yeah layher is more rounded so very hard to decide between the 2
 
hswt - cuplok needs to be tied every line not every other as t&f / layher. Also given the 2-2.5 lifts the chances of hitting a slab / column were slim. Yes you can if its a brick facade but we were trying to put it on rainscreen facades!
 
IDH said:
hswt - cuplok needs to be tied every line not every other as t&f / layher. Also given the 2-2.5 lifts the chances of hitting a slab / column were slim. Yes you can if its a brick facade but we were trying to put it on rainscreen facades!
Click to expand...

Rainscreen facades usually have a structural back up. Or you could have done buttresses.
Would have thought SGB would have found a solution or even amended the manufacturers specs.:p
 
IDH said:
hswt - cuplok needs to be tied every line not every other as t&f / layher. Also given the 2-2.5 lifts the chances of hitting a slab / column were slim. Yes you can if its a brick facade but we were trying to put it on rainscreen facades!
Click to expand...

Not according to my training in Genlock, you would think they just copied and pasted the tube tie pattern.

---------- Post added at 06:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:55 PM ----------
richie34 said:
what the waiting time after your portfolio has been sent back to assessment date.Or how the fuk do i post a new thread here so confusing this forum is
Click to expand...

Give it a chance Richie there is a new thread button top left of the main forum, it's green.
 
It didn't really matter what the tie rules were - our installers generally ignored them anyway and did it as t&f. Personally I was generally happy to see any ties in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom