Tg20:13

jimbo20uk

jimbo20uk

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2010
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Location
North London
What does everyone think about this then ?????

Apparently a re-write of 20:08 is on on the cards just in time for Christmas :nuts:

NEW TRAINING / NEW BOOKS / NEW RULES AND REGS

DO WE REALLY NEED THIS ????
 
I don't know much about it but I am hoping it will give us more scope without having to run to a designer every 5 minutes to put a simple job up, what about you?
 
Too many designers connected to the NASC for that to happen
 
TG20:13?????.........Are you kidding???

The industry hasn't universally adopted 08 yet!!!! When is this absolute waste of time (AND OUR MONEY!!) publication hitting the streets then? What are the changes & differences within it then?? **** me.....the NASC keep changing these Regs. faster than a Premiership Team changes it's ******* shirts!! What is the point of this rewrite????? Who is profitting from this pointless episode??? The cowboys will just keep following TG: **** ALL & all the NASC members will get bogged down with more *****:D:D

Come on then Jimbo! Fill in the gaps??:mad:
 
If they don`t relax the rules on design drawings for nearly everything the construction industry is going to grind to a complete standstill due to the shortage of designers
 
can't see them going back on design requirements at this stage, with regard to chasing loads back and working out exactly how over/under stressed each element is to ensure that the required factors of safety are in place, but a few more standard details would be helpful (not for me obviously!)........the problem with anything simple involving beams, for example, is that the guidance has to be impartial and can't mention any one particular 'brand' (steel ladder beams are ok as they have generic properties, but everyones going away from these).........in my opinion, in this regard, it would be up to the beam manufacturers to prepare their own standard details for their own beams in order to give scaffolders some breathing space.........
just my 2cents, for what it's worth..... (easy now........)
 
I agree GM, hence my high hopes for the re write.
 
TG 20:08 covers many basic scaffolding structures included sheeted jobs. A simple generic design scheme package can be sourced to cover loading bays, cantilivers ect. Why does it need to be rewritten????
 
Tg20

In the absence of any British Standard (BS 5973 withdrawn) TG 20 is the standard for scaffolding in the UK otherwise we would have had a European Standard (EN1139 for systems) imposed which would have put all T&F companies out of business. Whilst not ideal lets hope the re-write offers some improvements.
 
I agree with your desire to see some improvements but can't agree with t=f companies going out of business, it would just have meant we would be out of line with our European cousins which is not too unusual. Have you seen how they put them up?
 
The job with the wooden transomes is a picture postcard compared with some scaffolds i have seen in Portugal
 
Exactly, I don't get it, no surprise I suppose but are we the only country in Europe to try and follow these guide lines and if so why aren't we still writing our own?
 
Has anyone seen the draft proposed content---any NASC Member got any info they would like to share ???
 
Chances are Gary you will get a copy in your in box before I ever see it.:D
 
Garry Adams said:
Has anyone seen the draft proposed content---any NASC Member got any info they would like to share ???
Click to expand...

I am sure both Simian & Safety & Access will have a draft copy?:idea:

Regarding design briefs.....BS:5975 (Temporary Works) can be used to design any type of T&F structure! TG20 is not the only reference point/standard......
 
Alistair

Perhaps your right, I'll have to give Ian a call...

I wonder what delights they have en-store for us eh...

Im guessing Torque Values will appear ;)...

What would you like to see included ???

Garry...
 
As usual I will be far wrong and knowing your contacts I wouldn't be surprised if you have a bit of inside info but it would surprise me if there were torque values in it as technology has not yet caught up with it.

I am honestly not that bothered about the regs as long as we all have to follow them but I would dearly love to see a lot more scope for following known design principles. We all know a beam can go in and span say 8 meters without 8 pages of mind numbing calculations that mean nothing to your average scaff. Just a bit more freedom to exercise our experience would be nice, that last picture I posted on the other thread was solid and would stand any loading or adverse weather you could throw at it but would in no way be compliant just a few years later.
 
If I'm not mistaken British Standard (BS5973) was withdrawn and replaced with
(BSEN12811). Whilst this is not a law in the UK it is however a British Standard and it is recognised legally as the minimum accepted level of work.
This states that all scaffolds must be designed.... TG20 was released by the NASC as a way of working that permitted a basic scaffold to be built without a design. The main floor was that TG20 stated only four load classes and made no allowance for towers, birdcages etc and as such according to minimum standards these both needed a design. I believe TG20:13 is addressing this detail.....But as stated above some ofthe small companies never gave a t**ss about TG20:08 or BS5973 so i doubt they will care much about this either..... untill they face a judge in court, if that should be the case, so for them yes its a wast of time, for those that take the game seriously then it should make BSEN12811 a litle more workable in the UK
 
Last edited:
Not all small companies Geoff but I take your point.
 
Going on recent history, can you honestly see them making things simpler and taking away some of the ridiculous regulations that they have introduced?

They're talking about TG20:13, am I right in thinking they fecked up TG20:08 with the wrong wind tables?

How about they get the existing regs right before they start drafting the next lot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom