Scaffolding as a basic stage structure

[Junior8]

; just make sure they are also competent to design it for your situation (you need to tell them about the additional timber deck and the sand etc.), or that they pass the design on to someone else who is competent to design it. Ask them to provide proper calcs so you are sure this is the case.

 

Since the Dreamspace judgement this advice is a must. You need proof in your hands that this has been done. DSA is also right to mention building control, indeed I can think of one case, where I was personally involved though happily not directly, where the licensing officer called them in to look at a scaff built stage which had to then be reinforced. In this case it was the deflection of the boards during dance which was the issue - that's a matter to keep well in mind with this method of staging.

[Robin D]

Or if its only 4 feet, can you not use a timber tie to connect the top of the flat directly to the stable? Potentially simpler and more rigid.

[Tom]

regards attaching flats, french brace and stage weights have worked for years......

Oh come on - everybody is freaking out about the stage blowing away and you suggest that...!?

Even in the sheltered confines of a courtyard a good gust of wind will have a braced flat over, not to mention a good kick from a passing turn.

[paulears]

Are we not following our usual tendency to doom and gloom and dismiss, without just standing back a little. Of course there are many scaff companies who haven't a clue - but the same applies to purpose built decking hire too. Viewing the project from a little difference seems to me to be an ideal combination of scaff and decking - the playing surface being decking for simplicity and potential speed (and cost) - coupled with vertical 'interesting' elements to produce the surfaces covering the entrances and exits. None of this is alien to the professional scaffolding firms - they spend most of their time on big projects constructing safe and complex support systems - very often with cladding to protect what goes on inside. These kind of projects are properly planned and designed - they don't just turn up with a lorry of scaff and let the erection team just start to build. This seems an ideal project to combine the different techniques and products. Sometimes I feel the doom and gloom prevails, rather than an exciting project that just needs the correct people and time applied.

 

DSA has it right, I believe. His advice is simply to get it designed properly by people who know how to do this - but this doesn't mean you lose control. You produce some drawings of what you want, then let the people who know turn the drawing into something that will work, be safe and be insurable.

 

A festival stage in high wind seems quite a different type of structure to a scaff layman. Nowadays we all seem to be experts and assume that we should say no, unless there is a reason to say yes - when surely we should be positive and encourage this kind of things, but make sure the experts are involved.

[kerry davies]

Really and truly if you are getting a professional company in to construct the stage they should be given all the requirements and asked for advice. It is highly likely that flats could be supported by an integrated scaffolding design as you will need one if only for the legs. (Crosspost with Paul here and I agree that as long as you get "a man who can" it shouldn't be problematic.)

 

If I am right in where I think DSA works then take his word as gospel, that firm has at least one member who is "world-leading" on temporary structures and has experience of the practical side of disaster recovery, not just the theory.

 

Having done many site-specific performances I am loath to "hide" entrances and backstage elements in a manner more appropriate to a theatre. Can you not make a feature of a problem and direct the piece in relation to the site? Audiences have a higher level of suspension of disbelief in the open air and particularly in the built environment. You have a chance to do something creative with the site so why hide it?

[ramdram]

Whilst on another errand to the outfit in Millbrook I asked about stage loading and being covered in sand. (This comes under the heading of things I never knew...)

 

Having a layer of sand and water poured over same and stage was doable, had been done, and they were not that bothered if it happened again.

 

I was then given to understand that stages, according to the "regs", should be able to withstand/support certain weights, and the below platform support rails, so to speak, should be on 600mm centres. Note the should...

 

The platform itself should be 18mm minimum (IIRC) and to a certain "strength". You can google that stuff if interested.

 

Some of their stages were rated at 5.5kN/m2 or 560kgf/m2, up to Steeldeck at 7.5kN/m2 or 765kgf/m2. (For those who had momentarily "forgotten", inc' myself, you are supposed to use kilogram force or kgf in a conversion from Newton, as it is an SI unit of force.)

 

This may be of use for those interested in the conversion thing, and the site offers much, much more on that sort of conversion gen, just follow the links:

 

http://www.convert-me.com/en/convert/pressure#nmsq

 

And, if anyone was interested in Steeldeck and the force you can apply:

 

http://www.steeldeck.co.uk/original-steeldeck.htm

 

with a handy snap demonstrating its ability to park lorries...

 

Interestingly there is a link on that page to a further test by BSI bods who confirmed that the official load rating is actually a bit on the conservative side.

 

So the conclusion is, I believe, that if you need a stage then get a proper stage. It is purpose designed and fit for purpose.

 

What might be an issue, as has been alluded to above, is if you have to load said stage with sand and people say, is that the surface on which the stage sits can carry the load.

[johnlinford]

Some of their stages were rated at 5.5kN/m2 or 560kgf/m2, up to Steeldeck at 7.5kN/m2 or 765kgf/m2. (For those who had momentarily "forgotten", inc' myself, you are supposed to use kilogram force or kgf in a conversion from Newton, as it is an SI unit of force.)

 

Just a bit of pedantry, but kgf is not, and never has been, an SI unit for force, that would be the Newton. The 'kilogram-force' is the force exerted by 1kg under Earth's standard gravity, so 1kgf == 9.80665 N. The reason for use of the unit is ease of interpretation - you'd have to do a bit of maths to work out how many kilograms you can load given the rating at 7.5kN/sqm; the kgf number tells you exactly. If you use the slightly easier number of 10N/kg, it gives you a little bit of room for error and easier maths.

[ramdram]

** laughs out loud **, you forgot the comma JL.

 

Plus the links make it easier to read about the difference in force etc, etc...

 

And, the only folk doing the math would be the stage provider/erector. They are professionals and it is they who get paid to do the sums and provide the "underbase", aka baulks of timber, or steel sheets. This is useful from a legal point of view...