Apotheosis for the 'real' systainer.

[Frank Pellow]

Thanks for the pictures, Michael, but I must say the length of the handle negates my theory just a bit. It seems to me a slightly shorter handle would have resulted in less distortion. That said, 70 lbs. is way more than I will ever want to carry in a Sys stack.

Yes it does. The distance of your triangle theory is longer from the handle than the distance 4 lugs would be which is what I thought thats why the classic lid will bend less but like I said twice before I ain't seen it in person but the picture shows what I was on about any way.  I thought it was funny why people were agreeing with you even though your theory would of been correct with a shorter handle I couldnt understand even after the picture showed you that the handle was to long they agreed with you  [huh]  (Frank Pellow)

JMB

Guilty as charged.  [doh]

 

[mouppe]

In 10 years' time, will we all be moaning about the T-loc replacement?

 

[Michael_MA]

Thanks for the pictures, Michael, but I must say the length of the handle negates my theory just a bit. It seems to me a slightly shorter handle would have resulted in less distortion. That said, 70 lbs. is way more than I will ever want to carry in a Sys stack.

Yes Greg, i'm completly with you, it's an akward weight and i would never ever carry this around to make my spinal discs glad
I just tried to quickly put something together and was surprised myself how heavy the stack was getting..
Also on the next Test, i will put the strain more on the middle of the grip to simulate a human being carrying it..

@All: I'd like to ask the everybody here, what weight should i put on the T-LOC stack as a reasonable number for you.. maybe 45-50 lbs ?

kind regards, Mike

 

[James Metcalf]

In the rigging world A three point pick is statically determined. Example ; You are picking 100 lbs. Each leg must be good for 33 lbs.
If you pick the same load (100lbs) in a four point pick; Each leg must be good for 50 lbs.
This may or may not apply here, but something to think about.
James Metcalf
Barnhart Crane and Rigging

 

[Frank Pellow]

@All: I'd like to ask the everybody here, what weight should i put on the T-LOC stack as a reasonable number for you.. maybe 45-50 lbs ?

kind regards, Mike

Mike, I just weighed the heaviest stack that I carry on a regular basis and it weighed 23.5 kilos.  This is just a little above high end of the range that you suggested.

 

[jmbfestool]

Thanks for the pictures, Michael, but I must say the length of the handle negates my theory just a bit. It seems to me a slightly shorter handle would have resulted in less distortion. That said, 70 lbs. is way more than I will ever want to carry in a Sys stack.

Yes Greg, i'm completly with you, it's an akward weight and i would never ever carry this around to make my spinal discs glad
I just tried to quickly put something together and was surprised myself how heavy the stack was getting..
Also on the next Test, i will put the strain more on the middle of the grip to simulate a human being carrying it..

@All: I'd like to ask the everybody here, what weight should i put on the T-LOC stack as a reasonable number for you.. maybe 45-50 lbs ?

kind regards, Mike

Ill have a look what my GUN systainer weight is  thats the weight I think is the heaviest people would have in their systainers

JMB

 

[image132]

I don't know how heavy it is but I've picked up my CT22 via my TS55 that was connected to it. Don't know if that is a worthy weight? I'll measure a little later.

 

[Michael_MA]

I don't know how heavy it is but I've picked up my CT22 via my TS55 that was connected to it. Don't know if that is a worthy weight? I'll measure a little later.

Hi Chris,

the weight sounds reasonable, but unfortunatly i dont have the CT22, i'm using the SRM45 Planex as ShopVac and my TS55 Systainer is re-lauched as my "Werkzeug"-Tainer  [big grin]
But i'll get the weight somehow together, i understood something between 23 - 25 KG should be fine.

kind regards, Mike

 

[Michael_MA]

So, here we go..

for all Classic Systainer Fans (like me either..) here is the rub..

it bends as well with the "Load-Stack1 from above = 35,6 Kg.. here are the pictures..

Maybe not so good visible from the front, but from the side, the top and the rear.

 

[Wood_Junkie]

In the rigging world A three point pick is statically determined. Example ; You are picking 100 lbs. Each leg must be good for 33 lbs.
If you pick the same load (100lbs) in a four point pick; Each leg must be good for 50 lbs.
This may or may not apply here, but something to think about.
James Metcalf
Barnhart Crane and Rigging

I don't know anything about rigging, but wanted to clarify if you meant 25 lbs for the four-point example?  If it really is 50 lbs, why?

Also, just being nitpicky, I would hope in the 3 point pick that each leg is actually good for 34 lbs, as 33 each would be just a hair short, no? 
Again, just look at this from a math standpoint.

 

[AlexThePalex]

Thanks for the pics Michael. The bending of the lid looks far more acceptable with the classic systainer.

 

[Michael_MA]

Hmmm.. agreed Alex, but only if you dont stress the word "far" to much    .. cos the side gap in the middle looks quite close to the T-LOC with "Load-Stack-1"
...

But now here is the Ultimate Test..  with the new improved and hand optimized "Load-Stack-2" = 24,45 Kg  [thumbs up]
= 1 CXS + OFH2200 + OFH2200 Accessoires + 3 additional Kg  in the OFH2200 Systainer (weights see first picture)

and please excuse my fingers on the last three pictures.. i'm not holding, or pushing the lid, it's just the complete stack on the rope tended to turn away from the camera.. [embarassed]

 

[jmbfestool]

So my little Paint drawing is been proven correct by your pictures thank you!

JMB

 

[Michael_MA]

So my little Paint drawing is been proven correct by your pictures thank you!

JMB

Well, if your little paint drawing is ment to tell us: "Yes, the new T-LOC's are sturdy and will withstand the required work load.."  ..  then i would say Yes..  [thumbs up]

I think, we ALL made this efforts to verify the sturdiness and robustness of the T-LOC Systainer in conjunction with the Classics..
T-LOC  IS the way and i'm glad about it.. Damn did i hate it to remove exactly just THAT Systainer with the required tool within a stack of ten..

I'm sure, we get soon used to it.. and in a year we ill love it  [big grin]

 

[Corwin]

Michael,

Nice job of photographing the weighted stack of Systainers.  Good work and thank you.  [thumbs up]

Yet, I do not share your conclusion.  To me, the new T-Loc Systainer looks to be close to the point of failure, where the Classic Systainer has much further to go before reaching that point.  Consider what would happen if the lid of the new T-Loc were to bend just a little further upward and its side-to-side movement was no longer contained by box's inner lip -- wouldn't the new T-Loc latch come unlatched if the lid shifted sideways just a little?  Over time, I would think that the new lids, after repeated flexing would not be as strong as when new and might be more likely to cause a catastrophic failure.  The Classic Systainer doesn't have this potential.  I do see where we will love the ease of latching and unlatching the new T-Loc, but that will all be negated if just once we have a lid failure.

While we have considered this strength issue, there still remains the other aspects of these new T-Locs.  I may be wrong, but I don't see where they could/would offer the Drawer or Rack Systainers in the T-Loc design.  So, with the Classic Systainers we currently have, along with the Drawer and Rack Systainers, I just don't see these new T-Loc Systainers as a good fit with our system of storage.  Hopefully, my opinion of these will improve once I have my own T-Loc Systainers.

 

[mouppe]

Doesn't the experiment demonstrate that under expected reasonable loads, the t-locs can take the weight? I am sure if you increased the weight to 100kg it would fail, but I couldn't lift that much with one arm anyway.

And a certain amount of flex might be a good thing if it helps distribute the weight more effectively.

 

[Corwin]

Doesn't the experiment demonstrate that under expected reasonable loads, the t-locs can take the weight? I am sure if you increased the weight to 100kg it would fail, but I couldn't lift that much with one arm anyway.

And a certain amount of flex might be a good thing if it helps distribute the weight more effectively.

How do you figure that the flex is helping to distribute the weight more effectively?  That doesn't make any sense to me.

This does show that the lids of the new T-Locs flex under a load.  And, to a lesser amount, so do the lids on the Classic Systainers.  I just think these new T-Locs are more likely to experience a failure than the older models.  Over time, and in varying temperatures the new T-Locs may prove to have a flawed design.  I fail to see any way that this new design is going to be stronger than our current Systainers, so I do question the choice to go forward with the change.

 

[jmbfestool]

Doesn't the experiment demonstrate that under expected reasonable loads, the t-locs can take the weight? I am sure if you increased the weight to 100kg it would fail, but I couldn't lift that much with one arm anyway.

And a certain amount of flex might be a good thing if it helps distribute the weight more effectively.

I dont understand how it distributes the weight?!?!  The weight is always on the lugs even if the lid bends its still on the lugs.

JMB

 

[mouppe]

Doesn't the experiment demonstrate that under expected reasonable loads, the t-locs can take the weight? I am sure if you increased the weight to 100kg it would fail, but I couldn't lift that much with one arm anyway.

And a certain amount of flex might be a good thing if it helps distribute the weight more effectively.

I dont understand how it distributes the weight?!?!  The weight is always on the lugs even if the lid bends its still on the lugs.

JMB

Yes, the total weight remains the same, but when the lid flexes maybe more of the weight is directed to the rear of the systainer and away from the t-loc where it might be stronger.

I don't really know, I was just thinking out loud.

 

[Coen]

I think it's also important to note that with the classic systainer, the only lid that was under stress was the lid of the systainer that was on top of the stack. With the T-loc systainers, each and every lid in the stack is under stress.

I also wonder how long the bottom of the T-loc systainers will last if you push them around on the pavement of the garage. The bottom feet now have a function when stacking.