Page 1 of 2
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 3:11 pm
by LandscapeLou
Hi all, this is my first time to post but have spent many years using the fab info in and about the archive and pages.
Anyway- my question is this- To cut Marshalls Tegula 80mm 160 gauge - which of a Block splitter or masonry bench saw is best in the long run?
I work for a local authority and am currently "discussing" with the highways engineer a scheme which is onsite already. He had specified in the contract that the Tegula blocks were all to be sawn cut, with suitable apparatus. The sub contractors continue to use a splitter, They state that it is more than adequate to do the job well as well as quieter and less dangerous (their insurance may not also cover use of a saw). The engineer is concerned that as the blocks are being laid on the highway (860m2+ of road, footway and parking spaces to be trafficked by anything including refuse vehicles), that splitting does not offer a clean enough and therefore long lasting solution. He feels it will probably create more maintenance in the long run (the lack of is something which us authoritities often get moaned about!). Does anyone have a definative answers for this?
Thanks
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 5:26 pm
by Rich H
In my opinion, it has to be the saw, particularly if you have curves, etc. Either way, the quality of the finish has more to do with the operator than the tool!
If the contractor doesn't have insurance to cover the use of a saw then I'm amazed they qualified to bid for the job in the first place.
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:59 pm
by Pablo
Structurally a splitter should be fine but Tegula can be a bit hit and miss with regards to getting a neat cut. Any cut joint should be >5mm preferably 3mm so don't see how maintenance etc would be an issue. As long as it is correctly sanded and the base is good it should be fine. Strange they have no insurance for saw cutting. Not understanding his gripe about cleancut versus longevity but he (or she) is an engineer so it's probably jobsworth Boll*cks anyway. I would use a saw personally but plenty wouldn't.
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:01 pm
by surreyhillslandscapes.com
A block splitter, if both the man and the tool are up to scratch should be fine for the majority of the cuts, I use a block splitter then run a diamond saw through the joint after, looks like its been saw cut and takes half the time. but if it states that they have to be saw cuts in the contract then surley they can't really argue ?
Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:13 pm
by matt h
They have not met the spec and so could technically be in breach of contract. A saw is definately better, but noise and dust containment/slurry is an issue
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 12:29 am
by lutonlagerlout
i am a splitter convert,saws are dangerous noisy and dusty
splitters are not
obviously there will always be cuts that need to be sawn but minimising this reduces risk and pollution
the operator is the key
LLL 
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 12:56 am
by matt h
what splitter do you recommend?
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:31 pm
by surreyhillslandscapes.com
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:09 pm
by LandscapeLou
Hi all, and thanks for the help so far. It seems a mixed result, but having been on site to compare the two cutting techniques, I have to agree that the sawn is a better finish. There will be some radius work too, so a consistent finish is very important. The tumbled blocks just crumble a bit too much when split, which I agree could be a future maintenance issue. I think for road building that these sensitive edges should be finished to the highest standard and I will take the engineers advice on this! (even if it is a bit noisier and dustier)
As for insurance, I think they were just trying to make excuses not to do the saw work! Maybe I'll post some photos or a web link when it's done. Thanks again.
Posted: Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:06 pm
by Rich H
There shouldn't be much dust, if any, if used with a water attachment. The poor operator just ends up with a nice plastercast!
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 12:01 am
by Tony McC
Tumbled blocks should not "crumble" when split. If they do, then they're crap blocks and should be sent back. There is no processing reason why tumbling should compromise "splitability".
The new guidelines on saw-cutting are to be launched on May 6th. These will have the effect of increasing costs (ever so slightly) for contractors, and if you follow the guidance from Interpave, there is no good reason NOT to use a splitter. Let your RE argue against that.
On an aesthetic point: you have tumbled blocks, with distressed edges, and then you saw cut, producing a block with three distressed and one neat edge. That's weird, a bit like saw-cutting reclaimed yorkstone: it just shouldn't be done.
Sawn or split, in 3 months they'll all look the same, but the saw option will have generated clouds of dust or lagoons of icky slurry, along with plumes of fumes and CO2, while the splitter will have produced clean off-cuts, some gritty residue, and two squirts of WD40.
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 1:52 pm
by matt h
Maybe I,ll become a convert.. let you know how i get on :;):
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 2:39 pm
by surreyhillslandscapes.com
You'll probably get the arse with it at first and want to send it back, but once you get the hang of it, you'll want to buy another one for the other arm. :p
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 11:51 am
by Bob_A
matt h wrote:what splitter do you recommend?
What about these type of splitters.
http://www.tool-net.co.uk/p-31495....er.html
They're often sold on ebay for £50 -£80
I realise there are plenty of tradesmen on the forum and they need something a bit more professional, I've been lead to believe these mini splitters are not as robust and take longer to get the jod done but I'm in no hurry.
Probably the biggest advantages is cost and size. After all those big Probst jobbies don't half take up some storage space!
So what's the verdict please, would this splitter be ok for a diyer doing some home projects
Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 12:09 pm
by Dave_L
That splitter looks a little DIY and flimsy - although I would reserve judgement until I actually saw it in the flesh.
You can't beat a Probst!