Talk:Acrow prop

Acrow is a company that introduced the first widely used adjustable steel shoring post in the UK. This is a brand name made generic, like Kleenex, but I suspected it was not a commonly used one, having used these devices on many occasions yet never having seen or heard this term. The term I used was always "jack post", but I was aware this was not exclusive either.

A common term for this device "adjustable steel column", although the terms "telescoping", "jack", "screw jack", "pier", "prop", "shore" and "post" can be used interchangeably. For instance, there's the "adjustable jack post", Home Depot's "shoring post", "adjustable steel post", the ["adjustable steel column", "adjustable steel prop", "adjustable steel shoring post" and even the "lally column", in spite of the fact that the actual Lally column was something fairly different.

So, whenever I'm faced with these sorts of terminology issues, I normally turn to Google Books for a quick look at how the terms are used in the literature. This turned up:

1200 adjustable steel post 882 post shore 815 adjustable jack post 707 adjustable steel column 396 adjustable steel prop 106 Acrow prop 85 shoring post 77 adjustable steel shore

As you can see, even the trades to not commonly use the term "Acrow prop". The #1 hit among the terms above was 4440 for Lally column, but the vast majority of these used the term properly, as a concrete-filled post. Likewise, "shore post" was too generic to get anything useful.

And although it's not quite as useful, a normal Google hunt is useful too:

330000 adjustable steel prop 291000 post shore 83800 adjustable steel post 88100 adjustable jack post 51000 adjustable steel column 42900 shoring post 32000 Acrow prop 18900 adjustable steel shore

In this case the clear winner is "adjustable steel prop", which is the most common term used in China. Acrow prop does better in this case, but is still clearly not a common term. I called my local Home Depot and asked for a Acrow prop and they had no idea what I meant, but "shoring post" got me to the right desk instantly.

So now to a patent search. As the basis for the term "acrow prop" is based on its invention in 1935 in the UK, I simply looked for examples of similar devices prior to that time. This turned up literally hundreds of hits, and a number of these turn out to be significantly similar. For instance, this 1932 patent shows a device called "adjustable shoring" that is similar with the exception of the position of the jack. this patent] is identical to the modern version, and references patents all the way back to 1904. I couldn't find these, oddly, but I did find this one from 1916 which appears to be the same thing with the exception of the form on top. Given this, I suspect that the Acrow is no the precedence setting example, but I'll keep working on this line.

So, given that there is a generic term that is widely used around the world, including the UK and other areas where Acrow prop is also used, while Acrow prop is only sometimes used and largely in the UK and Oz/Kiwiland, it seems that this article should be moved to the generic version to avoid confusion.

Comments? Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

• Opppose You're only doing this to troll my spelling correction of your mis-spelling of tachymetric. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:48, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Wow, you're accusing me of trolling and bad faith editing? After making many edits to the article, and explaining them in depth? And then RVing all of those edits six months later without any attempt to contact me or any other involved editor. I am re-doing the edits. Do not make similar changes without explaining your reasons here first. Maury Markowitz (talk) 19:38, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

You appear to have mistaken this article on Acrow props for a different article on jack posts. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:45, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Please describe the difference - how is an Acrow prop different from a jack post. One might be confused, notably as you have repeatedly REDIRed the later to the former, which implies they are the same, or similar. Further, please address the issues I raised, in considerable depth, above. Specifically, there are large regional differences in terminology for this item (I came to this page to post an image of my screw post) so you will have to demonstrate conclusively that Acrow prop somehow differs much more materially than the others in this manner. Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:55, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

First of all, Acrow prop is an article on a notable topic, with supporting references. De Vigier invented and named them, the term is now genericised to the Hoover & Sellotape level, at least in the UK. This is enough to make an article stand. Write jack prop by all means and expand it to cover the vast range of others out there, but there is no reason to merge the article on this one product into it. ...And yes, "Acrow" is the common term in use for all of them to this day (UK at least), true Acrow or not.

Secondly, the Acrow design was, AIUI, novel and unique as a screw-adjustable shoring prop. The "Adjustable Shoring" patent you cite could be used for centring during construction, but not on its own for shoring during repair. It's adjustable, but only in discrete steps. As masonry is both stiff and brittle, it's essential that any shoring added can be adjusted to fit exactly, otherwise it takes no weight and it's really not a good idea to let a wall 'settle' onto its shores. Props before the Acrow, including that in the patent, were packed into place with timber wedges. The Acrow innovation was the infinitesimally adjustable screw thread.

Finally, Acrows are far stronger than most other jack props. Compare the weight loadings for the cited products.Now there's no reason why both large and small props can't be designed and made, but clearly most of the non-Acrow models are not a functional replacement for the branded Acrow article. It's particularly noticeable if you compare the ratios of prop mass vs. supported weight. Andy Dingley (talk) 07:51, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

with supporting references: We don't need references that show someone uses the term, we need references that show someone uses the term in order to differentiate itself from the generic. As the article stands there is a single technical reference, BS Props, which does not even have the term Acrow in it. This means that you are using the term generically, yet arguing the opposite. And it's not just you, the standard you refer to, British Standard BS4074: 1982 , is called "Specification for metal props and struts". All of this evidence, provided by you, demonstrates the term is generic.

Acrow design was, AIUI, novel and unique: Failed to demonstrate, no citations provided.

Acrows are far stronger than most other jack props: Failed to demonstrate, no citations provided (well there is one, but it demonstrates the exact opposite).

no reason why, clearly, particularly noticeable Personal reflections, unsupported.

You need to provide an RS CITE that clearly and unambiguously states something to the effect that "many people use the term Acrow Prop to refer to any [adjustable post], but in fact the Acrow is distinct and should not be confused." If this is true, then it should be easy to clearly demonstrate - like the article on Kleenex, which starts right off by demonstrating the difference between the brand and the generic product. So far the only evidence you have provided is the exact opposite. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Should 'Jack Post' and 'Acrow Prop' be merged?

As a reference I quote the conversation I had with Andy Dingley on my [User talk] page before I noticed that much of what I wrote had been discussed here earlier. Meanwhile Andy has reverted the merger:

Acrow prop

I see that you've gone ahead and merged this, despite there being very clear disagreement as to the virtues of merging it. Also the refs in there, from Acrow prop still don't support this new name of "Jack post". Andy Dingley (talk) 13:52, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about this, Andy. I clearly have to take the blame for not looking at the talk pages before merging the two articles. Both articles being quite short and marked as "stubs" I did not expect any content on the talk page at all. But now I certainly regret not having checked this.

I did look at the Google-search results and more than a million entries for Jack post versus around 80.000 for Acrow prop. My understanding was that an Acrow prop is a subtype of Jack post but I am not a native speaker and admittedly do not have a full grasp of the subtle differences between American and British terminology. But I thought I'd do Acrow prop justice by moving all content and references and making Acrow prop a paragraph of its own.

Now I cannot find the talk page of the former Jack post article so I assume there was no content yet and the software moved the Acrow prop content over automatically.

I appreciate that you did not reverse the merger right away. This would most likely have happened in the German Wikipedia which I mostly work on. But I naturally would not object I you decide that the merger should better be undone. KaiKemmann (talk) 17:21, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

KaiKemmann (talk) 17:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Acrow/Acro

The trade name Acrow comes from the greek prefix acro = height. cf acrophobia = fear of heights. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.234.250.60 (talk) 23:52, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Merge, again

In spite of several years passing, we still don't have a single reference that suggests that these should be two separate articles. The original reference on BS props does not even contain the term. Note that "Acrow" is the name for de Vigier's engineering company (see doi.org/10.1108/eb056033), not a term that describes the product. "Acrow prop" literally means "the props made by Acrow". As I amply cited above, such posts, identical in every feature, were already in use before de Vigier even arrived in the UK.

@Andy Dingley:, unless you have a RS reference that *clearly* defines the difference you claim exists, I am going to merge these articles and further RVs will be considered disruptive. @KaiKemmann: I would like your input as well. Maury Markowitz (talk) 03:30, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Maury,

there is not much for me to say other than that I am still much in favour of merging the two articles.

KaiKemmann (talk) 03:35, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Support merging Acrow prop to Jack post for the very same reasons that were written at the top of this page more than seven years ago. ^Leviv_ich? ! 04:57, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Name: 'Acrow'

The company website, and a Daily Telegraph obituary for the inventor, notes this rather lovely nugget, "The company is named after the traditional Acrow Prop, itself named after Mr Arthur Crow, the solicitor who formed the company." This is far too interesting not to be more widely known, but I don't know how to put it in the actual article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.254.91.202 (talk) 15:22, 4 October 2019 (UTC)