|
jude
Jul 15, 2005, 3:00 AM
Post #1 of 10
(4687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2003
Posts: 67
|
I've had trouble getting enough tension in the sling with opposing pro using a clove hitch. I've thought about using a locking girth-hitch. It's easier to tighten, but it doesn't stand up too well in my test lab (living room).
Any thoughts or better ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
jercech
Jul 18, 2005, 8:01 PM
Post #2 of 10
(4687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 12, 2004
Posts: 45
|
you could always just sit in front of the TV and practice tying clove hitches in slings...?
what works for me is pulling on the loop that comes from the tensioned leg, (the one that goes over everything else) get it really tight and then use the other hand to pinch it over the carabiner. After this is held tight you can pull the slack side through to lock the clove hitch down without loosing much tension (sorry if you can't visualize this, I can't explain it better without a sling and a couple 'biners.) It takes practice but you can get a fair amount of tension in the sling.
While you're at it, practice tying clove hitches backwards, upside down, facing away, one handed...these skills come in handy.
I don't know what a locking girth hitch is but the clove hitch works for me.
|
|
|
|
|
shakylegs
Jul 18, 2005, 8:08 PM
Post #3 of 10
(4687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2001
Posts: 4774
|
Never heard of a locking girth hitch either.
One thing I've always wondered about, when clove-hitching opposing pieces: doesn't this created the dreaded American triangle?
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Jul 18, 2005, 8:15 PM
Post #4 of 10
(4687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
Creating an ADT is the goal with opposing pieces. Without getting bogged down in an argument about why you use opposing pieces in the first place, the point of the setup is that you need to generate a force pulling the pieces together. Doing this with a couple of bolts is dumb because it multiplies force unnecessarily, and the bolts are perfectly capable of holding the downward force in the first place.
In reply to: Never heard of a locking girth hitch either. One thing I've always wondered about, when clove-hitching opposing pieces: doesn't this created the dreaded American triangle? |
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jul 18, 2005, 10:23 PM
Post #5 of 10
(4687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: Creating an ADT is the goal with opposing pieces. Without getting bogged down in an argument about why you use opposing pieces in the first place, the point of the setup is that you need to generate a force pulling the pieces together.
What pulls the pieces together, holding them in place, is the tension that you get from the clove hitches. A true ATD would allow the pieces to fall out.
When you clove hitch the pieces together with tension, that's not a true ADT.
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Jul 18, 2005, 10:34 PM
Post #6 of 10
(4687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
OK, true, the cloves are holding things in place while there is no load, kind of like a cam's springs hold it in place when it's just sitting there, but once there is load perpendicular to the rock or whatever, trigonometry takes over and you are back in ADT land.
|
|
|
|
|
toejam
Jul 18, 2005, 11:34 PM
Post #7 of 10
(4687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 358
|
I use a girth hitch often, generally when placing an opposing piece in a vertical crack. Its a lot faster and easier than clove hitches, great for getting that first multidirectional placement. In horizontal placements, or those more dependent on opposition, I would be more likely to use the cloves. Can't beat the girth though, when you only have one hand and the stance is strenuous.
As far as the two point cloved runner being an ADT, I've always thought that the cloves change the behaviour of this configuration. It is the standard recommendation for opposing pieces I've read from a variety of sources. I'd be interested to hear some of the more knowledgeable posters like rgold dissect it though.
|
|
|
|
|
jercech
Jul 19, 2005, 5:01 PM
Post #8 of 10
(4687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 12, 2004
Posts: 45
|
using clove hitches on horizontally placed opposed pieces does NOT create an ADT. The pully effect of the runner over a carabiner causes an additional inward force in the ADT setup. Using clove hitches stops the pully effect, therefore no ADT. The goal of using the clove hitch is to get tension between the two nuts thus holding them in place, but this does not result in the sneaky force multiplication present in the ADT.
Clove hitches can be tied fairly easily one handed by clipping through with the sling, then grabbing one leg of the sling and looping it the correct direction an clipping again. Getting the correct length and tension takes two hands, but tying the knot is easy with one hand. Which is why I recommend practice.
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Jul 19, 2005, 5:12 PM
Post #9 of 10
(4687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
Right, had my head up my ass on that one. No ADT unless something slips. Duh.
|
|
|
|
|
jercech
Jul 19, 2005, 5:21 PM
Post #10 of 10
(4687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 12, 2004
Posts: 45
|
I should add that when you put nuts in opposition in a horizontal crack you will get drastically higher forces at the nuts. You have the same downward force but you are adding a large inward force as well. The inward force depends on the angles but it could be much larger than the downward force. By placing nuts in opposition in horizontal cracks you must accept the inward force, indeed, you are using it to hold the nuts in place.
The insidious aspect of the ADT is, through the use of pulleys, you can multiply these forces.
|
|
|
|
|
|
