|
veganboyjosh
Jun 22, 2006, 11:50 AM
Post #2 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
interesting.
i've been a fan of the kleimheist since i tried it, much more so than the prussik. easier to tie/untie/release/unlock/move/etc...
the last link in your post appears to be the same link as the first...didn't see anything about via ferrata...
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 22, 2006, 1:29 PM
Post #3 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
Well, for one thing, in the comparison, what they call a kleimheist does not look like a kleimheist at all to me.
this thread woudl be better off in the lab forum, don't you think?
|
|
|
|
|
slacklinejoe
Jun 22, 2006, 1:30 PM
Post #4 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2003
Posts: 1423
|
I wish the long article was translated it looks like there is some good analysis in it from what I could make out.
However one very important note on a few of the methods covered in that article: Any Bachman style friction knot that goes around the carabiner in a method that pinches from the spine to the gate is relying on the locking carabiner's gate lock strength to prevent an inward pull - for most carabiners this is closer to around 500 lbs. I have no idea if the text in the article condones this knots use, but if you are playing with knots that load inwardly on the gate do so with caution.
|
|
|
|
|
tisar
Jun 22, 2006, 2:00 PM
Post #5 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 2577
|
In reply to: I wish the long article was translated it looks like there is some good analysis in it from what I could make out. However one very important note on a few of the methods covered in that article: Any Bachman style friction knot that goes around the carabiner in a method that pinches from the spine to the gate is relying on the locking carabiner's gate lock strength to prevent an inward pull - for most carabiners this is closer to around 500 lbs. I have no idea if the text in the article condones this knots use, but if you are playing with knots that load inwardly on the gate do so with caution.
The article mentions the problems of the first knot and displays it for 'historical interest only'. Interesting sidepoint: The article is written by Bachmann himself. He's 76 now and invented the 'Bachmann knot' 1946 - because he knew of but couldn't find anyone to show him the Prussik knot.
- Daniel :D
|
|
|
|
|
slacklinejoe
Jun 22, 2006, 2:11 PM
Post #6 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2003
Posts: 1423
|
This thread should probably be moved to the new "Lab" forum or at a minimum the Gear Head's forum.
|
|
|
|
|
mrcoolshoes1105
Jun 22, 2006, 2:41 PM
Post #7 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2006
Posts: 51
|
question: wouldn't using a spectra or even nylon sling for a prussic/kleimheist type friction knot eventually melt the sling due to the heat produced? the last thing i would want to smell while rapping a 180 foot pitch is melting nylon. :shock:
|
|
|
|
|
cintune
Jun 22, 2006, 3:29 PM
Post #8 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1293
|
Accessory cord sheath is nylon....
|
|
|
|
|
cintune
Jun 22, 2006, 4:23 PM
Post #10 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1293
|
This looks like the new standard. Might have to be replaced more frequently is all. Wonderful stuff, this dental floss.
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Jun 22, 2006, 11:02 PM
Post #11 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
Not new at all, that's just a Hedden hitch which has been around nearly 50 years. The only thing different is the overhand (not really needed) and a few extra wraps to make up for the spectra webbing. It is indeed a better choice than the klemheist or Prusik. But don't start renaming old knots.
|
|
|
|
|
cintune
Jun 23, 2006, 5:02 PM
Post #13 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1293
|
The O-ring made by the sewn section is unique, makes it a little easier to ascend with. The same idea, only different, is making a foot loop out of a sling tied with a beer knot: using the double-thick tails on either side of the knot as a stay-open loop.
Messed around with some fresh Mammut slings yesterday, it sure does put a curl in the slings after a few raps. All in all, though, yet another cool trick for the bag thereof. Thanks, RC.com
:)
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Jun 23, 2006, 6:41 PM
Post #14 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
In reply to: but that overhand significantly changes how the downward force is turned into friction.
Any data to back that up? Just playing with and without, I'm not finding much difference. Would be interesting to see some test results (in English). Still doesn't seem like an adequate reason to change the name of an existing knot, enough confusion already.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 23, 2006, 11:53 PM
Post #15 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
YOu gys should really learn how to use google. it translated the page for me, LOL.
All I had to do was search google for the italian title, and voila! (that's french for , basically, "Here you go!")
http://translate.google.com/...t%3Dopera%26rls%3Den
|
|
|
|
|
radtrad
Jun 24, 2006, 1:39 AM
Post #16 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 23
|
i read in Ashley's Book of Knots that only 3 new knots were made in the last century
|
|
|
|
|
cintune
Jun 24, 2006, 2:33 AM
Post #17 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1293
|
Nothing like machine translation for free entertainment. "In order to experience the extreme possibilities of this node, Franz has tried it on metallic cables with bonds turns out to you."
|
|
|
|
|
knudenoggin
Jun 24, 2006, 3:51 AM
Post #18 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2004
Posts: 596
|
In reply to: i read in Ashley's Book of Knots that only 3 new knots were made in the last century
But how would he know? Afterall, he didn't make it even halfway to 2000.
(And he credits himself with more novelties than this, alone.)
In reply to: what they call a kleimheist does not look like a kleimheist
The Klemheist & Hedden are, but for wraps-count, upside-down versions
of each other; seems that the K. needs more wraps to hold as well as H.,
though I've found H. to hold once then NOT hold subsequently, in tape!?
(Note that "Kleim" should be "Klem", which comes from the "klemmknoten"
which translates to "friction knots" (my guess is "clamp" for "klem(m)"). :-)
In reply to: >> that overhand significantly changes how the downward force is turned into friction. Any data to back that up? Just playing with and without, I'm not finding much difference.
the Hedden to hold as I stood & bounced a little, then to not hold at all on
repeated efforts. I tried a couple other things, and ultimately got a Klemheist
to hold. I think that the tightened Hedden too much transfers load into both
ends of the knot and so just pulls it down w/o constricting. (This is a big
YMMV case given various materials, loads, etc..)
But, now, with the same materials & the "FB-", I found that on
a couple bounces with a well-loose collaring bottom loop, the loaded parts
slipped over/around the Overhand knot, and then more tightly jammed as
for a (regular) Hedden--losing much of the supposed benefit of the revision.
Shrinking the size of the Overhand's loop led to similar tightness as for the
original Hedden, alas--didn't easily slide to re-grip.
Here's a "new" knot to try, to redress the above problems; I call this one
a Hedden & A Half (HAH) (hoping there aren't other reasons for
the abbreviation :lol: ) : tie a Hedden, but loosen the loaded parts' reach
through the bottom bight and bring them around (Hedden not untied, just
loosened for insertion...) to tuck through this loosened arc to make a sort
of embedded Half-hitch. (If e.g. the loaded ends are turning around down
and to the right to go through the lower bight, one would bring them around
the hitched object in the opposite way, around left behind and then front through
the loosened reach, like a Munter Hitch.)
This embedded Half-hitch seems to pretty well prevent the knot from binding
too tightly, but grips well (esp. with cord!).
Arborists use friction hitches in ascent/descent & changing position, as their rap.DEVICES
(i.e., they slide the knot)! They have a pretty diverse set, by now, and there
are some special cords made with Vectran or an aramid (even PBO?) for
resistance to heat. The trad. way of use has the climbing rope over some
crotch, so half weight per strand & on the knot. But there is now a move to
use a Single-Rope Technique, too.
cf. e.g.: www.mytreelessons.com/friction%20hitch.htm
& www.treebuzz.com/articles.php (couple PDF articles re hitches here)
*knudeNoggin*
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 24, 2006, 4:46 AM
Post #19 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
Well it's good to know that that hedden is not a kleimheist, at least. I don't knwo a thing about the hedden, and I have no interest in it, I guess caue the kleimheist ain't broke, adn I know it fairly well, but I know nothign about the hedden except that it is not a kleimhiest, LOL.
About arborists, you do know they are mostly crazy, right? IF yo uthink climbing is dangerous, check out the death rate for arborists. YOu'll be shocked. I know three that are rock climbers, two are famous in the south, one is a partner of mine.
Tree workers love the blake hitch.
About Ashley, his copyright is from the 40's I think? THe beer knot is later than that for one. I doubt you will find a bowline with yosemite finish in ashley either, unless I have forgotten about it being in there. the ring bend tie in is anohter one that I do not think is in ashleys, nor is htat nice application of the double fishermans for rap line joining, sometimes called the inline fishermans. Try to find the figure 9 in Ashley's.
there, that's four or five, and I ahve not yet begun to fight!
Ashley did indeed claim a LOT of new variations, his book is full of innovations. I can think of two bends, without really trying, that he created.
Don't get me wrong, I love Ashley, that is THE knot book, but Ashley himself would tell you that new knots are bound to come up.
|
|
|
|
|
knudenoggin
Jun 24, 2006, 6:00 PM
Post #20 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2004
Posts: 596
|
In reply to: the ring bend tie in is anohter one that I do not think is in ashleys, nor is htat nice application of the double fishermans for rap line joining, sometimes called the inline fishermans. Try to find the figure 9 in Ashley's.
"inline fisherman's"? Google is bewildered; you mean the offset form, put forward
by Bachmann, tested by Edelrid, as posted also on Jost's site? (There is a simpler
solution to that.)
As for the Fig.9, in single strand & symmetric, that's #525, which form makes
for a decent, non-jamming by secure loopknot (!). #1425 can be seen as a
similar form of this structure, as a bend, each rope making an incomplete Fig.9
(incompletely tracing the opposite rope).
But as there are hundreds of knots presented in Ashley's ABOK, there
are hundreds of knots known to one or another folks that aren't there.
Arguably, the klemheist & Prusik are there, though not shown for their use
in ascending ropes.
*knudeNoggin*
|
|
|
|
|
knudenoggin
Jun 24, 2006, 6:09 PM
Post #21 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2004
Posts: 596
|
In reply to: Nothing like machine translation for free entertainment.
Here's a long Conclusion to a study of shock absorbers, to good to miss:
In reply to: Conclusions It achieves some that the insertion of the dissipator of energy in the assurance chain is not one panacea. Its effectiveness, in fact, goes estimated case for case, since the behavior of the tool depends on the globality of the fall conditions that - as we have seen - can be most various between they. With regard to, it is perhaps opportune to emphasize like its efficiency evidently depends on the relationship between the dissipabile maximum energy from the tool and total energy in game (largeness, this last one, than in its turn it depends on the height of fall and/or the weight of the mountain climber): much greater one is this relationship, much more elevated will be the reduction of the sollicitations on the dismissal. However, to the ends of the reduction of the cargo on the dismissal, the role of the dissipator can be important provided that: . . .
(No, this is not Dubya--too long for him, though much his style.)
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Jun 24, 2006, 6:54 PM
Post #22 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
In reply to: In reply to: i read in Ashley's Book of Knots that only 3 new knots were made in the last century Got a citation for that--I'm curious. But how would he know? Afterall, he didn't make it even halfway to 2000. (And he credits himself with more novelties than this, alone.)
centuries don't just begin and end in years that end in 0's.
|
|
|
|
|
cintune
Jun 24, 2006, 8:10 PM
Post #23 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1293
|
In reply to: Its effectiveness, in fact, goes estimated case for case, since the behavior of the tool depends on the globality of the fall conditions that - as we have seen - can be most various between they.
This should be the standard cut-and-paste answer to any question about anchors. Save a lot of time.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 24, 2006, 10:27 PM
Post #24 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: In reply to: the ring bend tie in is anohter one that I do not think is in ashleys, nor is htat nice application of the double fishermans for rap line joining, sometimes called the inline fishermans. Try to find the figure 9 in Ashley's. "Ring bend tie-in"? --as in the (Overhand) Loop knot? ABOK has it.
Nope, it is a ring bend tie in, you can find it in the AMGA manual, and elsewhere. IT is rather bizarre, but I don't think it is bad any more, LOL. It freakes me out to look at it though ,and I'll never use it.
In reply to: "inline fisherman's"? Google is bewildered; you mean the offset form, put forward by Bachmann, tested by Edelrid, as posted also on Jost's site? (There is a simpler solution to that.)
Yep, that one. Do you know what it is intended for? What is your simpler solution?
In reply to: As for the Fig.9, in single strand & symmetric, that's #525, which form makes for a decent, non-jamming by secure loopknot (!).
Um, the figure 9 given in On Rope is not symetric. After glancing at 525, that does not appear to be the same knot.
In reply to: #1425 can be seen as a similar form of this structure, as a bend, each rope making an incomplete Fig.9 (incompletely tracing the opposite rope).
Nope, not the same at all, look in On Rope.
In reply to: But as there are hundreds of knots presented in Ashley's ABOK, there are hundreds of knots known to one or another folks that aren't there. Arguably, the klemheist & Prusik are there, though not shown for their use in ascending ropes. *knudeNoggin*
3,854 to be exact.
I found the munter in there once, not used the way climbers use it though, and not called a munter. You could look for yourself or try to fidn the long forgotten post where I mentioned that.
At least someone else is reading ashleys though, LOL!
I actually use the barrel knot, AKA blood knot, talked to a rope engineer about testing it in spectra once, at first there was interest but then I let it drop, adn just used it, ad it has not failed yet.
I think thereare a lot of very servicable knots in ashleys, some of the wall and crown variations or one in those same pages (don't remember the exact knot number, but I have it tied on a talon in a cannibalized mammut spectra sling, it's still holding after two years) are good for stoppers on the back of talon hooks for insteance, and the jug knot is good for water bottles, much superior to a clove hitch.
I've also used the constrictor hitch for slinging chicken heads, as opposed to a clobe, slip knot or girht hitch.
|
|
|
|
|
knudenoggin
Jun 25, 2006, 4:26 AM
Post #25 of 35
(6918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2004
Posts: 596
|
In reply to: Nope, it is a ring bend tie in, you can find it in the AMGA manual, and elsewhere. IT is rather bizarre, but I don't think it is bad any more, LOL. It freakes me out to look at it though ,and I'll never use it.
where some of the ends (doing a "re-woven" sort of making a 2nd eye)
reenter the Overhand as for the EDK vs. Ring bend side (tracing from the
main tensioned line instead of the other eye leg); which would be done to
keep the knot from jamming. Many of these look fine.
In reply to: In reply to: you mean the offset form, put forward by Bachmann, tested by Edelrid, as posted also on Jost's site? (There is a simpler solution to that.) Yep, that one. Do you know what it is intended for? What is your simpler solution?
preferred by (discriminating) climbers for joining abseil ropes. A simpler
solution is to begin tying the Offset Overand but tuck only one end out to
make an overhand (in that end's rope) and then continue with a full, or even
half turn more with the outer end before tucking it out, making either
a Fig.8 or Fig.9, resp., with it--by "outer" I mean that this rope is the one
whose turn just described will be what the loaded lines bear against and
will try to pry wide/open. By having an extra half or full turn here, the knot
resists this opening force. (But there is no need to have BOTH ropes in this
form--say, to have an offset Fig.9--, as the inner binding won't serve the
need, and only add bulk. Now, yes, by this reasoning an Offset Fig.8 should
be better, and it's not; but in the half-8/half-Overhand knot the ends are
tucked in opposite directions and this gives stability against the knot flyping.
Still, one can go a full turn for the Offset 9-Oh. And it's probably better to
have the thinner rope making this extra wrap, being "outer", as it will
have a greater difficulty at being pulled out around the thicker, inner line.
The Offset Grapevine has such an extra turn, but it has much beyond that,
which adds bulk; the EDK (OOB) is liked ALSO for its compactness, and the
Offset 9-Oh is just a little bigger.
In reply to: Um, the figure 9 given in On Rope is not symetric. After glancing at 525, that does not appear to be the same knot.
the same, in that sense. In fact, the series Overhand, Fig.8, Fig.9, ... ,
F.8+n has symmetric forms, the 8 & higher two each. All have the form
where the bight-center arc around 180deg and then there is a crossing of
ends to exit through the closed loop--each greater in the series having one
more twist of ends before they exit. (Picture #522 with the loop at the end
of the twists enlarged so that it could pivot at the uppermost crossing back
down to be immediately below the lowest crossing.) There's anther form,
which is got by #525's righthand start; just pull on the ends and you'll see
it, and see that a connecting part is likely too loose; and from this, the
similarity of #1425 to a "9" of this form can be seen. --nothing like the
"Fig.9" of common reference, no. But some loopknots based on this sym.
structure are quickly tied w/o ends and won't jam, and so could replace
the Fig.8 in many uses. (And for single strand use in e.g. a knotted climbing
rope for gym class, such knots would be able to be untied.
In reply to: Nope, not the same at all, look in On Rope.
Since you must have the 2nd (I've 1st, which only has mention of it in the
Glossary), note that the so-called "Three-coil (& 4-, 5-) Prusik hitches got
turned upside-down (one word only of text changed, to match!) by editorial
goof, and rendered friction hitches that don't grip (if both ends are loaded,
as is intended for Prusiks) !! --the single upper wrap pulls down on top of
the multi-wraps and prevents them from gripping! (I guess we can regard
these as "new" knots (lacking a future).)
In reply to: In reply to: But as there are hundreds of knots presented in Ashley's ABOK, 3,854 to be exact.
ID #s, many of which don't identify knots, and many knots are illustrated more
than once; the number of actual knots, esp. practical ones, is far smaller:
e.g., only about 50 each of bends and single-loop knots, and 100 hitches are given.
In reply to: I actually use the barrel knot, AKA blood knot, talked to a rope engineer about testing it in spectra once, at first there was interest but then I let it drop, adn just used it, ad it has not failed yet.
it in solid braid nylon and some other smallish ropes, and it held King of
Hill position (except to note that Fig.8 loopknots at ends of each test specimen
never broke!!). Yeah, be nice to test it.
(Re HMPE fishline ("gel-spun"), the Blood is supposed to be pretty weak,
with a Grapevine-like (more wraps for the skinny line) knot better.)
In reply to: I think there are a lot of very serviceable knots in Ashleys, ... I've also used the constrictor hitch for slinging chicken heads, as opposed to a clove, slip knot or girth hitch.
near or away from loaded direction? (Won't increase binding if near, so away,
I guess.)
Acutally, here I think that a sort of opened-up Clove, aka "Scaffold HITCH",
might work best--giving the sort of Girth-hitch binding but on EACH side.
Confer http://www.layhands.com/...ts_Miscellaneous.htm (#16)
or-quicker load--http://www.inquiry.net/ images/rope08.gif .
Because of the structure of this knot, these ends can load into the knot
at less hard angles than for a girth hitch (i.e., they can be brought more
forward, towards the load); the structure will have 3 wraps on the chicken-head vs. 2 for Girth.)
Ashley's Stopper, #526, esp. if tied with doubled rope, makes a simple and
great stopper for preventing rapping off the end of a rope--nice, trefoil
stopper face, good lateral bulking.
As for "in Ashley's Book of Knots that only 3 new knots were made in the last century",
yeah, could mean, but unlikely, "past 100 yrs" vs., for Ashley, 1800s. But
in any case, it would be hard for him to be aware of all that went on.
E.g., he seems to think he "invented" the Constrictor binder, but that knot
was described and even illustrated previous to his asserted discovery of it.
In any case, I've looked a few places for it--where he describes discovering
the Ashley Stopper ("Oysterman's" --not!), and in into. pp; there is a place
there where he mentions finding 3 knots unknown to his ship master?!
But I'm not aware that he made some claim regarding new knots.
*knudeNoggin*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
