|
bighigaz
Jun 25, 2006, 7:29 AM
Post #26 of 35
(4631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 696
|
This is good stuff. I LUV KNOTS! ...And Hitches!
Time to play.
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Jun 25, 2006, 3:28 PM
Post #27 of 35
(4631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
I like the look of the FB-sling friction knot. Sure it may have more friction, but in many case you DONT want more friction.
Also I suspect wear would be a problem. Whatsmore the claimed advantage of strength is a bit silly. Beefy 7-8mm looped cord is plenty strong enough. I don't see how you would be putting high loads on a prussik anyway. Even if you fell on it, presumably it would be attached to a dynamic rope so shock loading wont happen.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 26, 2006, 2:16 AM
Post #28 of 35
(4631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: 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. Well, maybe it's something like what I've recently been playing around with, 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.
Hmm it does not seem to be on the net by the name ring bend tie in, but yo ucan find it in the AMGA manual, and other people have mentioned it, so, good luck. IT looks liek a ring bend with a loop, but it's a little more complicated than that. I have never tied it other than to play with it in disbelief, LOL. IT is not confidence inspiring, evne if it is a great knot.
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: But as there are hundreds of knots presented in Ashley's ABOK, 3,854 to be exact. Simplistic claims for ABOK having 'over 3500 knots' are based on the illustration 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.
Well probably none of the decorative knots are practical for climbers, but they are still knots.
There are what, 7 or 8 ways to improperly tie the carrick bend, and those are in there too, but they are still knots.
Closer to 3500 than to a few hundred.
It's true, in the front he gives all thos occupational knots, themn repeats em later in the appropriate section, but still, a buttload of knots.
But yo uare right, not 3859. I just looked at the last page of knots for that number, haha.
In reply to: 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. Tape or rope? I'd expect it to be weak in rope; but some guy A-vs-B tested 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.)
That goes along with Ashleys tests. I've used it in cord and webbing, going on several years now, no problem, it has never moved.
I don't really care how it acts in fishing line, I don't climb on that much. well, not any more.
In reply to: 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. On the chickenhead, do you put the, er, knotted/crossing part of the knot near or away from loaded direction? (Won't increase binding if near, so away, I guess.)
I put hte knot on top of the chicken head's waist, and let the sling hang down from both sides. I use LONG sling for this. the good thing about the constrictor is that it would pull tighter from either side, so it proably does not matter, but you can tie it in a sling over a CH with one hand wasily if hte knot is on top.
IT's the same trick as Ashley gives for tying over a post or staub, and you can do the same thing with a clove hitch, which is good to use on a biner when ou need opposition or to tie in quickly.
[quote="knudenoggin"]
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.) /quote]
I don't like Layhands, the guy is a religious nut, and I do not trust them.
In reply to: 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.
Hmm I will have to look at that.
In reply to: 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*
I have actually read thought the whole damned thing and I don't remember the three knots in the last century bit either, in fact, I think he is more likey to have said that there is a boatload of knots yet to be made, and he probably had not seen all the ones in existence. that's just how his gneral attitude seems to me.
Ashley seemed to feel that you could make up a knot if you wanted to put in the effort. HE claimed enough of em himself, right or wrong.
In a book as big as that one, I think we can forgive a few errors.
TOo bad someone has not taken such pains with a book on climbing knots and potential climbing knots.
|
|
|
|
|
tisar
Jun 26, 2006, 7:03 AM
Post #29 of 35
(4631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 2577
|
In reply to: I like the look of the FB-sling friction knot. Sure it may have more friction, but in many case you DONT want more friction. Also I suspect wear would be a problem. Whatsmore the claimed advantage of strength is a bit silly. Beefy 7-8mm looped cord is plenty strong enough. I don't see how you would be putting high loads on a prussik anyway. Even if you fell on it, presumably it would be attached to a dynamic rope so shock loading wont happen.
I'm currently in touch with Franz (Bachmann) and about to get part of the article(s) translated into English. It'll take me some days though...
For short: The fb friction knot is a side product of the question how one could get additional pro on (wet, iced, whatever) via ferratas. One big advantage is its ability to grab on steel cable - be it as ascender or movable protection. The later use benefits well from the greater strength, since the protection on via ferratas is much less dynamic than in normal climbing.
I don't get the 'more friction' part of your post. In case of use I want infinite friction, or at least as much as I can get. Other way 'round, when the knot is in 'standby mode', it should have minimum friction. I couldn't test the fb friction knot for rappel by now, but I did play with it at home for a while. Seems to me it performs at least as good as an autoblock, and definetly better than a Prussik. Maybe someone already did a live test? I'd be curious to hear about!
- Daniel
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 26, 2006, 12:43 PM
Post #30 of 35
(4631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
Better than what prussik Tisar?
YOu have to give prussik cord diameter, Rope diameter, and the number of wraps on your prussik , as well as the number of wraps and the material used on your autoblock, before anyone can begin to judge your tests.
|
|
|
|
|
tisar
Jun 26, 2006, 1:39 PM
Post #31 of 35
(4631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 2577
|
In reply to: Better than what prussik Tisar? YOu have to give prussik cord diameter, Rope diameter, and the number of wraps on your prussik , as well as the number of wraps and the material used on your autoblock, before anyone can begin to judge your tests.
No 'tests' here. Just playing around with an 8mm dyneema sling and a fuzzy old 10.5mm rope. Prussik and webbing just don't work well - no wonder so far (and I stopped using the prussik with cord before, since it's lot of fiddeling around for a knot that untightens not too well). The fb did well with three wraps and opens up easyly - similar to the autoblock.
Since there's no doubt so far that all those knots serve their purpose in a rappel setup, it all comes down to handling here - which is a matter of taste mostly.
Personally I will most likely stick to cord (6mm, 3 wraps on 9.6mm rope) for abseiling, since that's what I'm used to, but I might switch from my usual klemmheist to the fp (klemmheist with overhand). At least I'll give it a try, but as said, I couldn't do field testing by now. I just think it might untighten a little easier.
The dyneema setup on the other hand will come handy in a different way: I sometimes assist in teaching how to lead. To shorten bolt distances we install a static rope next to some routes and fix biners via sling and friction knot. I feel that if a friction knot graps on a steel cable it might be the best for our setup too...
- Daniel
|
|
|
|
|
tisar
Jun 26, 2006, 2:00 PM
Post #33 of 35
(4631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 2577
|
In reply to: In reply to: To shorten bolt distances we install a static rope next to some routes and fix biners via sling and friction knot. Instead the alpine butterfly would be a much more ideal way of connecting to the static line. Obviously this isn't possible on cable but for static rope it should be an ideal solution.
Thought of that, but it's a pain to get them in there. You cannot pre-knot the rope, since you don't know where you'll need the knots. And putting them in on rappel is just ugly - pulling the rope up for the purpose and then those static ropes just don't knot that well :?
We're facing falls in a range up to 3-4ft maybe, and it's backed up by the original bolts anyway. The friction knots are easy and fast to install and the whole setup is more than sufficient safety-wise. I'd go for this setup over butterflies anytime.
- Daniel
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 27, 2006, 2:54 AM
Post #34 of 35
(4631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
Learn to tie an inline figure 8 with one hand, lile a real man.
|
|
|
|
|
knudenoggin
Jun 27, 2006, 5:38 AM
Post #35 of 35
(4631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2004
Posts: 596
|
In reply to: Closer to 3500 than to a few hundred.
(Note that #s 3844-49 aren't of knots.)
2) Most of Ch.41 (Decorative Marlingspike Seamanship), #s 3463..3854
are of what you wouldn't consider as "knots"; and many of the knots
included are listed (also) in earlier #'d images as noted (e.g., the
Constrictor (#3853), the Crossing-Knots #1193 (#3851) & #1151 (not
"1152") (#3854) are listed/numbered previously).
3) Similarly, but for particular seizings & whippings, little of
Ch.40 (Practical Marlingspike Seamanship) (#s 3083..3462) is about
"knots", and several of the included knots occur previously (again
the Constrictor, e.g.).
4) Then we continue to back up through Ch.39 (Solid Sinnets), 38
(Plat Sinnets), 37 (Chain & Crown Sinnets), 36 (Odd Splices), 35
(Eye Splices), 34 (Long & Short Splices), 33 (Tricks and Puzzles),
& 32 (Square Knotting (macrame')). So, #s 3854-2484 = 1,370 #'d
images DQ'd, roughly. And similar reductions are in order for other
chapters, as I don't think that you want to count button knots, turksheads,
multi-strand lanyard knots, and the like as the sort of "knots" to which
one commonly speaks.
5) Further reduction comes by eliminating repetition, as indicated
above. E.g., the Clove Hitch has 31 citations in the index, not
all of which are attached to image #s directly (as the item) but
some are (note that p.71 is a bogus citation; but three uncited
case DO attach to images: p.305(#1805), 314(#1887), & 318(#1936)!);
the Constrictor has 13 citations, the Bowline a dozen, and so on.
Or, to look at it another way, most of Ch.1 (On Knots) is either
#'d non-knots or knots shown later, and most of the knots that are
featured by use in Ch.2 (Occupational Knots) reappear in a later
chapter on each's respective class (hitch, bend, loopknot)--taking
out most of #s 1..513; and many of the Ch.24 (Ring Hitches) also
see duty in Ch.21 (Hitches to Spar & Rail...) and even in Ch.23
(Hitches to Stake and Post, Pile and Bollard); and even some
loopknots are put forward also as "hitches".
Awww, heck, we can still get all tied up in this ... :roll:
-----
See #2159 as a chickenchoker !?
:D
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
