Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 99

Thread: Negative Rigging

  1. #81
    TreeHouser Jomo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    San Diego
    Age
    58
    Posts
    31,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squisher View Post
    At times it does feel as if he does. Because I just can't help myself. Lol.
    The devil made me buy this mess eh?

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0SLifea3NHQ

    Jomo

  2. #82
    TreeHouser murphy4trees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia PA suburbs
    Posts
    1,051

    Default

    Kenny,
    Don;t mean to pester you, can you qualify the 5-8% difference... any references ??? I recall hearing bowline was smewhere around 60% strength and double bowline is around 75-80%...

    when you add the friction of the rope on the piece it acts like a multiplier, making the difference even more consequential in terms of total force needed to break the rope.. I may not have said that just rigt, but you get my meaning ...

  3. #83
    Student of the Jedi treebilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    North Lawrence,OH
    Age
    38
    Posts
    3,060

    Default

    Daniel you stated that the regular bowline broke and the double did not. I'm not doubting the double being slightly stronger, but could it also have been that the regular bowline was tied at the end of the rope where the most wear would be present. I'm not doubting you but maybe the original knot was tied in a "bad" section of the rope.
    -Rich

  4. #84
    TreeHouser murphy4trees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia PA suburbs
    Posts
    1,051

    Default

    so long ago I couldn't say for sure....... this conversation has made me re-think the way ropes and knots are tested.. seems like tying arigging rope to a piece of wood and then pull testing would give the most accurate information.

  5. #85
    TreeHouser Sponsor theTreeSpyder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by treebilly View Post
    Daniel you stated that the regular bowline broke and the double did not. I'm not doubting the double being slightly stronger, but could it also have been that the regular bowline was tied at the end of the rope where the most wear would be present. I'm not doubting you but maybe the original knot was tied in a "bad" section of the rope.
    .
    That was one of my first thoughts..
    .
    Previously, i honestly tried to track down some of the numbers i've watched over years and couldn't find any;
    many broken links in my stash etc.
    .
    i do know that i really pushed for DBY over years; and fought this narrower difference stated between the 2 for years;
    to some pretty smart peoples on IGKT etc.
    .
    Consistently, the wisest always said many of the ratings are parroted, some made up, most tests not scientific enough to stand scrutiny etc. etc.
    For years i chased and compared all i could find.
    Also, there is so much if dressed and set properly, different materials/braids/stiffnesses that affect these knots in families when looking at tables of them that it is hard to make generalizations. Sometimes same tester finds this group of knots stronger in his dynamic lines but other group stronger in static lines etc. Then fishing lines totally different, then dyneema etc. (just to show range, but lessons at each layer too)
    .
    Over time; fighting for DBY, holding it in my hand, looking at the architecture and how all rest of my theories and understandings lead towards:
    Eye is dual legs of pull equal to single leg of Standing Part as most loaded single leg.
    Weakness from deflection from pure inline, at most loaded part >> just outside knot/ where they break!
    .
    That isn't much different at that point in either single or double Bowline;
    They both start loaded same and deform from pure inline same.
    Main difference at that point of the architecture is on single immediately deforms again, double rides out more before makes same change.
    .
    All the rest of my model theories actually more in line with what they were telling me about Double Bowline!
    So i had to fall back!
    i'm still all for DBY anyway, but that is where i've chased this to; and that was the range that stuck in my mind.
    .
    "Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed" -Sir Francis Bacon
    We now return you to the safety of normal thinking peoples.
    ~ Please excuse the interruption; thanx -the mgmt. ~

  6. #86
    TreeHouser Sponsor Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Upper Peninsula
    Posts
    2,017

    Default

    Interesting, and good to know. Adding the double takes like literally two seconds.
    “Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterward.”
    Vernon Law

    Sam

    MI-4209A

  7. #87
    TreeHouser Sponsor DMc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Montana
    Age
    64
    Posts
    1,715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by murphy4trees View Post
    ...... this conversation has made me re-think the way ropes and knots are tested.. seems like tying arigging rope to a piece of wood and then pull testing would give the most accurate information.
    Murphy, have you ever read the rigging research done by the HSE in the UK? It's a few years old now but it has tons of useful information. Lots of real world/tree world testing. This is a page from it.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Screenshot_2017-01-04-14-16-36.jpg  

  8. #88
    Student of the Jedi treebilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    North Lawrence,OH
    Age
    38
    Posts
    3,060

    Default

    Good stuff. I see that Sampson seems to be involved with these kind of test often. I'll look into this a bit deeper tomorrow. Thank you for posting
    -Rich

  9. #89
    TreeHouser murphy4trees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia PA suburbs
    Posts
    1,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DMc View Post
    Murphy, have you ever read the rigging research done by the HSE in the UK? It's a few years old now but it has tons of useful information. Lots of real world/tree world testing. This is a page from it.
    I think I did read some of that.. Very impressive info.... that may have been where I remember getting those #s

  10. #90
    TreeHouser sawman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    paulsboro,nj
    Posts
    1,758

    Default

    Got it double blowline= two rabbit holes

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •