The Official Random Video Thread!

[Knotorious]

Drop tests are performed to ensure that climbing gear can withstand shock loading and not kill you, pull tests determine the breaking strength, which is used in the working load calculation. Isn't that what you meant?

Interesting. I always thought drop tests had some kind of effect on the ultimate rating, as I believed taking drop tests into consideration is important for generating a proper 10:1 safety ratio, and that shock loading was used as a part of a manufacturer's quality control at the very least.

But if the rating is not affected by drop tests, is drop testing then done at forces well below the rating value as a form of stress testing? Because shock loading any product at the rating would predictably end up killing the end user and destroying the product more often than standard pull testing/static loading up to the same extremes.

I was thinking that perhaps the results of drop testing partly contributed toward the reality that most hardware and software are rated for ~3kn+ LESS than what they usually actually break at (as evidenced by most publicly available break test data and break test channels like HowNot2) , which might be the manufacturers way of creating a hidden margin of safety should one of their products be used incorrectly (such as being shock loaded or cross loaded; despite making it very clear that their products shouldn't be used in such ways in the manuals) and to maybe protect the manufacturer to some extent, ensuring that any third party who break tests their products correctly will find that their products consistently break above the rating.

But I reserve the right to be wrong. Like I stated from the very beginning, this has never been anything more than a "theory" for me.

 

[Knotorious]

This is a pretty cool, new gear hook.

 

[Tree09]

drop testing then done at forces well below the rating value as a form of stress testing?

Yup, there's standards for this especially for the European rating, it's basically a pretty long factor 2 fall (rope stretched above and falls 2 rope lengths, aka worst case scenario) with the expected size of a climber, done repeatedly until the rope breaks. The rope then has a number of falls rating, because each time the fibers stretch and don't always return to normal. It's was developed for rock climbing since those are dynamic ropes, and I'm sure there's others here that know far more than i do about the dynamic tests. I'm pretty sure the rope isn't allowed to exert a certain force to the climber either in order to pass, so the rope has to be designed to be dynamic enough to absorb the force to keep you safe.

most hardware and software are rated for ~3kn+ LESS than what they usually actually break at (as evidenced by most publicly available break test data and break test channels like HowNot2) , which might be the manufacturers way of creating a hidden margin of safety

Yup, that's the margin of error for their manufacturing, and should be completely ignored. If they say it's good for a number, that's the expected breaking strength as far as anyone other than the manufacturer is concerned. The safety factors are there for a very good reason, and going past them is a hard no.

drop tests had some kind of effect on the ultimate rating, as I believed taking drop tests into consideration is important for generating a proper 10:1 safety ratio, and that shock loading was used as a part of a manufacturer's quality control at the very least.

They have an effect if it's safe to use as a climbing rope, but not for the rated breaking strength. If you took a fall on something with no give you wouldn't fall but you would be severely injured (at a minimum), so that's the risk that they're testing when drop testing. The slow pull ultimate tensile strength test is what is used to calculate the wll, and that is the same for all rigging. For most climbing or fall arrest gear the minimum breaking strength is 5000 pounds, which gives a safety factor of around 20 for a 250 pound guy to put that in perspective.

 

[Mellow]

Sorry, I'm blowing up this thread.

That's the first step.

 

[CurSedVoyce]

I basically use a general rule of no more than 3' of slack to keep it at about fall factor 1. Not an exact figure, and there is some built in leeway into that. But 6'+ fall is no bueno. Unless you have a shat load of rope out in the system. Then the elongation helps.

Fall Factor Explained

Fall factor is a simple calculation: take the distance of the fall and divide it by the length of rope or lanyard available to arrest the fall.

www.safetyliftingear.com

How to Calculate Total Fall Distance When Using Fall Protection

Do you have workers at height? Do they have fall protection equipment? If you know how to calculate total fall distance for workers at height, you will...

www.mazzellacompanies.com

 

[Knotorious]

I basically use a general rule of no more than 3' of slack to keep it at about fall factor 1. Not an exact figure, and there is some built in leeway into that. But 6'+ fall is no bueno. Unless you have a shat load of rope out in the system. Then the elongation helps.

Fall Factor Explained

Fall factor is a simple calculation: take the distance of the fall and divide it by the length of rope or lanyard available to arrest the fall.

www.safetyliftingear.com

How to Calculate Total Fall Distance When Using Fall Protection

Do you have workers at height? Do they have fall protection equipment? If you know how to calculate total fall distance for workers at height, you will...

www.mazzellacompanies.com

But wouldn't 3 feet of slack, 3 feet above your anchor be a factor 2 fall? I think the most important rule is to stay at or below your anchor point as often as possible, and to keep slack obviously to a minimum.

 

[Knotorious]

As long as you stay at or below your anchor, no matter how much slack you have (unless you have so much that you'll hit the ground), you can only ever produce a factor 1 fall or lower.

EDIT: But of course, @CurSedVoyce is also correct in saying that anymore than 3 feet of slack, even with a factor 1 fall, would f*ck you up.

 

[CurSedVoyce]

 

[Knotorious]

Interesting how a knot in a Nylon sling will actually reduce forces. I definitely wasn't expecting that. Makes me want to use Nylon for alpine climbing, instead of Dyneema, going forward. Too bad it weighs so much more and takes up more space.

 

[Knotorious]

...aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand there go our jobs!

 

[Mick!]

There go your jobs, I’ll be long retired or dead by the time those can replace me.

It’s interesting to ponder what the future will bring.
Lets go back to 2000, what would an individual transported from then to now, a quarter of a century later (give or take) think was the most astonishing thing about 2024 earth?

 

[Nutball]

How stupid people are.

Oh, wait, no... how global warming hasn't come close to destroying the earth.

 

[stig]

That absolutely everybody are looking at their phones ALL the time.

 

[Mick!]

How stupid people are.

Oh, wait, no... how global warming hasn't come close to destroying the earth

Not everything is about politics and conspiracy stuff, we’re trying to look beyond this for once. People were stupid in 2000 you know.

That absolutely everybody are looking at their phones ALL the time.

The rise of the internet and everyone’s addiction to it? Decent call.

 

[Nutball]

That absolutely everybody are looking at their phones ALL the time.

They'd be like, "Those are phones?!"

 

[lxskllr]

Cell phones would be the biggest that comes to mind for the average person. 2000 was recent enough that most of the cool stuff we have was iterative from 2k stuff, so not a real surprise. Having powerful general purpose computers that can fit in your pocket is a big deal. There's a lot of industry specific stuff that's pretty amazing, but most people don't know about it.

 

[Burnham]

Following on what John observed...the difference in the tree climbing gear we have today compared to 2000? Stunning amount of innovations and changes in the way many of us do the work.

I'd bet there's been more changes in the last 25 years than in the 150 years before that.

 

[Nutball]

Stihl light bars on a super light weight 80cc 500i.

Not sure when miniskids appeared in tree work.

 

[Knotorious]

This car is insane...

 

[Knotorious]

This parrot has the moves...

Watch until the end.

 

[stig]

Following on what John observed...the difference in the tree climbing gear we have today compared to 2000? Stunning amount of innovations and changes in the way many of us do the work.

I'd bet there's been more changes in the last 25 years than in the 150 years before that.

In a way those two are connected.
We used to be a bunch of separate tree worker entities, struggling in our daily work.
Now we are part of a hive mind, constantly exchanging ideas.

Example: in 1999 I went to Northern California for the 20 year blackbelt reunion in my old Karate dojo.
Accidentally came across Fundamentals of general treework, was amazed at the to me unknown knowledge in it, bought it and was set ahead of my fellow treeworkers, suddenly being the guy who knew all the nifty foreign tricks ( not quite true, I had been logging in several foreign countries, so I was already seen that way).
Enter internet and tree fora.
Voila, in 2009 I went over for the 30 year reunion, but this time I go Redwood climbing with the author.

It is unvelievable how the internet has changed the World.

 

[Knotorious]

Internet, itself, has changed dramatically. Remember how we all used to have to connect to our ISP through a dial up connection on a hard telephone line through a CAT-5 cable or telephone cable? Now most of us have insane bandwidth on our computers/phones through fiber optic WIRELESS internet (Wi-Fi) and even monthly, low budget cellular plans often come with unlimited 3-5G data. Also, the rise of moderation on the majority of venues on the internet, and new coding, provide us with much safer, faster, better online experiences. We can be almost anywhere in the world, with our smart phones, and have a viable signal that can accommodate high speeds, streaming, and large file sizes.

Back when I was a kid, anytime I had a question, I had to go to the library and use the Dewey Decimal System to locate a book and then scan through the book's glossary or index in order to hopefully find the answer in the suggest blocks of text. Now I can just go to Google.com (among countless other search sites) and instantly get a list of countless relevant websites/articles that fit my search query. Even more recently, as of just the last year, most search sites have AI functionality, so, after entering a query, you get the BEST answers compiled into one singular, thorough result at the top of your browser page.

For some nostalgia, listen to this old school modem dialing up to the ISP...

 

[cory]

This is so cool, I always wondered how the heck a sewing machine works. Talk about ingenuity !!

 

[Knotorious]

This is so cool, I always wondered how the heck a sewing machine works. Talk about ingenuity !!

Great episode on sewing machines...

The thumbnail for that obscure channel was stolen from this video.

 

[Knotorious]