Arboreal Symbiotic Integration Harnesses

jomoco

Active Member
Plumbing these reels to water 4 plants each is not hard.



Despite the ridicule I'm sure to incurr, I've decided to name this system an Arboreal Symbiotic Species Integration Harness, ASSIH.

jomoco
 

jomoco

Active Member
I've got a rigging brain teaser for you guys, directly associated to this system.

The support line rigging route goes from the reel at the base, up the trunk, then outwards along the bottom of the target limb.

But how can you rig along the bottom of an irregular dog leg limb without getting line abrasion against that limb? To do this one must have pulley support from both above and below to get past a dog leg with no abrasion.

I've worked out a way to do this trick, but I've never seen it used before, atleast in this industry. The old sailing ships probably had redirects very similar to what I've devised using an anchored ring with a pulley attachable at any compass point inside its diameter.

Does anyone get what I'm driving at?

Or am I speaking mandarin and making no sense?

Expandable yet rigid limb anchors, that do no cambial damage?

jomoco
 

dylanclimbs

Member
Ya...I can picture it...I think!

It seems interesting, but it also seems as though you'd have to thread one end in, rather than it being midline attachable. Unless the ring could be compromised and reset.
 

Tom Dunlap

Here from the beginning
Administrator
I think that Captain Jack Aubrey might have rigged his HMS Surprise with a 'fixed dead eye' in a similar fashion. Using some wood like lignum vitae would have eliminated the need for some parts.
 

jomoco

Active Member
I'm using a humming bird feeder to weight the snot out of this little jacaranda limb that's about 1/4 inch in diameter. The wind moves the feeder torquing the heck out of the little feller. It'll either break or get stronger.



I'll go a month weighted, give it a couple of weeks unweighted, then load it up again for another month.

jomoco
 

Tree_Frog

Active Member
[ QUOTE ]
In case some of you haven't figured it out yet, I am furious with every authority like TCIA and the ISA who supports Cobra dynamic cabling systems.

They remind me too much of the SCOTUS, ruling that corps can use their money to lie through their teeth legally.

Scientific truth and integrity can now be bought and sold apparently?

Come on you CA's pushing this crap, explain your lame rationales, please?

jomoco

[/ QUOTE ]

Please explain you logic about the Cobra and similar products.
 

jomoco

Active Member
It boils down to the stupidity of supporting trees with a material so much weaker and vulnerable to natural forces than steel, or even live wood itself.

Cobra's vulnerability to abrasion, chewing rodents, fire and UV degradation when compared to traditional steel cabling systems, makes it a laughably inferior cabling system in this industry, IMO.

It's not so much a question of if Cobra systems and the CA's who install them will find themselves in a court of law lamely trying to defend their inferior product against damage suits, but when?

I'm an old school advocate of only cabling a tree to help support a structural defect in a tree's structure, period.

jomoco
 

jomoco

Active Member
I can only speak from firsthand experience of my own installed steel cabling systems that are over 20 years old and still going strong.

Is it your contention that Cobra systems are not vulnerable to the same abrasion, chewing animals and fire that steel systems can easily withstand?

If so?

Please, elaborate?

jomoco
 

pinus_rigida

New Member
cobra claims the product lasts 12 years. traditional eyebolt anchored cabling systems can probably outlast the lifespan of most trees they're installed in. strength is definitely an issue- i'd love to see some research done comparing how the 2 systems fail. my biggest gripe with cobra is damage to tissue. Yes installing a bolt through a stem is invasive, but a tree is more equipped to deal with that wound than girdling injury. BUT do you think an arborist would really be in trouble in court if the client was told: we are only limiting your risk, they must be inspected annually, replaced every 12 years etc?
 

Tree_Frog

Active Member
Seems that both systems have there place. To only use one system would lessen your ability to satisfy both the tree's needs but the client's as well. This is where we have to use the available research as well as experience to satisfy both objectives. Wouldn't you agree?

Look at your current project. You are experimenting with current techniques and your experiences to develop a new system for a client. Now to place steel hooks to hold the pulleys would be traditional. Designing a non invasive system is not. Are you incorporating UV and rodent damage into the equation of 10 pound plants that are suspended above a landscape and potentially people? What is your inspection interval?

Just some thoughts?
 

jomoco

Active Member
All it'll take to get a court ruling against Cobra is one of their systems failing and causing damage to people or property, due to abrasion or fire that a traditional steel system could have withstood.

The arborist who installs it will be held liable as well guys.

Stupidity has a price, and that's as it should be.

jomoco
 

jomoco

Active Member
[ QUOTE ]
Seems that both systems have there place. To only use one system would lessen your ability to satisfy both the tree's needs but the client's as well. This is where we have to use the available research as well as experience to satisfy both objectives. Wouldn't you agree?



[/ QUOTE ]

No, and I question your assumption that Cobra systems meet the tree's or client's needs.

Trees become dependent on cable support for life, and polypropylene ropes are an inferior choice to meet that lifelong need by any measure compared to galvanized steel.

Do you see any utility companies using polypropylene rather than steel in their systems?

jomoco
 

jomoco

Active Member
[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't the fault lie in the ANSI standards if applied and installed properly?

[/ QUOTE ]

If ANSI has approved using Cobra rather than steel systems in the tree industry?

Then yes, absolutely, IMO.

jomoco
 

Tree_Frog

Active Member
The sailing and boating industry uses poly lines. Those are dynamic loads that are incorporated. Same as tree movement.

Why transfer all loading from the branches to the root plate when you don't have too. Static cabling binds the tree together to incorporate a shift in loading dynamics. Dynamic systems uses tree dampening until loading exceeds the anticiped caution zone for the defect due to research.

Also, why do we climb with both dynamic and static lines. It all depends on the application.
 

jomoco

Active Member
You don't think utility lines are subject to dynamic loading?

Then why do they use all steel inline compression springs?

Pity the poor trees without us around to "help" them!

Install your 8 ton cobra system to specs in a codominant white alder, then load it to just 2 tons of tension and see what happens! Two nicely girdled leaders facing imminent death!

Does Cobra have warning labels stating not for use in soft barked tree species?

No? Then sue the pants off them, along with the idiot CA who installed the system.

jomoco
 
Top