Puzzle Shows Freely Available Rigging Force Help

TheTreeSpyder

Branched out member
Location
Florida>>> USA
This brain teaser i made up in head from watching rigging and drawing out the forces bouncing them off different groups for a while now. It is supposed to be a free hanging load on 1 line, that goes under the load and ties up high (rope runs from support in a "J" pattern) on the load. The question being, if the load is frictionless and weighs 100#, what is the line tension at the hitchpoint and the bend? The attatchment is entitled "From the Mind of Mayhem".
 

Attachments

  • 10499-From the Mind of Mayhem.webp
    10499-From the Mind of Mayhem.webp
    64.2 KB · Views: 141
The applications that i have tried to show the helpfullness of this force i have over time named LegOnLoad, Self Tourquing Rigs, Over the top Lacing, Hinge Pocket Pressure Rig, Hinge Strength Forcing, Rotational Force etc.

If the Load in the puzzle is 100#, the load at the bend is 200#; for we have loaded a leveraged arc inducing this power, even on the load itself as in this puzzle. So, if here, then anywhere it should be seen, that if we bend the loaded line, we get a leveraged return. Even on the load itself, with the load as the power source, we can leverage force greater than the load.
 

Attachments

  • 10501-Mayhem Fish Scale.webp
    10501-Mayhem Fish Scale.webp
    194.6 KB · Views: 91
Test Setup drawing. If the hitch is too high, system destabilizes, as the hitch is loaded to the value of the load,and should not be given higher leverage from the operating pivot of the pulley than the load itself!!

In my laced rigs, when using an arc-ed line on the load for an effect, i have to be carefull where i place the hitch more. The loss of power by the friction at the turn is made up by using the same friction for me, by sweating out a leveraged purchase of line from that position prior to cutting/loading. In this way the bend, position C's loading is high as possible, by still being the sum of both legs of line to it.
 

Attachments

  • 10503-Mayhem Test Setup.webp
    10503-Mayhem Test Setup.webp
    88.3 KB · Views: 65
The Mayhem Principal applied to a rig, to alter the load's rigging properties by altering it's balance. Using the extra loaded point at the hitch, to alter the balance of loaded points, also other multiplying factors of angled line and proper loading to empower the system.
 

Attachments

  • 10506-Mayhem Applied- change CoB.webp
    10506-Mayhem Applied- change CoB.webp
    157.7 KB · Views: 60
A closer look at the previous and the chained multipliers proposed, powered by the load's weight and length, making these friends, not foes.
 

Attachments

  • 10512-Mayhem Applied- change CoB closer look-A.GIF
    10512-Mayhem Applied- change CoB closer look-A.GIF
    213.5 KB · Views: 51
The proposed inertia effect on a spar that the line lacing is not supporting the load as before, but the hinge is. Proposed the forces are self cancelling until movement, but then the self cancelling forces down the major axis of the spar, now pull at an angle for an instant as their inertia continues, but this instant is at the instant of forcing the hinge stronger as in First Flexxing of Hinge Theory. The inertia of the forces reacting at the hitch and arc points to throw towards each other causing more of arc effect on hinge(?)

This inducement would also be available to the rigged branch, in addition to the virtues discussed previously that are given to the branch by the fact that it is laced about the same, but the line carries the load, like in original puzzle.
 

Attachments

  • 10514-Applied Mahem-Inertia Effect.webp
    10514-Applied Mahem-Inertia Effect.webp
    127.3 KB · Views: 51
A proof of power in the rigs/puzzle arc by measuring distace of input/output relationship with yard stick rather than a scale. Simpler materials, anyone can test, the line moves 2x as far as the pulley, every time.

Now come payday; i expect y'all to be teaching some magic, and get your lunches bought fer ya's; on the spyder, i'm generous that way!
 

Attachments

  • 10517-Mayhem Yard Stick Scale.webp
    10517-Mayhem Yard Stick Scale.webp
    245.3 KB · Views: 49
Diagram of how the setup for the pruf approaching measuting the power not by the pull ratio of input/output, but this time tracking the other half of the formulae, and meaqsuring the distance ratio between the inputt/out put rather than the loading directly.

But, the distance factor being the inverse/reciprocate of the power change (so that the force x distance change at any one point when multipliplied always equals 1/equality factor; showing no made up or loast force, all accounted for).
 

Attachments

  • 10518-Mayhem Yardstick setup.webp
    10518-Mayhem Yardstick setup.webp
    67 KB · Views: 56
The trick of hanging the load from a single line, and gettingmore than the load's weight in the line tension running around on the load, seems ver elusive to many.

It really works and once the extra force loaded point(s) are on the load, leveraged apart, leveraged by angle and bend etc,; the next idea is to use that to advantage rigging. Sometimes, putting the better choice of hitching on the load, is even easier, and you can take more. For one thing, presetting with a line thru a crotch can be done from the ground even, and used several times before rigged out by just hitching the end to the butt, for the far point is already rigged, and now torqued! But to see when to use it, and it is easeir or the extra power helps, ya got to walk the learning curve!

Here is another do-it-yourself pruf with even fewer items. You set the rig as before, only add a line over the support and tied to clevis, but let it hang loose on the control side. Now, the original line does the mayhem pattern of a DWT on the load as it pulls. But pick up harder on the new line, to let the mayhjem rig relax, and it hangs like a regular tieoff, no 'mayhem'. With your fingers, you should be able to tell that the line holding the clevis is tighter when mayhem is line is used. Taken a step further, you can rig so that a 4/1 pull likewise happens on the clevis with the slick throwline powered by the load's weight that this all mounts on. i guess that would make a heck of a nut cracker hanging from the ceiling; pick up the load, place nut in, drop and 5x1 breaks nut open!?!
 

Attachments

  • 10526-Mayhem Violin String Proof.webp
    10526-Mayhem Violin String Proof.webp
    144.9 KB · Views: 58
Hi Tree spider,

This experiment is correct as I see it but its not the original Puzzle.

In this experiment you have connected a third point to the system this is the place that you have taken the the reading from?This gives an external point of leverage letting the holding line create double the force.
If you turn this system on its side you will see that both of the legs attached to the broom stick Now create a balancer as such with an angle less than 30 degrees.A basket sling config for example at 30 degrees can only lift around 50% of the load it can lift at 90 degrees the two legs are pulling against each other there by approximately doubling the force on the line.

In the original puzzle there is no third leg.The rope must have a third point of attachment to create this double load.
If you have a 100kg log on a rope there is a 100kg in the rope it only becomes 200kg when you attach it to a third point.and hang it. The original puzzle there are only two legs and a bend,no point of leverage from a third The rope is now not pulling against itself and only holding the 100 pounds.

If this is the case then I have to agree with rescuemans first statement on the subject....

Very interesting stuff.

Didj



The fundementals
 
The last drawing was the original with an added line; but that line is for an alternate support, not shared. For showing the differance in the loading whether being supported by the red lin or the blue. Yet another line was added for support later. It was such that it would place a 4/1 pull on the test point of the shackle support. Now we let 2 supports hang free, as one was loaded; then alternated to show the obvious differance in loading by which line you pulled to support the test log.

On the 4x test pictured, the hitch kept sliding, the force was so much!

As far as being useful to us, well actually that is where this all started, observing my rigging as i felt around in the dark, trying to follow what seemed like better options as it evolved. Like sniffing on the trail of something. Besides previous referances; let me make a few observations that have become obvious to me in playing with these rigs.

Every change in the amount of loaded points, their pressure, their direction, amount of positions and their leverageable distance from each loaded point seems to matter.

We have placed a loaded point on the ballast end of the hanging load; in this 1st class balance that can be very good.

We have loaded,stabilized the pivot/rigging point to load more.

Nature will take the path of least resistance, loading the line higher is not Her choice. Nature will want the increased rope tension releived if you allow a path of less resistance (such as turn to unroll); it will be taken.

Pressing down with load on line slowly before tearoff, instead of carrying across on hinge and not tensioning line, can add leveraged help from the line to the hinge, in turning and supporting the load.

Or something like that
 

Attachments

  • 10529-Mayhem Loading Poll-Answer.webp
    10529-Mayhem Loading Poll-Answer.webp
    30.6 KB · Views: 63
Hi Tree spyder,

I understand the hypothesis Problem is it defys the laws of physics as I see it.If you take your diagram.The holding leg will have a 100lbs which means that the second leg will have a 100lb and so on in theroy your right Problem is that the second leg having the same force in it will instantly roll the object out of the first bend making it a 100lb again and so on.The only way to stop this and make the object stay in the same position is applying an equal and opposite force to the top to stop it rolling out.This will then give you the desired result.But you have now put a resistance force into the system.A third external leg.For example if you connect the top of object back into the load rope by another rope at the top to stop it rolling you will then create the resistance required to make the Ma work."Triangles"The object is pulling against its self again.Energy can not be created and can not be destroyed justed added to!!!!

The answer to your question disregarding Newtons Laws
would I believe be a 3.08 ma and Vr of 4 on the pulley system at the bottom taking in to consideration there is also no such thing as zero friction on Earth

308Lbs Approx



Didj
 
i speak in zero friction to view at outside constraint on that part for figuring SWL etc.; i don't count on friction there. And easier talking about these things and realizing there is something there etc.

And yes, seeing as the extra tension is in the line at a slant or curve beyond what is needed, that alone creates perhaps a useable condition; in that Nature will be looking to unload the extra tension. This would be a version of the forces taking the path of least resistance, which for a line would be getting whatevber load it does have to carry to hang in a strtaight line, plum-bobbed under the support.

A line slanted to a load that presses down on the line, is raised to a higher load, any other event of bend or angle will be a multiplier of the present line tension. i think the ankled line will raise the tension of the system, the bend the tension at one point(?)
 

Attachments

  • 10544-Some Mayhem Thoughts.GIF
    10544-Some Mayhem Thoughts.GIF
    165.5 KB · Views: 45
~10 years ago this guy i climb for from time to time started getting rental personel, then placed all his guys under that umbrella to cover Workmen's comp etc. As it all was phasing in, any worker on a roof became more of a problem, for the personel company didn't allow that etc. This was evolved for taking branches over roofs whole in one sweep, that wouldn't seem likely otherwise without similar tension from lift from GRC$ or other rig from above, rather than from gravity below, but to same end? (Kinda mighta stole that line from Murph, talking about Big John's strategies).
 

Attachments

  • 10580-How i used.GIF
    10580-How i used.GIF
    24.9 KB · Views: 46
Rock Around the Clock strategy that works well without bend, seems more intense with.

i've used this for best control, control when i wanted a left support and only had a right one; on occasion i have tiptoed around an aluminum antanae when no room to lift, and trusted no other method.
 

Attachments

  • 10581-most leveraged tightening.GIF
    10581-most leveraged tightening.GIF
    46.7 KB · Views: 59
Extra time for application has been brought up. Some learning curve etc.; but sometimes it saves time. Especially as a better transitional strategy from rig to rig i think.

As far as the line loading goes, here i claim more tension on the line; but try to deal with no impact on this super self tightened line. i think the trade off would be less loading. For, i've seen force quoted here and else where as being (speed x speed) x (weight/2); so the increase at loading through weight not speed would be less(?)

Here the climber can save a lot of time, be safer etc. working the trunk line, and still have well leveraged hitch points on the bigger limbs. The strategy also uses overhead friction and a high angle support, with most of the load down the pillar strength of the trunk i think.
 

Attachments

  • 10592-mayhem easier transitions.GIF
    10592-mayhem easier transitions.GIF
    50.4 KB · Views: 45
Ken,

I used to frequent a physics discussion group. Some of these guys really seemed to know the subject well. I learned over time what to look for when it came to who I could rely on for honest and correct information. There was 1 guy though, in particular, who, seemed to know the basics well, but, was very wrong about everything he posted and was proven wrong. The guy continued posting incorrect information concerning these basic principles even though he was proven wrong, time and time again. I had to learn I couldn't trust anything he posted. The subject matter he chose to write about was of interest, so, when I started reading posts at this particular discussion group, I started reading his posts and threads. The people who became so inspirational at this discussion group for me was not so much the guy who made it a point to always lie, since I figured out he was challenging the system without proof, but the people who persistently made it a point to correct him, no matter how basic the concepts this guy twisted around. He posted nearly every day and good people corrected him every day. I'm glad some people were there to help those of us who didn't know.

This little story is ment as a reminder that perhaps we need to be a little more responsible with our information and we need to look after 1 another along with those who may look to us for answers. No1's giving away their livelyhood in a way it takes something from them.

Ken: where have you found it stated here, or anywhere else that (speed)×(speed)×(weight)/2 = force? This isn't true. (velocity)×(velocity)×(mass)/2 = kinetic energy, but it is not force.

Joe
 
Re: Puzzle Shows Freely Available Rigging Force He

Joe writes:
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Ken: where have you found it stated here, or anywhere else that (speed)×(speed)×(weight)/2 = force? This isn't true. (velocity)×(velocity)×(mass)/2 = momemtum, but it is not force.

Joe

[/ QUOTE ]

Joe, linear momentum is (mass)x(velocity).
kinetic energy is (mass)x(velocity)x(velocity)/2.
 
Re: Puzzle Shows Freely Available Rigging Force He

...and like many times before this 1, I stand corrected. Thank you sir.

Joe
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom