Adjustable Rope Bridge

[Joeybagodonuts]

Sounds like you are saying the issue is is more about the CTRollnlock potentially stripping the cover off the rope, when shock loaded and being used as a rope bridge adjuster.

Coming off what i posted, I'm not really following that, but I'll reiterate..
What im saying is, if the issue is the ridged cams on the RM destroying the cordage at 4kn, I would like to see the CT in the same test scenario because it's ridges look way more aggressive. Because of that fact, I would want to "assume" its going to do the same thing as the RM.

We've seen the CT tested on a bridge configuration, but not in the same way they are testing in that bulletin Mower Posted. At least not that i have seen.. (just regular pull tests iirc)

I've never heard of that actually happening to anyone, nor have I seen any testing to determine whether that is something that may concern us. The testing I have seen proved to me that the Rollnlock is up to the task, strength wise, as shown in Richard's pull test vid.

Right we haven't really seen anything yet.. but that bulletin does show reason for some concern, at least to me it does so regarding Ridged Cam design. (I had always thought it was the spiked teeth that you had to watch out for in these scenarios & that the ridged were alright)

Yes the videos we've all watched at this point show the R&L being able to take some heavy loading outside its intended purpose.. but what I'm saying is what's it do when tested as so in that bulletin.. For all we know the CT could do the same thing..
Also, what's the RM do when when tested on a bridge in the same fashion as the b CT. Does it end up the same as the CT & show strong? Or does it fail the cordage extremely low.

Antec?

Yes Antec. They are using the little blue ridged cam RopeMan as a bridge option..
Antec is a Subsidiary of Miller Fall Protection. Whether that's the same as the Miller welding manufacturer, idk.. I swear i posted some links & or pictures of this further back in this thread.. Maybe it was a different thread? All i know is there was instruction manuals on useage with their name at the top, which said to me it wasn't some third party addition/modification to the saddle.

Edit- yup it was another thread..

https://www.elagage-hevea.com/fr/amfile/file/download/file/160/product/87/

 

[John@TreeXP]

What I recall from Richard's pull-test video is that a rope bridge itself gives out at a certain point and using the rnl only reduces that by very a minimal amount. What he didn't do is hang a fully weighted climbing saddle from a rnl augmented rope bridge and drop it from various heights, as needed more carefully examine the shock-load factor, rather than simply being pulled to the breaking point, as shown in Richard's test vids.

 

[Joeybagodonuts]

I got a request here if y'all don't mind.. Has anyone seen any info/video on the CT being used in a drop test or static straight line pull? If so, could you post a link or results? I had sworn Rich had done a Static straight pull on a peice of climb line, but i cannot find it again. I may have been thinking of something else..

I'm curious to see how it performs compared to the Blue Ridged Cam RM Mower posted some test infos on..

 

[Joeybagodonuts]

This is the one I was thinking of. But there is a lot of more info and discussion on using the ropeman.
The CT roll n lock is what you want. Look up yoyomans aka richard, videos of pull tests in the exact same configuration you are using the rope man.
He had one that was very strong, check it out.

Hey Mowerr.. been trying to look into this thing & gets some info regarding what happens with it in comparison to the RM..

Well, I've been looking in all the wrong places.. all i had to do was look down & half of the info is right here in front of me.. The CT has a marking on one of its sides which states the max load that should be applied to the progress capture cam. Ironically it is the same number at which the RM causes damage/severing in the testing info you provided....4kn.. Now that isn't to say this is a definite apples to apples test/comparison... Just thought that 4kn number showing up again was ironic & makes me wonder even more if these two devices, although different in design, will act the same on a bridge...

Kong duck has same relative progress capture limit as well.. 450kg..

Obviously this goes without saying but, Richards testing shows that CT in a bridge config will surpass that limit before sheath failure/possibility for severing.. Still left wondering what the RM will do in that test... I should just send mine to him & see what it yeilds..