COMPUTER MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN BELAYING TECHNIQUE

Brutha, how could it not be?

Do we not belay loads on the end of a line safely to the ground, or; self belay ourselves with self contained brake to our load on line in SRT, the same in our closed DdRT loop......

The rope as a dampening/ spring connective device; who's increased amount can give more buffering to system connections.....the large forces at falling..dispersion of force by friction and allowed run.... And brake hardware, that multiplys the essential brake hand friction (not just adds to it) etc. are all pertinent and pairallel i think. Though our friction hitches; give both brake and hand to our self belay

Were the ink in the numbers runs thicker, verging into foreign charachters; well is just like greek to me and i leave for Dave, Joe etc.; but personally i beleive in the flow of the model and think it is a great link (once again).

For more melding with arbo rig and climbing; perhaps more focus on friction at support, lower elasticity garnished through line choice and legs of line to load as in
Lower Tensile for Safer Supports Thread & Check out this New Lowering Device Thread . Factorinmg the DWT affect of lower elasticity because of less loaded tensile; we can see that not only do we use lower elasticity lines than mountain/ rescue. But also, that a DdRT has more legs of support to the 'load' of the climber than mountain/rescue/ SRT. Therefore, the less elastic line is placed in pattern of even less elastic response; by bodyweight forces divided between both legs of support. Thereby; garnishing less elasticity from the line; moving forces having to carry more on the tensile of the line; raising line tension, and pulling on support more etc.

Or something like that i think, maybe...!
/forum/images/graemlins/propeller.gif
 
img6.jpg

I'd like to hear Claus Mattheck give an explanation of Vittorio Bedogni's diagram of the computer model of belaying stress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom