Distel hitch... Ba da ba ba ba (I'm lovin' it)
- Thread starter MikoDel
- Start date
I tried the Micho today. I learned it from a nifty 50 sec vid on Utube, made a little composite of screen caps and emailed myself so I had a reference outside. I climbed a locust tree and set some rigging for a big hanger that I have to cut down. That's all I was able to accomplish today - I was siriusly sick the past few days. (My fault tho) Anyway, the Micho is smooth and sweet. Grips and releases beautifully on old, furred out 12-strand tied w/8mm gold prusik cord.
But I found a few problems with it coming down. Since the locust T.I.P. was only about 35' up, I didn't bother switching out to a descender. In my first experience the Micho DOES NOT LIKE to be slipped down using your hands as the friction. It bound up something FIERCE on me. Now unlike a Schwab or a VT, which can be loosened/unbound fairly easily, the crisscross on the bottom of the Micho does not lend itself to being easily slacked. So by the time I was a few feet off the ground, it was VERY very tight, not slipping well at all. And I do this all the time with other friction hitches. I keep all the tension in my hands, completely slacking the hitch under my palm - this has never been an issue.
The only time that has ever happened to me (way worse actually) was early in my learning, when I stupidly tried to descend on a prusik I used for footlock ascent. THAT'S not something U ever wanna try.
I will call this hitch: ALMOST.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but now that I'm doing tree work full time as my only job - I can see why so many of you switch to mechanicals. This stuff is taxing enough. I don't need one single xtra headache.
And locust... OUCH. OUCH. OUCH.Attachments
A stationary rope, as in SRT? Sorry if I'm dull but I'm not quite getting you. I ascend/descend DRT, everything's moving. Ya know, if you've been doing this a long time, like I'm sure you have, you just EXPECT certain things to happen a certain way, if they fall into the category of rote, same old, SSDDay... like how my knots behave on familiar ropes. My point is, I was just surprised the hitch bound up when I was taking all the friction, keeping it slacked. That has never happened to me before with an approved climbing hitch for DRT. But they all get tite, sometime or other, and have to played w/a little
RyTheTreeGuy
Branched out member
- Location
- Canada
Hey Miko,
You may want to try one less wrap with the 8 mm cord...4 mm is a big difference in diameter and if you are used to tying your hitches with 10 mm cord it will lead to much more binding. Take one less wrap and if additional friction is needed you can rotate the eyes on the hitch cord to tighten the last wrap of your hitch and provide you with the reliable grab you want and the silky smoothness you need. Cheers
You may want to try one less wrap with the 8 mm cord...4 mm is a big difference in diameter and if you are used to tying your hitches with 10 mm cord it will lead to much more binding. Take one less wrap and if additional friction is needed you can rotate the eyes on the hitch cord to tighten the last wrap of your hitch and provide you with the reliable grab you want and the silky smoothness you need. Cheers
knudeNoggin
New member
Way back in this thread MikoDel vowed, re the Distel hitch,
"I'll try tying it upside down... see what happens."
Did you in fact try this?
I ask, for in the revision of OnRope, the images for their imbalanced-coil Prusik h.s got flipped wrong-side up, and in this orientation the single turn of one loaded part bears down into the multi-wraps of the other, and so forces them to slide vs. allowing them to grip --or can do so. The knot's coil is supposed to be what I'll call an "expansion" coil, building grip the Chinese finger-trap way, by expanding the length of its contact and tightening --vs "compression", where the pull into the coil tightens it as it stands in place. The text for the book IIRC might've been slightly altered to accommodate the mistaken rotation of the images; ya gotta wonder what whiz kid got this done (I do have on reviewer in mind to ask).
(Expansion coils have the issue of ceding ground as they expand & tighten, but are much more easily loosened by just compressing them; compression coils are good to *bite* where they're put, but their tightness is harder to loosen.)
*kN*
"I'll try tying it upside down... see what happens."
Did you in fact try this?
I ask, for in the revision of OnRope, the images for their imbalanced-coil Prusik h.s got flipped wrong-side up, and in this orientation the single turn of one loaded part bears down into the multi-wraps of the other, and so forces them to slide vs. allowing them to grip --or can do so. The knot's coil is supposed to be what I'll call an "expansion" coil, building grip the Chinese finger-trap way, by expanding the length of its contact and tightening --vs "compression", where the pull into the coil tightens it as it stands in place. The text for the book IIRC might've been slightly altered to accommodate the mistaken rotation of the images; ya gotta wonder what whiz kid got this done (I do have on reviewer in mind to ask).
(Expansion coils have the issue of ceding ground as they expand & tighten, but are much more easily loosened by just compressing them; compression coils are good to *bite* where they're put, but their tightness is harder to loosen.)
*kN*
TheTreeSpyder
Branched out member
- Location
- Florida>>> USA
Wow Brocky!
.
i think these Friction Hitches in general are all tune-able mechanics in some ranges.
.
The 2 stage Friction Hitches with hardware in the primary raw force stage_1 and then a choice of all rope Hitch in upper stage_2 seem quite logical progression(also with heatsink in stage_1) and less dependent on cord size being smaller/denser than host on 2 leg pulls?
.
The rigidity and the size of the hitch 'cord' in 2 leg pulls of half bodyweight to each leg in Friction Hitch(like Prusik rather than single leg at full bodywieght like Tautline or Blake's), but grabbing single host line to ride is usually best if 50-75% of host.
But this is a variable point to each style and weight
>>to adjust the size and rigidity of the cord as a material that are sculpting Friction Hitch in
>>to how much it imposes to grab or slide on host 'rail' ; and fine tunings inbetween.
Cord choice, Hitch choice, Host choice and style are tuneable features for different effects.
Friction Hitch properly, not a Bend to join(but can be used as one) in this classification system.
>>Host line needs no arcs, is grabbed as would a hand rail
>>the cord is the Hitch, it has arcs, arcs rule knots/ropework, linears are just a connecting pass of force.
.
But, from simpler beginning forms we may see the same principle shown, of the actively grabbing ropePart, knot etc. needs to be at least as much rigid tension as the other ropePart/or another rope grabbed in Sheet Bend. But in Sheet Bend the active grab ropePart is at full force too. But, still is the same law; just adjusted for the different xTension(Loading) factor difference of half in a 2 loaded legs of a Friction Hitch.
.
i think these Friction Hitches in general are all tune-able mechanics in some ranges.
.
The 2 stage Friction Hitches with hardware in the primary raw force stage_1 and then a choice of all rope Hitch in upper stage_2 seem quite logical progression(also with heatsink in stage_1) and less dependent on cord size being smaller/denser than host on 2 leg pulls?
.
The rigidity and the size of the hitch 'cord' in 2 leg pulls of half bodyweight to each leg in Friction Hitch(like Prusik rather than single leg at full bodywieght like Tautline or Blake's), but grabbing single host line to ride is usually best if 50-75% of host.
But this is a variable point to each style and weight
>>to adjust the size and rigidity of the cord as a material that are sculpting Friction Hitch in
>>to how much it imposes to grab or slide on host 'rail' ; and fine tunings inbetween.
Cord choice, Hitch choice, Host choice and style are tuneable features for different effects.
Friction Hitch properly, not a Bend to join(but can be used as one) in this classification system.
>>Host line needs no arcs, is grabbed as would a hand rail
>>the cord is the Hitch, it has arcs, arcs rule knots/ropework, linears are just a connecting pass of force.
.
But, from simpler beginning forms we may see the same principle shown, of the actively grabbing ropePart, knot etc. needs to be at least as much rigid tension as the other ropePart/or another rope grabbed in Sheet Bend. But in Sheet Bend the active grab ropePart is at full force too. But, still is the same law; just adjusted for the different xTension(Loading) factor difference of half in a 2 loaded legs of a Friction Hitch.
The SRT two part hitches can be made without metal by using a series of hitches to take some of the load off of the wraps, the Synergy X below works nice, the four wraps and hitches is the right combination for me.
On the metal containing hitches seems that the wraps are making most of the friction, with the ring below them it would only dissipate its own heat, maybe cool the rope slightly from some heat generated below it.
On the metal containing hitches seems that the wraps are making most of the friction, with the ring below them it would only dissipate its own heat, maybe cool the rope slightly from some heat generated below it.
knudeNoggin
New member
Wow, I'd think that this will work if the part reaching to the top, mere-turn, is ensured to be mostly UNloaded, so that the compression coil can in fact compress. "Letsid", eh? As in Let Sid try this, and See Sid Slide! (-;
But we should note that the OnRope cases were *cow*-, not clove-, oriented, which puts the two ends smack adjacent, bottom/top re loading, where as in the Distel's case it's clove-oriented turns and there can be some sliding off of the upper one (and a problem with this would be the jamming of ends at this shared entry area, inhibiting loosening).
Thanks,
*kN*
TheTreeSpyder
Branched out member
- Location
- Florida>>> USA
Looks like are showing double pull of half weight style in the 2stage and extended friction list in 1/2" on 1/2"?
Same rigidity?
Go fatter then host with these systems?
.
edit:
Serial dual systems work in other stuff rope and other as primary system hitting pretty hard, but leaves some minimal for cleanup. So doesn't fully load 2nd stage as hard/more fine tuning, being buffered by 1st taking raw hits and loads in my imagery(sometimes this is more expensive internal parts in other things). Stage_1 in these ropes gives more rigid ropeParts to potentially bend host like rack linear list of 180arc frictions strategy, stage_2 not so capable(not rigid enough any more) but used to grip more than bend host here anyways (grip with what I see as a radial list of 180arcs). Minimal work by 2nd stage cleanup, but gives a second positive check. As like hand after Muenter, rack,fig8 devices etc. Kinda a 1-2 where 1st 'punch' destabilizes against hard, 2nd is a clean-up KO against the force..
Same rigidity?
Go fatter then host with these systems?
.
edit:
Serial dual systems work in other stuff rope and other as primary system hitting pretty hard, but leaves some minimal for cleanup. So doesn't fully load 2nd stage as hard/more fine tuning, being buffered by 1st taking raw hits and loads in my imagery(sometimes this is more expensive internal parts in other things). Stage_1 in these ropes gives more rigid ropeParts to potentially bend host like rack linear list of 180arc frictions strategy, stage_2 not so capable(not rigid enough any more) but used to grip more than bend host here anyways (grip with what I see as a radial list of 180arcs). Minimal work by 2nd stage cleanup, but gives a second positive check. As like hand after Muenter, rack,fig8 devices etc. Kinda a 1-2 where 1st 'punch' destabilizes against hard, 2nd is a clean-up KO against the force..
Last edited:
