false crotch hitches

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I thoroughly disagree. The Timber Hitch excels at this! That's one aspect of security.

[/ QUOTE ]
Here are some quotes form the first couple pages of a web search :
"Used to attach a rope to a log, or where security is not an issue. This knot tightens under strain, but comes undone extremely easily when the rope is slack. "
"This is an important hitch, especially for dragging a heavy object like a log. It will hold firmly so long as there is a steady pull; slacking and jerking may loosen it."
"if you decide to use the Timber Hitch for any lengthwise pull, you should make sure that any sliding motion will cause your tucks to tighten, not loosen."
"It is simple to tie and as I discovered, simple to goof up if you don't pay attention."
"a Timber Hitch used alone may become untied when the rope is slack, or when a sudden strain is put on it."
 
Lots of those web pages were written by rank amateurs. A lot of them have flatly incorrect information. In fact, the one you reference shows the wraps in the WRONG DIRECTION relative to the pull and too few tucks. Not exactly a good source! No wonder you're confused.

Clifford Ashley mentions that the Timber Hitch was used at sea for securing the standing ends of topsail clewlines and fore and main clew garnets... which is a far more brutal flogging than you'll ever see in tree work. Furthermore, ease of untying after use is a separate issue from security. I think you're confusing the two.

http://www.geocities.com/roo_two/knotindex.html
 
Ahh, I do believe we have stumbled upon the source of disagreement. Yes, most of the web pages referenced by Mike were written by amateurs. But then most tree workers are also amateurs, so it is appropriate. Some of us with over 10 years experience think of ourselves as somewhat knowledgable in this 'industry', but we are in the minority. Seems like most smart people tend to abandon treework after 4-5 years for a better profession. The overwhelming majority of tree workers have less than 5 years experience and therefore most wouldn't know a properly tied Timber hitch if you hung them with it.

The industry needs idiot-proof knots and hitches since most using them don't have enough experience to tell if it's tied right or wrong.
 
I have personally seen a piece of a spar tied of with a timber hitch, invert and roll right out of the rope. I have also seen an unloaded pulley, secured with a timber hitch, become untied while the groundy was trying to flip it to the climber.
Rocky is right, perhaps they were tied wrong or used in the wrong application because of lack of experience, but when personal experience and multiple references say it can loosen when not loaded or loaded wrong, I believe it.
As to Ashley's reference, I'm a sailboat racer for going on 35 years now and the only application I ever heard was diagonal lashing, which is what Ashley may be refering to. http://www.northnet.org/ropeworks/archive/daglas1.html
As you see it has little to do with our discussion.
 
If you saw a hitch roll out of the rope, it was not a correctly tied Timber Hitch. Your poor references are laughable. Most only mention that it doesn't jam up (which is a good thing). The one you use to denounce the Timber Hitch shows the hitch tied wrong. It's therefore likely they too saw an incorrectly tied "Timber Hitch" fail. That's not very scientific. I can tie any knot incorrectly, have it fail, and then irresponsibly call it insecure. I noticed that, probably like the original site, there are multiple copycat weekend warrior scouting sites, who also don't know the first thing about knots that parroted, word for word, the same incorrect information and show the hitch tied wrong.

You're entitled to your misguided conjecture. You're simply incorrect. Your colleagues have absolutely no reason to stop using the Timber Hitch.
 
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Your poor references are laughable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm glad I bring you happiness.

The Tree Climber Companion, by Jeff Jepson and with contributions from one this sites owners, Tom Dunlop, warns of the possibility of roll outs, and of loading vertically (90 degrees to the bight), the timber hitch. (page 78)
I hope this reference is not so laughable.
 
With the larger splices on the newer slings, you should place your half hitch on the two legs of the splice, not on the throat. This way you have 2 ropes at the turn doubling the rope strength at the bend.
 
Knude i think those are good thoughts, but may forsake (at least some of them) the security of a good choke hold on a sheer, smooth vertical.

i think that Mike's direction of pull analysis is so true, that i load everything so that the single tail pulls into the choke of an eye on loading.

Including if i place block etc. directly overhead or under the load, that i place the block on the side of any imbalance, so that the offbalance pull sets into the restriction of the eye, whether it is sling, cow, timber, bowline etc.

i use loop runners on almost every 'limb load'; i have a carabiner in one end. i come from the side the support isn't on (when not straight overhead) and throw the small sling around under with the weight of the carabiner (so it ends up pointing towards support/on support side), then loop the restriction of the eye of the sling over the carabiner end. Specifically so that any loading tightens and not loosens the choke.

i think that anytime you can keep the main stress/pull of the 'joint' in line (knot, hitch, eyesplice) you would tend to make the system more secure and strong (as long as the chosen strategy didn't violate rope handling standards somehow). So i think that Sherrill's long eyesplice is a good idea, and have mimicked kinda when hoisting a 2:1 system, making a larger bowline eye to support the dropeye pulley from in the air, so that the eye of the knot was on the pulley side of the support, and the actual half hitch holding the eye together across the friction type buffering of the branch, not taking the brunt of the pulls and shocks itself. So much so that also it can be examined that the pulley is on a bight, in basket support position (stronger) and the weak part of the bowline recieves very little load if the friction going over the top is enough. To really take advantage of that strenght potential i think you should have 2 carabiners in parallel support linking the bowline and pulley, so as to not have to tight a arc in the rope at that loaded point.


Orrrrrrrrrrr something like that!
-KC
 
Mike, I'm not sure where you want to tie the clove? I'm referring to tying that one half on the THROAT. Adding an extra half or your clove(if this is where you want to tie it)is not going to help. Still only one turn touches the bight. If one turn "pops" through, the other is goin with it(if it does slip out). All that's needed, and what I'm saying, is the extra wraps, of your choice, around the doubled part of the hitch as shown in pic.
Also you keep mentioning smooth pole? I also don't know your tree experience? But, this hitch on the greater majority of trees as a main anchor point for medium to heavy duty rigging, which I think most use this application for, find the performance outstanding. Don't see too many smoothed pole trees around me. Your incident might exist in the sailing world with the smooth poles. I also can't say I've seen this hitch used other than a main anchor point or as other contact points along the lowering line system.
Just remember different hitches/knots for different apps. Use accordingly.
 
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Your poor references are laughable

[/ QUOTE ]
The Art and Science of Practical Rigging by ISA/ArborMaster also warns of misuse of the timber hitch:

"This hitch is most secure when tied on larger pieces and when the pull is always against the bight, such that it tightens the hitch on the stem. The sling should never be loaded away from the bight because doing so could loosen it." (Pg. 53)

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
You're entitled to your misguided conjecture. You're simply incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]
Come on, now. We can disagree and still be respectful!
 
Couple of good points there Rescue; as far as the knotting part goes, i think part of a riggers job is to make sure that everything pulls straight into the restriction of any eye or line crossing. Like a calculated machinist/engineer inspecting/ setting the line with the most positive, leveraged resistance by pulling in the opposite direction of the loading everytime, at every point. For sure positive security.

When lacing a cow hitch, that the load will pull down on, i always put the first wrap under the pulley tail first (so first loading pulls into it's lock first), then over it. The pulley goes to the heavy side(once again locking agianst any 'lead' /off balance force on that axis) to like wise pull into the bight/eye/line cross.

In Kevin's attatchment (in post 2 of the thread); even the finish with the standing tail, goes to the top over the line to pull against it/ lock into it positively in this fashion of step by step machining to positive lock against the pull strategy.

So that is a constant examination of every system and pints within a system to me. So, i think on a half hitch running bowline, that both turns should be in the same direction, both bights restricting the off balance of pull whether by line angle or load weight. Also, the running bowline should always go on the C.o.B. side (heavy side) of the preceding half hitch, as likewise pull closed positively and not open.

i set cloves etc. all the same way,the single pull leg locking into the crossing/locking of the eye/bight/intersection restriction by the power of the pull in the opposite direction. So i think that simple principal is very powerful and positive, and the timber hitch just one example. In the Timber Hitch's (like 'slippery hitch'?)specific case, (with 'loose splice' imagery), the tension and lock are the only things holding any semblance of a knot in place, so is easier to see as the point is exagerrated IMLHO.

Orrrrrr something like that.
-KC
 
In my experience the TH is less than reliable. If it's kept loaded it works fine. When load/unload it opens up and gives me some concern.

There are several parameters that I use for choosing a knot/hitch. Ultimately, it boils down to my confidence in the performance. I have NEVER heard of a cow hitch not working. I HAVE experienced a TH, not failing, but not performing at 1005 so it goes to my b-list. I learned how to tie a TH the first year of Boy Scout camp about 40 [ouch! :) ] years ago.

Tom
 
WOW; that is really something; i din't know they had BoyScouts that looonng ago!

Welcome Back Tom!


i would only use a TH for a false crotch in the air, if i could lock the standing end down so it couldn't get it's 'creep'/ even begin to walk.

Like making a TH out of the length of a roundsling and slipping the standing end over the block; putting a carabiner in it as stopper or to clip to back to sling itself etc. In a loop runner a carbeiner in the end of a timber hitch can let another carabiner hang thru eye of TH, for security. Or in a single line, i would finish with a few half hitches, perhaps placed to be trapped by the tension of the line too. Those are for strategies when not enough length to have a Cow out of it!

Down on the ground dragging a quick TH can be efficient when it doesn't matter tooo bad if it comes loose etc. IMLHO
 
What irritates me is the unscientific statements of pure anecdotal evidence of hitches that may or may not have been tied correctly.

They need to define the correct way to tie a Timber Hitch. Then, define how it can be loaded when used. Then test those conditions repeatedly. Compare the results to other hitches tested with the same battery of unbiased tests. Leave the anecdotes at home... they're useless. I'm unable to reproduce this insecurity in a properly tied Timber Hitch. It does not come untied. Lengthwise sliding is a different issue.

Part of having a scientific conclusion is that the results can be reproduced .
 
I never used it just based on how un-knotlike it looked. but I'd figure I'd try it out since you mentioned it and I was curious. I couldn't shake it to the point of untying. I quit after 100 shakes each time. I did 24 tests on a total of 11 different objects, 10 of 'em mostly round 1 square. sometimes I'd shake one way, sometimes another. not bad. I think I hurt my arm tho'. I don't think Im gonna test any other knots today. ya need a machine to do it to save your arm

charlie swanson
 
Is Ashley \"unscientific\"?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
What irritates me is the unscientific statements of pure anecdotal evidence

[/ QUOTE ]

As for another reliable source, I just came across this quote: Ashley says that the timber hitch is "much used in handling cargo, for which it is very convenient, as it practically falls apart when pull ceases." (The Ashley Book of Knots, p.290, #1665)
 
Re: Is Ashley \"unscientific\"?

When Jeff Jepson wrote the first edition of The Tree Climber's Companion in'97 he showed it for use as an anchor for blocks. He also wrote. "It is not recommended for lowering limbs because of its potential to "roll out" unless the hitch is preceeded by a "marl" or Half hitch so it is loaded properly." I know that we're not talking about using the TH to lowere limbs, this is to add another bit of information only.

In the illustration of the TH he states, "Four turns should be considered minimum." After TCC hit the bookshelves he got some feedback about the TH and changed the minimum wraps to five.

Tom
 
Timber Hitch

In 'The Art and Science of Practical Rigging' video 3
'Rigging Knots', Ken Palmer warns about some of the problems
of the timber hitch (loading direction, changes in trunk diameter, etc.).
He also recommends least 5 tucks, and make sure the tucks
are evenly distributed around the circumference of the tree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom