Friction Hitch

Do you currently live in Southern California?

  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
Re: Outlawing friction hitches

"Founder/ 1st president of IGKT, author, updater of the ABOK bible Geoffrey Budworth put the strength of the Adjustable Hitch in the 80%+ class i believe. Usually that category seems reserved seating for the renowned Fig.8 family; with about only splices, Tensionless Hitch and Double Noose/ Scaffold/ Double Fisherperson's/ Anchor to self whatcha-ma-call-it earning higher 'grades'"

I really appreciate a sense o' humour to give these debates some gravity Spydy - thanks
grin.gif
 
Re: Outlawing friction hitches

I think this is closer to the Safety Belt hitch than the Adjustable.

The adjustable I looked at ( has a few other names, including the Mangus....) has two coils upward, with a half hitch down underneath the first coil.

That is quite different than this, which coils downward four times.

Safety Belt is closest I have found, but still a bit different.

This would need to be strength tested.
 
Re: Outlawing friction hitches

The Adjustable Hitch as pictured is meant to be an adjustable eye. So; the whole thing is loaded; the Adjustable Hitch pulling into the eye. What we are saying is conceptualizing that leg of the eye as a downward pull to set, cut the eye and keep pulling on the friction hitch side; and you have a Shannon on SRT; only with Bitter End tucked up under 1 instead of 2 of the bottom rings/ turns; with same direction of pull on the friction hitch part of the Adjustable.

Viewed like this, sitting in DdRT, we would serve the tail high and give a Coil downward, last Turn going around the Standing Part and host/lifeline as 1 unit, and then after that; tucking/ reeving up through that single last Turn. Making that tuck under 2; would make a Shannon; if i'm understanding correctly.

Almost the same 2/1 exists in the Adjustable's eye; as in the DdRT application; allowing the slide under load smoother mechanics. The differentiating points would be the 2/1 with static helper leg is in eye of Adjustable and to the opposite side of hitch in DdRT and the tensioned line under the friction hitch in Adjustable eye; not DdRT.

Orrrrrrrrrrrr somethin like'dat
propeller.gif






edit-
This is what i'm looking at: Shannon Hitch Animation; i figured out bug in my lil'animation engine; still not perfect; especially fig.8 (that i been steering away from fighting with
crazy.gif
in previous animations).
 
Re: Outlawing friction hitches

The knot will be strength tested against a few other friction hitches. Strength and performance under normal conditions and under severe, sudden loading, high speed descending, and breakage point will be review and prepared in a report format.

More on this later. Generalizing about "strength" is difficult without empirical data. If I were to make a "general" statement, however, I would have to say it is quite a far cry from a "figure 8". Especially in function, degree of bend, and over all design. That would be likening a blakes to a square knot. It's a whole different animal.

anyway, thanks for all the feedback, this does add a nice ammount of influx for debate.

More on this when results come out.
 
Re: various hitches

[ QUOTE ]
i say jump into the 21st century and use the closed system, then you never have to worry about a tail again.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm glad someone said it!
grin.gif
 
Re: various hitches

[ QUOTE ]
i say jump into the 21st century and use the closed system, then you never have to worry about a tail again.

[/ QUOTE ]

The progression of performance from a typical open vs. closed system is normally quite large. I haven't found that to be the case here, and that's why I haven't needed to go to the closed system. This knot out performs other open hitches by at least 100 percent, closing the gap on the closed system hitches to the point where it is non-defineable in many situations.

I totally agree, if open hitches, such as the Blakes, were great, then why would we have gone to closed hitch set ups? Because they weren't so great.

I like using a single line technique. It provides me with a simple system I can quickly check over whenever I am leaving a work station in the climb, moving to another. That's my method. It is safe, and I employ it with safety in mind.
It's also a good bit easier to use than other hitches I tried to use in the past.

I also like the fact I have a half inch line that is securing me, and during work that makes a lot of difference over a thinner closed loop. That's just my opinion.

So, your point is very valid with many of the open hitches in use today, but I don't believe it applies here. That is precisely my point also, and I am also glad that somebody brought it up. Open hitches in use today are generally more difficult to use than many of the closed hitch set ups.

For those who wish to employ the open hitch, give this a try. For those who left the open hitch to go to a closed system because of performance, give this a try also. If you are niether of the above, then don't feel threatened by the guy the next block over you see climbing on this. It is probably me, and I am not waving the finger at you over there, just waving my hand in a "hello".

This is only another tool to carry around and apply where needed. I happen to use it a lot, and find it safe, and easier to use than any other open hitch out there. Whether you like it or not, this is a 21st century open climbing hitch. I just presented it, and I can't back date it. It came out around 2000.

Take it or leave it. It's a matter of opinion and comfort, and safety record. I have relied on this knot in situations where I am weighing 220 pounds with gear and saw, and throwing 200 pound blocks, using this knot as a pivot point. That event has occurred over and over again, without failure. Why would I want to go to a different system? For lighter weight pruning, sure, I will employ a closed system set up with a hand saw, and self tending device. Or when collecting seeds and cuttings, travelling barefoot through the canopy, yes, I would desire to travel quick and light at those times. Speed is much more critical in certain instances. But not always. There is a balance of safety and speed, depending on scenario. That's where I choose an "all around" knot. For me, this is it. For others, they have there own also.

Thus, the beauty of self expression and choice.

Yes, lets form the Knot Pro Choice movement. It will confuse them all. Are you Knot Pro Choice? I am all about Knot Pro Choice. There is no need to "outlaw friction hitches", as attempts to do so are being made in Europe. How absurd.
 
Re: various hitches

[ QUOTE ]
Take it or leave it. It's a matter of opinion and comfort, and safety record. I have relied on this knot in situations where I am weighing 220 pounds with gear and saw, and throwing 200 pound blocks, using this knot as a pivot point. That event has occurred over and over again, without failure. Why would I want to go to a different system? For lighter weight pruning, sure, I will employ a closed system set up with a hand saw, and self tending device. Or when collecting seeds and cuttings, travelling barefoot through the canopy, yes, I would desire to travel quick and light at those times. Speed is much more critical in certain instances. But not always. There is a balance of safety and speed, depending on scenario. That's where I choose an "all around" knot. For me, this is it. For others, they have there own also.


[/ QUOTE ]

Great post again TrEECoWboy, as a confirmed closed system thinner loop climber I will be trying your knot as my 2nd TIP..nice one
cool.gif
 
I will call this knot "Tree Cowboy". "Shannon" was an interim label for it, during the discovery and examination process.

As the formalities of knot classification proceed, the knot will be called "Tree Cowboy".

Climb on.
Enjoy.
 
Re: various hitches

someone presented this last week in a photo with a split tail, and a closed system.

It's all the same, the knot is the guts of the system/open or closed.

As Obama says, if you put lipstick on a pig, its still a pig.

-Tree Cowboy
cool.gif
 
Re: various hitches

[ QUOTE ]
someone presented this last week in a photo with a split tail, and a closed system.

It's all the same, the knot is the guts of the system/open or closed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong on both counts:

1) The other knot is NOT what you've presented; it is a ProhGrip
(aka "Blake's") with an extra two "upper" wraps and one fewer (one vs. two)
"lower" wrap (which bind the end), AND loaded on both ends ("closed").

2) What determines a knot in my book is loading profile--and taking what
in your knot is an unloaded end and putting it to work certainly alters
the knot (which is exactly the case with what arborists (originating Over
There, in the UK?) call the "Icicle Hitch" in distinction to what John Smith of
the IGKTyers presented as able to grip a tapered object--the difference
between loading both vs. the one end, respectively.
(Grip seems to be stronger for single-strand vs. parallel-strand loading.
--Franz Bachmann's conjecture, and a casual observation of mine.)
(There's a lotta "YMMV" in knotting.)

Just as a Sheet Bend and Bowline have markedly distinct behavior
from their different loading (despite Spydey's luv for seeing their
form-wise likeness).

I'm quite surprised you don't see the difference in structure!
(Consider, if the coil is, as is yours, away-loaded (top-loaded,
for a downwards pull), how his tuck so differs--it doesn't penetrate
any of the coil! (And how *untoward* its final wrap is!)
Taking the perspective of loading the other end, you can see it as
a Blake's ("ProhGrip" recognizes Prohaska, who beat Blake to discovery),
and count the extra and differently apportioned wraps.

*kN*
 
Re: various hitches

THanks KN, I had to study it another 5 years.........I still climb on it regularly, and it still does well. Like any other knot, it needs to be dressed, but once dressed it stays well. I think I will call it the "Cowboy Up". It is a unique configuration, and doesn't burn during an abrupt decent, because the load is on the top, and distributed through the four coils a bit equally as the coils arch with a load. When ascending, there is no stick in the bottom coil as in a Blakes. I like it, and find it quite practical in most situations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom