knots and anchors

Fairfield

Participating member
Here is a question I will throw out to the guys that train other climbers (not saying there is a wrong or right to this). When teaching your new guy about knots, do you tell them that the knot makes the *ROPE* weaker?

When teaching the new guy about anchors do you tell them that a frictionless hitch makes the *ANCHOR* stronger?

I have my way I do like to teach it but I more would like to take in your thoughts on this.
 
Something that Pete Donzelli taught me was that knots and hitches don't make ropes weaker. They make them less efficient. If they weakened the rope the rope would be weak even after the knot/hitch were untied. I know...this is conceptual and maybe irrelevant, but it is accurate.

I don't understand what you mean in your statment about anchors though??? Please explain...
 
The anchor question, I once listen to a instructor at a class state that if you place a tentionless hitch instead of say just a wrap 2 pull 2, 3 pull 1, girth hitch, that it would make the *anchor* stronger. I was almost thinking that he didnt mean it the way I just wrote it but it turns out he did. I didnt say anything due to it not being my class and I am just not that guy that will call out an instructor infront of a whole class.
 
I have sat through classes as well where the instructors (and they are right) state that the tensionless hitch and w3p2 makes for a stronger anchor then, say, a bowline. But the applications of those anchors are based more in the low angle rope/water rescue world where most of your ropes are in the horizontal plane. I have thought about the tensionless which a couple times and can't seem to find a config that I am satisfied with to go vertical. It has some pretty cool advantages though.
 
The term "frictionless hitch" is simply wrong. The hitch depends on the friction between the rope and the object it is wrapped around. People keep emphasizing that the tensionless hitch develops the full strength of a rope and is stronger than any knot. That is an advantage only if you have tensionless hitches on both ends of the rope.

Knot strength tests vary a lot. The absolute values and relative rankings of knot strengths depend on what rope is used. If you need a knot that is ten percent stronger, you should be using a rope that is four times stronger. I choose knots on criterea other than strength tests done on a rope of a kind that I am not using.
 
[ QUOTE ]
knots and hitches don't make ropes weaker. They make them less efficient. If they weakened the rope the rope would be weak even after the knot/hitch were untied. I know...this is conceptual and maybe irrelevant, but it is accurate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rockclimbers often trim the ends of their new, long lines,
to remove those parts of the rope that in fact HAVE BEEN
MADE WEAKER, by (either) knots (being compressed) and
bending of the line through 'biners on falls. (I don't
know if studies have tried to narrow the focus on what
is doing the (more) weakening --knots are at line's end,
and likely bent-through-'biner points at a greater remove.)

Not only, as BobT notes, should one not be working so close
to a knotted line strength that <u>which</u> knot matters,
but you'll be hard-pressed to gain such detailed knowledge
(i.e., test results differ and aren't explicit in detail
sufficient to be sure ... !).

As for using the "tensionless hitch", that is ofter more
comical than beneficial.

*kN*
 
[ QUOTE ]
...one not be working so close
to a knotted line strength that <u>which</u> knot matters,


[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed...if this is an issue you're too close to failure...get a stronger rope.
 
Sorry have not got around to explaining the reason of this post sooner, have been getting busy again. I will start by saying I have the same thoughts as all of you on this. The statement was made to me that by taking a tensionless hitch to say a tree that you are some how making the anchor stronger. My question due to the way it was said was, " are you saying that the tree as the anchor will now hold more weight?". (as if the manor that you connect to the anchor will change the failur point of it). I got a long blank stair after asking that..... I then said that to me an "anchor" is an object that you will connect your system into. The manor to wich you tie off to that object(s) is just that, the manor to wich you connect to it. If that anchor fails at 5,000 lbs then it will fail at 5,000lbs no matter how you tie to it.

As for the knot making the rope weaker. It was stated that by placing a knot into the rope you will make the rope as a whole weaker, I would be app to say you reduce the mbs of the rope from that point and after. For the rope as a whole though you dont. Almost all of us have used one rope as two lines before and just isolated the two sections with a knot some slack and then another knot(the two knots being for the anchor connections). Say I use a eight on a bight for one of the knots and a butterfly for the other. One knot will reduce the mbs more then the other, but at the same time it will not have an effect on the rope as a whole.

What made me a little uneasy about this was these two subjects were not able to be explained deeper by the "instructors" when asked. I hate when people will so called teach something that they dont have a full grip on them self.

Sorry about the "frictionless hitch" comment, I did mean to say tensionless. Oh and ya I think that a tensionless hitch is way over used (most likely do to lack of understanding of forces about to be seen).
 
may i slightly derail the convo?

i have a lanyard with (fisherman's knots?) which attach the carabiners to each end.

the inside bend of those knots that contact the caribiners directly...

is that a more likely point of failure than other parts of the rope assuming even wear?

as stated above, would it be beneficial to, at times, trim the ends and retie the end-knots, creating a shorter lanyard?

Next time I replace that knot, I wish to dissect it at that point to see what i can see

Thank you
 
FWIW, you answered your own questions ... well thought out, IMO.

I'd recommend a thimble next time:

318685-DEDAThimble.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 318685-DEDAThimble.webp
    318685-DEDAThimble.webp
    37.2 KB · Views: 51
[ QUOTE ]
I'd recommend a thimble next time:

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, if you're able to make such a nice (hot pink!) seizing,
skip the bulky <u>strangle knot</u> (this is NOT a "fisherman's"),
and put in two more such seizings. Nice work, SingleJack!

*kN*
 
[ QUOTE ]
...Wow, if you're able to make such a nice (hot pink!) seizing,
skip the bulky <u>strangle knot</u> (this is NOT a "fisherman's"),
and put in two more such seizings. Nice work, SingleJack!

*kN*

[/ QUOTE ]

Jack, the knot you pictured is still in the sliding noose stage as it has not bottomed out. Your strong seizing is doing most of the work.

Dave
 
When I need to seize the ends of a knot I only dream of doing it as neatly as SingleJack.

The seizing technique I use is called the 3M End Seize. Black electrical tape is wrapped around the base rope then spiraled down to smoothly cover the tail of the rope.

Brion Toss used the term 'Butane Backsplice' for using a lighter to melt the ends of ropes. In that application I use the 3M Backsplice...similar to the 3M End Seize ;)
 
[ QUOTE ]
Jack, the knot you pictured is still in the sliding noose stage as it has not bottomed out. Your strong seizing is doing most of the work.

Dave

[/ QUOTE ]

Good eye!
And the "bottoming out" that might occur with this particular structure
isn't going to be pretty: i.e., the first potential *bottom* it would encounter
is the thimble (sides); but, that's rather slight, and conceivably the knot
could be forced around that to the ring, which itself doesn't offer much
of a base.

[ QUOTE ]
When I need to seize the ends of a knot I only dream of doing it as neatly as SingleJack.

The seizing technique I use is called the 3M End Seize. Black electrical tape is wrapped around the base rope then spiraled down to smoothly cover the tail of the rope.

Brion Toss used the term 'Butane Backsplice' for using a lighter to melt the ends of ropes. In that application I use the 3M Backsplice...similar to the 3M End Seize ;)

[/ QUOTE ]

But that doesn't make a strong seizing! (And ... black, vs. hot pink?! ;) )

The shown strangle knot itself can be adapted-extended to make
a decent whipping or seizing : using mason line (about what the hot pink
is, if not precisely --mason line comes in hot green, pink, white, &amp; gold),
make a strangle knot with 5 or 6 overwraps, finishing it with a tuck
of the tail folded into a <u>bight</u>; give one additional twist-wrap of this with
the opposite end (the 5-6 overwraps in mason line, and 7-8 in 30#(?)
monofilament fishline, provide sufficient breadth of the knot for the
extra inner wrapping of ends); finally, with ample bight material, one
can add a finish of a few more wraps using the sailor's whipping
technique of wrapping side of the bight around &amp; around over the other
which will be pulled out to tighten it all --then cut off neatly.
One can haul on substantial whipping material with tools for purchase,
which is nice, in contrast to maintaining a high tension in putting on each
wrap. I use pliers (or hammer) to compress the whipping in the belief
that it helps distribute the hauled tension throughout the overwraps
(hauling on the ends, after all, delivers force directly to only the ends
of the wrapping, not so surely the central wraps).

In the attached photo are whippings on three half-inch sized ropes
(pale blue CoEx laid, dirty white nylon(?) 12-strand, &amp; Yale &lt;whatever&gt;)
The top one (blue CoExtruded PP/PE) uses fishline, and the sailor's whipping
finishing wraps are on the right (at the rope's end; else one would have
to pull the entire rope through them, on the other end!); one can just
make out that the ends' wrapping each other runs in the crease of the
lay, starting about 5 wraps in from the right --i.e., this is the right
side of the strangle, right of which come the sailor's wh. wraps.
(The gold mason-line whipping right of this was put on because the
dang &lt;--can I say that?-- bristly end fibers were really annoying me!)

Now, the bottom, yellow, arbo-rope has a similar whipping oriented
the other way 'round, which is maybe easier to start, but okay to finish
only if --as here-- one has a short bit of rope (this was a sample).

The center whipping is of mason line (150# tensile).

All in all, these are also examples of recycling. (;

*kN*
 
I was remiss in not cropping the pic to focus attention on the thimble recommendation.

However, several quite useful observations have been the result:

As to the knot - I left it un-named; "Scaffold-ABOK1120" aka "Triple Overhand Loop" (TOL) aka "Triple Fisherman's Loop" aka "Strangle Knot" aka "Noose" ... What e v e r ... I prefer, the less sinister, TOL.

The knot is "bulky" but was thought to act as a buffer when pulling the snap back though a union so as to minimize cambium damage - BTW not worth the hassle.

It is "not bottomed out." True, but not for want of trying. It was tied, dressed then "set" with triple body weight (600#). It locked-up tight before it "bottomed out". Then the seizing was applied. So, I let it fly because it did not jam into the thimble ... never did.

As to the seizing - It IS mason single braid line, stitched, whipped, over whipped with two frapping turns and a flat knot -- learned from Brion Toss. I love seizings ... they're COOL and gives me something to do while my dear wife is watching "Desperate housewives" ... LOL.

Not quite sure kN, if you like or dislike the "pink". But, I like it because it's very easy to see and inspect before, during and after each use. I use a DEDA (a la TomD) with red(ish) on the right and green(ish) on the left to aid in differentiation during use.

In addition to the above, the seizing certainly assists in security &amp; it is useful to monitor any 'creep' in the TOL ... also, might have helped a little, to fair that "bulky" knot through unions.

It should be noted, that picture is fairly old and that lanyard has long since been retired, as has its successor. Both performed flawlessly throughout their working lives.

As to three seizings instead of the "bulky" knot - I wasn't comfortable relying on seizings alone ... perhaps unfounded. However, I'm currently using spliced 3-strand, thimble and a Pink/Green seized finish. It seems to be working nicely.

My apologies for participating in taking us way off topic ... but, hey, we're still learning from each other ... right?
 
[ QUOTE ]

As to three seizings instead of the "bulky" knot - I wasn't comfortable relying on seizings alone ... perhaps unfounded.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not unfounded at all. I've seen too many seizings fail probably due to some application defect (of which there are numerous factors). On the other hand, a good knot can be inspected for correctness, and after that you don't have to worry about the skill of the tyer impacting performance.
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom