New ANSI revision on the slate

I'm wondering if a girth hitch is prone to loosening thus negating the intent of preventing cross-loading. Seems like a tight splice would just simply "be tight".
 
First off , this is my first post to TreeBuzz. Been following the site for quite some time and have enjoyed the sharing of information and stories. It is a great tool to learn from others experiences, hopefully I can help someone out some time as I hope someone here can help me.

There is a lot of talk about splicing and the standards that may or may not apply to our field. My question is for the guys out there who are actually doing the splicing. Do you carry insurance to cover your products, or are you treating it as a " use at your own risk" situation. I only ask because I have been splicing for some time for my own use, but on occasion will splice for others. ( well ok, I will do it for anyone who asks)

I have tossed around the idea of splicing full time and have actually looked into the product liability insurance that it would require, however, the numbers are just not feasible. Do any of you have this insurance? And if so, what company are you going through? It seems to me that since the rope manufacturers put the instructions for certain splicing techniques on their web sites getting proper coverage for this should be easier than it is.

Anyway, if anyone has info regarding this I would truly appreciate it.


As far as the whole Girth eye or tight eye topic, I have always been a proponent of using what you are comfortable with. I would hate to force someone to use something that they just aren't confident with and finding out later that an accident occurred because of it. I personally prefer a tight eye on my climbing line, but will use girth eyes for certain applications like dead eys slings.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I'm wondering if a girth hitch is prone to loosening thus negating the intent of preventing cross-loading.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once you sit on the girth hitch it tightens up and stays in place.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I use an adjustable false crotch when working a spar and need to put a screw link in the eye in order to retrieve the AFC after moving down the spar. With a larger eye I can put the link in with the carabiner and leave it there for the entire spar. With a small eye I have to take the 'biner out, put in the link, and then take the link out in order to put the 'biner back in the eye because they will not fit in the eye at the same time.

If I had to use a small eye I could attach the link to the eye with a piece of string so that I could attach it and leave it there, but then the link flops around too much.

For this reason I prefer the larger eye.


[/ QUOTE ]

This quote is from a post that I wrote in this thread back in June. I have several ropes with tight eyes and, not wanting to let a good rope lie idle, I randomly used a rope with smaller eye and then a rope with a larger eye. I've gotten used to the link on the string and now prefer the smaller eye because it is more streamlined.
 
I have both types in my arsonal, and i like them each for different reasons..... but i'll be danged if they are going to tell me that the method that i've been using for years is unsafe..... if your small splice is good, there is no way that you are going to side load... a good way to check this is, put your biner on the small splice.. if you hold the rope out horizontal and the biner stands out, then it is very unlikely that you can side load....

my other concern is: does this rule apply to Eye-n-eye split tails?........ that could make for some combersome pain-in-the-butt girth hitches.. oh well, i guess that i will need to do All my splicing if this goes into effect
 
I am ALL about the tight eye, or what I call a "carabiner eye."

Imagine girth hitching for the eye-eye split tails...BLECH! Fortunately, my slack tender doesn't allow the hitch to migrate around the 'biner, so it's a moot point.

Insurance for splicing? I've looked (several times) and never has the cost for the insurance allowed me to get it.

love
nick
 
Has anyone tried a slightly twisted (and locked) splice; so as to lay flatter/ less tourqued when girth or round turn positions taken on krab? i think 1 reason for a long eye is to buffer loading to the splice itself with pulley hanging from sling redirecting force, or anchoring a Porty etc.

But, a long splice also helps in not tourquing/ twisting the end of a line girth or round turned to krab at line termination. i think in any twist/arc/ non-linear piece of line; force must be carried farther than if a straight line for same work. Thereby, extra distance multiplier is invoked at every turn, bend, arc etc. Only the straight inline elemants don't increase in force, for they are the minimal distance to the work; being straight lines, so they get the minimal loading of the force itself; without distance multiplier. So anyway; any twist/turn is multiplier against; a hard twist tourquing or spreading splice; more worser i think.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have both types in my arsonal, and i like them each for different reasons

[/ QUOTE ]

What are the reasons you like the bigger eye?

[/ QUOTE ]

1: Some of my hardware is easier to use with a big eye
2: I like connecting my large eyes to my throwball /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif


But, if you gave me a choice, i would chose a small eye. I think that this would be the choice of all the guys that i work with too (since i do most of their splicing)

Is there any way that we can give input into the changes in the standard? Who makes these changes? Do they have any field experience?

Rob

P.s. Mark i hope that this answers your ?.... the only reason that i have any BIG eyes any more is because they are older ropes that i've had a while.... i guess that i'm still a little sentimental about them (Don't talk bad about them, they never let me down /forum/images/graemlins/9lame.gif)
 
Rob,
Go to the ISA homepage and find the link to the Z133 public feedback forum.

Almost everyone of the voting members on the Z committee has many years of field experience. If I were at home I think that I could find a list of the voting members. The members are not technocrats who think up ways to make life more difficult for working people. The intentions are good.

The next time that the Z committee meets my membership on the committee will be voted on. For the past several years I've attended the meetings and taken part in the discussions about the 2006 Z. Anyone can attend the meetings and take part in the discussion. If there is interest in being involved, let me know. there are several sub-committees that do important work and could use help too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom