Ossel Hitch

[TheTreeSpyder]

Been waiting to bring this up in EyeSplice thread, but figure i'd give a fresh start.

A Cow Hitch is very simple and faithful. "In Tree" etc. working with smaller line, slings etc. for directing and controlling mounted carabiners and devices; i might use a Cow Hitch too, for adjustability to different mounting sizes that a number of chokes with sling etc. doesn't work.

A lot of times, the branches might be kinda small, slippery in texture for less friction by area and intensity for hitch to grip. When in question, i go to an Ossel Hitch; viewing it as an altered form of Cow/Muenter hitch strategies, that share the reverse in turn direction to make restricting bight, that other double turn hitchings (clove, round turn) don't have.

The Muenter function/base made first, can make either a Cow or Ossel easier to adjust, and takes most of the load, then the finish of the Cow or Ossel, finishes the trap. Ossel trapping under the more intense, direct pull of the loading i think.

i still believe in the 2 leg support of the long eye or round sling for this lacing as superior. Flat rope of webbing or hollow Tenex, leveraging less, due to less dimension, on the bend in rope at the carabiner forming either eye or loop support.

Great Hitch, with one simple alteration i think, good fer small line pulling a larger too.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Comparison of how positively, and immediately an Ossel traps itself to secure, versus a Cow Hitch.

The strategy of trapping a reduced pull under the main pull to secure, is intensified, by the simple change in finish to mule/lock off the Muenter/BackHand Hitch.

 

[knudeNoggin]

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of times, the branches might be kinda small, slippery in texture for less friction by area and intensity for hitch to grip. When in question, i go to an Ossel Hitch

[/ QUOTE ]
Hmmm, I'm surprised that you have any success with this, as the knot is designed
for hitching like-sized ropes; as the hitched object becomes relatively larger,
the point for that "immediate" nip that you highlight becomes an open space in
the angle of the SPart and its turn around itself--it is not longer going to be
snug to the object and capable of nipping the end.

You might however try the Reverse Ossel H., where the nip comes purely in the
rope-on-rope, mostly unaffected by object diameter. In this Reverse Ossel,
further security--in particular, security when slack--can be obtained by making
a turn around the SPart with the end (tucking it beside itself).

I've found that the Ossel H. isn't all so lastingly secure even in appropriate
diameters, with some modern slick ropes--part of its effect of old in the
natural-fiber nets must've come from that rope's swelling a little when wet
(and being not so slick, to start with).

*knudeNoggin*

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Dan da Man; Didja git my emailz? Ya gonna hang around longer this time?

Good point; i think the Ossel will do what you say, pulled straight out from the mount. As is charachteristic of the family of lacings formed from a BackHand Hitch (Muenter on a spar etc., for base of a knot). In this family i include Ossel, Cow, Timber etc.

My drawing was for a base hitch (Cow or Ossel)choice. The worst angle of pull for security of any of this family, i think is pulling straight off the spar, and a Cow, fairing less favorably at this angle than an Ossel. At some other angles of pull, in relation to the mounting, i think the Ossel is superior too, giving more self trapping of the working tail. Especially in the use of a downward pull on a vertical spar, that self traps the working tail/bitter end most immediately against the mounting. i use this in the dynema slings on the small mounts; i don't think that is as slippery.

i think that in addressing the line to the mount clockwise, that BackHand Hitches greatest 'nip' on the working tail/bitter end to secure is at ~5 o'clock(Timber, Cow, Ossel etc.). Which is different than other base strategies, of turns, rather than backhand. A turn, roundturn, crossed turn base configuration addressed to the mount in a clockwise direction, favours a more secrue nip ~7 o'clock i think. Both positions are after force reduction through friction from the source pull; but the relative direction of pull at 5 or 7 is about the same. i look at the pull of the lacing ont he mount as kinda a square. All sides pulling toward source pull, face pulling off mount, sides pulling along side of mount, most pull direction traping into mount, being the backside of the spar/mount from the pull. Illustrating direction as an important, actually leading importance to force once again.


New MyTreeLessons Page: Examples of Included Bark Tears