oldfart
Participating member
- Location
- Asheville, NC
OK, too bad. Can you discribe what you rigged for your retriever?
Rigging Whoopie
- Thread starter oldfart
- Start date
- Location
- Madison WI
Ill get it from the shop and take some pics tomorrow.
- Location
- Randolph, MA
Tom, I had a loopie with a pinto rig on it in a tree a little while ago and it seems pretty much the same as a u-saver retrieval.
You could just put a wichard shackle on the adjusting end of the loopie and choke the loopie on the branch/spar in a way that leaves the pinto not too close to the crossover part and with the tail obviously well below the pulley.
You could just put a wichard shackle on the adjusting end of the loopie and choke the loopie on the branch/spar in a way that leaves the pinto not too close to the crossover part and with the tail obviously well below the pulley.
oldfart
Participating member
- Location
- Asheville, NC
Nick Bonner, would you run a little experiment for me please? Storm Sandy trapped me in the basement (a dangerous thing) and I think I stumbled into another way to install a r-R saver. Could be good with your 3R system.
Currently, you install your system using TCC Method #1. It works, but has the disadvantage of having the block climb over the branch.
TCC #2 would keep the block out of the tree but you can’t use it. The block would drop like a rock as tension comes off the throwline when you rethread to the rigging line.
This new method is similar to TCC #1, except you invert the saver and let the LARGE ring lead on the way up. The block never crosses the branch on install or disinstall.
You may need a heavier bag than normal. It has to deliver just enough tension to hold the block while the bag descends back to you. It has MA and friction helping, but it will depend on how heavy your block is.
I don’t think you’ll even need a knot to retrieve. The weight of the block and the rigging line should pull it back to you. Send the throwline up from the other end of the rigging line. Control by letting the throwline double up and pass over the branch to the ground.
Throwbag up, gravity down.
If this works, the implications are huge. It liberates you from the limitations of the big ring/small ring geometry. You don’t need it. Your choice of hardware becomes much broader.
For example, Norm, if Nick says this works, you could hang an arbblock on one of your pear savers, converting it to a pulley/ring saver. But you wouldn’t need to do the custom welding. You don’t need the r-R geometry any more.
Tom, you could run this test on your ring/pulley rig as is. Just change the installation setup.
If this works, I’m working an idea that could turn the “large” ring hardware into a much friendlier bend radius for the rigging line. More later on that.
OF
Currently, you install your system using TCC Method #1. It works, but has the disadvantage of having the block climb over the branch.
TCC #2 would keep the block out of the tree but you can’t use it. The block would drop like a rock as tension comes off the throwline when you rethread to the rigging line.
This new method is similar to TCC #1, except you invert the saver and let the LARGE ring lead on the way up. The block never crosses the branch on install or disinstall.
You may need a heavier bag than normal. It has to deliver just enough tension to hold the block while the bag descends back to you. It has MA and friction helping, but it will depend on how heavy your block is.
I don’t think you’ll even need a knot to retrieve. The weight of the block and the rigging line should pull it back to you. Send the throwline up from the other end of the rigging line. Control by letting the throwline double up and pass over the branch to the ground.
Throwbag up, gravity down.
If this works, the implications are huge. It liberates you from the limitations of the big ring/small ring geometry. You don’t need it. Your choice of hardware becomes much broader.
For example, Norm, if Nick says this works, you could hang an arbblock on one of your pear savers, converting it to a pulley/ring saver. But you wouldn’t need to do the custom welding. You don’t need the r-R geometry any more.
Tom, you could run this test on your ring/pulley rig as is. Just change the installation setup.
If this works, I’m working an idea that could turn the “large” ring hardware into a much friendlier bend radius for the rigging line. More later on that.
OF
oldfart
Participating member
- Location
- Asheville, NC
FYI, there's a couple of new vids up showing the Rigging Whoopie in action and one new one today showing the use of a cast equalizing thimble to boost strength and bend radius.
I gotta say I'm so impressed with the new X-Rings. I'm dying to get my hands on them. There's going to be tons of new ideas for anything that uses a ring. Great work David.
OF
I gotta say I'm so impressed with the new X-Rings. I'm dying to get my hands on them. There's going to be tons of new ideas for anything that uses a ring. Great work David.
OF
bonner1040
Branched out member
- Location
- Boston
Tom How can I pull the ring up on the bag side? The bag will pull right through the ring.
oldfart
Participating member
- Location
- Asheville, NC
Hey Nick,
Push it thru, clip on an HMS carabiner and pull. Normal flip at the top but the block stays below the branch.
Here's the tricky part ... As you start lowering, the weight of the bag (2:1ma) plus friction needs to hold the block as you slowly lower the bag and binner. Works good for me on smaller pulleys. I want to see if it'll work on that huge ISC of yours. You may need to clip on another bag.
Thanks!
Push it thru, clip on an HMS carabiner and pull. Normal flip at the top but the block stays below the branch.
Here's the tricky part ... As you start lowering, the weight of the bag (2:1ma) plus friction needs to hold the block as you slowly lower the bag and binner. Works good for me on smaller pulleys. I want to see if it'll work on that huge ISC of yours. You may need to clip on another bag.
Thanks!
oldfart
Participating member
- Location
- Asheville, NC
Oh boy,
I just realized I use the 2.5" ring and you use the 3" ... Bummer!
I just realized I use the 2.5" ring and you use the 3" ... Bummer!
oldfart
Participating member
- Location
- Asheville, NC
Nick,
I ran some tests today with mixed results.
First,
The "large ring first" method absolutely works and keeps the block out of the tree. But the rigging ring needs to be smaller than your 3-incher to be able to hold a binner on the way up. But if you reeve through to the other end of the bull rope and tie a knot and throwline, you get the block back without it ever going over the branch. Completely easy, completely reliable.
Thats the good news.
The bad news is that the "bag up / gravity down" idea works fine but only under special circumstances, exactly like those you had in your video: heavy block, small dia branch, smooth branch. Then the block is killing itself to get back to you and you don't need a knot.
But to be reliable under all circumstances, you need the knot. And that means you need the differential geometry of two different sizes for the "rings". That, unfortunately, is tyranny over your available hardware choices.
The obvious choice to provide a reliable return is a second throwline attached to the block. Artificial gravity. I'm not happy with the idea of that line to interfer with the basic rigging opperations.
There are other choices, I'm working it.
Thanks anyway.
OF
I ran some tests today with mixed results.
First,
The "large ring first" method absolutely works and keeps the block out of the tree. But the rigging ring needs to be smaller than your 3-incher to be able to hold a binner on the way up. But if you reeve through to the other end of the bull rope and tie a knot and throwline, you get the block back without it ever going over the branch. Completely easy, completely reliable.
Thats the good news.
The bad news is that the "bag up / gravity down" idea works fine but only under special circumstances, exactly like those you had in your video: heavy block, small dia branch, smooth branch. Then the block is killing itself to get back to you and you don't need a knot.
But to be reliable under all circumstances, you need the knot. And that means you need the differential geometry of two different sizes for the "rings". That, unfortunately, is tyranny over your available hardware choices.
The obvious choice to provide a reliable return is a second throwline attached to the block. Artificial gravity. I'm not happy with the idea of that line to interfer with the basic rigging opperations.
There are other choices, I'm working it.
Thanks anyway.
OF
oldfart
Participating member
- Location
- Asheville, NC
This vid shows the OmniBlock with the Rigging Whoopie, plus an installation technique that keeps it out of the tree.
Rigging Whoopie with OmniBlock
The Omni is like a piece of jewlery. Terrific. Use it when you need lower friction or wear and you're willing to give up some mbs.
Don't use it for catching dynamic loads. It has a ball bearing construction and those bearings will peen under impact loads. The pulley will get "clicky" and will wear prematurely.
Attach with a steel rigging binner > 36kN. The Rock Stainless is stong enough but still small enough to fit through the 2.5" rings.
If tending the gate makes you nervous, use a medium (3/8") or large (1/2") maillon rapide pear link. I like the medium. You give up a few hundred pounds of pulley rating but it fits on the thimble nicely and fits through the rings.
OF
Rigging Whoopie with OmniBlock
The Omni is like a piece of jewlery. Terrific. Use it when you need lower friction or wear and you're willing to give up some mbs.
Don't use it for catching dynamic loads. It has a ball bearing construction and those bearings will peen under impact loads. The pulley will get "clicky" and will wear prematurely.
Attach with a steel rigging binner > 36kN. The Rock Stainless is stong enough but still small enough to fit through the 2.5" rings.
If tending the gate makes you nervous, use a medium (3/8") or large (1/2") maillon rapide pear link. I like the medium. You give up a few hundred pounds of pulley rating but it fits on the thimble nicely and fits through the rings.
OF
bonner1040
Branched out member
- Location
- Boston
Tom, sorry I never got around to doing that test. I am sure your procedure was more scientific than mine would have been anyway. I have so many things on my plate right now..
In all honesty what I have been using is a U-Saver I spliced with soft lay 3 strand, a pensafe ring and a PINTO Rig with an ABR prussick. I find that it fits all of my rigging needs and have dropped some pretty stout logs on it. the company I work at wont let me use any personally spliced items for life support, which I found out after I made it, so it was relegated to rigging and has pleased me to no end.
I shortened it to limit the size of riggable wood, around 36". I have negative blocked some cherry logs that maxed it out in terms of diameter about 10-11" and as tall as me, 6' or so. It works so well that I dont see a need for anything else.
In all honesty what I have been using is a U-Saver I spliced with soft lay 3 strand, a pensafe ring and a PINTO Rig with an ABR prussick. I find that it fits all of my rigging needs and have dropped some pretty stout logs on it. the company I work at wont let me use any personally spliced items for life support, which I found out after I made it, so it was relegated to rigging and has pleased me to no end.
I shortened it to limit the size of riggable wood, around 36". I have negative blocked some cherry logs that maxed it out in terms of diameter about 10-11" and as tall as me, 6' or so. It works so well that I dont see a need for anything else.
oldfart
Participating member
- Location
- Asheville, NC
Hey, Nick, no problem. That testing led me to the Wedgie ... a cheap, reliable way to bring the block straight back. I'll do a vid when I can.
I'm really interested in your comment about the Rig in negative blocking. I don't think it's a good idea but, strangely, I think the Pinto might do better than the Pinto Rig. Same strengths, but a bushing wouldn't peen like a ball bearing under impact loads.
Try putting the pulley up to you ear and spinning it. If you hear any "clicky" sound, your drops are taking a toll on the bearing, even if the pulley has the strength to catch the load.
Let us know ...
OF
I'm really interested in your comment about the Rig in negative blocking. I don't think it's a good idea but, strangely, I think the Pinto might do better than the Pinto Rig. Same strengths, but a bushing wouldn't peen like a ball bearing under impact loads.
Try putting the pulley up to you ear and spinning it. If you hear any "clicky" sound, your drops are taking a toll on the bearing, even if the pulley has the strength to catch the load.
Let us know ...
OF
Tom
Just wondering why /how you got hooked on to the whoopie? Why not using the same tenex, rings etc just make usual rr fs?
Climbing rr fs use a prussic and I' sure this is stronger as a whoopie. I use straight rr fs non adjustable why is the adjustable such an important feature?
Just wondering why /how you got hooked on to the whoopie? Why not using the same tenex, rings etc just make usual rr fs?
Climbing rr fs use a prussic and I' sure this is stronger as a whoopie. I use straight rr fs non adjustable why is the adjustable such an important feature?
