Rope stuff

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought a Becket Bend was the name for the hitch to secure and adjust a wire cored flipline to the harness hip D?

[/ QUOTE ]
Why? ... *knudeNoggin*

[/ QUOTE ]

Blair (p. 74 and p. 75) calls it a Becket Bend. But, although Blair makes reference to Ashley, he seems to have mis-read the reference.

Ashley (#1431 and #73) calls the form a Becket Hitch ...

[/ QUOTE ]
Whooooa, there: you've run with the name not the knot, which to most eyes
here is a Buntline Hitch. "Hitch"/"bend", a wished-for classification distinction
not so well rooted in historical use ("Anchor bend", also "Sheet bend", being
knots to objects, initially--sheet to sail clew, not rope-to-rope as SB is used
today).

An enduring trouble with such names as "ring hitch" is that they really serve better
as group vs. knot names--and indeed Ashley has such an entitled chapter.

Re "girth hitch", add to naming issues here the fact that rockclimbers use this to mean
the sling-to-sling joint that might be tied like a "girth"/"bale-sling hitch, but results
in a rather square-knot-like structure (though typically asymmetric, in actual
material shape, and thus with a somewhat predictable breakpoint!).

*knudeNoggin*
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought a Becket Bend was the name for the hitch to secure and adjust a wire cored flipline to the harness hip D?

[/ QUOTE ]
Why? ... *knudeNoggin*

[/ QUOTE ]

Blair (p. 74 and p. 75) calls it a Becket Bend. But, although Blair makes reference to Ashley, he seems to have mis-read the reference.

Ashley (#1431 and #73) calls the form a Becket Hitch ...

[/ QUOTE ]
Whooooa, there: you've run with the name not the knot, which to most eyes
here is a Buntline Hitch.
*knudeNoggin*

[/ QUOTE ]

Spydey followed the knot, which is a Buntline. Lazarus followed the name, meaning that that name is a different knot. I followed Lazarus and agreed that that name (Becket Bend) is a different knot (although, according to Ashley, it should be Becket Hitch). I think you initially misunderstood that Lazarus had followed the name.


[ QUOTE ]
"Hitch"/"bend", a wished-for classification distinction
not so well rooted in historical use ("Anchor bend", also "Sheet bend", being
knots to objects, initially--sheet to sail clew, not rope-to-rope as SB is used
today).

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that hitch vs. bend can be confusing and contradictory. Ashley addresses this, and names three bends that are really hitches (although sheet bend is not one of them). Ashley illustrates and desribes a Becket Hitch tied rope end to eye splice. Ashley apparently sees the eye as different enough from the end of a rope to term the knot a hitch, rather than a bend.


[ QUOTE ]
Re "girth hitch", add to naming issues here the fact that rockclimbers use this to mean
the sling-to-sling joint that might be tied like a "girth"/"bale-sling hitch, but results
in a rather square-knot-like structure (though typically asymmetric, in actual
material shape, and thus with a somewhat predictable breakpoint!).

[/ QUOTE ]


If I understand your knot, I think many arborists would also use the term girth hitch to refer to the sling-to-sling joint. Tends to bind under load, however, so it's only used once... /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
 
All write, we're rocking and rolling now!

In terms of the Ring/Girth vs. Cow hitches; i go with the final line of verse #1890 in our bible; "...as both parts are pulled on equally" to define ring/girth as adverse to a cow. But, that is by my follow the force mechanics imageries. Thus to me an end of line with spliced or bowlined eye can be girthed to device, and a center of a line, with 1 leg not sharing force in similar lacing is a Cow. Personally i have always taken Girth Hitch to mean that the hitch reaches around the full girth or it's host, and is pulled evenly on both legs. Also the splice/knot joining the legs must exit the hitch, or else it is a running eye type ie. Running Bowline etc.

i agree that most would call sling to sling a girth; even though sling to other mount might be called a choker. Double choked sling to a straight line a prussik. But, i all ways try to follow the force trail to define; roses and thorns being the same even if under any other name.

To me a hitch to bight is a SheetBend; an upgrade of bight to bight of Reef/Square class. A Sheet to self to form eye is a Bowline, while a Sheet to eye is a Becket(#1900); and Sheet to hook is a Bill(#1879). Notice that a BlackWall(#1875) is a hitch to hook, that would sound the same here; but the differance is the securer grip to nip Bill it's path around the larger part of outside of hook. Blackwall as a simple hitch just is at bottom; each must have rope correctly sized to the hook size for proper mechanichs.

What is shown as a Toggled Bight (#1914) we've used well and i've referred to on my site as a Toggled Becket.

Some olde texts even have refereances of hitching a line to another, or bending a line to post; so these things have been blurry before; coming from many different ages, geographies, disciplines etc.

My follow force imagery and mechanics defines a Single / Simple Hitch pulled backwierds (same lacing with force flowing opposite direction) as a Crossed Turn. Thus a Clove or Cow Hitch to me is each not just 2 Hitches, but rather each a Crossed Turn, followed by a Single Hitch; and thus the lower security. A Constrictor corrects this failing some, and is much more secure. #1893 is like our krabs to me; a krab being a single leg of support moused; as opposed to real double leg supports of clevis or screwlink. (Not to start any more trouble or anything.....) /forum/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
 
TM,

As a climber despite your elevated accredation you no doubt don't carry an air of superiority over a peer who is just as much a proffesional without the BCMA accredation. I'm not picking on BCMA's as much as I'm picking on those who forget that those that touch trees and hang their life from them might carry a significant understanding and insight of trees.

PPP's (pencil pushing pansies) who think they're elevated strictly because of accredation.

Many of the ITCC competitors focus on working trees, instead of talking about trees, I regard as peers, some look down on them because they labour for their dollar. This I have a problem with. And in our case up here these people are also trying to legislate how people like Ransom, Chisholm, Strasser, Holzer, Chipps, Meyer, Lee, Krause, Kramer, etc (all of whom have great knowledge of arboriculture) are going to work at heights, despie their proffessional aptitude.
 
Thanks for elaborating on the eccentricities Mahk. I can't muster the energy to get embroiled - but I'm glad you did!

/forum/images/graemlins/applaudit.gif
 
I know what you mean about PPP's Mangoes (in another passion of mine, that means Prodrive Performance Package .........whoosh...pissssshhhh...! /forum/images/graemlins/driving.gif ).

If we stop at achieving established accreditation, such accreditation becomes the badge of mediocrity (generalised comment).

Experience is a very valuable qualification in itself.

A concept recognised by Health and Safety Consultants in the UK is 'Competent Kate', Kate standing for Knowledge, Ability, Training and Experience. If all 4 aren't there in sufficient quantities, competence is lacking.

Its a good angle to test those making decisions that affect you.
 
warning: knots blabber below

[ QUOTE ]
Spydey followed the knot, which is a Buntline. Lazarus followed the name, meaning that that name is a different knot. I followed Lazarus and agreed that that name (Becket Bend) is a different knot (although, according to Ashley, it should be Becket Hitch). I think you initially misunderstood that Lazarus had followed the name.

[/ QUOTE ]
(If I'd kept all the quotes I'd be dizzy (ier) ! :-)
Well, yes, I didn't see a bowlinesque Becket H. form being used to a rigid metal
"D" ! --it is, eh?!

[ QUOTE ]
I agree that hitch vs. bend can be confusing and contradictory. Ashley addresses this, and names three bends that are really hitches (although sheet bend is not one of them).

[/ QUOTE ]
The historical use of "bend" (vt) included such things as "bend the hawser to the
anchor". Cyrus Day addresses the nomenclature confusion expressly:
The word "bend" is almost obsolete as a noun except in names like "carrick bend"
and "sheet bend". It is still used, though not extensively, as a verb (e.g., to bend
a sail or cable). Now primarily a nautical word, it was once familiar to landsmen
as well as seamen. To bend a bow meant to tie (bind, bend) a bow string
to a bow. By transference, the word acquired its modern meaning to curve
or to crook. Ashley tried to reestablish the word "bend" as a noun. ...
This system of nomenclature, however, cannot be justified on the grounds of
traditional usage. The sheet bend, for instance, is so cnamed becuase it was formerly used to bend the sheet to the clew of the sail, not to the end of another line.
I also want a functional knots classification; but I'm thinking that it should adopt
some terms not already overloaded with meanings. (And that's about as far as I've
gotten down this path.)

[ QUOTE ]
Ashley apparently sees the eye as different enough from the end of a rope to term the knot a hitch, rather than a bend.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm with that. "eye hitch", to me. --and if there are enough cases of rigid "beckets",
I'm all for separating that set of knots; unlike eyes, beckets so defined won't
yield to the hitching rope's tension, which is a good point of discrimination.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Re "girth hitch", ... to mean
the sling-to-sling joint that might be tied like a "girth"/"bale-sling hitch, but results
in a rather square-knot-like structure

[/ QUOTE ]
If I understand your knot, I think many arborists would also use the term girth hitch to refer to the sling-to-sling joint. Tends to bind under load, however, so it's only used once... /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
?? It shouldn't bind so badly. Just bounced a bit in a couple of polyester solid 7/16"
cable-pulling tape slings & one 9/16" tubular nylon climbing one, and like "melts
in your mouth", they opened readily. (Tried a *Dbl.*Girth, so to speak, in the two
polyester slings, *girthing* each end, that way.)

Confer www.climerware.com/cknot1.htm .

(-;
 
[ QUOTE ]
I didn't see a bowlinesque Becket H. form being used to a rigid metal
"D" ! --it is, eh?!

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Seems to have been pretty common in some areas.

Do you have the reference for the Cyrus Day quote? I would read more.

Thanks for the knots link. Looks like an interesting site.

Arborists use slings almost exclusively for rigging--and by 'rigging' arborists mean lifting/lowering/moving/holding sections of trees. The weights and forces are much heavier than would be generated by a climber. I haven't tried the 'double girth hitch' yet, but I suspect that it would bind under the load of a large log or even a large branch.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Do you have the reference for the Cyrus Day quote? I would read more.

[/ QUOTE ]
Cyrus L. Day, <u>The Art of Knotting &amp; Splicing, 4th Edition</u>, p.12(b)ff

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the knots link. Looks like an interesting site.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, that precise URL is a bit off--but via the page's "return" link, you
can begin at the beginning and read the half-dozen or so pp., which are interesting.

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't tried the 'double girth hitch' yet, but I suspect that it would bind under the load of a large log or even a large branch.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, it can, but put in another "girth" or two and it shouldn't at all--essentially
two bights interlocked w/extended twists in their legs, between which is just air
(a slit under load), and this slit is readily opened, loosening the twists (the u-turn
ends of the bights are now too much apart to effect a locking bind).

*kN*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom