Splicing by Tuttle

re: Brion

I don't regard them as short buries, based on the fact that I have fully tested them in every sense.

If you owned a rope firm and said they got to be buried 8ft! so then the law firms are having a party....so many firms in every industry bottle out on 'claim/blame' compensation by saying this and that to cover thier .....

Having worked in so many industries, the ropes are obvious to me based on the construction and threads used.

I am trying my best to get 3 types of standards, CE for europe, ANSI for the relevent countries and ISO for any in between.
 
As an aside...

Let's say you pull (300) e2e's at 400kg with no failures. Statistically that gives you 95% confidence that 99% will survive 400kg. (For 95/99 you need 0 failures in 299 samples.) Is that good enough? This is called "attribute data" and it has significant limitations. What about the 1% you know nothing about? With attribute, the # of samples you need increases exponentially if you want to demonstrate higher reliability. A better approach is to generate "variables data". This is done by pulling the splice to destruction and generating numbers rather than pass/fail. From this you can calculate the capability (Ppk, Cpk) of your process. With variables data you need way fewer samples to assess process capability.
 
Tuttle,

YOu should really listen to what Brian and Chuck are telling you. They both know a LOT more than you about what they're talking about. You're putting people at risk of injury or death. For what? What are you saving?

How can you think that you know more than experts?
 
When Brion Toss tells someone about a splice, they sure as hell better listen.

IMO, there is not a better all around synthetic and wire rope splicer, not to mention Rigger than Brion.

I have nothing but the highest respect for him.
 
[ QUOTE ]
When Brion Toss tells someone about a splice, they sure as hell better listen.

IMO, there is not a better all around synthetic and wire rope splicer, not to mention Rigger than Brion.

I have nothing but the highest respect for him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed I respect people who know alot about things in every profession.

I have just looked at the splicing instructions provided on Brions website, and have noted that the cover of the rope in the instructions is tapered from the crossover point, where as mine are tapered a fair distance from the crossover.

I'm only talking about my 8mm and 10mm eye2eye things, which start from 700mm>950mm, so the rope needs to be firm at one point and supple for the main part, plus it needs to be exact for peoples preferances.
 
Hi again,
And first, I am glad that we now have a conversation; I was very uncomfortable with the preceding bluster and condemnation (the latter on my part).
The taper in those instructions begins, not at the crossover, but a tracer length away. I, too would consider playing with taper location for your Prusik application, and I understand that a longer tail, regardless of taper, can be an inconvenience. I might even understand it if you intentionally created a weak splice in pursuit of other virtues, so long as you acknowledged that weakness, and could prove security; this is basically how we deal with knots.
Looking forward to further conversation.

PS,
I paid Chris Girard to say those things about me.
 
The tapers are based on my time working out exactly how much to remove/leave, that amount is based on how to achieve the splice.

My methods would be very difficult to do by hand, its a mechanical process of 6:1 pulley system. So that is why its a tight splice.

Each rope that I splice has differing thread removal based on its construction.

It is not done by chance, but a refined process that I have spent 3yrs doing, making approximatly 4000 eye2eye's prusik cords.
 
[ QUOTE ]
PS,
I paid Chris Girard to say those things about me.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL,That's a good one Brion.

BTW, I don't want to disrupt this thread, but how's that ankle doing these days? Didn't you have surgery on it a few years ago?
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
PS,
BTW, I don't want to disrupt this thread, but how's that ankle doing these days? Didn't you have surgery on it a few years ago?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah got it fused. And a bit less than a year ago, I got a new knee. I am glad that they still make parts for these old models. All working well. Saturday I got to go sailing in the bark "James Craig", out of Sydney harbor (Australia). Got out to the end of the jibboom and up to the main t'gallant with no problems. Not ready to retire from climbing yet.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The tapers are based on my time working out exactly how much to remove/leave, that amount is based on how to achieve the splice.

My methods would be very difficult to do by hand, its a mechanical process of 6:1 pulley system. So that is why its a tight splice.

Each rope that I splice has differing thread removal based on its construction.

It is not done by chance, but a refined process that I have spent 3yrs doing, making approximatly 4000 eye2eye's prusik cords.

[/ QUOTE ]

Got it. Sounds fairly reasonable. But what I'm seeing is that there are 4000 prusik cords of unproven strength and security out there. They might be fine. Based on your description, and my experience with similar applications, they probably are. But it is only now that you are talking about testing, and not even specifying what kind of testing. We don't know how close to the edge all those users might be.
Let me give you an indirectly related example. When double-braid splices were new, the people developing them did not bury the core. They reasoned that, with the cover and core on one side of the eye, and the cover on the other, the eye was 150% the strength of the standing part. No need to bury that core, and add to the struggle of running the splice home.
Then people started dying, mostly from nylon mooring line snap-back, because sometimes, particularly on wet bollards and cleats, all the load came onto one side of the eye. If it was the side with just the cover, there was actually less than half the rope strength available, because the end of the core produced a stress riser.
Other accidents happened when the cover became frayed, and this wasn't noticed in time, and there was no reserve of strength available from the core.
That's when we started burying the core, even though it made the splice harder. Over the years, I've several times heard of splicers who "discovered" that there was no need to bury the core, because, hey, the eye is so much stronger than the standing part. The only good thing I can say about this "discovery" is that it has provided me with a certain amount of income as an expert witness.
As a rigger I have experimented a very little with Prusik cord splices, and even came up with one that Samson tested, all the while maintaining that the product (Bailout) was unspliceable. I still owe Kathy Holzer one of those cords. Sorry Kathy, it is just so tough to splice. Anyway I believe that splicers should never, ever decide on their own to make a production run that messes with accepted splice standards, and I say this as a past sinner. The people we are splicing for, every time they buy something from us, are saying, "Here is my life. Take care of it, will you?"
 
Brion - kudos to you for taking the time to provide some really interesting history re. splice failures.
Your book "Working Rope book 5" is one that I really appreciate.
 
[ QUOTE ]
4000 e2e splices??? im calling bullshit on that figure......

[/ QUOTE ]

Approximately 3.6529680365296803653 prussiks per day? Six splices on small cord? That does seem a bit much.
 
Brion, of course I'd like to buy all of them, but if you could recommend just one of your books for now, which would it be? Preferably something with some history as well as "how to".

Thank you for your insightful commentary.
 
How much load will an eye of a e2e hitch cord see in a worst case scenario?
Lets say a drop with a maximum shock load force of 10 kN, what would really be beyond anything reasonable.
Max force on one eye would be 5kN in SRT and just 2,5kN in Ddrt (which I assume that still most e2e's are used for).
And in reality I bet the load will be much less because of all the other factors playing in.

Dont get me wrong, I do think its important to discuss all of the above, and its for sure most important to know mbs of the gear we use. But I dont see a need to panic or get unfriendly here.
Seems Tuttles customers are alright with buying e2e's without mbs...

Looking forward to the results of testing!
 
It's my thinking that an i2i prussic will only ever be exposed to somewhere in the neighborhood of 1500 lbs as most friction hitches slip at forces greater then this figure. Many variables in play here ie. friction hitch choice, material and texture, diameter of host rope and prussic cordage, static vs dynamic loading, ect, ect, ect... Suppose this slippage theory is correct each eye would then see only half of the load, supposing it is properly dressed and set. Correct? I've been splicing for a few years now and am proud to say "I learned double braid splicing techniques from Chris Girard, sharing the methods of Master Rigger Brion Toss."
 
[ QUOTE ]
It's my thinking that an i2i prussic will only ever be exposed to somewhere in the neighborhood of 1500 lbs as most friction hitches slip at forces greater then this figure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you know whether any data has been published on this?
 
Nope fella's, the figures are true, I make a load everyday.

Re: Brion
The cover and core are fully buried (have you seen the pictures in this thread?) the throat is also lockstitched and sealed, the good reason for the stiffness in the throat is to help push the prusik knot when in use.

I hear the same everyday about 'my lifes on that line...etc etc' I would not produce something I deemed not fit for use, My UK qualifications allow me to so, So what you get is quality and strength, My feedback says it all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom