Systems "Registry"

Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Hesanarborist, it is about ddrt becsuse that is the standard for our industry. If your hitch fails, your falling. Its like the curve in math class. The accepted standard for tree climbing is also footlocking with a prussic strop. You cannot write the rule book in srt without rewriting it for ddrt climbing systems. Or it is double standard. I was taught to be okay with one point of attachment. Both footlocking and ddrt, why do the rules change when i tie my rope off in a different way? Hitches have been tested, they have been shown to be reliable if configured correctly. I have a close relationship to my hitch, ill use a old stick for a rope wrench and be fine with it.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

It boils down to tying a good quick grabbing hitch on a tried and trusted rated cord.

It doesn't matter if it is DRT, SRT or climbing a g-damned vine, the hitch it what keeps you aloft, nothing more, nothing less.

me and my hitch got a tight bond now too, real tight ;)
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Right now I am on one of Surveyor's devices...the newer dogbone. With hitchclimber, ultra o carabiner and Armor Prus 8mm. Works well for me.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

I think some excellent points have been made.

I like Hesanarborist's idea about no such thing as a full proof system. I also fully realize a meteor may streak from the sky and obliterate my T.I.P! As with all things there are limits, but it is a great concept to keep in mind.

I also think it necessary to lay aside the Dbl rope system verses SRT compare contrast for now. Why not focus on SRT as the thread started? What we discuss/develop/dismiss can then be applied to dbl rope at another time.

My initial concern with Muggs system remains. He has skirted the issue of total hitch lock up with larger cordage. Is this the answer? I do not know. It may very well be. The holy grail may have been right before us the whole time!!

What I do know is I have seen similar systems fail. I have shared that to the best of my ability.

Muggs. please be careful. You can take my advice or not. I offer it freely and in a tone of concern and friendship. We have never met, but we are tied by a common interest and industry.

Just a few theoretical questions:

1) Would the WR be a better device if it did "lock on" not allowing a fall in the event of hitch failure? (by failure I mean everything from the hitch not grabbing to astrological event)

2) Is this not the essence of a device's "sweet spot" that many mechanical devises such as the Petzl Rig have for example?

3) Would an established device such as the uni benefit from a sweet spot?

4) As has been stated many times SRT work positioning for tree care is new and emerging, but it is not either in many high angle disciplines. Why not look to some of those for guidance?

5) Why do spelunkers, tower workers, rescue squads and many others not use cordage based systems such as Muggs has proposed?

Thank you for your time in reading. I'll look forward to the responses.

And Tom thank you for your clarification on two points of contact via SRT as you see it. I fully understand your viewpoint.

Tony
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Kevin I have to disagree that it is about DdRT, but I will leave that out since this is an SRT thread. All that I was pointing out is that when I look at a system I DO think to myself what will happen if it fails. In Muggs case, he will free fall, if he had a friction device like a rope wrench or others, he would fall at a slightly lower rate of speed then free fall with a slighty greater chance of stopping or slowing himeself if he caught the rope in his hand.

I have had a hitch fail to catch in DdRT once, I went about 10' and caught myself one handed, dont think I could have done that in the same scenario with an SRT system.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

I dont think doubled rope technique should be left out of the conversation because it is tree care. I dont think we should look to tower workers, cavers, or rock climbers because they face a whole different set of challenges and obstacles. Bot ddrt tree climbers and srt tree climbers are tree climbers. It is also helpful in understanding the way SRT is used in tree climbing and its multidirectional usage. This is not going up and down washing windows.

It doesnt work to tell some tree climbers that they only need one point of attachment and then tell other climbers that they need two. We have a standard for tree climbing that is defined by years and years of people working in trees.

Looking at traditional footlocking and ddrt helps explain our relationship to hitches that no other industry has. You will find that hitches are so variable that they are hard to regulate. You will not see hitches at working at heights industries because they are basically impossible to certify and regulate, some in our industry are trying to do that but I believe that certifying hitches is ill concieved pandoras box.

The one "certified" hitch in our industry to date, i find to be a terrible hitch made out of bad material. It may work for some people but it does not work for me. The other thing that gets me is the whole "certification" process. If The standards were written by the ones who are selling the certified hitch. Does it mean anything to create something and then certify it yourself?

Hitches are SOOO variable that they will react differently to different climbers as well as different rates of wear. A slightly older hitch on a rainy day will react much different than a new hitch out of the box on a dry day.

Another place the issue of using ddrt as a standard starts coming up is in trunk belay systems. I climbed for many years without a trunk belay system crossing my mind. It still has a hard time crossing my mind even though the option is there with SRT.

When you say you have seen similar configurations fail, what do you mean Tony? That sounds very scary. I have never seen any system fail and I hope I never do. I do know of a toledo climber who hit the dirt because of a hitch that didnt catch, I have heard of this happening since I began climbing. It is a terrible thing but there is complacency and human error involved in all of these accidents. Poorly tied knots. Is the answer to end the use of hitches entirely in tree climbing and have everybody climb on lockjacks and a second line?

I climbed on a Dragonfly Harness for many years. I hated the shackles and the screws that had to be tightened with lock tight. Even with locktight I had nightmares they would begin to roll out and I would not notice. I even strung up my harness with New England Tech cord. Finally I switched to a saddle that is completely inspectable
(thank you Matt Cornell!), using hardware and textiles that I can inspect and I am comfortable with. I no longer have that "if" in the back of my mind. I always had IF in my mind due to webbing.

you could create a device like the asap or buddy, or ISC rocker that acted like a seatbelt. I think you would find that it would be an impediment to smooth climbing. The Rope wrech especially in its newer versions will 99% of the time help the hitch do its work and thus be part of the system. However, I think its prudent to always tie your hitch like there is no rope wrench there at all. That is why I emphasise it not being for life support. It is for psychological reasons that the climbers emphasis must be on his hitch and its ability to keep you from hitting the deck. If the rope wrench helps, than great. But its better to pretend that its not there when you tie your hitch. At least that is the way I feel about it.

there is my mid day ramble.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

"The Rope wrech especially in its newer versions will 99% of the time help the hitch do its work and thus be part of the system."


Kevin, was that a Rope Wrench 2 teaser!?!?! Thank you for your "ramble" I do like the mindset of tying the hitch as if there were no rope wrench there, I also like the thought of the added friction if my tightly tied hitch cord were to fail somehow. I hope I didn't come off with a harsh tone (i hate expressing myself in writing)
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

I agree with Kevin that we shouldn't be looking to other industries for comparison in regards to SRT. Like he said, they face a whole different set of challenges then we do, and a whole different sets of rules. Hitches are used in other industries because they can't be certified, and can you imagine rappelling the heights some of those guys work on with a hitch at all? You'd burn through cordage like no tomorrow.

Not to mention these guys are going down 80-90 percent of the time, rarely does their work involve going up and down tens to hundreds of times a day like we do. Plus, you have to think about the lengths of rope they're dealing with. Weight matters to them, they don't want to lug around larger diameter ropes to accomplish the same goal a smaller rope and device can.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Tony wrote:

4) As has been stated many times SRT work positioning for tree care is new and emerging, but it is not either in many high angle disciplines. Why not look to some of those for guidance?

---That's what I did when I read the first edition of On Rope many years ago. Most of my SRT principles are based on what I've gathered from other rope access professions. The work place that we have is unique and needs to maintain it's place. We can look over 'there' and learn...and share too.






5) Why do spelunkers, tower workers, rescue squads and many others not use cordage based systems such as Muggs has proposed?

---Tradition...

From what I gather other rope disciplines wanted to have systems that reacted the same all of the time. They abandoned cordage/rope friction and went to mechanicals. It is much easier to duplicate the performance of mechanicals than cordage.

Arbos have a better understanding of rope/rope friction than any other profession. We should be proud of that and with taking this climbing technique further than the other rope professions ever dreamed about.

I'm going to start a new thread about rope/rope friction.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

[ QUOTE ]
"The Rope wrech especially in its newer versions will 99% of the time help the hitch do its work and thus be part of the system."


Kevin, was that a Rope Wrench 2 teaser!?!?! Thank you for your "ramble" I do like the mindset of tying the hitch as if there were no rope wrench there, I also like the thought of the added friction if my tightly tied hitch cord were to fail somehow.

[/ QUOTE ]

I live for this stuff. Kevin can't wait for your innovation to take the next step.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Just another comment about why hitches make so much sense for tree climbers and not for cavers, and all the varieties of industrial climbing:

I believe tree climbing is the only high angle discipline where the climber is constantly making short movements up or down (or sideways) on rope in a work positioning system, the hitch hasn't been improved upon for this kind of rope use. A few devices have come close but nothing yet beats a well tuned hitch.
-AJ
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

[ QUOTE ]
Just another comment about why hitches make so much sense for tree climbers and not for cavers, and all the varieties of industrial climbing:

I believe tree climbing is the only high angle discipline where the climber is constantly making short movements up or down (or sideways) on rope in a work positioning system, the hitch hasn't been improved upon for this kind of rope use. A few devices have come close but nothing yet beats a well tuned hitch.
-AJ

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree Andrew, not to mention that with tree work there is not nearly as many abrasive surfaces as there are in other SRT environments, such as industrial work. As a matter of fact, wood is the least abrasive surface, especially wet wood.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Tower climbers dont really use ropes, much less hitch based systems. We only used ropes for hauling material up and sending material down.

The initial ascent is on a ladder with a safety cable, and a 'quick climb' or a cable grab as a safety. Work positioning is with a variety of lanyards and fall pro is from 2 6 foot pelican lanyards connected between the shoulders, using a decelerator lanyard.

Muggs,

There is nothing wrong with your system...

Tony, go hang 25' of the ground in dDrt, grab your hitch and pull down hard... or fall of a branch and then panic and grab the hitch hard, either way you will plummet to the ground.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

[ QUOTE ]
Here is my SRT system. It is just a 4/2 XT made out of True Blue (1/2" rope) on Samson Static Kernmantle 5/8". Handles like a dream, no mechanical doodads required, ultra-simplistic. Don't knock the 5/8" until you try it.

SRT%205-8%20Front.jpg

SRT%205-8%20Rear.jpg


[/ QUOTE ]
THANK YOU MUGGS FOR SHARING! This is interesting about the large diameter and makes simple sense. There is no money in this for some device selling people and some people that just thought they have bought and put together the perfect srt system don't want to believe it works either. No, I haven't tried it yet, but I bet it works great, I can tell you are honest about it.

Some other benefits I see, easier to grab bigger diam rope. More rope there, in case of handsaw or chainsaw mistake, what I don't like about srt is that if the rope beside you or below you gets cut, you fall; in drt the rope getting cut below you didn't result in you falling.

I will try this out , thanks again!!!!

Oh yeah, he said don't knock it before you try it. Well, they sure tried to beat it down, wow.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Hey x, how does the rope below you getting cut lead to a fall? Do you mean in basal tying? That's one of the reasons I don't basal tie... Apologies if I'm missing something bro....
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

X, we're not all against it and as a matter of fact, most of us are more than willing to try it out low and slow.

I think "The Muggs System" is great (Muggs let me know if you don't like me calling it this) if it pans out and it'll be another option for people to try SRT.

May not be for everyone, but only time will tell.
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Kevin,
When I say "fail' I mean everything from a hitch failing to grab after it was broken loose resulting in a very rapid descent, to the cordage simply not performing as expected. Luckily none have resulted in more than terminal pucker factor for all involved! Resulting in the expected effects for a few days!
I appreciate your sentiment and you willingness and openness to share. It is in this way we shall move forward.

Ranger,
Your first paragraph seems, to my mind, a good set of reasons to look to other disciplines for ideas/techniques/equipment. Taking systems to extremes can be helpful for discovering limitations as well as benefits.

Moss,
Good point on the constant movement. Perhaps if some of our systems were as certified as in other industries, tree workers could export more ideas than import! Please do not take this as a call for more regulation! However, we have as much to share as we have to learn. I wonder why the rollover seems to be one sided towards the 'in' and not the 'out.'

X,
I hope you were not referring to my posts as trying to "beat anyone down." I am just advising caution. I am not anyone's kindergartner teacher, not do I issue hall passes. Do as you all wish, when you wish. I just want to share some knowledge and experiences, because if I do not share them, then they are useless to me and everybody.

223,
Tower climbers was just one example of many that came to mind as I was writing. Whether they use ropes or lines as we do only effects how much we can learn from them not the idea that it pays to look at all aspects of high angle work because we can always learn.
I agree that forcing any hitch down in any cordage application will cause decent! It must be this way. We still must consider a fundamental difference in doubled rope as opposed to single rope and that is the 2:1 vs. 1:1. To put is simply for the sake of this discussion, when it comes to double rope going up this difference is a con, but down a pro. In Single line it is opposite. Can we agree on that?

Et al,
That is why I think we need to stop comparing doubled rope and single line and focus on forces in only single line for this discussion. They are different animals. Justifying a single point of contact in one does not justify a single point of contact in all or any for that mater. We can justify or show the fallacy of single point of contact in Double rope in another forum at another time, if you wish.

In thinking on this, it seems to me we are perhaps not involving/considering climbing line anchoring systems enough. In single line the anchors are stationary and can be separated by considerable distance. They do not see climbing line movement (while climbing) and therefore, do not help absorb friction. Friction management is at the core of any system, but especially single line because it is focused at one point.
Friction must be managed in predictable ways. How do we do this?

Tony
 
Re: Systems \"Registry\"

Tony,

Friction management in SRT couldn't be simpler...at the hitch/device. No rope friction to calculate.

Ropes can be run through multiple redirects that might or might not help to dissipate the load on the redi or the climber.

There were rumblings in Europe to set a standard for climbing hitches. I lost track of the discussion but it was interesting to watch for a while. Since there ARE so many variables it was proving difficult to standardize a test for the CE rating. What started out as a good idea soon was viewed as a way to 'make' ART tools the only 'hitch' that could be used because they could be tested and eliminate a lot of variables.

Like I said...I stopped following the discussion and I have no clue what the conclusion was.

Your desire to set different performance standards for DdRT and SRT will likely not get traction. All of what we are talking about here will be brought into the discussion in the next Z133 rewrite. When that happens there can NOT be a seperation...climbing is climbing. It will be too cumbesome to have standards for SRT and DdRT..oh, and OSHA makes rumbles about having us climb in a true DRT with TWO ropes like rope access. Does anyone want that to happen???

Friction in SRT is much easier to manage in predictable ways than in DdRT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom