[ QUOTE ]
Tom,
I'm glad you mentioned this, "....how can we tell what sort of [theoretical] safety factor we have at the TIP? "
I have wondered about that almost everytime I start to climb. My problem is I don't know what safety factor is considered acceptable for the TIP????
I hear about the 10:1 margin for rope, gear, etc. but I don't believe I've ever heard what margin to expect/test for on a TIP????
[/ QUOTE ]
This is why knowledge of tree bio-mechanics and species characteristics are essential to safely climbing and working amongst them. Read claus Matthecks work to understand tree safety factors and the axiom of uniform stress.
On another note regarding bounce testing - this is essential in my book. I use two bug guys, with a foot in a handled ascender loop. This way they can stand and if something gives they land on their feet.
Second, always have the line rigged over several smaller limbs or one 'bomber' limb.
The danger comes from the first three meters - if the twig you didn't see snaps, there could be sufficient slack before catching the branch to land you on the deck on your butt (very bad). More slack than this and you'd certainly have noticed it visually via line angles (ie line over twig above branch) - I carry a small cheap pair of binos to check after the high viz access line is up. Proof loading with twice body weight and bounce will give the all clear for the initial two meter runway. After this a safely set up system will have sufficient energy absorption and ground clearance not to worry about it.
There are other options to reduce the risks of ground strike in the first couple of meters. Use your groundie to 'spot' you, breaking your backwards fall more upright. and you can even use a bouldering matt. Oh yeah, and i see guys using a chainsaw to weight the line - maybe not such a good idea in light of the above.
The hazards are the same with footlocking, only the risk of injury greater and controls limited.