Turns out I did not have the tools to drill precisely on center either. I could really feel the eccentricity on decent on single sheave I made so I had a friend who is a machinist make a flat faced sheave bushing. Now I have finally had a chance to alternate between the bearings and the single sheave on several climbs and will agree that the single sheave is better at reducing rope shift. Now I am curious why @SoftBankHawks has switch to using Petzl Vector from Sirius 500. It appears that Vector can not be spliced by hand. A disadvantage. What advantages does Vector offer?
TRT
- Thread starter SomethingWitty
- Start date
SoftBankHawks
Branched out member
- Location
- Japan
I'm a rope nerd, just gotta try em all! Sirius is still my main TRT rope.
Energy absorption within a climb line is crucial. I so often hear climbers wanting static static static. We need energy absorption.
That can be accomplished in a few ways, and being critical of the multiscender at play is where to start. If I'm on a hitch based system, I want some elongation in the line itself. If I'm on a mechanical, I want to know what force it takes to make it slip, and get energy absorption there.
Being that most mechanicals do slip at relatively low loads compared to hitches, it perhaps leaves room for a more static line to be at play. I'd say this with consideration of what the line was designed to do, and whether the use is appropriate. The manufacturer is the best resource to contact with questions like that.
I am a rare bird in that I don't mind some elongation in my rope. I just don't experience an issue once I'm up and working, and managing a neglegable amount of stretch before ascent just doesn't matter. I also don't like rope with memory, as a nice hand is best.
All just my opinion.
That can be accomplished in a few ways, and being critical of the multiscender at play is where to start. If I'm on a hitch based system, I want some elongation in the line itself. If I'm on a mechanical, I want to know what force it takes to make it slip, and get energy absorption there.
Being that most mechanicals do slip at relatively low loads compared to hitches, it perhaps leaves room for a more static line to be at play. I'd say this with consideration of what the line was designed to do, and whether the use is appropriate. The manufacturer is the best resource to contact with questions like that.
I am a rare bird in that I don't mind some elongation in my rope. I just don't experience an issue once I'm up and working, and managing a neglegable amount of stretch before ascent just doesn't matter. I also don't like rope with memory, as a nice hand is best.
All just my opinion.
I agree, Eric. I have mentioned to climbers that the bounce they are feeling on ascent is greatly influenced by their climbing style, the application and timing of force. Almost without exception, the response is defensive or denial. Whatever.
The fact is though, if you have lots of bounce on one rope and not on another and the only thing changed was the rope, the energy that created bounce is still there. If you're not feeling it, where did it go? Just as dynamic rope can dissipate energy transfer, a more static rope can magnify it. When energy transfer is sharp and abrupt, things tend to break.
The fact is though, if you have lots of bounce on one rope and not on another and the only thing changed was the rope, the energy that created bounce is still there. If you're not feeling it, where did it go? Just as dynamic rope can dissipate energy transfer, a more static rope can magnify it. When energy transfer is sharp and abrupt, things tend to break.
All just my opinion.
Thanks Eric & David. Your opinions are just what I wanted. I appreciate all the information and experience you bring to Treebuzz.
SoftBankHawks
Branched out member
- Location
- Japan
UK/Euro regs demand nylon and polyester...boing boing. It has created quite a fuss among Stationary climbers since Cougar Blue became bonafide...boing boing !
I rigged up some Globe 5000 for my TRT system, apart from having to use knots and it having a little more of a stiff hand, I saw no difference in stretch to the Sirius 500. I was more curious to see how the tighter cover braid performed over the Sirius.
More and more I want to test before I go fully into a new system, it makes logical sense to do so. That chap in Japan experiments beyond belief but his output is chaotic, I have no idea what his motivation is to combine every existing climbing tool into a single system !? I just don't get it . Nearly everything will work a little bit though this has no inherent worth. There has been a spate of climbers using the ART Positioner as a main belay point (did the idea come from him?), we had to put a notice on the ODSK homepage that this is not a safe or constructive way to think about system design. Again, I don't understand the motivation to do these things, or at least to put it around and let genuine curiosity be misinterpreted as something else. Matisse said "Students, cut out your tongues." A little harsh perhaps but of course only a metaphor.
I rigged up some Globe 5000 for my TRT system, apart from having to use knots and it having a little more of a stiff hand, I saw no difference in stretch to the Sirius 500. I was more curious to see how the tighter cover braid performed over the Sirius.
More and more I want to test before I go fully into a new system, it makes logical sense to do so. That chap in Japan experiments beyond belief but his output is chaotic, I have no idea what his motivation is to combine every existing climbing tool into a single system !? I just don't get it . Nearly everything will work a little bit though this has no inherent worth. There has been a spate of climbers using the ART Positioner as a main belay point (did the idea come from him?), we had to put a notice on the ODSK homepage that this is not a safe or constructive way to think about system design. Again, I don't understand the motivation to do these things, or at least to put it around and let genuine curiosity be misinterpreted as something else. Matisse said "Students, cut out your tongues." A little harsh perhaps but of course only a metaphor.
My interest in the different line options is to see if there is an 8mm line with a high enough rating that single leg might meet or at least come closer to ANSI requirement. Whether or not it is static or dynamic (boing, boing) is not my objective. I thought I had found this in the Marlow Doublebraid. According to their spec sheet it has a MBL of 5203. I sent a section to TS and was surprising when a straight unspliced piece of Marlow Doublebraid broke at 4056 lbs. This turns out to be a common number for many 8mm robes. Both the Global 5000 and the Sirius 500 are listed at 4047 which is odd since Global has a dyneema core. Petzel Vector also listed at 4047. The Admiral 7000 is way up there at 8767.
I have found that Sterling has two offerings not from the sailing world but are in the climbing realm; Oplux & Canyonlux. These both come in at a MBL of 5440. Not sure how spliceable these may be but they seem like they may be worth further investigation. Anyone had any experience with these?
I have found that Sterling has two offerings not from the sailing world but are in the climbing realm; Oplux & Canyonlux. These both come in at a MBL of 5440. Not sure how spliceable these may be but they seem like they may be worth further investigation. Anyone had any experience with these?
SoftBankHawks
Branched out member
- Location
- Japan
Good on ya, Papadirk, it takes some interesting head scratching to rig TRT right. Does ANSI require each piece of the configuration to exceed a said amount? And is there further regulation of configurations? For my mind configurations are where the crux of the matter lays. When you get a chance I'd like to see some photos of your set up's.
LandonPainter
Participating member
- Location
- Colorado
I have been climbing with TRT since meeting Paul and Eric in November, and I have to say, I'm sold! It runs smoother than my other SRT setups and there are a bunch of anchoring configurations. Being on a continuous loop is genius. You can really customize for each tree. Thank you gentleman for the knowledge. I think this will be the future of tree climbing. I hope to climb together again soon!
SoftBankHawks
Branched out member
- Location
- Japan
That is incredible to hear, Landon.
Landon, glad to see this thread get a bump. what are you using for rope?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
LandonPainter
Participating member
- Location
- Colorado
Sirius 500 I believe. Paul could better answer that, he spliced up the lines I'm using. I wish I had another set of 200' lines for tall west coast conifers. I guess another trip to Japan is in order. Cheers!
TimBr
Official Well Known Greeter
- Location
- Northern Virginia
@SoftBankHawks & @oceans; Thanks for keeping @JohnnyPro's ideas alive, when he seems unable to participate himself. I'm sure he appreciates it.
Tim
Tim
FreeFallin
Branched out member
- Location
- Wisconsin
Could someone embed a couple of TRT example videos? After reading all of this thread I think I understand the concept but can only find 4 Jonny Pro videos, I can see the dual line he swings on but not much of the setup. Any other examples people are trying would also help me get my head around the whole TRT idea.
Is the differentiator from DdRT just that a climber is hanging from both dual lines, or does it include the idea of multiple connections to the tree in a continuous loop, with a kind of floating hang point between them? Help me out here
Is the differentiator from DdRT just that a climber is hanging from both dual lines, or does it include the idea of multiple connections to the tree in a continuous loop, with a kind of floating hang point between them? Help me out here
Here are a couple of early videos from @SoftBankHawks .
Sorry I don't have more. TRT is different from DdRT because the climber is using two small diameter ropes acting as one SRT line in a single device, usually a modified RR but with the advantage of being able to separate the two lines at your anchor point. As @LandonPainter put it "there are a bunch of anchoring configurations. Being on a continuous loop is genius." Very much a work in progress for myself. Hope this helps.
Sorry I don't have more. TRT is different from DdRT because the climber is using two small diameter ropes acting as one SRT line in a single device, usually a modified RR but with the advantage of being able to separate the two lines at your anchor point. As @LandonPainter put it "there are a bunch of anchoring configurations. Being on a continuous loop is genius." Very much a work in progress for myself. Hope this helps.
SoftBankHawks
Branched out member
- Location
- Japan
This may help a little: http://thewoodenhand.com/trt_anchors.html
SoftBankHawks
Branched out member
- Location
- Japan
It is a curiously expansive platform for technique. I'm actually bang into ART's new tools so have been on DdRT for a few months ( another curious thing after so many years with stationary systems). But before the TRT workshop last November I started playing with hanging tools via prussik loop around the two TRT legs (above me) and walking them down to me when needed. I'm talking about chainsaws (with scabbard!), traverse kits, anything heavy that can be kept at a distance until needed.
Last edited:
New threads New posts
-
test
-
-
-
-
Free CEUs: February 05 & March 05 - 'Urban Forestry Today' Webcasts @ Noon (Eastern)- Started by UFT
- Replies: 0
-
-
