X-rigging rings

Hey X man great video I'll be sure to watch it again for what I missed the first time, but just a couple questions about the beast in the butterfly,

1. why don't you just timber hitch the first ring with the tail and save going through the original ring it seems like a step for nothing? Not trying to nock it or anything i just don't understand.

2.if you're putting the butterfly in why don't you save a lot of steps and just tie it further down the tail (assuming minimal taper) then you could put both rings through the bight of the sling making a cow hitch.

No half hitches, timber hitches or anything needed if you're running the rigging line through both xrr's.
As far as I understand, and please correct me if I'm wrong but a cow hitch would be stronger than a timber hitch to.
So more simple, efficient, strong. Any thoughts?
 
Thanks, Michael.

No doubt about it, the clove is kinder on the cordage. But the crossover loop is semi-tough to work out of the deep groove on the Beast after it's been loaded. I'd use it for a semi-permanent connection (like the 28/20 on the Locking prusik). Or if I knew I was pushing close to the SWL.

The girth flips open with your thumb but it stays down held by the groove lips.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Hey X man great video I'll be sure to watch it again for what I missed the first time, but just a couple questions about the beast in the butterfly,

1. why don't you just timber hitch the first ring with the tail and save going through the original ring it seems like a step for nothing? Not trying to nock it or anything i just don't understand.

2.if you're putting the butterfly in why don't you save a lot of steps and just tie it further down the tail (assuming minimal taper) then you could put both rings through the bight of the sling making a cow hitch.

No half hitches, timber hitches or anything needed if you're running the rigging line through both xrr's.
As far as I understand, and please correct me if I'm wrong but a cow hitch would be stronger than a timber hitch to.
So more simple, efficient, strong. Any thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

Kevin, I surely don't take it as you being negative and love the input.

sometimes on stuff like this, when we think it's an awesome configuration, after a few other peoples input, we then progress together towards an even better configuration.

I've got an idea from some parts of your suggestion that I'm eager to try out.
 
[ QUOTE ]
David, I have watched your video many times. Basically, I’m awestruck … I NEVER work at that weight. So you have to take these comments with a grain of salt!!

As a rig setup to test the 2-Beast top rig, I very much like the two sling/butterfly arrangement. By using two slings, you double the cordage and put all the focus of the test on the two Beasts and what they do to the rigging line. Excellent test arrangement.

But I’m puzzling whether I’d use that for production, because you don’t have a choking grip on the spar.

To my un-experienced eye, the most dramatic event was that bark stripping. In fact, the only reason it stopped sliding was the protrusions below the tie point. Check it out. On a smooth spar, that puppy could have slid a long way. You can also see the lack of choke on those top view slo mos. It’s nice to get the 2:1 when you tighten the sling initially, but those gripping forces are tiny compared to the shock load.

Even if the safety of controlling the load were not an issue, all that crap on your slings comes from the sliding not from the shock load.

I’m preposterously un-qualified to speak here and I’d like to hear from others …


OF

[/ QUOTE ]

Tom, great input, THANK YOU.

"But I’m puzzling whether I’d use that for production, because you don’t have a choking grip on the spar."

I think this is a very important topic and maybe should be discussed and explored more.

What if someone did the wraps REALLY loose and not tight like I did them? also, the wraps should wrap from the TOP DOWNWARD, so that if there is ever rolling, it gets tighter. I never thought about doing them really loose and seeing what would happen until your post, I'm thinking I should experiment with that and put out a caution if i find that loose wraps cause it to slide under normal loads. It never occured to me to consider

The load put on the sling causes the wraps to be pinched, but you are right, it does NOT choke and get tighter that way.

Now, when used on "normal" loads under SWL of the sling, I have not had an issue of it sliding down the trunk.

but i agree, the "idea" of not choking does seem wrong.

Now, if you view the few videos out there on the net that show rigging ropes break, you will often find that choked slings also skin down the trunk just before the rigging line breaks.

I viewed the white slings skinning down the spar as normal.

I will continue to think about this though and thank you.
 
[ QUOTE ]
What you're seeing in the first negative blocking scenario in the video is a combination of a little bit of stretch, a little bit of sliding, and a little bit of slack coming out of the alpine butterfly and the timber hitch. All of these things occur in the sling during negative blocking. The first one shown in the video looked very normal for regular rigging scenarios. David tried to show the other end of the spectrum by shock loading a large amount of weight during negative blocking. That was when the excessive sliding and bark scraping occurred. This kind of shock loading should never occur during normal rigging operations. It appeared to be sort of a worst case scenario test. I think the point was to show how the rings and slings would hold up in that configuration during that kind of worst case scenario. You very astutely recognize that there are many other concerns and dangers in a worst case scenario like that one, including but not limited to rope strength, tree/anchor point strength, and physical shock to the climber. There are limits to every aspect of what we do and every component we use. The real skill is to maximize our team, our tools, and our scenario without introducing unnecessary danger. That unnecessary danger was introduced here, in a controlled environment, for the sake of experimentation.

[/ QUOTE ]

good post
icon14.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Props to X and his guys: they put in a long, cold day to prove something … two (2) Beasts do just fine for top rigging even under the most brutal test conditions.




[/ QUOTE ]

ha, might have looked like one cold day, but was actually 4 days spread out over several weeks.

did it on days that were too bad for tree work
 
David, nice vid. I liked it so much I got off my [pick a different word] and ordered a few Larges and some Tenex from Luke yesterday. Thanks for the invention and dedication to bring it to us.

Frank
 
thanks monkey, next time, order some from Xtreme Arborist instead so we can keep the 35-40%.
bling.gif


We hardly clear anything when treestuff, sherrill, etc sell them. but, joking asside, we sure appreciate those companies carrying and selling them. We need them and if only a couple bucks per sling or ring, so be it.

plus I'm away for the week and it may have been a delay in your order if you placed it this week.

so THANKS for getting some and choosing treestuff!

(i bought internet for 24hrs, where i am, I'll be off the grid again for the next few days, see you all).
 
Can do David, I didn't realize you lost that much.

On a side note to you or others looking, most of my rigging will be light duty with a mini porta and the large X-rings. Can I use XTC 12 Strand 1/2 with all the above goodies?

Thanks
Frank
 
Xman

In some of OF videos with his beast whoopie he shows a whoopie choked or round turned once around the whole stem do you think that that might be a simpler way to reach the same goal?

Would 1 whoopie be as strong as your 2 slings since you put knots in yours?

Or do you think they would work fairly comparatively?

I just know I prefer doing thing simpler and once if I can, it may just be my lazy side coming out.
 
I started building x-ring systems around my blocks/pulleys but Tom's words six months ago begat innovation ! Heavy and expensive pulleys, not that I have a problem buying or working with them when the need arises, seem less and less relevant these days.

The x-ring populous have been moving in the same direction - negative rigging! (attachment)19mm tenex with beast whoopie, we start the bury outside to give the bight a stronger area to sink in to.

The friction co-efficient between double braid and the hard coating is an important question but strength loss is manageable, it always has been managed, just in different ways and areas. Teufelbergers’s ‘Sirius’ seems to offer less movement and milking from a big double braid, the 32 plait constructed higher heat resistant cover may give benefits?
 
Paul, I like your thinking. Your post got me puzzling over the similarities between your sling, an eye splice and a whoopee.

Suppose you brummeled a Beast into an eye splice but then carried the buried tail all the way through the full length of the sling? Would that “phat sling” be stronger for top rigging? If so, would the extra strength be useful or not?

OF
 
I'm not sure how Tenex would react to being filled? Length of bury dictates amount of friction so you'd up the security of a straight bury. If you think of folding a rope in 2 and pull testing it compared to what you suggest....? lets try it!
I've learnt to tie a choking knot around the eye and not the neck, seen some pictures of tenex snapping when tied around the neck too but am not sure why it happens?

Tenex melts pretty easy on the inside of the bight, it's great to get the larger diameter into the beast so comfortably.
 
Would you have to double up the whole thing or could you do 5 tucks of the tail(equal to a timber hitch) than a 1/2-1 fid bury.

It seems in my mind if you do 3 or more tucks it would lock it off and the length of bury wouldn't matter as much. Like chasing a double figure 8 on a bight with a fisherman (just incase) but really it does nothing.

I've also seen on some boating sites where they just keep weaving end through end til the fid length is up I'm sure the strength is mainly in the first few but it can't come undone its solid. I just don't know about the strength loss etc

What do you guys think?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Xman

In some of OF videos with his beast whoopie he shows a whoopie choked or round turned once around the whole stem do you think that that might be a simpler way to reach the same goal?

Would 1 whoopie be as strong as your 2 slings since you put knots in yours?

Or do you think they would work fairly comparatively?

I just know I prefer doing thing simpler and once if I can, it may just be my lazy side coming out.

[/ QUOTE ]

sorry for the delay, I haven't been on the buzz in a while.

I think Tom, (old farts) beast whoopie is a better set up for negative rigging and more versitile. I didn't mean to come across like this was the best negative rigging X-Rigging Ring combination out there. Now that I look back, I see that Tom was comparing the two as well.

I am doing a video on EACH X-Rigging Ring sling and the possible uses for it. I started with the most simple sling.

I was excited about doing big negative rigging with the simple white sling because it was a fairly new discovery.

IF a person only owned these white slings, here is how they could negative rig with them.

Carry on the good conversation
 
Here is an idea I have been thinking about (Light rigging sized for me). 1 Sling made from 3/8 tenex-tec, repeat twice more for a total of 3 separate slings. Now braid those 3 slings together to make 1 cord with 3 heads. I get my bend radius all the time but only carry up 1 cord. I suppose you might be able to use the 3 heads separately for redirects or MA pulley system. Any thoughts? Other than I am nuts, lol.

Edited: Forgot to mention the(3) 20x14 rings in those slings.

Frank
 
[ QUOTE ]
Here is an idea I have been thinking about (Light rigging sized for me). 1 Sling made from 3/8 tenex-tec, repeat twice more for a total of 3 separate slings. Now braid those 3 slings together to make 1 cord with 3 heads. I get my bend radius all the time but only carry up 1 cord. I suppose you might be able to use the 3 heads separately for redirects or MA pulley system. Any thoughts? Other than I am nuts, lol.

Edited: Forgot to mention the(3) 20x14 rings in those slings.

Frank

[/ QUOTE ]
MonkeySex,
Nothing wrong with that, sounds pretty good and similar to a few drawings I have. But, if doing "light" rigging, then you don't likely need three "heads" (rings). And, my thought is, if you needed three heads, then 3/8" might likely be the weak link, so do a larger diameter cord.
But! This is cool to keep reading that people keep in mind three rings and bend radius. this is awesome to keep hearing my echo actually. this means people have heard and understand the importance of bend radius.
I hope not to ruin it by saying this;
tomato.gif
but if truly light or medium rigging, you can be very safe with one ring, or two rings of the 28x20. I took medium to heavy stuff on one ring for a whole year in production tree removal work and nothing went wrong, not even glazing. I try to set the cautions high because who knows what one person's opinion of light rigging is compared to another. That's why I've tried to constantly beat into heads not to use one ring on terminal rigging with sharp angles on a single ring. And officially, I'm going to keep saying don't use one ring, unless for redirects.
People have been taking medium size stuff on thin steel biners for years and will continue to do so. Do you watch any youtube? Some scary stuff out there and it's amazing to see decent size weights taken on single steel biners. I cringe and expect to see that biner cut through a rigging rope like a knife. It's amazing what a rope can actually take.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Kask Stihl NORTHEASTERN Arborists Wesspur TreeStuff.com Teufelberger Westminster X-Rigging Teufelberger
Back
Top Bottom