X-rigging rings

chris_girard said:
Boomslang, you're from Canada right? As is KevinS and it looks like our friends from the north are taught a different safety factor for rigging than what we are taught here in the States. Does that make it wrong? Not at all, as long as you understand the principles behind the teachings and from what I've read, you guys are doing just fine.

Thanks for posting the link. This is a very good discussion, but I don't want to take away from David's XRR thread.

Oh yeah, I own 5 XRR slings and they go out on every job I have, whether I need them or not. Standard part of my rigging kit.
Click to expand...

My xrr slings come out every time my porti does and I guess even more than that, there great my #1 rigging tool, aside from rope of course.
 
Treetopflyer said:
How about of we get going on the efficiency of Xrings . Like a block or pulley is whatever percent efficient. Xring$ frictional coefficient?
Click to expand...

Hope fully David chimes in but I do know what used to be a block and porti is now sometimes a rr fs at the top and a re-direct xrr at the bottom and the guys can hold a surprising piece
 
So that is what I like about the rings, they really provide just the right amount of friction..stops the shock loading dead in it's tracks...even if the piece is not allowed to run....
 
I think with the smooth friction of the rings as redirects and the idea behind the tht, which I'm sure will be just as nice a product as the rings, X may have found the cure to rookies bouncing the shit out of you on that spar. New solutions to old problems are always nice.
 
I have been thinking about the fact that the X rigging rings have been designated as to be not used for life support, yet David has argued that their breaking strength numbers are irrelevant because they are essentially a thimble in the load bearing rope. Where am I going with this? I was thinking that an excellent application for the small rings would be in a rockett sling (Levirockett's development) made out of AmSteel for a crane tie in. Any thoughts?
 
As long as the ring didn't ever dislodge from sling and you burned through the sling in the process on descent. I'm sure that sounds like a sweet setup.
 
Worthaug said:
I have been thinking about the fact that the X rigging rings have been designated as to be not used for life support, yet David has argued that their breaking strength numbers are irrelevant because they are essentially a thimble in the load bearing rope. Where am I going with this? I was thinking that an excellent application for the small rings would be in a rockett sling (Levirockett's development) made out of AmSteel for a crane tie in. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

I think the no climbing thing is maybe a comfort level thing for Xman. The rings and slings are all rated. He's willing to beat the hell out of them to prove it but a climbing system is someones life in your hands so to speak and they still are fairly new so maybe that has something to do with it, let people get to know them. As well as far as I know his goal was to make a new rigging system which he did so maybe he doesn't want to deal with any ansi or other testing for life support stuff.
I'm not sure how insurance works for inventing stuff, if he's only tested it for rigging maybe its a legal insurance thing.

This is all pure conjecture, it's just the impression I've got from reading different things.
 
I agree about the life support senerio. You also have to remember that these rings were originally designed and have been used for many years for rigging on Sailboats. They are designed to take a beating along with lots of loading and rope runnings. In my opinion X has done a wonderful job introducing these to our industry along with creating some new products and ways to use them. These are rigging rings from every manufacturer that makes them, to make any of them come with a "life support is okay" statement would be massively expensive for the manufacturers. You have to keep in mind that the amount of rings we buy is inconsequential in their big picture. Adding cost to them for our our @10-20% of their sales would never get past their bean counters. The other 80% of their customers don't need them to be life support and would simply change brands. Keep in mind we on a good a day might own/buy 30 rings. A medium sailing ship has a couple hundred of these on them. Just my take on it and I am certainly not putting words in Davids mouth or even trying to express any of his thoughts.
 
monkeylove said:
...to make any of them come with a "life support is okay" statement would be massively expensive for the manufacturers...
Click to expand...

I think your post brings clarity to the subject... it's easy to overlook this. Tests for life support have to be repeatable, meet with strict engineering protocols to ensure that what you are testing for is actually applicable to the goals, must be well documented, published and subjected to review by safety standards organizations, etc. and are time consuming. Very expensive. For a manufacturer producing rigging products, this means hiring someone to do all this, dealing with insurance and legal issues and as you said, getting it all past the bean counters.

There's probably a lot of great ideas out there that will never make it to production because of this. On the other hand, the little guys coming up with great stuff and doing all the early testing, because we're not subject to such srutiny, often catch the attention of the big boys who are able to bring the products to market. After seeing the nifty splice oceans came up with, I wouldn't hesitate to use the X-rings in a life support anchor, myself. Would be nice if someone with the means to do it decides to take a serious look at them for this purpose, and market products using them for life support applications.
 
monkeylove said:
I agree about the life support senerio. You also have to remember that these rings were originally designed and have been used for many years for rigging on Sailboats. They are designed to take a beating along with lots of loading and rope runnings. In my opinion X has done a wonderful job introducing these to our industry along with creating some new products and ways to use them. These are rigging rings from every manufacturer that makes them, to make any of them come with a "life support is okay" statement would be massively expensive for the manufacturers. You have to keep in mind that the amount of rings we buy is inconsequential in their big picture. Adding cost to them for our our @10-20% of their sales would never get past their bean counters. The other 80% of their customers don't need them to be life support and would simply change brands. Keep in mind we on a good a day might own/buy 30 rings. A medium sailing ship has a couple hundred of these on them. Just my take on it and I am certainly not putting words in Davids mouth or even trying to express any of his thoughts.
Click to expand...
You just bought two Bulldog Bones didn't you? Liability waiver signed?
...
 
Yes I did along with Rope Runner and it's form. Nobody says you can't use them or the rings for anything you wish to use them for. What they say and X says (I believe if I am remembering correctly) is that they are not rated for life support. If I choose otherwise than I am on my own.
 
Worthaug said:
So why are you opposed life support ratings David? All it takes is a form and a signature...
Click to expand...

We're not saying he's opposed just that for now his aim was rigging and he accomplished that.

All something needs to be considered for ppe is 1 form and 1 signature? Are you sure there isn't just a bit more to it than that?
If not maybe there should be so people tighten there belts and add another step so there is so many zig-zag kind of questions and recalls out there.

If you are that sure about your rings and slings they are yours so whether you sign a waiver and go for it or just go for it, it's not with the manufacturer's go ahead either way but they are your rings yes they are good enough to do the job.

If you look at swl and bend radius they're great but so are 30 other tools that are ok.
By all rights if you trust it for rigging you should trust it for climbing they both have load and targets so realistically they're totally fine but just not what he had aimed for.

If anyone is dying to add these to everyones climbing bag talk to david and see if he'll allow you to do all the testing lawyering etc and put in the hours then we can all have them.
 
Last edited:
KevinS said:
We're not saying he's opposed just that for now his aim was rigging and he accomplished that.

All something needs to be considered for ppe is 1 form and 1 signature? Are you sure there isn't just a bit more to it than that?
If not maybe there should be so people tighten there belts and add another step so there is so many zig-zag kind of questions and recalls out there.
Click to expand...
Actually, 1 form, 2 signatures. The user and the producer.
 
Kevin and Monkey, you guys have made some excellent points and I appreciate your insight. I don't know why but I must have been in an argumentative mood. There are already plenty of good tools to use as a crane tie in, so I'm gonna let this idea go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom