XTC and mech. ascenders?

I did a quick search on the forum, and didn't find anything here about this... so it's a simple question, how do the XTC ropes work with mech. ascenders? It says they keep their round shape, so that's a plus. Also, how are they with knotting? Are they nice and supple or stiff? If you like it and use it, tell me why and what your setup is! Thanks for all input.

mateo
 
One of the most important things to check when you use ascenders on traditional, half-inch, arbo rope, is that the ascenders are made to accept the rope. Many ascenders are only made for up to 12mm ropes. Depending on how you do the math, arbo ropes can be 12.5mm and up. If the rope is too large the cam won't go through enough of it's rotation and the grip won't be tight enough. There are many arbos using ascenders and other gear that isn't compatible with the gear.
 
So... there isn't any particular reason why they wouldn't work with XTC? I know of a number of ascenders that work up to 13mm line (1/2 in). I believe that the XTC ropes are kernmantle... if I am mistaken, I would love to know!

Still no responce on the XTCs arborist knot abilities though...

mateo
 
The Kernmantle line I use is a static line and XTC is a dynamic line.
Very little stretch vs. moderate stretch.
Static Kernmantle has a very tough outer sheath, good for ascender abuse.
 
I use the XTC Fire with CMI Ultrascender and with the Yates Rocker during ascent, and with the Petzl ID or a Rappel Rack for descents, and it works great with all those cam devices and others meant to fit a true 1/2" rope. It also works wonderfully with the Knut knot or the XT advanced hitches. It doesn't glaze easily and not at all with HRC cord.
It also truly keeps its shape, is very resitant to abrasion at least as much as most other arbo 16 strand ropes and is as supple as Poison Ivy, more supple than KMIII, (for comparisons); and soooo the point is it takes and holds knots very very well with little attention to having to dress them well, versus some other ropes, like the Fly.
I even prefer the XTC over the Poison Ivy because of it being a little thicker and more substantial, especially for everyday work.
It also has very little stretch or at least as little as a Kernmantle which is nice for a 16 strand non-kernmantle.
Hope this helps.
 
Kernmantle rope

Modern climbing rope consisting of bundles of continuous nylon filaments (Kern) surrounded by a braided protective sheath (Mantle).
(d) Kernmantelseil

Found this in The Climbing Dictionary: http://home.tiscalinet.de/ockier/climbing_dict.htm

I know that we commonly refer to 11mm static line as kernmantle but from that definition it sounds like any rope that has a core (kern) and a sheath (mantle) is of a kernmantle construction, even 16 strand and 12strand.
That dictionary is more for Rockheads and a little quirky(it even has a defenition for beer). Anyone care to clarify?
 
Eric,

You're right and the defintion is correct. What arbos think of as kernmantle ropes is different than the rest of the rope world. This is another language issue that won't be easy to correct. :)
 
Yes, there is much confusion here. Kern means core, mantle means jacket (German). This construction was originally designed by Edelweiss in the 60's (I think) to improve the safety of mountaineering ropes from rock abrasion - The jacket is designed to protect the core of load bearing fibres.

12 strand single or hollow braid was used by arborists in the USA originally over 3 ply because it was light, low stretch, didn't twist and would knot easily with a taut - line hitch (dynamic kernmantle is too stretchy but would hold a tautline, low stretch kernmantle wouldn't hold a tautline). 16 strand hollow braid, was designed not to flatten like the 12 strands and have a smoother surface. It therefore has a core to keep a round cross section to aid knotted strength, but the strength is in the sheath. It is sometimes called kernmantle, but it isn't.

Hollow braid is a term generally reserved for the type of loose contruction used in products with easy adjust friction splices like whoopie/loopie slings and cobra type bracing rope. I don't like it for friction hitches as it has no core as back up from melted fibres. In fact, I think it has too many drawbacks that pretty much exclude it from PPE. Other construction types do a better safer job.

Double braids have a load bearing sheath and core. They are heavy, soft, and flatten. The Fly is a true kernmantle with a thicker than normal sheath, and a good round cross section.It runs nicely through 11mm devices and is light weight. A great all rounder for the climbing Arborist. Also makes great split tails for Blake's hitch, and safer, because the load bearing fibres are protected by a thick sheath. The Blaze is a double braid that flattens. I prefer the Fly as it has greater protection from abrasion and UV, and is easier to grip (ergonomics)with a round cross section. Also knots nicely, and has a little bounce - another safety consideration after you realise the forces that can occur in some situations (like that little peg breaking just above the anchor branch you thought you were on!).

Problems arise when deciding upon application and making important decisions during inspection - where are the load bearing fibres? How many could be damaged before relegation or retirement?

Double braids aren't best used for climbing or natural crotch rigging, as the sheath /core slippage can reduce strength as they slip against each other. They can also milk easily with a prusik, which can also loosen a splice if run to one end, which happened to a good mate of mine who fell 35 feet on the second day of useage when the splice pulled through because he rotated ends. I'm not sure how the Blaze differs from other double braids not to worry about this? I think some Arborists obsess a little too much about low stretch and splicability, at cost to other important considerations!

Many manufacturers without a rock climbing pedigree, tend to call any ropes with core and sheath a 'kernmantle' - irrespective of where the strength is, or origins and import of the term.

Enough, time to get some paid work done! /forum/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Standard setting on nomenclature between rope manufacturers would be nice!
 
By accepted parlance, arbo ropes aren't generally considered kernmantle even though, by using the definition from the Cordage Institute, they are. We tend to think of kernmantle ropes when we see rock climbing ropes or static lines used for access lines.
 
I use the HRC AND Fly combo. Also the ascender I use(at times)for SRT, with backup, is the right handed petzl. No complaints. Is there a better combo? And why, be gentle when considering my lack of knowledge.
 
Roger,

Lots of ways to ascend. It's always good to hear that more people are backing up their ascenders. It can't hurt.

My preferred back up is a Rocker clipped to a biner at my bridge. It keeps my two attachment points seperated.
 
16 Strand Arbo rope doesn't have the protective outer sheath that we typically think of with kernmantle rope. The outer layer of arbo rope IS the rope, the core being mostly just fill (and a little strength).

Just making sure we're on the same page!

love
nick
 
Yes Tom
I think I could use a rocker in that way. I love the croll chest rig for spiking back up a pole after coming down for lunch/ kicking lazy arses/ enlightening the client they don't know best.

But when I get to branches, its too easy and tempting to forget the lanyard and just run the croll. The Rocker would follow the croll up nicely, and I'd be happier in the devices abiltiy to hold a small fall over aggressive cams.

Err...spiking up trees to be dismantled that is /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Okay, so a core with strength and a protective covering = kernmantle.
A core for holding shape inside an outer rope with strength = not a true kernmantle.
Got it! I think. Thanks Nick.
 
Roger,

The Petzl and back up is great. I might offer one change for ascending- use a KMIII or other static line. The reason I say this is because the Fly has more stretch (which is great during work positioning) but can be difficult and lose efficiency during ascending. I am less worried about and type of a fall while ascending since I leave very little room for a slip.
 
I have definately noticed some stretch with that particularly when in single line ascents. Less(stretch)makes more sense towards an efficient climb. Where would one look for the KMIII?...I bet I could find some in Columbus...Too bad my chances of making it there are dismal at best.
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom