Okay, now, since you’ve decried my “gentle” loading of rope to a “mere 11%”
of breaking load (i.e., near a typical Working-Load Limit), how is it that you
have been loading your “rope” so that your (mis-?)tied #1452 knots have jammed?
(And it should be noted that I’ve used smaller sizes of cordage
which have been more heavily loaded, %-wise.)
Modeling behavior takes some careful consideration and scaling of factors;
I don’t find David’s results to be representative of what I have seen firsthand,
so I doubt its value as a model. (And we haven’t seen the actual knots.)
Looking back in rec.crafts.knots, it looks like Dan himself was also hallucinating regarding the Ashley Bend jamming: You [b]CAN tie it such that it becomes quite secure-when-slack[/b], and can jam http://groups.google.com/group/rec.crafts.knots/msg/646d9aa28d604870?hl=enGoodness, who needs to look back there? I’ve said as much here – that
the structure offers a version that would suffice in some springy PP rope
which is a fairly common material. “Jamming” in this case means “being
secure when slack”; loosening and untying are still possible in such cases
of light usage. But not in most uses, and not in reasonable working loads.
(Knots that jam somewhere towards their breaking point
aren’t facing the worst of their issues, then!)
It’s like pulling teeth to get you to admit jamming. You insinuated/stated above that others are just “imagining” it. I needed the 2X4 of your own words to remind you
[/quote]
You continue to ignore my explicit speaking of distinct versions of a
knot known as “#1452”. I point out that jamming is possible in one
and --furthermore-- that such behavior might well be desired (and be
well shy of any permanence given reasonable, not ridiculous, loading!).
I can easily get the Ashley Bend to jam well short of breaking the rope. In the countless times the Ashley Bend has jammed for me, I never once broke the rope. In fact, I don't think I've ever broken a rope in field usage even during accidental overloading.
Sounds like you’re tying the knot incorrectly. But we’re interested in
learning about the details of your “field usage” with those countless jams.
I’ve been putting various cordage to my 5:1-pulley stress test, and don’t
see all this jamming you find rampant.
(I still recall your dubious assertions of VersaTackle actual MA, which I had
carefully, simply, repeatedly tested with weights. Re-reading your moved
site, I see that assertion: "The Versatackle has a high mechanical advantage
– despite some demonstration of the opposite. Time to revisit that thread
(before the fun(ny stuff) with loops folks make this place loopy!); I was
going to leave Knot4U’s elation unbalanced, but I have some interesting
new data on this.)
While I didn't cite that part on my page, towing a truck is, once again, a very poor test of security. You know this, yet you're suddenly acting like you've forgotten how to test knot security.I cite the correct portions of Ashley.Ha, yeah. "... the least secure knots known, its only rival being the Whatnot" !! Right, and you can tow a truck with it.It never occurred to you that there are other conditions that show insecurity beside such a poor test as a steady load?Not that my load was completely steady, as even the initial standing in
the pulley puts a surge into the rope; the SParts draw, the tails yield a
little and shift, and the binding occurs. Then one can “bounce”, to up
the force (overcoming sheave friction) and give some “shock”. What
do you want, a UIAA drop test?
How about slack shaking of various rope types for the ABoK1409? How about shaking with occasional light loading?
I’ll just say that I’ve done the shaking, and see nothing remarkably
insecure about #1409 more than various other non-jammed knots;
and the security-under-load test is just what goes to the Ashley
likening to the WhatNot, which pretty quickly/surely rolls and
spills.