Your biography, doodles, derogatory language, deflection, etc. is not evidence of your theory. I will take your lack of photos of the phenomenon you predict as concession that your nylon-melting hypothesis cannot be taken seriously.
If you want to be taken seriously, you need to do testing.
It is time to take the back and forth, off original topic subject matter, either private or in another thread please.
Thank you.
Touche’ !
Yes, we SHOULD have some sort of drop-test-with-rope-movement
results for consideration (rather than the Nth testing of same ol’
knots devoid of detailed explanations … --such as I recently posted
a URLink) !! Surely there become discarded harnesses, and even
newly minted ones put to the test by manufacturers --either to
warn of the vulnerability, or to tout resistance to it (say, by
incorporating high-temp-resistant Kevlar into it) !?
I have conceived of a hitch-solution to the tie-in problem
as a way to have another in multiple, safety “back-ups”,
e.g. as follows ::
tie a clove hitch to the harness (1st bonus : this puts
2 dia. of rope through then, which might be Good, IF
equally loaded)
(having left ample tail…) tie a strangle knot on tail
of clove near the hitch (this will serve first qua binder
on another tail, and in back-up work qua stopper against
the hitch) ; then
put in a bowline with the tail --something one can do
with a “PET = post-eye-tyable” eye knot–, and then
tuck the eye knot’s tail through the binder (strangle)
and tighten up.
.:. Now, the hitch first loads like double eyes --no running
against harness. The binder cannot much loosen, given
the proximity of hitch & eye knots on either side.
So, first the eye knot has to loosen and come untied
(which it does somehow after the binder has lost grip
of its tail!);
then a fall loads the hitch which is closed down by the
compressing of the strangle (but with rope movement,
now); the strangle would have to loosen a lot, and
then migrate off a rather longish eye-knot&tail length
of end of rope before it cannot assist hitch-holding
(though if it CAN, I surely don’t expect a mere clove
hitch to be in any effective state!!).
Again, though, in part of the above there IS a risk
of rope movement, at possibly high-loading.
Dan,
With all due respect:
The moderators have already intervened to put a stop to this nonsense and off-topic discussion.
You are perpetuating this discussion further (why)?
May I suggest that a new topic of discussion be started and titled as follows:
“Noose versus fixed eye knot for direct attachment to harness for climbing and/or work at height applications”
In that topic, we could explore why not a single training agency on Earth (including international bodies such as the UIAA) do not recommend noose structures for tying-in. We could debate nooses and their effect on textile harnesses during a free-fall.
The debate could focus on fixed eye knots versus a noose tie-in and how each performs in a fall-arrest event.
EDIT NOTE:
Ahh, I just noticed you have tried to start a new thread - but the title should be changed to:
“Noose versus fixed eye knot for direct attachment to harness for climbing and/or work at height applications”
Amen.