Friction and Termination Hitches Pictured and Tested

General Discussion
1

Friction and Termination Hitches Pictured and Tested

They also like Tenex for Friction Hitch; folks still think i’m crazy with my flat line hitching. i tell ya it grips good, high strength(5k in 3/8) and flatttens out to maintain more high strength and friction area. i like it in a (Sailor’s) Gripping Hitch; but finish with backhand hitch. But what they call a Becket; i call a Buntline/Clove to self to form shrinking eye??

i’d think that unless you are over a fire pit or electric line; a little slip and elasticity to keep forces low on support, connections, bod etc. would be desireable. Especially in DdRT/ doubled line that is less elastic than mountaineering line that is used as a single line(doubled line; always less elastic than single line; becuase less load per leg of support in doubled). So, perhaps when the greatest risk is impact loading/fall; the slippier knots they toss out are better??

Great numbers on Scaffold/Dbl. Noose/ Double fisher persons once again. i like mine as an Anchor to self to form shrinking eye/turn not crossed. So lean more towards knudeNoggin’s naming of Double Noose.

2

Good find, KC! (spot it from up in a tree? ;D )

But, as usual, the report leaves many things unstated, and ignores some details.
So, time to start compiling a set of questions and other notes . . . .

–dl*

3

Tree Ropes and Hitches Tested is another one (just to keep these all together)

and 2 general descriptive articles by Mark Adams: Climbing Hitches and . Many utility uses for these hitches. When climbing you can only ascend and use them as a safety grip only on a single line. But, if line tied to climber goes up over support and back to climber (giving 2:1 advantage) to run through a friction hitch (now 2 legs of support, 1 of which is through friction hitch) you can descend too.

4

Is a very BIG one (96pp!!), NB.

and 2 general descriptive articles by Mark Adams: [url=http://www.treebuzz.com/pdf/climbing_hitches.pdf]Climbing Hitches[/url] and [url=http://www.treebuzz.com/pdf/0505_geneology.pdf]Son of a Hitch - Friction Hitch Geneology[/url].
It was in researching the [i]Son of a Hitch[/i] article that errors of the revised edition of [i][u]On Rope[/u][/i] were discovered (to which notice authors haven't responded), re the imbalanced "Prusiks" (aka "Schwabisch"). Interesting reading, yes.

:slight_smile:

5
But, as usual, the report leaves many things unstated, and ignores some details. So, time to start compiling a set of questions and other notes . . . .

After an initial read, here are some problems I see with the report (and, sadly,
these are not uncommon in the case of knottting).

p.17: The exact form of the Fig.8 loopknot isn’t specified–either to dressing,
or to which end is loaded.

The Dble & Tple Overhand Nooses (stupidly named “D/T FishermanKnots”)
are reported as having one “failure” and two "DNF"s (each), but no force is
given for the DNF, nor is there an explanation of what this means–that the
test was stopped for lack of length of test bed w/o anything breaking, or that
the break occurred elsewhere (where, then); and what was the maximum
force sustained in these DNFs?! There is an implication that somehow the
strength of the noose hitches was 100%, but that makes quite a contrast
with the single cases where the knot failed at 74%! (Conceivably, the “100%”
case saw the splice fail, either indicating poor splicing or much overstated
rated strength.)

pp.throughout: It’s not stated how the breaking strength percentages were
figured–was the strength of the rope actually TEST-determined (how?),
or was the vendor’s rated strength used as the basis?

p.18: The grapevine (Dble.Fish knot) seems rather weak in the 3/8" rope
at just 70%, though that’s not far from some common reported values.
The 1/2" rope didn’t fail at the knot, so the data shouldn’t be presented
as presumably knot strength. (Had the knot been tied in both sides of
the test specimen sling, the break at the smaller pin might have been
avoided.)

p.21: =>‘Valdotain’ (not ‘tian’) Hard to make out the “Gripping Hitch”.

p.22: Interesting to attach the name “Fig.8 on a Bight” to a loopknot with
a closed ring around its eye, which necessitates having access to the end
(though in a short lanyard such as arborists use, it could be that the ring
is reeved prior to tying the knot).

p.23: “Becket Bend” => “Buntline Hitch” --surprising cock-up on this!?

p.24: The Grapevine bends are shown in discordant form (the component
Dbl./Trpl. Overhands are of opposite handedness). I doubt this was how they
tied them, actually (but some artist took liberties for ease of presentation).

–dl*