View Single Post
  #14  
Old 11-14-2006, 10:40 PM
Dan Lehman Dan Lehman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 51
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brion Toss View Post
Hi again,
Dan, neither stitching nor whipping will add significant compression to add to the handcuff effect. Whipping might apply more, but even if so, whipping can be chafed away. In any event, both methods provide security through shear strength, not compression.
Maybe I'm thinking of a different whipping than is commonly employed?
Tying extended Strangle or perhaps (Dbl.) Constrictor knots in strong material enables
a good deal of tightening to be done (a man can easily pull with 60-100+ # force on the
ends). This I'd think would give good assurance against low-load shifting.

Quote:
As for how we know if invisible stitching is intact, you may as well ask how we know if the buried tail of the splice is intact; of course they almost certainly are okay, as they can't be chafed externally, or degraded by UV.
What is "invisible stitching"? Don't you have to bring the thread to the rope surface both
as a methodological necessity but also in order to bind the sheath--the point of it?! And
if so, then that thread's vulnerable. (As for knowing about the bury, well, what possibly
can happen to it?)

Quote:
We might as well ask why ANSI requires ...
Indeed! And the answer might be something like learning how sausage is made, not
terribly attractive. I think that Tom Dunlap (arborist) and some others have some insights
to some of the motivations behind some rules, and IIRC, they don't all seem so compelling.

Quote:
The strength of arborist rope might seem needlessly high, but there are a couple of compelling reasons for it: shock loads can easily multiply a person's weight (which could easily approach more like 300lbs at times, what with all the gear that arborists take aloft);
Ah, not with diet, then.
Or maybe durability was part of the formula. (Paolo Bavaresco found some interesting
diffferences in residual strengths of various lines--some seemed to lose a lot, others not
so much.)

--dl*
====

ps: I seem to be queried for re-logging in a many steps en route to making a post,
even though I logged in once or twice (or ...) previously and got the jolly "Hello, Dan Lehman"
greeting!? Homeland Security in on the operation?
Reply With Quote