Seeking test data: rope on rope
|
Hello MP |
|
for various cord and sling widths ... |
|
If one consenting rope wants to hop on another consenting rope for some "action" in the privacy of a daily rate rope bag, why do we need to collect data on their knotty interaction? |
|
Tom-onator wrote:If one consenting rope wants to hop on another consenting rope for some "action" in the privacy of a daily rate rope bag, why do we need to collect data on their knotty interaction? Assuming both ropes are of legal age...Eeeeeew! 5 year old ropes? |
|
Anyone have this info in English? |
|
Eric LaRoche wrote:Anyone have this info in English?I can translate if wanted :) |
|
Thanks for the info! |
|
Serkan Bettermann wrote: I can translate if wanted :)yeah me too. 12,9 kN translates to 12.9 kN |
|
Pierce-Kenji wrote:Thanks for the info! Although, I guess what I'm looking for is the breaking strength of one cord doubled over another (basket), as in for example this scenario: One rope is shortened by a few feet, and this small piece is tied off around a tree. The longer remainder of this rope is threaded through this and rappelled off of. What is the theoretical breaking strength of this connection?While it may not be as quantitative as you're looking for, my answer to this question is: VERY much stronger than you need for the rappel. Absolutely no need to worry as long as you're careful to eliminate rope-on-rope movement. So not simul-rapping or lowering. Folks have been rapping off cord (with no metal between them) for decades. |
|
Right, GunkieMike and Jake, I know that it would by a large margin hold a rappel; rappelling sees some of the lowest forces in climbing, so high degrees of strength reduction are still acceptable. |
|
Also interested in how much this reduction is mitigated by increasing the number of strands being contacted. It seems to me that in particular would be a more complicated measurement, as it isn't just a simple matter of doubling or tripling the bend radius. |
|
In other words, how capable is this connection of tolerating some real forces, not just the load of body weight. |
|
JohnnyG wrote: yeah me too. 12,9 kN translates to 12.9 kNIt is a shame to see such a great joke wasted on this website. |
|
I doubt anyone has ever tested this in a climbing scenario since it is not part of the safety chain system we use. However the rope does not fail through the tie-in points of a harness so clearly it doesn´t have a major effect. |
|
Pierce-Kenji wrote:In other words, how capable is this connection of tolerating some real forces, not just the load of body weight.Oh please, stop trying to make this relevant when it's not. You're looking for hard numbers that are in fact TOTALLY IRRELEVANT and meaningless. REAL forces are forces that might be generated during normal climbing activities. And what everyone is trying to tell you is that normal climbing activities will not generate the level of forces that would threaten a climbing rope. Feel free to keep up this vision quest of yours but be honest about what it is - a purely academic curiosity with no practical relevance to anything we do. Real forces...pfft. |
|
I'm sorry this line of questioning offends you. |
|
And Mike, if you believe this type of information is truly useless for anyone in any field, then I think what you should be saying instead is that no one has ever found any reason to conduct such tests, and that I should find someone to perform some because no data exists. |