Check my numbers please?

[Bundle 2]

Ok, but I suppose that there are implications for the load placed on the anchor limb. Regardless how the load is transferred above the piece to be lowered, the angle is tightest at that point, near 180 as it comes down???

Thats mech adv'...and weak spot....touche

[softbankhawks]

Ok, but I suppose that there are implications for the load placed on the anchor limb. Regardless how the load is transferred above the piece to be lowered, the angle is tightest at that point, near 180 as it comes down???

 

If we look at diagram 3, which pulley would be the anchor?

[softbankhawks]

Thats mech adv'...and weak spot....touche

 

So it would be a rope strength issue?

[softbankhawks]

As the double whip tackle terminates and forms a closed loop, like a traditional climbing system, then there would be no weight increase at that point?

[Bundle 2]

As the double whip tackle terminates and forms a closed loop, like a traditional climbing system, then there would be no weight increase at that point?

You seem confused as to whether you need to safe guard against wood( tree ) failure because it is an unknown quantity or your gear...

Gear= the only value you can take away with you & know to what extent U have used your eqpt

Tree failure could result in damage &/or injury upon failure....right.

To answer your question..weight is not the issue again, here, it is force ( ft/lbs )...yeah..?

 

Curently reading Ken James papers on Mass damping......the forces involved to breaking point are of interest to arborists by way of understanding the dissipation of energy within crown mass and harmonic frequencies re: failure.

[Amelanchier]

If we look at diagram 3, which pulley would be the anchor?

 

Bear with me 'cos im rusty (and a wee bit hungover)...

 

If the system is static and the load has been applied (i.e., via the GRCS) then the pulley on the piece to be lowered (pulley A) experiences the greatest load because the angle is approx 180. To my mind it doesn't matter how well the load is spread over the rest of the tree past pulley B because in placing A within the system and tying back to the same limb with the running bowline focuses the forces back onto that limb. Depending on the leverage that could be a problem?!?

[softbankhawks]

To answer your question..weight is not the issue again, here, it is force ( ft/lbs )...yeah..?

 

That's interesting. Instinct kicks in when the GRCS is straining to pick something....OK....I'm going to look into this more.

Wouldn't the mechanical advantage lessen the poundage throughout the pulleys (or wherever the forces run at that particular situation)? Assuming that the tree will not fail on recieving the load. While winching up 700 kg, will not 700kg be maintained until the piece is hanging, if we imagine that the cut is perfect and the hinge wood does not fight?

A question. A 2:1 MA means that the piece weighs 350kg?

Another one. Where is the displacement, if any?

 

 

Curently reading Ken James papers on Mass damping......the forces involved to breaking point are of interest to arborists by way of understanding the dissipation of energy within crown mass and harmonic frequencies re: failure.

 

I'll look out for this.

[Bundle 2]

ok...Optimisation is the key here...

[softbankhawks]

This model concentrates the D.W.T. I confused the compound dynamic rigging with the static D.W.T. rigging.

Continue....

[softbankhawks]

Optimisation of what?