X Rigging Rings, thoughts

[Wooden Hand]

Italian company - Antal.

[Gerbutt]

Yeah I've seen those ones but they area marketed for boats so no conformity either for tree work?

 

I myself don't care, I still use my HH even though it isn't LOLER'ed. I just wondered if there's a "legal" way round it?

[scotspine1]

I hear you Tim, like I said, plans can be modified. Catching big tops is an unusual situation. If you want to catch big tops then you best spread force through as much rope as possible.

You cant say that 1 side of the ring would see more force than the other because it depends on length of rope and what ever you have going in in the system, additional MA one side and additional friction the other for example. Have you used the rings? They are intuitive.

The rings are far closer to a pulley than natural crotching, if I need compare.

 

Dont get me wrong I think the X Rings are great and would use them all the time if I had them, I was talking about a question mark over a specific application.

 

Does this help? I'm talking about snatching/catching this section to a dead stop as soon as the timber hits the rigging - at the point where everything pinches up tight - greater force between A and B, less force between B and C because of the friction at the X rings (B)

Edited February 7, 2015 by scotspine1

[born2trot]

What whole point?

If natural crotching is 100% friction, a pulley 0% and carabiner around 50% then the hard anodizing on the x rings will be somewhere between 20-30%.

 

How would the limb fall if natural crotching is 100% friction ? This is ludicrous ?

[Mountain man]

An expensive topping down strop, talk about re inventing the wheel...

 

M'y thoughts exactly. Not saying they're not good or anything, but there's nothing new about the concept really.

[RC0]

I agree Pete on the catching issue.

 

There's still a question mark for me on the X rings for those situations where you have to snatch a decent sized section of timber or a big branch, over a roof etc. A situation where you can't let it run.

 

In this scenario the amount of force on the rope between the section of timber and the x rigging rings would be much greater compared with a rigging block/pulley because a pulley allows the force in the rope to be dissipated along the entire length of the line down to the friction device. With the X rings the majority of the force is being taken by that short length between the timber/branch and the X rings.

 

Tim you'd have to factor that in, in such a scenario if there were no other option. There is no assumption by rope manufacturers that climbers are using the shock absorbing qualities of a line to its full potential when they stamp a WLL on a line. It's up the workers to do their own calculations to stay within those limits. On the video clip the tree was the weakest link, as is often the case with dead or compromised trees. My main point is that the rings put less stress on that and other tree rigging situations than what would pulleys....while arguably being more user friendly. In such situations (being the climber) it's always reassuring that you are doing everything possible to put things in your favor.

 

Pete they have double and triple triple ring configurations for big falling logs I believe. I don't have one yet. Most likely the knot would still be the failure point or that of the greatest strength loss, rather than the bend at the ring, depending.

 

The comment about reinventing the wheel. Wheels have come a long way since they were first invented or used. Same as motor vehicles, chainsaws, ropes and saddles. Whats important us that it's progressive. I've used 3 strand hemp rope with steel thimbles back in the day, and feel no desire to go back to that over the options that are now readily available.

[Mountain man]

Understood Reg, but what exactly is the difference? Anodized aluminum rather than steel, fancy smancy rope rather than 3 strand.

It's the same thing, just modern materials.

[RC0]

Understood Reg, but what exactly is the difference? Anodized aluminum rather than steel, fancy smancy rope rather than 3 strand.

It's the same thing, just modern materials.

 

The principle is the same, sure. But here you have much greater strength, and durability....modern material like you say. Smarter. I've seen enough polypropylene ropes and slings snap, buckled thimbles to recognize it as progress. Plus the availability of various configurations to suit your needs. Not that you couldn't have your own thimbles and polyprop custom spliced....but why would anyone ?

 

I'm not trying to sell the rings. The thread title is 'thoughts'....and my thoughts are that they can potentially offer a significant margin of climber safety over blocks. I'm speaking purely from my own experience and observations of course.

[Mountain man]

Fair enough, I tried to buy then in HBs before Christmas, but they only had the rings "loose" which disappointed me.

[Darrin Turnbull]

The principle is the same, sure. But here you have much greater strength, and durability....modern material like you say. Smarter. I've seen enough polypropylene ropes and slings snap, buckled thimbles to recognize it as progress. Plus the availability of various configurations to suit your needs. Not that you could have your own thimbles and polyprop custom spliced....but why would anyone ?

 

 

 

I'm not trying to sell the rings. The thread title is 'thoughts'....and my thoughts are that they can potentially offer a significant margin of climber safety over blocks. I'm speaking purely from my own experience and observations of course.

 

 

Thats good enough for me. Thanks once again for this info.