Wooden Hand

2 hours ago, Ian Flatters said:

 

 

Sadly not, you’ll have to build your own.

See it as a blue peter project for adults. I posted these on Facebook recently as someone asked for some pictures on them.

 

 

Thank you so much for the information !

I wondered if the toe spikes for pole climbing are available through a retailer and if so where?

Thank you.

On 21/09/2018 at 20:02, tree-fancier123 said:

the throw hook - is it any better than others - available to buy?

Sorry for the late response.  The hook is quite a different in design, setting and application and works well on larger trees.  I carry it most climbs for a variety of work positioning solutions, often setting it up close and climbing away from it.  Unlike the 'r' shaped hooks (or should that be 'n' shaped?!) this Bennett Hook can release easily from below.  It hasn't replaced my Eppel Hook, I now carry both and it is available from Thompson Tree Tools.

5 hours ago, stihlmadasever said:

Looks very similar to the petzl grigri

The music makes me want to pee..

The outside shape and lever are similar but internally the straight rope passage means that rope walking is achievable, which is a universe away in terms of application.

Thanks Rich, kind as ever.  It's great to carry a 10mm access line and have every one on the team get on the LOV2.

The helmet is the Wall Rider from Mammut, great for hot days and cycling !

ODSK are the Japanese distributor for the LOV 2 and I helped them to make a little video explaining the device.

Paul

Hi John,

it works for me, I wonder what to do ?

Thank you, Reg.  I too wonder why most people are happiest when an experience is packaged and sterile when it is so easy to just walk.  I'm looking forward to see where this goes for you.

Hello,

I recently uploaded an article about SRT ropes to the ODSK homepage, please check it if you think it may be of interest.

http://www.works-odsk.jp/original120.html

Thanks

Paul

I came to upload this, thank you for beating me to it.  Mark, the deal with us is to get arisings to a stable place because it will stay there until it rots.  Swinging, sliding and pulling the timber fairs better than hand-balling and location means no cranes and loaders.

Yes, we do enjoy rope work!

Hello all,

First off, apologies to moderators if this is seen as unpaid advertising, which it is, though I wanted to mention that this August I am coming over from Japan to do a one day double braid splicing workshop at TREEKIT.

For those of you new to splicing it will certainly help guide you through the harder parts of the process, and for those older hands it may give you some extra clues as how to refine understanding and develop a more fluid ability for a variety of rope conditions. The workshop will follow instruction from my splicing book.

Many thanks

Paul

https://www.treekit.com/events/current-workshops/splicing-workshop-with-paul-poynter.html

[ame]

I could never see logic in the Quickie design.

What is it a solution for?

Anchors, long term anchors that are out of sight, need to be rigged counter to what the Quickie offers.

I wonder how much force it would take to smash those pin heads off when cross loaded?

The reason I'm asking about rope selection is that should a ground anchor be used we have a potential for twice the 'normal' load on the rope. Potentially if then used in this configuration for rescue it becomes four times the 'normal' load. One of my climbers said he had read an article about the working loads tree climbing ropes are designed for and that some of the lower specification ropes are not strong enough to have an acceptable redundancy for all SRT applications.. I will try and track down the article.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my D6603 using Arbtalk mobile app

With an 11.5mm double braid, tied and knot blocked against a ring you have around 15-20kN ABS. That gives a 100kg climber a 15-20:1 safety factor, a rescue scenario potentially halves this. Is this adequate?

Testing for the ART Twin Line got 22kN with an Alpine Butterfly blocked directly to the side plates of the Cocoon 5 pulley, their user instructions ask for a natural anchor to withstand at least 12kN.

It comes down to what you desire, what you feel is safe and fit for your company. You should see some of the anchors that the gardeners tie into over here, completely hair-raising, I suspect that they average a safety factor of 2:1 at most.....with gear averaging ten times that !

 

A single rope (even without the added semi-active rope of a base anchor) may absorb much more force in a fall than a doubled one as the force isn't halved/ strand so it can elongate more, absorbing the impact.

Hey Mikey,

I wanted to write this into an exam recently but was asked to remove it because I couldn't back it up with any facts. Do you know of any testing done on this? Perhaps we could do something together in the autumn?

I'm writing a risk assessment and method statement to support the use of SRT. I am not aware of any national (FISA/AFAG type) guidelines for this. If there are any please point me in that direction.

 

Non CE marked equipment eg the rope runner causes me some concern. As its not CE marked it can't be supplied/sold for the work we do in Europe. I am interested to know how others are managing the risk assessment and method statement in this and similar situations?

 

Also

 

I understand that not all tree climbing ropes are suitable for SRT. Is this the case and if so what makes a rope appropriate and another one inappropriate and how are people managing this particularly with sub contract climbers providing their own kit

 

Thanks David

Hello David,

It is nice to see your considered approach to taking stationary rope system(s) into the professional work environment. You are right about mechanicals not being certified and while this may stop you from going deep into the work practices right away, it is only a matter of time before a certified device comes into the market. It is sensible to do some homework regarding the myriad differences in risk awareness and anchoring strategies inherent to stationary systems. This way you may iron out some close-calls before they appear at your work site. And find ways to manipulate the systems to best suit your work environment.

From my own experience of running dismantling crews along railway lines I have set up some protocols.

1. No Big Shots as the rebound can be uncontrollable.

2. Very specific throwing risk assessment which ensures the safe capture of the uppermost point in the tree when setting a floating (trunk anchored) line. Blind bounce testing is not how we do it, logical and systematic steps and multiple person and angle checking is key for us.

3. We work off trunk anchors around 1-2% of the time and so we developed ways to self release the trunk anchor in order to set top anchors. This is a huge subject. I expect you will need to differentiate between work off a top anchor or work off a floating anchor and then apply known techniques to deal with each. There is no question that for simple tasks simple trunk anchored systems are hard to beat but it is also true that they pose a far greater risk when cutting and rigging. I have watched novice climbers bounce there non running chainsaws along the anchor leg when accessing, it does't take much to cut a taught line.

4. Set retrieve lines after the work has been done as they are simply a hindrance.

5. Use false anchors to save damage to the tree and rope. You can use stationary systems within DdRT anchoring ideas. In fact, this is a mighty good way to make the transition from dynamic to stationary.

6. Understand the difference between load sharing and non-load sharing re-directs.

7. Relearn basic movement patterns so as not to rag the hell out of elbows and shoulders.

I have just finished writing a test for an association over here and decided to fail systems if they did not have the implicit rigging potential to retrieve as and when the climber needs to. Single stationary systems, wether top anchored or floated fail in this. It may not be a crucial point for you but I thought I would mention it all the same.

Good luck and please throw any questions back to me.

Thanks for sharing that.

Thanks man, my pleasure !

Very useful article, thank you for sharing. It sounds like you have an interesting and worthwhile job.

 

I have a couple of minor criticisms, though I accept I may be a pedantic prick for posting them!

 

On the Knot Block Static Strength table, the kernmaster fails at 1.7kN. Is this a typo? Looks like there might be a digit missing. Also, when I see experiment data like this I want to know the sample size. Fair enough if it's a single test per combination, but I'd like to know.

 

On the Remote Anchoring flow chart step 4 asks "Is the throwline set against the strongest part of the anchor?". This would hugely and unnecessarily limit line placement options: surely you mean "...sufficiently strong part of the anchor"? I can see that this might be nit-picking, but if this is to function like a best-practice standard I think it is important that the user can follow the process literally.

 

One more criticism, and I really do hate myself for mentioning something so petty, is where you use pseudo-equations like "Force = Branch Angle + Lever Angle + Mass" etc. Since you are dealing with physics and actual numbers elsewhere in the article, I personally would much prefer such concepts (valid and useful as they are) more like "Force -> Branch Angle , Lever Angle , Mass" or some other way that is clearly not an equation.

 

Hope I haven't offended, trying to be constructive. I certainly learnt some useful stuff skimming through this and will no doubt refer to it again.

yes, it must be a typo. this knot block testing data comes from the second run of breaks we did, not sure how many were broken of the top of my head but for sure it was not 'batch' testing, rather testing the waters of what may seem an unorthodox way of anchoring an arborist system. There are plans to review what we got and delve a little deeper into 1 knot, if memory serves me correct the butterfly and double loop sinnet seemed to have most potential. The former for its shock absorbing potential and the latter for higher overall breaking strength. As little or no data exists for this I wanted to publish what we have so far, ongoing thoughts for sure.

It's an interesting comment, about the 'strongest' or 'sufficiently strong' placement. My motivation is to inspire climbers to not take gambles, I have no quibbles with what you say. If a stronger part of an anchor exists why not put the rope into it? Cutting corners quickly get out of hand, in my experience.

I'm not sure what a pseudo-equation is, I'm interested to hear more about this comment. The first responder, tree-fancier, said something along the same lines, perhaps, he likes science over conjecture, is this what you mean? I like tactility, for me being in a tree is an experience of many things, intellect and spirit.

Thanks for the comments, I hope to look more into the anchor categories based on lever length and angle, I just got this great little tool called a Goniometer, used by physiotherapists to measure how far patients can bend limbs, it's perfect for trees too.

Thanks Ben.

tree-fancier, perhaps filling you in with the context I am writing in would help. Japan has a very young industry and there is a huge movement for technical rigging works right now as there is so much of this work, basically all the trees that cranes can't reach are being cut and there are thousands of them long over due. Now this technical side of what we do is not the whole picture of arboriculture, my work at the moment is creating safety procedure and guidelines for the work on Japan Rail sites, safety follows the boom of technique and hopefully after this Japanese tree workers will become more interested in the science and benefit of amenity arboriculture.

For any SRT nut cases out there....

Eric Whipple and I will run a two day TRT (twin rope technique) workshop in Matsumoto, Nagano, Japan, this November. Of course this is a long way to go but it is an interesting and beautiful place and this is a one-of-a-kind workshop. We have one international customer who will visit and work at the Maruichi site for a couple of days after the workshop, I can extend this offer to you too.

Send any questions too: [email protected]

Many thanks

Paul

The Wooden Hand | workshop

Hi all - My new article has been uploaded to ODSK's homepage. You can separate the Japanese and English version, hopefully makes it a little easier to read.

Safe Anchor Choice

Thanks .

Alpine Butterfly tied and blocked against a ring and ring offers a fair amount of absorption too.

I dunno why people assume a screamer is needed for SRT though, it never comes up with DdRT systems which are much more static due to the rope being doubled over.

If you are anchoring properly and slack tending properly then you don't need a screamer.

I bought it. Hours of technical know-how, it's crazy, SRT seems to have endless possibilities. Ben 'Minty' Rose is name checked for his retrievable re-direct knot ! Nice one Lawrence !!

with the outer core broken it would not reduce the strength massively.

 

I would agree with steve that that amount of damage would probably not happened from pulling it up 70 ft.

 

was there any ropes running around the canopy.

 

sorry im not an srt climber so not sure of your set up and how it works.

 

glad your safe

Dude, please be careful about saying such things. That rope is severely damaged and has lost easily half its strength. It wouldn't take much to finish ripping the cover clean and sending it whizzing down the core. I have seen this kind of damage from retrieving a pinto anchor, seems like it may be a common flaw.

Thanks Sam.

Thanks Mr Fox !

Try this one, should be OK now.