New product for Figure 9 users

**GrizzlyAdams** · 09-11-2007, 17:42

Originally Posted by Dutch

...

Some of the posts sound like my ground dwelling friends....I don't wanna fall....

I don't want to fall!

Grizz the coward

**Nest** · 09-11-2007, 17:53

Originally Posted by GrizzlyAdams

I don't want to fall!

Grizz the coward

A lot of faith in their setup. Fall from that and you might not walk away.

**Dutch** · 09-11-2007, 18:04

I don't want to fall!

Grizz the coward

Griz point well made

**GrizzlyAdams** · 09-11-2007, 18:13

Originally Posted by Cerberus

A lot of faith in their setup. Fall from that and you might not walk away.

well it kind of takes the fun out of the picture, but it's what came to mind thinking about not wanting to fall.... Blackbishop gave me a nice price for 3 Potomac underquilts when I was gearing up for me and two sons to hike the AT in the Whites this summer, and I promised him I'd take some photos highlighting his very nice quilts. So this was posed. The crazy one in the family, QuantumCat, is actually in the middle one, long enough for the photoshoot. And you better believe I hung from those lines and gave them the bounce test before he got in. Not that it would have occurred to him to do that---20 years old, and immortal. The kind of guy who'd take my Subarau Outback up to 140 miles/hour on the Interstate, if it would go that fast. I sorta suspect he's tried

Grizz

**schrochem** · 09-11-2007, 20:21

A vice helped quite a bit.....
Attached you'll see the final product from Rapt's CAD design. My scale here is a bit quirky but it's in the 3-4g range(EDIT officially 6g).
I did the bouncy test and laid in the hammock for awhile and it held fine.
I wanted to tie a half hitch but forgot....
I also tried something new (to me) and made a tube from the owf 1" webbing. I'm sure others have tried that but it doesn't seem to distribute the weight of the line like I'd hoped....
The design definitely works.
Was I apprehensive about laying in the hammock?...yes.
I think there is potential in a few different directions here.
I think there is a way to minimize webbing and yet come up with a solid adjustable solution. I just want enough webbing to protect the tree.

**GrizzlyAdams** · 09-11-2007, 21:16

Originally Posted by schrochem

A vice helped quite a bit.....
Attached you'll see the final product from Rapt's CAD design. My scale here is a bit quirky but it's in the 3-4g range.
I did the bouncy test and laid in the hammock for awhile and it held fine.
I wanted to tie a half hitch but forgot....
I also tried something new (to me) and made a tube from the owf 1" webbing. I'm sure others have tried that but it doesn't seem to distribute the weight of the line like I'd hoped....
The design definitely works.
Was I apprehensive about laying in the hammock?...yes.
I think there is potential in a few different directions here.
I think there is a way to minimize webbing and yet come up with a solid adjustable solution. I just want enough webbing to protect the tree.

jest saying the obvious. I specialize in that!

having the full width of the webbing around the tree (without channeling a line) will distribute the pull over a wider area, be easier on the tree.

you can use the full width of the webbing around the tree, and tie cord on the ends of the webbing. You'll need maybe a foot and a half more webbing on each side...about a foot to get past the tree and about 6 inches to bend back into a bight for a double sheet bend.

but you knew that.

You have the tools to cut aluminum???

The other night I studied the hitch WBG showed, and toyed with a length of cord and a figure-9 doing it. It seemed to me that the cord was looped over one leg of the "anchor", and then the standing end is looped, twisted and plunked over the other leg to secure the knot. Now most of the time when I've used a figure-9, after I do the first loop (over the leg w/o teeth) the standing end is under tension, and I hitch off the working end over the other leg. In fact one can do the same sort of bight-and-twist but with the standing end---which is not under tension. Any of this making sense to you? Can you / are you doing the last bit of hitch with an end under tension? I understand that an empty hammock doesn't create much tension...I guess I was wondering if hitching off the standing end rather than the working end worked, mattered, etc.

dang that thing is small

Grizz

**schrochem** · 09-11-2007, 22:07

Originally Posted by GrizzlyAdams

jest saying the obvious. I specialize in that!

having the full width of the webbing around the tree (without channeling a line) will distribute the pull over a wider area, be easier on the tree.

you can use the full width of the webbing around the tree, and tie cord on the ends of the webbing. You'll need maybe a foot and a half more webbing on each side...about a foot to get past the tree and about 6 inches to bend back into a bight for a double sheet bend.

but you knew that.

You have the tools to cut aluminum???

The other night I studied the hitch WBG showed, and toyed with a length of cord and a figure-9 doing it. It seemed to me that the cord was looped over one leg of the "anchor", and then the standing end is looped, twisted and plunked over the other leg to secure the knot. Now most of the time when I've used a figure-9, after I do the first loop (over the leg w/o teeth) the standing end is under tension, and I hitch off the working end over the other leg. In fact one can do the same sort of bight-and-twist but with the standing end---which is not under tension. Any of this making sense to you? Can you / are you doing the last bit of hitch with an end under tension? I understand that an empty hammock doesn't create much tension...I guess I was wondering if hitching off the standing end rather than the working end worked, mattered, etc.

dang that thing is small

Grizz

Yea, I figured it wasn't going to work well, but I wanted to try it nonetheless.
I work the aluminum, I used a drill, a hacksaw, and some files. The thing that helped me was a vice to hold it (I've been meaning to get one of those for years.) So it wasn't really hard to do.

I think I understand what your saying but shortly after reading it and trying to relax after a night of DIY binging, I 'think' there is another way.
Notice how I used the hole end of the anchor. I looped it through the main hammock line. That way it stays on the line and doesn't get lost.
Now if I take the end of the line and pass it through huggers, I attached to the tree but not secure yet. If I had a loop on the end of that line. I could just secure it over the anchor (well one with mor pronounced hooks. To adjust hammock, I would slide the anchor up and down the main line.
I think that would work......

**GrizzlyAdams** · 09-11-2007, 22:37

I studied that picture before but wasn't sure which line was going where.

but all it appears to be now is a full turn 'round the hole and away. I guess on the one hand I'm not surprised it held for you...that's a pretty tight turn....but I wouldn't hang over any rocks doing that.

On the other hand, I do have recent experience working an SMC ring up and down the rope after being attached with a lark's head. Doesn't go anywhere under tension, but does like to stay tight after that. Someone mentioned using a clove hitch, which I've also tried. That holds under tension, but loosens up more easily and can be worked up and down the rope. The really nice thing about the lark's head over the clove hitch is that you can put the ring on the rope without threading any any loose end through it.

Grizz

**schrochem** · 09-11-2007, 22:39

so I realize a pic is better than me trying to explain something.

This is just a mock up but similar to what I just did.

To the left would be the hammock.
Line closest going off to the right would go to through the huggers and back (top line).
I had a loop on the end of the line and just did a lark's head around the anchor.
This was easy to adjust by 'sliding' the piece up and down the line closest in the pic.
With weight the line grabs tight around the loop, but is it secure??? I have no idea. Thoughts?

**schrochem** · 09-11-2007, 22:47

Originally Posted by GrizzlyAdams

I studied that picture before but wasn't sure which line was going where.

but all it appears to be now is a full turn 'round the hole and away. I guess on the one hand I'm not surprised it held for you...that's a pretty tight turn....but I wouldn't hang over any rocks doing that.

On the other hand, I do have recent experience working an SMC ring up and down the rope after being attached with a lark's head. Doesn't go anywhere under tension, but does like to stay tight after that. Someone mentioned using a clove hitch, which I've also tried. That holds under tension, but loosens up more easily and can be worked up and down the rope. The really nice thing about the lark's head over the clove hitch is that you can put the ring on the rope without threading any any loose end through it.

Grizz

Grizz,
I was just posting my latest findings while you were writing this up. I see you've answered my once around loop. I tried to make it a clove hitch (just twice around right?) and it won't work on this model because the hole's too small. But I did try it on a larger hole and it seem to move well enough. Not sure how that would work with a hammock on one end though.
Maybe I'll have time to try it out in the morning.