Question of Comfort

[JaxHiker]

Oh man, you got it bad. Laying awake at night thinking about the forums!

It didn't last long.

It may be the Hennessy that you aren't comfortable in. I know a few folks that just didn't like the feel of the Hennessy, but were able to find hammocks that they did like. Alas, some never find comfort. Poor tortured souls.

Actually I do think I've figured out how to sleep comfortably. I wouldn't be surprised to find something even more comfortable, but for now I'm able to get a good night's rest. When funds are available I might try something else.

[Youngblood]

I'm a long time Backpacker, relatively new Hammock hanger.. I've been out in my HH Ultralite Ex. A Sym a few times, and cannot quite get the hang ( no pun) of sleeping comfortably. Here's the problem. I have this overwhelming senation that my feet are always above my head. No matter how far up I try to position myself, I always get back to the center/middle & feel like I'm sleeping uphill... Is this unusual? Is it a "set up" issue? Am I just imagining?

I'm hoping there is an easy solution so that I might join the ranks of those who truly "love" their hammock.

I appreciate any input from new & veteran hangers. Thanks.

You may feel like your feet are above your head because they are when you get in your hammock. If you don't center your hammock between the two trees it can fool you.

[Schneiderlein]

You may feel like your feet are above your head because they are when you get in your hammock. If you don't center your hammock between the two trees it can fool you.

Nice graphic, Youngblood. I noticed this happening and started tying my hammock off-center on purpose to keep my feet higher, it just feels more comfortable to me that way. I am wondering how what you illustrated is impacted by a structural ridgeline and stretch (or lack thereof) in the suspension. I guess my questions is whether a structural ridgeline and low-stretch suspension cord can eliminate some or all of the effect you illustrated.

[Youngblood]

Nice graphic, Youngblood. I noticed this happening and started tying my hammock off-center on purpose to keep my feet higher, it just feels more comfortable to me that way. I am wondering how what you illustrated is impacted by a structural ridgeline and stretch (or lack thereof) in the suspension. I guess my questions is whether a structural ridgeline and low-stretch suspension cord can eliminate some or all of the effect you illustrated.

Thanks for the compliment. Basically the center of gravity seeks the center point between the two trees and you tend to slide towards it in the hammock. If the centering of the hammock and the height of the foot end versus the height of the head end keeps you centered relative to the hammock, all is good and you stay where you want to be. Neither a structural ridgeline or low-stretch suspension cord will change that.

[Schneiderlein]

Thanks for the compliment. Basically the center of gravity seeks the center point between the two trees and you tend to slide towards it in the hammock. If the centering of the hammock and the height of the foot end versus the height of the head end keeps you centered relative to the hammock, all is good and you stay where you want to be. Neither a structural ridgeline or low-stretch suspension cord will change that.

Maybe I'm being thick, but I can't picture it. It seems to me that if there is a structural ridgeline and no-stretch suspension cord, I could move one tree further away and keep the angle of the suspension rope the same by tying off higher to the tree without affecting the lay. Without the structural ridgeline, what you say makes perfect sense to me, but I can't picture it with a ridgeline, unless the suspension cord stretches.

I have to make some sketches. What program are you using?

[slowhike]

I'm thinking that what he may be referring to is this...
When you picture a person from top of head to bottom of feet, the center of of the weight mass is not in the center of those two points.
Most of the weight is in the torso, & that's what wants to slide to the lowest point.
So the feet are farther from the center of the main weight than the head, & therefore the feet are more likely to end up closer to the foot of the hammock unless the foot end is slightly higher to compensate.

At least that's were my thoughts were taking me... but if that's not what he meant... then never mind

BTW... someone else could no doubt do a better job of explaining what I just tried to explain<G>

[Youngblood]

Maybe I'm being thick, but I can't picture it. It seems to me that if there is a structural ridgeline and no-stretch suspension cord, I could move one tree further away and keep the angle of the suspension rope the same by tying off higher to the tree without affecting the lay. Without the structural ridgeline, what you say makes perfect sense to me, but I can't picture it with a ridgeline, unless the suspension cord stretches.

I have to make some sketches. What program are you using?

I used Visio software for the sketches.

But you might do better setting up a scale model. In the simplest form, are we not tying a cord between two points, attaching a mass to it, and watching gravity move it to the lowest point it can?

Distributing that mass along some length is somewhat secondary as is the stretch of some segments of the chord and the structural ridgeline across part of it. Once you get the basic model down, it doesn't seem like the secondary parts would be too problematic to add.

[golfhiker]

A quick thanks to all who jumped in & offered good suggestions. I intend to practice in the backyard & work on the various tips/configurations, etc. till I'm comfortable with my hang. I'm confident this can work!

[Schneiderlein]

In the simplest form, are we not tying a cord between two points, attaching a mass to it, and watching gravity move it to the lowest point it can?

There is no question in my mind that this applies to a hammock without a ridgeline.

However, it appears to me that a structural ridgeline should somehow prevent this from happening, or reduce the effect. I like to look at the limits and think of shorter and shorter ridgelines, up to the case where the ridgeline length approaches zero. In this case, the mass is no longer able to slide sideways at all. Starting from the zero length ridgeline and increasing its length again, it also seems that a mass can never slide to a point outside the ridgeline (and thus the hammock). Without a ridgeline, it is easy to see how a hammock could be rigged up so far off center that the mass would want to move to a low point outside of the hammock. These considerations lead me to believe that the structural ridgeline should reduce the tendency for one to slide if the suspension is off center.

[koaloha05]

I use a HH with its structural ridgeline. As Youngblood explained with illustrations and words gravity and mass eventually drops you down to some relative centering point with or without a structural ridgeline. The structural ridgeline may or maynot bias this point of equilibrium. Have to remember more suspension line means usually more stretch. So if off center hang even with equal head and foot end hammock height you may end up with the longer suspension end of hammock lower when weighted then add in the bias due to the real gravity center.

I always end up more towards the foot end when I hang centered and level. I'm going to experiment around with increasing in ~3.5" increments the head end of the suspension line to see if it will recenter my body and if it's anymore comfortable. No complaints where I end up now, but maybe there is even a better position.