New product for Figure 9 users

[turk]

I know there are quite a few people here, myself included that really
dig their hammock setup incorporating Nite Ize Figure 9 rope tighteners.

Has everyone seen the new Gen of Figure 9 products?
http://niteize.com/productdetail.php?category_id=29&product_id=157

Now comes with a carabiner on one end. Even more utility, and added
security for people concerned with losing them.

They now also come in black, both new and standard version.
I did search before posting this. I apologize in advance if this is redundant 'old news'.

[slowhike]

no, i had not seen that. i like it!

[FanaticFringer]

Those are pretty cool. Would make an interesting suspension system if it were much, much stronger and bigger.

[warbonnetguy]

yeah, no kidding, the weight limit on the old ones is so small for how beefy they are. they do look pretty solid, i wonder if they are indeed much stronger than stated. has anyone tried to see if it will work for the suspension? they are metal after all.

i think i'll go try.



Those are pretty cool. Would make an interesting suspension system if it were much, much stronger and bigger.

[warbonnetguy]

well i tried it, and it held, i even bounced moderately (would have bounced hard, but i don't want to collapse the celing in my garage). i'll have to ask my fiancee to look and see if it flexes when i bounce, i couldn't see any flex from the hammock.

this is the old fig. 9 rated to 150# and weighing 29 grams.

i used a slightly different wrap than is directed to create more holding power on the line. i definately think a covered line would be best due to those sharp teeth.

i'll post this info on the ring buckle thread too.






i think i'll go try.

[turk]

Man that is good news. How much do you weigh?
If you don't report a failure in the next day or two, I think I will order up
a set of the large carabiner version and try it out.

[warbonnetguy]

Turk,
just did some more testing, i filed the bottom three teeth off the 9, so it is just a v-slot, my line is all the way at the bottom of the notch now, and the line can now run freely without getting snagged on the teeth. (the way i tie goes through the teeth first). this may or may not be the best way(no teeth at all), but it still holds, the advised wrap won't even hold 20# with teeth removed.

i started by just rounding the teeth a bit, this seemed good b/c the rope in the notch alone would still hold the unweighted hammock, nice b/c you could go back and forth once or twice adjusting it to get the ends right, and then lock it off when you're done, but even with the round teeth you have to pull it out of the slot to make an adjustment, which isn't that big of a deal, but i wanted to see if it would still hold with no teeth so i filed them the rest of the way off, and now the rope pulls freely through the notch for adjustment purposes and still holds when wraped, but won't hold the weight of the unweighted hammock unless the wrap is finished, so a person might have to wrap and unwrap a couple of times to make any adjustments.

the more i think about it, it's probably fastest to file them so that they don't damage the rope, but leave enough so the line in the notch alone holds the unweighted hammock, and just pull from notch to adjust, that way you only tie the wrap once, when you're done adjusting, instead of once for every adjustment.

don't even bother with the caribiner 9, it's twice as heavy. i connected the regular 9 to one end of a tree strap via 6" of cord.

i'll probably try this on one end of my suspension to see how much i like it compared to my regular knot.

160#

pics on the way.

[slowhike]

hey, good info guys. keep us filled in on that deal. sounds interesting.

[warbonnetguy]

hey slowhike, what do you think about moving this to the ring buckle thread, i've been double posting this there.



hey, good info guys. keep us filled in on that deal. sounds interesting.

[slowhike]

hey slowhike, what do you think about moving this to the ring buckle thread, i've been double posting this there.

i think i could do that, but maybe it would be better to direct people reading the ring buckle thread over to this thread w/ a link.
that way we could keep the different adjustment systems somewhat separated, even though we've started talking about using the fig 9 as a hammock suspension.
what do you & the others think?
of course that thread has become as much about the cc buckle, etc as the ring buckles???<g>

[Shadowmoss]

Hmmmm. Use the biner attached to the 9 to click into the biner on the hammock webbing around the tree, and the use the 9 to attach the tarp? No wrapping around the tree for the tarp line, and still not a lot of interaction with the weight in the hammock affecting the tarp? May try this at the hangout....

(I can't seem to get this edit stuff figured out. If I have 3 edits, I'll fix it)

After thinking about it a few minutes more, I wouldn't be able to put the tarp up first this way and still have the webbing attached to the hammock.

[warbonnetguy]

yeah, that's what i thought too, there were o-rings, d-rings, cc buckles, those plastic rope cleats, and now 9's. more like "adjustable suspension thread" rather than ring buckles only.




i think i could do that, but maybe it would be better to direct people reading the ring buckle thread over to this thread w/ a link.
that way we could keep the different adjustment systems somewhat separated, even though we've started talking about using the fig 9 as a hammock suspension.
what do you & the others think?
of course that thread has become as much about the cc buckle, etc as the ring buckles???<g>

[warbonnetguy]

ok, here's some pics and more info,

tried the small 9's. i gave them the bounce test, they did not fail, which is suprising, although as you can see from the pic, they did bend quite a bit, what i think is interesting is that rather than bend open, they bent closed, so much so that i had to pry them open with pliers to remove the rope. i then bent them back to the deformed position for the picture.

these things are TINY, which makes me think the big ones are plenty strong.

here's a possible setup with each end of the hammock consisting of a 6' tree strap and 8' of line. (14' total length @ each end)

12' of 1" owf polyester tree straps=74g
16' of 3mm yale vectrus 12=29g
large regular fig. 9=31g x 2=62g

total=165g/5.9 oz.

the different wrap holds alot more securely than the one they show on their website, with their wrap, it's the teeth that hold the rope, which can't be good. i didn't try their wrap at all, just assumed it would shred my rope. after i filed the teeth all the way off the nine, i tied their wrap, and it slipped with just a pull from my arm (10-20#), whereas the new wrap still holds nicely with no slipping.

i attached the nine to one end of the tree strap with a double sheet bend, and the nine to the other end of the short rope with a clove hitch.

[warbonnetguy]

hey turk, i cut off quite a bit of unnecessary metal. a set of 2 can be about an oz lighter.

introducing the fig. 9 especial

[turk]

you are my new hero.

Way to take one for the team buddy. Anyone crazy enough to
play lab rat and be the first to hang from the mini figure 9's is
top notch in my books. Nice pics.

I am still going to order the carabiner type large figure 9's as I can
see some multi-use potential. thanks for showing us all how its
done. I will also try the regular large though I weigh a bit more,
I don't think I am worried.

[Peter_pan]

ok, here's some pics and more info,

tried the small 9's. i gave them the bounce test, they did not fail, which is suprising, although as you can see from the pic, they did bend quite a bit, what i think is interesting is that rather than bend open, they bent closed, so much so that i had to pry them open with pliers to remove the rope. i then bent them back to the deformed position for the picture.

these things are TINY, which makes me think the big ones are plenty strong.

here's a possible setup with each end of the hammock consisting of a 6' tree strap and 8' of line. (14' total length @ each end)

12' of 1" owf polyester tree straps=74g
16' of 3mm yale vectrus 12=29g
large regular fig. 9=31g x 2=62g

total=165g/5.9 oz.

the different wrap holds alot more securely than the one they show on their website, with their wrap, it's the teeth that hold the rope, which can't be good. i didn't try their wrap at all, just assumed it would shred my rope. after i filed the teeth all the way off the nine, i tied their wrap, and it slipped with just a pull from my arm (10-20#), whereas the new wrap still holds nicely with no slipping.

i attached the nine to one end of the tree strap with a double sheet bend, and the nine to the other end of the short rope with a clove hitch.

Warbonnetguy,

Your wrap in the pictures is different from the manufactures wrap..... do you see some extra value in your wrap approach ? ..... is it possible that your version accounts for any or all of the figure 9 distrotion?

Pan

[Redtail]

I'm confused. Doesn't the fact that you filed the teeth off and are tying a knot instead of the adjustable wrap negate the entire point of using a Figure 9? Couldn't you do the same thing with a simple chain link, ring, or biner?

[warbonnetguy]

redtail,
look at the pics above, the new wrap is still a wrap, not a knot, the pics show all the steps. step 1, 2, and the finished wrap after i let go of step 2. in fact, it takes no longer to do than the suggested wrap. instead of the teeth biting the rope, the last part of the wrap bites its own slack. the more weight applied to the hammock, the harder it bights on itself.

it could not be done with a biner, try it and see. i filed the teeth off, because they
damage the rope and are no longer necessary with the new wrap. this wrap is just as adjustable if not more so (rope can slide during adjustments if the teeth are gone)


I'm confused. Doesn't the fact that you filed the teeth off and are tying a knot instead of the adjustable wrap negate the entire point of using a Figure 9? Couldn't you do the same thing with a simple chain link, ring, or biner?

[warbonnetguy]

pan,
yeah, mine is diff. i didn't even try theirs, i just assumed it would shred my rope if the wrap slipped even a bit, which i think there is a good chance of slippage with that wrap. it just doesn't look like it has much holding power, but as i have partially filed the teeth off mine, the suggested wrap no longer works, which shows that it is just really the teeth that make that wrap work,and since i can't, it will have to be up to someone else to try and see if it works with the teeth and the old wrap.

my wrap bights onto its own slack, the heavier the load, the harder it bights the slack, i'm sure there is some point at which it will slip, but it held moderate bouncing from little ole me (160).

couldn't say about the deformation, thats an interesting thought. i did notice that the load is comming off the non-tooth side of the device in both wraps, so i thought forces on the device would be similar, but who knows. someone will just have to fold up some old air mats and ccf pads and try it.

did you see the fig nine especial? the top tie in point is aligned closer to the stem than if tied through the origional loop. since its closer to the stem, there is less leverage action on that joint, kinda like grabbing the base of a branch when you climb a tree as opposed to grabbing farther out the branch, so i think tieing it there is actually stronger, but looking at the mini, it seems it's the tooth side that would fail, not the rest of the device, although, the mini didn't really fail, it just bent.

now that i think about it, if the regular wrap did not slip, the toothed arm would likely bend 90 deg. different (front to back depending on direction of wrap), not in towards the stem. this is probably why it didn't break, because it hit the stem and kinda stopped.

somebody try it and see.




Warbonnetguy,

Your wrap in the pictures is different from the manufactures wrap..... do you see some extra value in your wrap approach ? ..... is it possible that your version accounts for any or all of the figure 9 distrotion?

Pan

[Redtail]

redtail,
look at the pics above, the new wrap is still a wrap, not a knot, the pics show all the steps. step 1, 2, and the finished wrap after i let go of step 2. in fact, it takes no longer to do than the suggested wrap. instead of the teeth biting the rope, the last part of the wrap bites its own slack. the more weight applied to the hammock, the harder it bights on itself.

it could not be done with a biner, try it and see. i filed the teeth off, because they
damage the rope and are no longer necessary with the new wrap. this wrap is just as adjustable if not more so (rope can slide during adjustments if the teeth are gone)

Thanks Warbonnet. I just meant the whole concept in general, I didn't mean apply your same wrap to a round connector. Just maybe an adjustable hitch instead that you'd lock after adjusting. Wouldn't something like a Munter hitch on a biner bite onto itself in the same fashion? I need to go try some instead of thinking out loud. But I see how your's is simpler and specific in utilizing the W shape.

[warbonnetguy]

well, it is a hitch i guess, but the fact that it is not closed (the device) like a ring means you can wrap it in 1 second rather than feeding the rope through the closed ring. a biner is not closed, but i know of no hitch that would work with rings or biners, that would be anywhere near this quick and adjustable. a clove hitch would hold, but is a pain to adjust, the munter can be adjusted easily (thats why they use it for belay/rappel emergency), but it is force from the belay/brake hand that locks the hitch, for a hammock, you would have to tie a seperate knott to perform this "lock off" function, and each time you adjusted it, you would have to untie the lock-off knot and then retie.

since you would be using tree straps, you couldn't leave it attached to the hammock line, only the straps, which means you would have to re-tie the hitch and the lock off knot each time you set it up. with the new hitch, only the hitch, no lock off.

so i guess ring buckles or cc buckles are faster than the nine, but only by the amount of time it takes to wrap the nine, like a second for each end, but for that matter i can tie my single sheet bend w/double bight directly to the webbing in about 2 seconds longer per end than it takes to adjust ring buckles. in fact, i bet the total time difference between ring adjustment and sheetbend adjustment is no more than a few seconds if you know how tie one quick, but sometimes it's just fun to play with hardware.




Thanks Warbonnet. I just meant the whole concept in general, I didn't mean apply your same wrap to a round connector. Just maybe an adjustable hitch instead that you'd lock after adjusting. Wouldn't something like a Munter hitch on a biner bite onto itself in the same fashion? I need to go try some instead of thinking out loud. But I see how your's is simpler and specific in utilizing the W shape.

[warbonnetguy]

hey pan, went to home depot and picked up some steel rings to try the garda hitch someone on the other thread was talking about, but i picked up another mini 9.

used the suggested wrap. it bent the exact same way, pinching onto the rope in the process aqain. got no slippage, but the rope was being pinched. anyway, 20 moderate bounces and it broke right at the bottom of the stem, but it broke on the opposite side of the bend. it was the tooth side that bent, but the failure was in the form of a tear on the opposite side of the bottom section, the smooth "hook"

[Peter_pan]

hey pan, went to home depot and picked up some steel rings to try the garda hitch someone on the other thread was talking about, but i picked up another mini 9.

used the suggested wrap. it bent the exact same way, pinching onto the rope in the process aqain. got no slippage, but the rope was being pinched. anyway, 20 moderate bounces and it broke right at the bottom of the stem, but it broke on the opposite side of the bend. it was the tooth side that bent, but the failure was in the form of a tear on the opposite side of the bottom section, the smooth "hook"


Warbonnetguy,

Thanks for the update....


Seems to me that the figure 9s for suspension has too many issues.... first, it is way beyond manufacture specs use.... Second, is the issue of rope damage, thus use on a long trip could also be catastrophic.... Third, the figure 9 bending could also present real disassembly issues in the field..... Fourth, metal fatigue at normal temps definately needs futher testing for issues at extremes of temp range.

alternate wrap is cool idea though, could help reduce teeth wear issue.

Pan

[warbonnetguy]

yeah, i'm guessing the 150# is a safe working load, which means the breaking strength should be quite a bit higher. maybe someone knows how to figure this out?

if you file off the teeth a bit, even if you just round them some, the chance of rope damage is a non-issue.

the fact that the mini held as much as it did says alot. the large is 10 x heavier. and it's stem is proportionally bigger as well.

haven't thought about heat and cold, but i've never heard of the strength of aluminum being affected by normal outside temps.

i'm not telling everyone it's safe, just that it passed the bounce test in my garage. anyone should certainly test it themselves with their own setup and bodyweight before using in the field, i do feel that it may indeed be plenty strong for use, although only time and use will tell.



Warbonnetguy,

Thanks for the update....


Seems to me that the figure 9s for suspension has too many issues.... first, it is way beyond manufacture specs use.... Second, is the issue of rope damage, thus use on a long trip could also be catastrophic.... Third, the figure 9 bending could also present real disassembly issues in the field..... Fourth, metal fatigue at normal temps definately needs futher testing for issues at extremes of temp range.

alternate wrap is cool idea though, could help reduce teeth wear issue.

Pan

[turk]

Just came home from work with a fresh pair of large standard 9's.
Will get out the file and do some bounce tests in the backyard tonight.
Let you know how it goes. I am a fair bit heavier at 185lbs.

[turk]

http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/showimage.php?i=1514&catid=newimages&cutoffdate=1


Fig 9's Large Smooth are completely bomb proof ! :cool:
I secured up my HHULBA in record time. In the first 2 pics
I used some emery cloth to only subdue the teeth on the Figure 9's.
After only short testing tonight, I saw some signs of abrasion.

After bouncing and swinging in the hammock, and having my
daughter pile in for a total of aprox 230lbs, I have absolutely no
concerns or reservations with the large Fig 9's. I also tried Warbonnets
backwards wrap because it seemed good and strong but still absurdly
fast and simple.

In the 2nd pic, I tried using the Fig 9 across a larger
axis. I have no idea if this would be stronger or weaker

In the third pic, I have now used emery cloth to completely remove
the Fig 9 teeth and also round out the 'V' groove on both sides.
Now I have no fears at all of abrasion. And to think I almost cut
my lines and went buckles and webbing. eek!
This is way lighter, and easily as fast to adjust.
Now to shave more weight and make them into Warbonnets
Figure 9 Special Smooth's (F9SS will become the new buzzword acronym)

This is one sweet setup.! Webbing is out, Fig 9's are in :D
spread the word.

[schrochem]

Good to hear Turk.
I was thinking about all this on the way home
I like the idea of less webbing.
I was coming up with some crazy ideas but this is by far the simplest.
Looking back at WBG's F9SS :))) it's really just a simple anchor type shape.
If strength is questionable I'm sure a machine shop could make one rather easily. I might ask a machinist I know about it...
But I want to go get one of these because I like the idea of less webbing and more rope.
Good find fellas

[warbonnetguy]

Webbing is out, Fig 9's are in :D
spread the word.

word,

glad you tried them.

i was thinking of drilling holes in strategic spots to reduce even more weight than just cutting off unnecessary parts. looks like the way u use them, you might have to leave more metal intact, but you're saving weight by not using tree straps, don't let a ranger catch you doing that. :D

what is emery cloth?

[warbonnetguy]

yeah, find out about it, it could be way lighter than my current one. the "flag" looking piece @ the top could be completely removed if there was a tiny eyelit at the top of the stem to tie the attachment cord to, and the stem could be shortened a bit as well, and the anchor hooks could probably be made a bit shorter than the factory one if they went up a little steeper. then you could drill some holes too. i bet you could get one down to 9-10 grams without sacrificing much if any strength (just be careful where you drill those holes).



Good to hear Turk.
I was thinking about all this on the way home
I like the idea of less webbing.
I was coming up with some crazy ideas but this is by far the simplest.
Looking back at WBG's F9SS :))) it's really just a simple anchor type shape.
If strength is questionable I'm sure a machine shop could make one rather easily. I might ask a machinist I know about it...
But I want to go get one of these because I like the idea of less webbing and more rope.
Good find fellas

[GrizzlyAdams]

Fig 9's Large Smooth are completely bomb proof ! :cool:


Good report turk.

"Who's Next" (where "Behind Blue Eyes" appears) is one of my favorite classic rock albums.

Grizz (behind green eyes)

[turk]

I was rethinking those new style biner Fig 9's. The only reason I would want
them would be to pitch my ENO single. But then I got rethinking the standard
ones, and they would be simple to modify for an ideal 1/8" spectra line suspension
used with the eno-1.

What do you think of this? ya I know I know ... treehuggers issue aside,
its a sleek minimalist setup and takes no time to cut down the Fig 9.
Also shaves the weight of the ENO slap straps and eliminates any biners.

http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/1/3/7/Fig_9_ultralight.JPG

btw - Warbonnet emery cloth is simply sand cloth, or grit cloth. Like sand paper, only more flexible and durable.

[schrochem]

Turk, it looks like that 'hook' might be a little precarious and subject to being torn off. All that force might just bend it back and fail.

[schrochem]

All this figure nine stuff got me thinking.
It seems like there are a few things we'd like to accomplish.
1)lightweight with use of just a little webbing for the tree and the rest rope.
2)easily adjustable and to tie off.

Of course the lightest combination is to use tree huggers and cord with a HH lashing, but that isn't that easy to adjust.

After seeing WBGs hacked up 9, it looks like a pretty simple piece. The climbing world has stuff like that but it's for bigger ropes and is typically heavier.

Someone HAS to of tried this before but I had an idea to accomodate the list above. it would require rope, tree huggers and a biner.
Rope would come off the hammock (like the HHs have), tree huggers round the tree, a loop of cord attached to one end of the tree hugger is fed through the other end and hugger hugs tree :)
But somehow we need to connect the two bits of rope and make the distance from hammock to tree adjustable.
How about using a prussik or kleimheist around the hammock rope the using a biner to clip onto the loop from the tree hugger?
To adjust, you just slide the prussik up and down the hammock support rope to where you want it.
So would that hold?
Besides the "f9ss" anyone else have an idea to fill that gap to adjust length??

[turk]

I don't think its going to fail. These things are way overbuilt. The tabs you wrap around in the 'W' shape are smaller.
I think in tinkering, I just proved it completely irrelevant. To use the system I have drawn in paint, you would want the strength
of the new model, gated carabiner version to prevent just what schrochem mentions.

However .... it is hard to beat WBG's previous trimmed down idea. His is simply lighter, and
serves the same purpose. The only decision that would need to be made is
if you are going to cut the eye off the Fig 9, or leave it on.
Here are some more pics to show my previous idea illustrated in paint, is really moot unless using the
new gated carabiner version.
http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/1/3/7/Fig_9_ENO1_original.jpg
The standard knot on the ENO single can sit in the groove behind the Fig 9 eye as in above pic.
Or you can undo it and simply thread the whole Fig 9 to the ENO 1 stock cord.


Warbonnets wrap IS the best thing I have tried so far. And his idea
of cutting off the eye entirely is certainly tempting.



Of course the lightest combination is to use tree huggers and cord with a HH lashing, but that isn't that easy to adjust.


I don't use any webbing or treehuggers... so I think that saved weight for me anyways, negates the addition of 2 F9SS

[schrochem]

That's it, I'm picking up some of the large ones tommorrow...
I just have the little ones and WBG has done that testing...

Hey Turk, starting the thread led to a VERY cool discovery, it's all good!

[warbonnetguy]

i couldn't help it, just wanted to see how light i could get it.

also switched the direction of the wrap so the load comes off the small notch, which causes the device to tilt less, and have less leverage on that joint since it's closer to the stem.

i gave it the bounce test, it was kinda scary:D but it's still in one piece.

the bit i used to drill the hole for the rope to go through was 9/64 i think. used a few smaller bits for the other holes on the stem.

[turk]

That is awesome!!! -- but yes scary. Easily refined though!
If you drill a series of tight holes and make a slot, you could keep a little more
meat on that one end.


Brilliant.

Now you've made me want to go pick up a scrap of plate aluminum and make
a 'T' shaped device based on your heavy mod.

[schrochem]

Hey WBG, who needs a machinist? :D
Heck you simplified it so much you could buy a piece of Titanium and make it yourself...

[schrochem]

All this figure nine stuff got me thinking.
It seems like there are a few things we'd like to accomplish.
1)lightweight with use of just a little webbing for the tree and the rest rope.
2)easily adjustable and to tie off.

Of course the lightest combination is to use tree huggers and cord with a HH lashing, but that isn't that easy to adjust.

After seeing WBGs hacked up 9, it looks like a pretty simple piece. The climbing world has stuff like that but it's for bigger ropes and is typically heavier.

Someone HAS to of tried this before but I had an idea to accomodate the list above. it would require rope, tree huggers and a biner.
Rope would come off the hammock (like the HHs have), tree huggers round the tree, a loop of cord attached to one end of the tree hugger is fed through the other end and hugger hugs tree :)
But somehow we need to connect the two bits of rope and make the distance from hammock to tree adjustable.
How about using a prussik or kleimheist around the hammock rope the using a biner to clip onto the loop from the tree hugger?
To adjust, you just slide the prussik up and down the hammock support rope to where you want it.
So would that hold?
Besides the "f9ss" anyone else have an idea to fill that gap to adjust length??

I was in bed, but the thinking kept going....
I remember seeing the Bachmann knot and the autoblock knot.
Since there would be a clip of some kind, it could work.
But I doubt it could get lighter than 8g of a hacked up 9 :)

[warbonnetguy]

don't think any of the friction knots would work on thin line.



I was in bed, but the thinking kept going....
I remember seeing the Bachmann knot and the autoblock knot.
Since there would be a clip of some kind, it could work.
But I doubt it could get lighter than 8g of a hacked up 9 :)

[warbonnetguy]

i don't follow, slot, which end, what?

yeah, and your diagram looks like it would be about the fastest way for a no strap adjustable suspension. you could even tie it permanently to the hammock. doesn't look like the hook is necessary.



That is awesome!!! -- but yes scary. Easily refined though!
If you drill a series of tight holes and make a slot, you could keep a little more
meat on that one end.

[warbonnetguy]

now that's what it would ideally be made of!!! stronger and lighter. 5g?



Hey WBG, who needs a machinist? :D
Heck you simplified it so much you could buy a piece of Titanium and make it yourself...

[turk]

I am thinking, pick up a scrap of plate aluminum. say 1/4" thick
and duplicate your hacked down design ... but like this...

http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/1/3/7/Figure_9_mod_T.JPG

The trunk of the 'T' where your index finger is ... leave more material there for
securing the other end of line.

[schrochem]

now that's what it would ideally be made of!!! stronger and lighter. 5g?


Okay, my wife is getting pissed because I keep waking her up when I get out of bed.....
BUT I thought of this (http://www.berkeleypoint.com/products/titanium/threading_plate.html)

Turn it sideways from how it's displayed.
Do you think there is enough to grab the rope like the V does?
I bet that sucker weighs nothing.
Okay...off to bed again.

[turk]

Okay, my wife is getting pissed because I keep waking her up when I get out of bed.....
BUT I thought of this (http://www.berkeleypoint.com/products/titanium/threading_plate.html)

Turn it sideways from how it's displayed.
Do you think there is enough to grab the rope like the V does?
I bet that sucker weighs nothing.
Okay...off to bed again.

Bingo!

You got it.

Use the same wrap warbonnet has for the 'W' side of the
Fig 9. But on both sides of your titanium buckle. No mods necessary.

That could work!

http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/1/3/7/Fig_9_full_adjustable.jpg
Fully adjustable from either direction and it would be stable! Not trying to pivot on the
long axis like the odd shaped Figure 9.
Solid titanium
and only 10 bucks.
Also must go to bed. Wife really pissed to hear a dremmel tool running
this hour of the night :eek: :D

[warbonnetguy]

yeah, that looks like it would be even lighter, but how would you create the twinke hole?




I am thinking, pick up a scrap of plate aluminum. say 1/4" thick
and duplicate your hacked down design ... but like this...

http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/1/3/7/Figure_9_mod_T.JPG

The trunk of the 'T' where your index finger is ... leave more material there for
securing the other end of line.

[turk]

yeah, that looks like it would be even lighter, but how would you create the twinke hole?

Drill a series of holes tight together and then use a dremmel bit to
cut the ridges left between until you have a nice smooth 'twinke' slot.
Or because they are aluminum I think you could do it with just a
"spiral saw bit" on low RPM.

[warbonnetguy]

yeah, i meant to leave a bit more metal there, its hard to get it just right, a machined one out of a flat plate of titanium would be awesome, they could even machine the holes with one of those water jet machines, bet you'd spend 100$ on a set though.



The trunk of the 'T' where your index finger is ... leave more material there for
securing the other end of line.

[schrochem]

now that's what it would ideally be made of!!! stronger and lighter. 5g?

I just read that it is heavier than aluminum (but lighter than steel)
Forgotten about that
The stainless steel webbing plate had a workingl load limit of 300lbs.

Titanium Facts:
Titanium known for its amazing corrosion resistance -- resistant to many acids and salt solutions. It is a light, strong metal with low density (60% as dense as steel).
Titanium is as strong as steel, but 43% lighter; it is 60% heavier than aluminium, but twice as strong; however these numbers can vary a little because of the use of different alloys. These properties make titanium very resistant to the usual kinds of metal fatigue.
The metal has excellent resistance to sea water and is used for propeller shafts, rigging, and other parts of ships exposed to salt water.

now to bed....

[warbonnetguy]

how much does the titanium buckle weigh? you can't wrap it because it's closed, you would have to thread it. you could cut the sides so it would be open and thus wrapable, but may not be strong enough then, but you never know till you try. looks like the exact same anchor principal indeed, however, i think the flatness of the nine may help hold the hitch. the buckle is made of round stock, and may not have enough friction like in a plate-like design. ropes pull much easier over round metal than over a plate, but you don't know till you try. hopefully it holds, let us know.

that's halarious, my fiancee is pissed b/c i spent an hour and a half fabricating the thing in the garage, and then i came in and hoped right on the computer. they just don't understand.






Bingo!

You got it.

Use the same wrap warbonnet has for the 'W' side of the
Fig 9. But on both sides of your titanium buckle. No mods necessary.

That could work!

http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/1/3/7/Fig_9_full_adjustable.jpg
Fully adjustable from either direction and it would be stable! Not trying to pivot on the
long axis like the odd shaped Figure 9.
Solid titanium
and only 10 bucks.
Also must go to bed. Wife really pissed to hear a dremmel tool running
this hour of the night :eek: :D

[warbonnetguy]

sorry i guess it is flat after all, not round, didn't look close enough.

[peanuts]

call me crazy, but the reason for the webbing is not to damage the tree, like rope does:rolleyes: :confused: with all the forces applied???:eek:

[schrochem]

call me crazy, but the reason for the webbing is not to damage the tree, like rope does:rolleyes: :confused: with all the forces applied???:eek:

Oh, I plan to still use webbing around the tree, but everywhere else is rope. Rope is lighter and packs smaller than webbing so if we minimize the webbing to just the tree its a lighter/smaller system.

[schrochem]

how much does the titanium buckle weigh? you can't wrap it because it's closed, you would have to thread it. you could cut the sides so it would be open and thus wrapable, but may not be strong enough then, but you never know till you try. looks like the exact same anchor principal indeed, however, i think the flatness of the nine may help hold the hitch. the buckle is made of round stock, and may not have enough friction like in a plate-like design. ropes pull much easier over round metal than over a plate, but you don't know till you try. hopefully it holds, let us know.

that's halarious, my fiancee is pissed b/c i spent an hour and a half fabricating the thing in the garage, and then i came in and hoped right on the computer. they just don't understand.

How important is the V grip to your wrap?
Will the buckle even work without that?

I just sent them an email on weight and load limit.
So WBG, you seemed to jump right in there on this one, why not the Bridge? :D

[peanuts]

ok, thanks for clarifying:)

[warbonnetguy]

How important is the V grip to your wrap?
Will the buckle even work without that?
:D
I just sent them an email on weight and load limit.
So WBG, you seemed to jump right in there on this one, why not the Bridge? :D

do you mean the sharper cut notch on the one side? i don't know, i think it could work without it on the nine, or one made out of plate metal, but the buckle is way different dimensions though, much rounder looking hooks.

do you have one of these buckles? does it work? or are you ordering one?

i've got a bit more free time right now, i've actually been posting quite a bit on the bridge recently too. i'll probably make one eventually if i have time, right now i'm letting grizz do all the work. :D

[schrochem]

do you mean the sharper cut notch on the one side? i don't know, i think it could work without it on the nine, or one made out of plate metal, but the buckle is way different dimensions though, much rounder looking hooks.

do you have one of these buckles? does it work? or are you ordering one?

i've got a bit more free time right now, i've actually been posting quite a bit on the bridge recently too. i'll probably make one eventually if i have time, right now i'm letting grizz do all the work. :D

Nope I don't have one so I don't know.
Just brainstorming.....

Ya know I was thinking that all we are really looking for is an intermediary between the hugger and the cord and still be able to adjust. I think using the hugger in the larks head mode and then just tying the cord right to it via round turn and half hitches is the lightest and pretty easy way.
I actually like tying the HH lashing but don't like untying to make an adjustment. The round turn/ half hitch is pretty easy to undo.
Anyone see a reason not to do it that way?

[warbonnetguy]

the easiest no hardware attachment aka "knot" setup would be tree straps larks head to tree. webbing can be wrapped backwards around tree to shorten.

tie rope to the single hanging loop via a sheetbend variation finished with a bight for instant un-tieability.

use a double sheetbend w/bight, or tie the single w/bight, and pull on free end to cinch the bight, before bight gets too small insert a second bight into the first one, pull on the necessary part of the knot to "cinch" the first bight down tight on the second one. to release pull on the free end just like a single o double with a bite, but you've got two bights so you have to pull twice.

sounds terrible, but if you can tie a single sheetbend w/bight, you can figure it out, and i think it's a bit faster than the double sheetbend, and it seems to settle less when first weighted.

i can tie the entire knot in 4-5 seconds or less . all the speed is in the single w/bight, it is the simplest possible knot. just a sort of half hitch w/bight around the strap instead of around itself. it should be pretty easy to find a diagram. of a single and double







Nope I don't have one so I don't know.
Just brainstorming.....

Ya know I was thinking that all we are really looking for is an intermediary between the hugger and the cord and still be able to adjust. I think using the hugger in the larks head mode and then just tying the cord right to it via round turn and half hitches is the lightest and pretty easy way.
I actually like tying the HH lashing but don't like untying to make an adjustment. The round turn/ half hitch is pretty easy to undo.
Anyone see a reason not to do it that way?

[GrizzlyAdams]

i've got a bit more free time right now, i've actually been posting quite a bit on the bridge recently too. i'll probably make one eventually if i have time, right now i'm letting grizz do all the work. :D

Grizz is having fun, but is in a phase of his work cycle that severely limits hands-on hammock fun time :( He is aiming to have his third version built in time for a family camp-out in mid-October. Earlier is possible, but not planned. He says that anyone else that wants to carry the bridge torch for a while is welcome to it.

Grizz

[schrochem]

the easiest no hardware attachment aka "knot" setup would be tree straps larks head to tree. webbing can be wrapped backwards around tree to shorten.

tie rope to the single hanging loop via a sheetbend variation finished with a bight for instant un-tieability.

use a double sheetbend w/bight, or tie the single w/bight, and pull on free end to cinch the bight, before bight gets too small insert a second bight into the first one, pull on the necessary part of the knot to "cinch" the first bight down tight on the second one. to release pull on the free end just like a single o double with a bite, but you've got two bights so you have to pull twice.

sounds terrible, but if you can tie a single sheetbend w/bight, you can figure it out, and i think it's a bit faster than the double sheetbend, and it seems to settle less when first weighted.

i can tie the entire knot in 4-5 seconds or less . all the speed is in the single w/bight, it is the simplest possible knot. just a sort of half hitch w/bight around the strap instead of around itself. it should be pretty easy to find a diagram. of a single and double

I'm going to have to take that one, one step at time. I did the sheet and double sheet. It looks like the webbing is best if the loop is rolled like a handle.

Berkleypoint responded and said the Ti slider weighs 4g but can't really say on the load limit...

[warbonnetguy]

what do you mean?

are you gonna order it?






I'm going to have to take that one, one step at time. I did the sheet and double sheet. It looks like the webbing is best if the loop is rolled like a handle.

what do you mean?

Berkleypoint responded and said the Ti slider weighs 4g but can't really say on the load limit...

[schrochem]

what do you mean?

I meant I needed to take your description one step at a time.
For 'rolling' the webbing I was just talking about something like this (http://www.yatesgear.com/rescue/image.htm?Bucket%20Style%20Rope%20Bags&rope&467468469RopeBags.jpg)
Just rolling the webbing to make the loop. That would make it better for tying to.



are you gonna order it?

I was thinking I might be able to find a SS thing like this locally and just try that. But maybe I'll just order the darn thing...

[warbonnetguy]

i bet you'll have a hard time finding it locally, mainly b/c it's titanium.

i've never tried rolling the loop. that would help it stay open when un weighted.
never had problems with it holding on even unrolled loops up to 2" wide. the narrower the width the better. 1" woodland polyester from www.owfinc.com works great. rolling it would be better for wear as well.

i've got some 1/8" x 1.5" aluminum plate laying around, i've been messing around with an anchor shaped device. the hook plates on the nine are 3/16", but i think i can just make it a little bigger. i can always use thicker metal if it is too weak.

[ZDP-189]

Hi, I'm new to this forum.

This thread is fascinating. It is such a simple and robust way to tighten and secure a line, requires no moving parts and is so easy and quick to make. One of these sewn into a Slap Strap would be very efficient. You could even make a rubber grip liner or full elastomer powercoat. That would reduce line wear and improve grip.

What you make it out of is up to you. Titanium is hard to get and harder to work, but aluminium or even high-tensile steel would be easy. It could be hand-filed, punched, or even welded from two rods of silver steel.

As for weight reduction by drilling holes, I don't have the training to do the engineering calculations, but there's always the trial and error method. I have a load-bearing point above my lathe. I would winch the lathe up on the Figure9, put it down, remove a bit more, then try again. When it gets to a point where it just about holds and there is no area that consistently fails, that's where I stop. The lathe can be lifted by two people with difficulty, so that's probably 300-400lbs and adequate overengineering unless you're doing something extreme, like bobbing in the wind from a single attachment point under an overhang.

The entire attachment system I am thinking about is a slap-strap, with the inside coated in a ribbed rubbery compound, with this attachment device stitched into the free end. I could even build in a short length of elastic tensioner, so that the slap-strap could grip a smooth surface without tension on the line. I think the result should even be able to support a man and kit from a pair of smooth steel poles, such as a street lamp.

[warbonnetguy]

hello, welcome to hf.

the ruberized tree strap is interesting, probably only useful for slipery surfaces such as metal poles though.

the device seems to grip fine with no coating. hasn't slipped at all yet even when first weighting it or bouncing.

a plate of aluminum is probably the way to go. you say titanium will be much harder to cut and file and drill?

you'd be suprised how much force is put on the hammock and the supports. due to the angles involved, it's quite a bit more than the weight of the user at each end. the more sag in the hammock the less force and vice versa.





Hi, I'm new to this forum.

This thread is fascinating. It is such a simple and robust way to tighten and secure a line, requires no moving parts and is so easy and quick to make. One of these sewn into a Slap Strap would be very efficient. You could even make a rubber grip liner or full elastomer powercoat. That would reduce line wear and improve grip.

What you make it out of is up to you. Titanium is hard to get and harder to work, but aluminium or even high-tensile steel would be easy. It could be hand-filed, punched, or even welded from two rods of silver steel.

As for weight reduction by drilling holes, I don't have the training to do the engineering calculations, but there's always the trial and error method. I have a load-bearing point above my lathe. I would winch the lathe up on the Figure9, put it down, remove a bit more, then try again. When it gets to a point where it just about holds and there is no area that consistently fails, that's where I stop. The lathe can be lifted by two people with difficulty, so that's probably 300-400lbs and adequate overengineering unless you're doing something extreme, like bobbing in the wind from a single attachment point under an overhang.

The entire attachment system I am thinking about is a slap-strap, with the inside coated in a ribbed rubbery compound, with this attachment device stitched into the free end. I could even build in a short length of elastic tensioner, so that the slap-strap could grip a smooth surface without tension on the line. I think the result should even be able to support a man and kit from a pair of smooth steel poles, such as a street lamp.

[ZDP-189]

Thanks for the kind welcome.

I think a small Fig9. should be sufficient. From reading Just Jeff's DIY page, I read that the designer needed to plan on 600lbs at each mount. Let's call it 1,000 pounds. 6063T6 aluminium has a 31,000 psi tensile strength, requiring 1/31 sq.in. equivalent to a rod of 0.02" diameter (in an ideal world).

[warbonnetguy]

oh no bro, i tried the small nines, they are tiny. they held my weight at first, after a few light bounces, they bent severely, and after a few more it broke.

i know there is a big difference in strength with regards to how its made. for instance a cold forged caribiner is stronger than the same design made by hot forging (or maybe vice versa), and nobody makes caribiners with cast aluminum b/c its way weaker. i don't know what forging or casting is though.

i called niteize, and asked for the method of construction (forged or cast) and the actual breaking strength, but nobody there knew anything at all.

it really aggervates me to call a company and everyone there is so ignorant about their own products. she said i could ask via e-mail and maybe get some answers, so i will try.

maybe you know, if i get aluminum from a metal store, the kind that comes say, 1.5" wide x 1/4" thick x however long you want it, is it forged or cast?




Thanks for the kind welcome.

I think a small Fig9. should be sufficient. From reading Just Jeff's DIY page, I read that the designer needed to plan on 600lbs at each mount. Let's call it 1,000 pounds. 6063T6 aluminium has a 31,000 psi tensile strength, requiring 1/31 sq.in. equivalent to a rod of 0.02" diameter (in an ideal world).

[ZDP-189]

Maybe it was designed by the marketing department, not engineering.

Casting aluminium often leaves bubbles and a didgy crystalline structure. Forging (plastic forming under load) does not.

I'd be very interested in hearing how it broke. That design is way sub-optimal for load bearing. It is based around a central beam, with protrusions off the side. The beam will bend at the top attchament point and it will be subject to twisting.

I plan to have a go at making a pair of v-cleats in a kind of golf-bag shape. I have not decided how large or how thich to make it, but it will be made from a sheet of cold-rolled or extruded aluminium.

The illustration below shows the design and how it scales. The size is fit to the rope size and the thickness is determined by the anticipated load.

http://www.l2i.org/hammock_vcleat.gif

This design has loops instead of prongsm, which is less convenient than the Figure9 clip, but stronger.

[warbonnetguy]

i posted a pic of the bent one on this thread, i later broke another. the hook that the working end of the rope came off (last step of the hitch) tore off the stem.

it's not really adjustable, you have to untie, adjust, then retie. but since it ties and unties so fast it is quickly adjustable. making it closed will make it much more difficult to adjust, unless you come up with a truly adjustable hitch. how bout a combo. closed on the weight bearing side, open on the other for easier adjustment?







Maybe it was designed by the marketing department, not engineering.

Casting aluminium often leaves bubbles and a didgy crystalline structure. Forging (plastic forming under load) does not.

I'd be very interested in hearing how it broke. That design is way sub-optimal for load bearing. It is based around a central beam, with protrusions off the side. The beam will bend at the top attchament point and it will be subject to twisting.

I plan to have a go at making a pair of v-cleats in a kind of golf-bag shape. I have not decided how large or how thich to make it, but it will be made from a sheet of cold-rolled or extruded aluminium.

The illustration below shows the design and how it scales. The size is fit to the rope size and the thickness is determined by the anticipated load.

http://www.l2i.org/hammock_vcleat.gif

This design has loops instead of prongsm, which is less convenient than the Figure9 clip, but stronger.

[ZDP-189]

So I understand that that means I should open the loop on the right hand side. That's no problem.

[Jazilla]

I called niteize, and asked for the method of construction (forged or cast) and the actual breaking strength, but nobody there knew anything at all.

I think it was stamped out. I watch a lot of How its made. It looks like something that was stamped out by a may ton press just because of how the seams look. But I really have no idea.

[warbonnetguy]

yeah, i saw those seams too.

no word back from niteize, i e-mailed them yesterday.






I think it was stamped out. I watch a lot of How its made. It looks like something that was stamped out by a may ton press just because of how the seams look. But I really have no idea.

[ZDP-189]

I knocked up a pair of these roughly based on my drawings and warbonnetguy's recommendation of opening the v-cleat side.

http://l2i.org/hammock_vcleat.jpg

Made out of 3mm (.12") extruded aluminium (aluminum), the pair's combined weight is 18g (0.6oz), but you'd only need one if you wanted to save weight. They seemed strong enough, but I'd much rather repeat the exercise in 5mm stock next time for a bit more safety margin.

The additional strength added by closing the loop seems to have made a lot of difference and the cleats survived a few bounces without any sign of damage.

Actually, on the first bounce, I ended up sprawled on the ground. I had made the profile with a nice sharp edge, like on a knife and that nice sharp edge sliced straight through the paracord that I was using. I quickly rounded all the edges with some emery cloth and ended up with what you see above. It's not pretty, but it still bites and grips well.

[ZDP-189]

BTW, the battery is an AA cell shown for scale. The loop hole is 1" wide to fit HH tree huggers and other 1" webbing.

[TiredFeet]

Why make your own device when there is one that is cheap, very strong and very light (almost as light as what you have made) and is readily available?

That is unless you want to make your own :D

But then what about those of us that don't have a machine shop or the skills to use one. :D

This is my first day on the forums, so if I sound behind the times, well I am, but trying to catch up. :p

[warbonnetguy]

looks good, not much meat @bottom right, it is a closed loop there though.

3mm=1/8"?, i was thinking of using 3/16", i think thats what the nine is.

nice touch with the webbing slot, are you going to sew it in permanent to the tree strap?






I knocked up a pair of these roughly based on my drawings and warbonnetguy's recommendation of opening the v-cleat side.

http://l2i.org/hammock_vcleat.jpg

Made out of 3mm (.12") extruded aluminium (aluminum), the pair's combined weight is 18g (0.6oz), but you'd only need one if you wanted to save weight. They seemed strong enough, but I'd much rather repeat the exercise in 5mm stock next time for a bit more safety margin.

The additional strength added by closing the loop seems to have made a lot of difference and the cleats survived a few bounces without any sign of damage.

Actually, on the first bounce, I ended up sprawled on the ground. I had made the profile with a nice sharp edge, like on a knife and that nice sharp edge sliced straight through the paracord that I was using. I quickly rounded all the edges with some emery cloth and ended up with what you see above. It's not pretty, but it still bites and grips well.

[warbonnetguy]

the one he made, and the one i modified from a fig. nine are a bit lighter than a regular nine. 2 reg nines weigh just over 2 oz., and two of these weigh between 1/2 and 3/4 of an oz.

the nine also has damaging teeth(which can easily be removed though)

as you will soon find out, many here who just enjoy making things themselves.

i plan to make a similar device, using nothing more than a vice, a hacksaw, a drill, and a file. no machine shop needed.



Why make your own device when there is one that is cheap, very strong and very light (almost as light as what you have made) and is readily available?

That is unless you want to make your own :D

But then what about those of us that don't have a machine shop or the skills to use one. :D

This is my first day on the forums, so if I sound behind the times, well I am, but trying to catch up. :p

[ZDP-189]

Why make your own device when there is one that is cheap, very strong and very light (almost as light as what you have made) and is readily available?

As my esteemed friend said, the existing product didn't work very well. It either cut your line, or bent, trapping your line in a permanent vice grip, or it snapped into two or more pieces.

Plus my ones weigh much less.

Plus my ones were free.

Plus I didn't have to wait 2 weeks for it to arrive in the post.

What you should be asking us is why we spend time and money making or buying something instead of learning to tie a proper hitch.


That is unless you want to make your own :D

You've pretty much hit the nail on the head, there.


i plan to make a similar device, using nothing more than a vice, a hacksaw, a drill, and a file. no machine shop needed.

I wouldn't. Mine are going in the bin. Even with a lot of rounding, after a bit of bouncing, it started to damage my lines.

I have a much better idea...

As TiredFeet implied, why make when you can buy better:

Sometimes the best solution has already been found in parallel applications, so I turned to a rock climbing instructor. He showed me a separate pulley and aluminium v-cleat king of similar to the Figure9. The problem was that rock climbers don't hang 4 feet above soft turf on 2-4mm spectra line, they hang 100 feet above jagged rocks on 8-11mm spectra line, so none of my lines would work with his rigging.

So who uses 2-4mm line and knows how to rig? Sailors do. I went to a yachting supplier and came away with a nylon v-cleat (9g) and a 16mm ball race block (12g). Both are rated to 1,000kg (a ton), similar to the 4mm spectra line on my HH. Unfortunately, the v-cleat is designed to be fixed to a surface, so I just needed to work out how to set it up.

This is how I did it.

http://l2i.org/hammock_tensioning block.jpg

I only use this setup on one side of the hammock.

The advantage to this system is that I can exert a lot of tension and quickly and securely lock it down while maintaining tension. This means I can mount the lines lower on the tree and lie flatter.

The downside is that I spent USD20 on the components. :rolleyes:

[GREEN THERAPY]

I have to agree with warbonnetguy.... ALL the fun is in tinkering with ideas and making ones own stuff. I have been following this thread and think I will get some aluminum plate and try to fashion a nine system. I also am in favor of far less of the strap and more of the lightweight small diameter climbing ropes for hanging from. My wife shakes her sweet head and comments that perhaps I am an excessive compulsive when it comes to projects that interest me, and it is hard to argue that I am not. So off to sew a Sgt Rock poncho/tarp ( yes the fabric is from Wal Mart ) then off to a local boat building shop for some aluminum plate. Thanks for all the ideas. The thought comes to mind " If we don't hang together, they will hang us seperately."

Amazing what you can do
When you don't know how

Green Therapy

[ZDP-189]

I had a lot of fun this weekend.

This is a strap with a ribbed Santoprene rubber backing.

http://www.l2i.org/hammock_poledancerstrap.jpg

I really must buy a sewing machine.

[ZDP-189]

I also did one heck of a mod to my $5 string hammock. I made it asymetrical by making two six-point line groups in the asym side anchor positions which I made from Marlow #4 whipping line. I added an adjustable structural ridgeline and now I am working on a fly-to-floor curtain. I have already bought the mosquito netting and ripstop and will be adding attachment tabs for my poncho.

The hammock weighs 5oz, the line another 4oz and depending on whether I want mesh or fabric walls, a few more ounces for that. I don't count the poncho, because I have to carry that anyway. The result is a hammock in a tent. I get to lie (nearly) flat, stay cool when I want to, the setup is safe to cook/ smoke/ eat hot foods in and my pack and boots stay dry. It weighs a little more than half the weight of a Hennessy Ultralight Asym and packs into a fifth the volume (excluding the poncho).

Where can you buy that for the twenty-twenty five bucks it cost me?

PS, you don't need a machine shop for any of those mods or even a sewing machine.

[warbonnetguy]

zdp,

just to clarify, it was only the small nine that bent or broke. those plates are 3/16" and rounded, and i've noticed no rope damage at all.

what about the weight of the steel quick link?

other than that, looks pretty cool. how does it perform?

what is required to unlock to make an adjustment? and to lock it back?

noticed any slipping, how secure does it feel?

is it easy to untie after being weighted?

is the quick link just so you don't have to thread all the line through the device, and instead just leave it rigged?

[warbonnetguy]

i want to see pics of that as soon as it's done.




I also did one heck of a mod to my $5 string hammock. I made it asymetrical by making two six-point line groups in the asym side anchor positions which I made from Marlow #4 whipping line. I added an adjustable structural ridgeline and now I am working on a fly-to-floor curtain. I have already bought the mosquito netting and ripstop and will be adding attachment tabs for my poncho.

The hammock weighs 5oz, the line another 4oz and depending on whether I want mesh or fabric walls, a few more ounces for that. I don't count the poncho, because I have to carry that anyway. The result is a hammock in a tent. I get to lie (nearly) flat, stay cool when I want to, the setup is safe to cook/ smoke/ eat hot foods in and my pack and boots stay dry. It weighs a little more than half the weight of a Hennessy Ultralight Asym and packs into a fifth the volume (excluding the poncho).

Where can you buy that for the twenty-twenty five bucks it cost me?

PS, you don't need a machine shop for any of those mods or even a sewing machine.

[ZDP-189]

zdp,

just to clarify, it was only the small nine that bent or broke. those plates are 3/16" and rounded, and i've noticed no rope damage at all.

what about the weight of the steel quick link?

other than that, looks pretty cool. how does it perform?

what is required to unlock to make an adjustment? and to lock it back?

noticed any slipping, how secure does it feel?

is it easy to untie after being weighted?

is the quick link just so you don't have to thread all the line through the device, and instead just leave it rigged?

Weight was about the same as the block. Stainless steel and screw gated.

It performs great. Once it beds down, it's there to stay and one tug and it's free. I tie a figure-8 knot in the end to keep it all together when it's loose, and I may tie a hitch if I was in a campsite and kids might tug at the lines.

There is no slip at all; nothing.

The link is so it will fit on the tree huggers. If using line, it'd be superfluous, and so would the block.

[ZDP-189]

i want to see pics of that as soon as it's done.

The hammock is done. I slept in it for a while. It was very comfortable. I could move about in it and it was very stable, just like a HH, but all the net was in tension and it was or appeared to me more roomy. I had the HH up in the same spot just before the net hammock, so there was a direct comparison.

I just need to do the poncho and then the curtains. I am considering a drawcord to turn it from a tent to a cocoon, once the cooking is done.

The point I was making, though was that it was fun to muck about and do something different for a change. I also did a bit of TIG welding for a friend, but that was just a chore.

[ZDP-189]

PS, Call me Zed, or Dan. :D

[ZDP-189]

The v-cleat works in fundamentally the same was as the Figure9: the line beds into the cleat. The difference is the nylon one is professionally designed to hold 2-4 mm spectra line and has a row of about 5 Vs in series.

[warbonnetguy]

so when you pack up, you disconnect the quick link from the webbing, and leave the quick link connected to the pulley, and the line stays threaded through the whole thing?

if you re-thread through the pulley and cleat at the start of each setup, you could just permanently tie the pulley to the webbing and eliminate the ring.

sounds like you disconect the quick link from the webbing and leave everything else connected, is that right?

seems like you could find aluminum hardware. get ultralite sailing stuff (line and hardware) from somewhere that specializes in sailboat racing, such as www.apsltd.com




Weight was about the same as the block. Stainless steel and screw gated.

It performs great. Once it beds down, it's there to stay and one tug and it's free. I tie a figure-8 knot in the end to keep it all together when it's loose, and I may tie a hitch if I was in a campsite and kids might tug at the lines.

There is no slip at all; nothing.

The link is so it will fit on the tree huggers. If using line, it'd be superfluous, and so would the block.

[warbonnetguy]

could you eliminate the pulley?



The v-cleat works in fundamentally the same was as the Figure9: the line beds into the cleat. The difference is the nylon one is professionally designed to hold 2-4 mm spectra line and has a row of about 5 Vs in series.

[ZDP-189]

could you eliminate the pulley?

The V-cleat was designed to be mounted, so unless I ran the line round the tree, no, I'd have to add something.

The pulley helps me put more tension on and feeds the line nicely into the cleat.

You should have a go, the cleats are only $4.50. The block was the expensive bit.

[warbonnetguy]

i'm going for min. weight right now, i think i will try making an anchor shaped plate device soon.

with that new hitch, the v-slot is not necessary, the weighted line pinches it's own slack. the hitch worked when having the weighted end comming off the v slot or off the hook looking side. i filed the v-slot so that it did not pinch the line. filed it into more of a u slot that did not pinch the line at all. line ran smooth through it before hitch is finished.

the u/v slot being really close to the stem applies less leverage on that spot, which was the point of failure on the mini.(weighted end was pulling on the rounder hook side, farther away from stem. didn't try the mini reversed, but i assume it would have held more due to the different leverage on that side.

both my u slots will be close to the stem.



The V-cleat was designed to be mounted, so unless I ran the line round the tree, no, I'd have to add something.

The pulley helps me put more tension on and feeds the line nicely into the cleat.

You should have a go, the cleats are only $4.50. The block was the expensive bit.

[TiredFeet]

the one he made, and the one i modified from a fig. nine are a bit lighter than a regular nine. 2 reg nines weigh just over 2 oz., and two of these weigh between 1/2 and 3/4 of an oz.

the nine also has damaging teeth(which can easily be removed though)

as you will soon find out, many here who just enjoy making things themselves.

i plan to make a similar device, using nothing more than a vice, a hacksaw, a drill, and a file. no machine shop needed.

All very well to make your own, but for less than $3.00, I can buy, off the shelf and locally, a device that weighs 11 g and is rated at 3147 lbs and will perform the exact same task and has no damaging teeth.

I agree that creating something and making it has a very satisfying feel, but I guess re-inventing the wheel doesn't really much appeal to me. If I can accomplish the task with what others have already spent mega-bucks developing, why not?

To quote:


As TiredFeet implied, why make when you can buy better:

So again, why??

[warbonnetguy]

well, i wasn't aware of such a device. 11g, same function, 3100 lbs. sounds too good to be true.

what's it called, where can i get it, can i look @ it on the internet.

post a pic of it, so we can see what you are referring to.

have you tried it out? how does it work?



All very well to make your own, but for less than $3.00, I can buy, off the shelf and locally, a device that weighs 11 g and is rated at 3147 lbs and will perform the exact same task and has no damaging teeth.

I agree that creating something and making it has a very satisfying feel, but I guess re-inventing the wheel doesn't really much appeal to me. If I can accomplish the task with what others have already spent mega-bucks developing, why not?

To quote:



So again, why??

[TiredFeet]

well, i wasn't aware of such a device. 11g, same function, 3100 lbs. sounds too good to be true.

what's it called, where can i get it, can i look @ it on the internet.

post a pic of it, so we can see what you are referring to.

have you tried it out? how does it work?

Sure you know all about this device.

I learned about it reading the thread on the ring buckle. I started using it after I scanning that thread. Didn't switch to the webbing though - that stuff is way too heavy.

Here it is:

SMC descending ring (http://www.rei.com/search?vcat=REI_SEARCH&query=descending+ring&x=25&y=8)

Specs:

weight: 11 g (0.4 oz),
breaking strength according to SMC: 3147 lbs, something or other in kN, some day may have read what that means.

All you have to change is the way you tie off the rope. But then you already changed that when you used the Figure 9.

Don't know exactly how much SMC spent developing that ring, but I'll bet it was more than I make in many years. I'll gladly make use of their investment.

By the way, I like those Figure 9s a whole bunch. I thank Turk for posting that they have a new one out.

[warbonnetguy]

the whole point is to make adjustments faster. we are using devices like the nine for one reason, it allows the use of a certain hitch than can be tied very fast, so fast in fact that untying it, adjusting the hammock, and then retying it is almost as fast as adjusting via cc buckles or ring buckles. with such a device, weight is saved by the hardware itself (2 modified nines weigh just over a 1/3 of what the 4 smc rings needed for a ring buckle setup would be).

weight is also saved by replacing much of the webbing with lighter line.

ring buckle and garda hitches require 4 rings, not two, and the ring buckle hitch will not work with rope, and the garda hitch works poorly.

just tying the rope to one ring would be no faster than just leaving out the ring and tying the rope directly to the webbing, old school style.

there is no hitch that i know of that is both quick to tie, untie, adjust. not to mention the fact that since the ring is closed unlike the nine, the rope has to be threaded through the rings several times to make even the simplest of hitches, whereas with the nine, you can just drape the rope over the hooks to tie the hitch.

i see no advantage to using a single ring @ each end vs. traditional setup(knot)




Sure you know all about this device.

I learned about it reading the thread on the ring buckle. I started using it after I scanning that thread. Didn't switch to the webbing though - that stuff is way too heavy.

Here it is:

SMC descending ring (http://www.rei.com/search?vcat=REI_SEARCH&query=descending+ring&x=25&y=8)

Specs:

weight: 11 g (0.4 oz),
breaking strength according to SMC: 3147 lbs, something or other in kN, some day may have read what that means.

All you have to change is the way you tie off the rope. But then you already changed that when you used the Figure 9.

Don't know exactly how much SMC spent developing that ring, but I'll bet it was more than I make in many years. I'll gladly make use of their investment.

By the way, I like those Figure 9s a whole bunch. I thank Turk for posting that they have a new one out.

[TiredFeet]

the whole point is to make adjustments faster. we are using devices like the nine for one reason, it allows the use of a certain hitch than can be tied very fast, so fast in fact that untying it, adjusting the hammock, and then retying it is almost as fast as adjusting via cc buckles or ring buckles. with such a device, weight is saved by the hardware itself (2 modified nines weigh just over a 1/3 of what the 4 smc rings needed for a ring buckle setup would be).

c'mon, man think. I said I wasn't using webbing. I'm using rope. Since when does using a single SMC descending ring demand that I use webbing. If you will think about this for 1 minute, you will realize that the ring was esgned from the get-go for rope, not webbing. Just because someone, sometime, somewhere decided to use webbing with it on a hammock doesn't mean that everybody has to.

Also, using rope I am using 1, repeat 1, ring per end of the hammock.


weight is also saved by replacing much of the webbing with lighter line.

C'mon man, think, read what I posted. I posted that I am using rope, not webbing.


ring buckle and garda hitches require 4 rings, not two, and the ring buckle hitch will not work with rope, and the garda hitch works poorly.

You are really getting caught in a manner of thinking that doesn't allow you to thjink outside of what you have been doing.

I'm using rope and 1, repeat 1, ring per end of the hammock. That is 2 rings total. The ring is all of the hardware I am using. That comes to less than an ounce of hardware for the suspension.


just tying the rope to one ring would be no faster than just leaving out the ring and tying the rope directly to the webbing, old school style.


Way wrong. Man, you need to really think about what you re doing and saying. Sure you can wrap that figure 9 fast, but you cannot warp the Figure 9 as fast using that modified wrap of yours.

I can shove bight through the ring and tie 2 slipped half hitchs as fast as you can do your modified wrap (well maybe a little slower, but not much over a second slower). As far as convenience. I can untie and adjust those half hitches as fast as you can loosen that wrap you are using after it as pulled tight enough to hold. You have to pull enough slack to unwrap, I just pull the free end and those 2 slipped hatches are gone.


there is no hitch that i know of that is both quick to tie, untie, adjust. not to mention the fact that since the ring is closed unlike the nine, the rope has to be threaded through the rings several times to make even the simplest of hitches, whereas with the nine, you can just drape the rope over the hooks to tie the hitch.

True I have to thread the rope bight through the ring, but not the whole rope. You ever try that and practice it??? It can be done pretty fast once you know what you are doing. But a word about speed. I'll take convenience over cutting an extra fraction of a second or even 2 or 3 seconds. In the total time it takes to hang the hammok, tying off the rope is insignificant. It is convenience that you are really looking for. Well convenience and weight savings. At 0.8 oz, those 2 rings are very convenient.


i see no advantage to using a single ring @ each end vs. traditional setup(knot)

If you mean the traditional Hennessy lahing, man that setup is slow and a real hassle. A simple round turn or 2 is fast. slipped half hitchs can be tied very fast and slipped they are easier than your wrap to undo. 2 slipped half hitches come undone simply by pulling on the end of the rope. Probably as fast, or faster than your wrap, which since it wraps on top of itself is going to be tight to undo. Through the ring with a bight and 2 slipped half hitches will hold any hammock.

Of course, you realize that you don't use the ring at the tree hugger. Uhuh, have you ever tied a trucker's hitch?? Well, if so then you know where to tie the ring on the suspension rope. Clove hitch it there or a larks head, through the tree huggers and back. An enginer friend taught me that hitch. Said it gave me a mechanical advantage so that I didn't have to pull as hard on the rope. Only trouble I had with that hitch, it kept wearing out the rope. Needed something else where that loop of the trucker's hitch is. Ring works great. Total cost for the rings? Less than $6.00, bought locally. That 0.8 oz really made hanging the hammock convenient. Thanked my friend for showing me the truckers hitch and showed her how I replaced theloop with the ring. She thought that was great idea. Said she had to do that to.

[angrysparrow]

c'mon, man think. I said I wasn't using webbing. I'm using rope. Since when does using a single SMC descending ring demand that I use webbing. If you will think about this for 1 minute, you will realize that the ring was esgned from the get-go for rope, not webbing. Just because someone, sometime, somewhere decided to use webbing with it on a hammock doesn't mean that everybody has to.

Also, using rope I am using 1, repeat 1, ring per end of the hammock.



C'mon man, think, read what I posted. I posted that I am using rope, not webbing.



You are really getting caught in a manner of thinking that doesn't allow you to thjink outside of what you have been doing.

I'm using rope and 1, repeat 1, ring per end of the hammock. That is 2 rings total. The ring is all of the hardware I am using. That comes to less than an ounce of hardware for the suspension.




Way wrong. Man, you need to really think about what you re doing and saying. Sure you can wrap that figure 9 fast, but you cannot warp the Figure 9 as fast using that modified wrap of yours.

I can shove bight through the ring and tie 2 slipped half hitchs as fast as you can do your modified wrap (well maybe a little slower, but not much over a second slower). As far as convenience. I can untie and adjust those half hitches as fast as you can loosen that wrap you are using after it as pulled tight enough to hold. You have to pull enough slack to unwrap, I just pull the free end and those 2 slipped hatches are gone.



True I have to thread the rope bight through the ring, but not the whole rope. You ever try that and practice it??? It can be done pretty fast once you know what you are doing. But a word about speed. I'll take convenience over cutting an extra fraction of a second or even 2 or 3 seconds. In the total time it takes to hang the hammok, tying off the rope is insignificant. It is convenience that you are really looking for. Well convenience and weight savings. At 0.8 oz, those 2 rings are very convenient.



If you mean the traditional Hennessy lahing, man that setup is slow and a real hassle. A simple round turn or 2 is fast. slipped half hitchs can be tied very fast and slipped they are easier than your wrap to undo. 2 slipped half hitches come undone simply by pulling on the end of the rope. Probably as fast, or faster than your wrap, which since it wraps on top of itself is going to be tight to undo. Through the ring with a bight and 2 slipped half hitches will hold any hammock.

Of course, you realize that you don't use the ring at the tree hugger. Uhuh, have you ever tied a trucker's hitch?? Well, if so then you know where to tie the ring on the suspension rope. Clove hitch it there or a larks head, through the tree huggers and back. An enginer friend taught me that hitch. Said it gave me a mechanical advantage so that I didn't have to pull as hard on the rope. Only trouble I had with that hitch, it kept wearing out the rope. Needed something else where that loop of the trucker's hitch is. Ring works great. Total cost for the rings? Less than $6.00, bought locally. That 0.8 oz really made hanging the hammock convenient. Thanked my friend for showing me the truckers hitch and showed her how I replaced theloop with the ring. She thought that was great idea. Said she had to do that to.

No offense, TiredFeet, but you really need to show more respect to the members here. Your method of speech comes across as quite petulant. Also, you need to spend some time doing some background reading of previous threads on this forum. Some of the methods that warbonnetguy referred to are established methods of use that he mentioned in making a point, not in telling you that's the only way to do things, or to refer to your specific situation. After all, this thread is about the figure 9 mod, not your suspension.

[slowhike]

thank you angrysparrow.
there are a lot of ways to accomplish the same task & some people are going like one way more than another... pros & cons.
but we encourage people to try new ideas. and hopefully we can respect each other even we when we don't care for another person's method.
...tim

[warbonnetguy]

you asked why i was using the nine instead of rings. yes, i am capable of reading and comprehending what you wrote, i was only stating the advantages of the nine over the common ring buckle method because you failed to explain your 2 ring method till just now. if you wanted me to explain why i was using the nine instead of your trucker's hitch method, you should have explained your method of using the rings when you asked the question. so all comments made were with regard to the common way of using the rings. even though i could read that you were using only 2 rings and rope as well, i didn't know enough about your setup to make a comparison, so i just made a comparison to the common ring setup.

first of all, i think you are imagining the new 9 hitch to be different than what it really is. you should try it to see how it really works. even after weighting, it doesn't tighten like a knot, there is no slack to pull, there is nothing to loosen, it unties at least as fast and effortlessly as popping a bight, and ties faster than tying two half hitches.

as for the truckers hitch, most people don't hang their hammocks tightly enough to need mechanical advantage. many feel the more sag/the looser the better.

i apoligise, i was not considering the tying of a hitch using a bight. this would indeed be vastly more convenient.

i agree that there are some knot methods that are slow to tie/untie, but not all. a sheetbend variation finished with a bight takes a couple seconds to tie and unties with a single pull like you have described. this uses no hardware.

could you not tie two slipped half hitches directly to the webbing loop rather than to a ring?. how does the ring change anything aside from allowing you to crank down extra hard via mechanical advantage of a truckers hitch?

if the two slipped half hitches hold on a ring, but not on a webbing loop(which i suspect may be the case), then just tie to the webbing with the sheetbend. it's just as fast as tying two half hitches, and just like the half hitches, can be finished with a bight for quick untie.

it seems to me that your rings do nothing but allow you to tie the truckers hitch without wear and tear on the loop. these same two slipped half hitches on a regular truckers hitch would be the same with a rope loop as they are with rings, and thus just as quick to tie/untie. when you realize you do not need the truckers hitch or any mechanical advantage at all, you can use less line, and tie the line directly to the tree strap using a fast tying/untying knot like your 2 slipped half hitches or a sheetbend variation.

like you pointed out, and i have stated elsewhere, a good fast knot with a quick release is pretty darn fast and convenient and weighs nothing.

i just don't see that your two rings are of any use outside the trucker's hitch which seems unnecessary to begin with. although i guess i can see how threading a bight or whatever through rings may be slightly easier than going through a flattened webbing loop which you may have to manually open with a finger.

the use of descending rings with webbing is nothing new, although climbers rap on a rope which runs through the rings, the ring is anchored to the cliff somehow. if the anchor is a tree, the rings are mostly attached to the tree via webbing. this has been the case for many years, as webbing slings replaced rope slings long ago, and cause less damage to the tree.

two modified nines weigh 16g total, and i bet a hommade set could be as light as 10-11 g for the set. the new 9 hitch is faster and easier to rig than two half hitches. i can say this, because i use that exact same method(2 half hitches) whenever i tie a truckers hitch. and i will say that it does work well. i'm just not convinced that the truckers hitch is of any advantage for hammock setup, and it just creates the need for more line and hardware that serves no purpose other than to reduce abrasion on the rope, which isn't even a concern with other, just as convenient knots, mainly the sheetbend.

[GrizzlyAdams]

I'm finding that the mechanical advantage (however you achieve it, be it trucker's hitch or rings or whatever) is not with pulling the suspension line tight, so much as it is having less force on the end you tie off. I've used bighted half hitches for quite a while on rings with 2.8mm Spyderline, and every now and then something gets twisted, and it does not just pop out with a yank. Getting the pressure off that half-hitch makes an ordinary one real easy, no jams.

just my $0.02

Grizz

[ZDP-189]

Back to Figure9; are there any conclusions we can draw?

Does it do the job? My vote: *** our of 5 "reasonable"
Which model? My vote: Large
Does it need modding: My vote: Yes, to round the teeth
Priced right? My vote: a little high
Light weight: My vote: Not wonderful
Would I buy it? My vote: No, I had too much fun using it for inspiration.

[warbonnetguy]

I'm finding that the mechanical advantage (however you achieve it, be it trucker's hitch or rings or whatever) is not with pulling the suspension line tight, so much as it is having less force on the end you tie off.
Grizz

that's why i made the comment about half hitches holding in the trucker's hitch scenario, but possibly slipping when tied directly to the webbing, i think i've actually tried before. anyways, sheetbend variations are just as fast and simple and don't slip at all(except for the single).

[warbonnetguy]

3 out of 5, come on. ties/unties in a split second, and never slips.
price too high? they cost 3-4 bucks each, i'd say that is pretty reasonable.
not lightweight? with mods it's 8g, or 17g for the first mod. either way it's way lighter than your pulley,plastic cleat,and steel quick link combo, not to mention it's the lightest adjustable suspension thus far.

i do agree with you about buying them though, it's much more fun to take the basic idea and make something better, although it's easier to grasp the concept if you try a nine first.



Back to Figure9; are there any conclusions we can draw?

Does it do the job? My vote: *** our of 5 "reasonable"
Which model? My vote: Large
Does it need modding: My vote: Yes, to round the teeth
Priced right? My vote: a little high
Light weight: My vote: Not wonderful
Would I buy it? My vote: No, I had too much fun using it for inspiration.

[turk]

absolutely!
The modified Fig-9's ARE the lightest fully adjustable suspension system
thus far listed in the forums. The first mod takes minutes to do, very little
DIY skill, and the price is a couple of bucks.

As for lightweight ... it is second only to simple knots.

[warbonnetguy]

glad you're back in the discussion turk.

[ZDP-189]

3 out of 5, come on. ties/unties in a split second, and never slips.
price too high? they cost 3-4 bucks each, i'd say that is pretty reasonable.
not lightweight? with mods it's 8g, or 17g for the first mod. either way it's way lighter than your pulley,plastic cleat,and steel quick link combo, not to mention it's the lightest adjustable suspension thus far.

i do agree with you about buying them though, it's much more fun to take the basic idea and make something better, although it's easier to grasp the concept if you try a nine first.

Those were just my personal impressions; I am happy to hear yours and other people's.

But by way of explanation, I gave it a 3/5 for functionality, because I don't like tieing off the way you did. I tried it the other way and found it much less secure. Regarding the weight, I was under the impression that with the weight saving mods, it quickly bent and broke.

The v-cleat alone weighs less, and has a breaking strain of one tonne. The pulley and link were added to add to the functionality. I have nothing emotionally invested in either system and I'm not saying one is better than the other. I doubt that Figure9 hammocks will take the hammocking world by storm, but then neither will my current rig, or the welded O-ring.

I think what this thread shows that rigging is a matter of preference. Everyone will have their own favourites, which may even change from time to time for each individual depending on the hammock, trees, gear carried and the weather.

If nothing else can be agreed, I guess I have succeeded in getting the thread back on topic. :)

[warbonnetguy]

zdp,
no hard feelings here, different strokes for different folks you know.
i'm kind curious to try your pulley system, although i probably won't go out and buy one just to try it, maybe i'll make it to a campout one of these days, and you will have inspired someone there to get one.

it was the small nine, (the tiny one rated to 50 lbs) that broke. all the mods including the 8g mod started as the large nine. they all held fine.

there are two ways of tying that hitch, tied it the wrong way when i invented it. both are the same, but at first i manually threaded the slack under the working end. i quickly realised you could simply lift up the proper line since it was an open hook.

i just drape one end over one hook and the working end over the other hook. couldn't be simpler or faster. should be just as simple and fast as the recomended nine hitch. there is a series of pics that shows this sequence in the first few pages of this thread.

i was just being a little beligerant earlier when i was knocking the weight of your setup. it was just in good fun though. i really respect those who go off in different directions than everyone else. i look forward to seeing what origional ideas you come up with in the future.

Brandon













Those were just my personal impressions; I am happy to hear yours and other people's.

But by way of explanation, I gave it a 3/5 for functionality, because I don't like tieing off the way you did. I tried it the other way and found it much less secure. Regarding the weight, I was under the impression that with the weight saving mods, it quickly bent and broke.

The v-cleat alone weighs less, and has a breaking strain of one tonne. The pulley and link were added to add to the functionality. I have nothing emotionally invested in either system and I'm not saying one is better than the other. I doubt that Figure9 hammocks will take the hammocking world by storm, but then neither will my current rig, or the welded O-ring.

I think what this thread shows that rigging is a matter of preference. Everyone will have their own favourites, which may even change from time to time for each individual depending on the hammock, trees, gear carried and the weather.

If nothing else can be agreed, I guess I have succeeded in getting the thread back on topic. :)

[schrochem]

BTW, WBG, I looked over some of the weights posted earlier and you noted 12' of webbing. I was thinking only 3-4' per end if used as a larks head around the tree. To use 6' seems like BIG trees.
Also, I saw Grizz refer to TeeDees comment about thin rope slicing webbing. I wonder how others feel about this. While I could see it 'possibly' happening, I wonder if it's a real worry. Also, if we roll the webbing loops, I think this 'might' eliminate that possibility or it might give it a smaller area to work on (but it's thicker..). The reason why I mention it here is because, unless we attach the 9 or a modified anchor 'thingie' straight to the webbing (not a bad idea) then there will have to be some rope going to the webbing.

[warbonnetguy]

i think 3mm vectrus 12 or spyderline is big enough to be ok. i could see that happening with bpl aircore 1 or 2mm though. i haven't noticed any problems with any 3mm. i think the rolled loops would last longer, and it is probably a good idea to check your loops frequently for such damage. it will probably wear out over time. if your straps are long, you can just cut off the old loops and sew on new ones.

i use larks head around the tree too. get 3-4' of string and make a circle. it won't go around a very big tree at all, but you can often find small trees to hang from. i just said (2)6', b/c thats what i've been sending out with my hammocks. you could definately go smaller.

how bout this?

permanently attach the line to one end of the tree strap. you still larks head the tree, but if the strap is too short, it still works, and the webbing would be in the back of the tree, where it is needed the most, maybe a few inches of line around the tree near the larks head if the webbing is too short to go all the way around. and the nine is attached to the end of the hammock.

very similar to the ring buckle setup, just replace the rings with a nine, and all the webbing (except for the last 4-7') with line.



BTW, WBG, I looked over some of the weights posted earlier and you noted 12' of webbing. I was thinking only 3-4' per end if used as a larks head around the tree. To use 6' seems like BIG trees.
Also, I saw Grizz refer to TeeDees comment about thin rope slicing webbing. I wonder how others feel about this. While I could see it 'possibly' happening, I wonder if it's a real worry. Also, if we roll the webbing loops, I think this 'might' eliminate that possibility or it might give it a smaller area to work on (but it's thicker..). The reason why I mention it here is because, unless we attach the 9 or a modified anchor 'thingie' straight to the webbing (not a bad idea) then there will have to be some rope going to the webbing.

[schrochem]

how bout this?

permanently attach the line to one end of the tree strap. you still larks head the tree, but if the strap is too short, it still works, and the webbing would be in the back of the tree, where it is needed the most, maybe a few inches of line around the tree near the larks head if the webbing is too short to go all the way around. and the nine is attached to the end of the hammock.

very similar to the ring buckle setup, just replace the rings with a nine, and all the webbing (except for the last 4-7') with line.

now you're talking about saving some weight!
Sounds like a great way to do it.
On the bridge hammock, we need something to tie the suspension and ridgelines to. Right now it's a ring or cinch buckle. So for the bridge it could save an additional bit of weight if it pulled dual purpose.

[schrochem]

okay, in regard to my 'all in one' type setup for the bridge I thought of a ring and anchor.
So this would have to be an all male (http://www.ra.is/karlmenn/Male_symbol.JPG) hammock LOL :D

But seriously, I think something along those lines would be lightest and most functional.....

[warbonnetguy]

yeah, i made something very similar, but made the stem too short. didn't even try it, will try w/longer stem soon.




okay, in regard to my 'all in one' type setup for the bridge I thought of a ring and anchor.
So this would have to be an all male (http://www.ra.is/karlmenn/Male_symbol.JPG) hammock LOL :D

But seriously, I think something along those lines would be lightest and most functional.....

[ZDP-189]

okay, in regard to my 'all in one' type setup for the bridge I thought of a ring and anchor.
So this would have to be an all male (http://www.ra.is/karlmenn/Male_symbol.JPG) hammock LOL :D

But seriously, I think something along those lines would be lightest and most functional.....

I could weld something like that out of stainless or silver steel bar stock. small enough it would be as light as an aluminium nine and stronger. Let me know if you want one.

[ZDP-189]

schrochem/warbonnetguy, I picked up a two of these buckle sets today at the store.

http://l2i.org/hammock_anchorbuckle.jpg

The 'male' bit is more or less as you described, and only weighs 5.9g (0.21oz). The loops fit a 3/4" webbing strap.

I have no idea what the breaking strain is, but if it can hold in my gut, it's gotta be good for a few hundred pounds. :D

Well, if you want them, PM me and you can have 'em for free and test your idea. If not, they're going round my waist - both of them, just in case. :rolleyes:

[ZDP-189]

i want to see pics of that as soon as it's done.

I've started a new thread:

http://www.hammockforums.net/forum/showthread.php?p=27139

[warbonnetguy]

those look very interesting. have you tried them to see if they are strong enough? i would be happy to test them out, but are you really in hong kong? shipping would cost a fortune and take weeks. i just sent something from colorado to bc canada, and it took over two weeks. i can't imagine shipping from china.


schrochem/warbonnetguy, I picked up a two of these buckle sets today at the store.

http://l2i.org/hammock_anchorbuckle.jpg

The 'male' bit is more or less as you described, and only weighs 5.9g (0.21oz). The loops fit a 3/4" webbing strap.

I have no idea what the breaking strain is, but if it can hold in my gut, it's gotta be good for a few hundred pounds. :D

Well, if you want them, PM me and you can have 'em for free and test your idea. If not, they're going round my waist - both of them, just in case. :rolleyes:

[schrochem]

those look very interesting. have you tried them to see if they are strong enough? i would be happy to test them out, but are you really in hong kong? shipping would cost a fortune and take weeks. i just sent something from colorado to bc canada, and it took over two weeks. i can't imagine shipping from china.


yea, thanks for the offer zed, but it seems like a long ways a way.
I found that owfinc sells a surcingle (http://www.owfinc.com/Hardware/mhardware.asp#Surcingles) that looks just like that.
google is calling a surcingle something else for horses but I bet it's a part of that. I bet I can find this locally.

[schrochem]

lots of interesting hardware over at seattle fabrics (http://www.seattlefabrics.com/metal.html)

[schrochem]

scroll down here (http://www.nationalwebbing.com/metal-hardware.htm) you'll see some more of the surcingles, but go a little further and check out the weird medical wire forms.

[warbonnetguy]

didn't see any 3/4 or 1" ones. looked like they were all bigger.

[warbonnetguy]

some of them look like torture devices




scroll down here (http://www.nationalwebbing.com/metal-hardware.htm) you'll see some more of the surcingles, but go a little further and check out the weird medical wire forms.

[ZDP-189]

I am in Hong Kong, but shipping is no problem at all. On another forum (http://www.britishblades.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41744) I recently shipped pocket knives to the UK for under a dollar. In fact the cost for the first 30g is only 50&#162; and these weigh 5.9g.

Shipping time was 4 days for the fastest deliveries. Most of the 20 recipients got theirs within 6 days. A few took longer, but that was because they shipped to addresses that they didn't visit to pick up from for a week or so.

The mail process is roughly like this:

Delivery to GPO (upto 1 day depending on time of day)
Sorting and security clearance (1 day)
Flight (1 day)
Customs clearance (upto 1 day)
Sorting and delivery (1 day)

Depending on the union coffee breaks and unfortunate timing coincidences like missing flights, you might add a day at any one or more steps, but not usually.

Give it a try, it will cost you nothing and you will get a feel for international shipping.

[schrochem]

didn't see any 3/4 or 1" ones. looked like they were all bigger.

well you are a tough one to please :rolleyes:

The main problem is with the nomenclature. It is definitely heavily used in the equestrian field. But I think the surcingle is more like a girth belt type thing. This 'clasp' is just part of it (or some of them) so it's kind of hard to find. I also think it's the 'old' way of doing things and so it might be harder to track down. Since this 'belt' is mostly used for horses, they aren't going to be using 1" webbing or leather.
I guess we'll have to find another industry that uses these things. First, I think we have to find a searchable name for what they are called.
But that will have to wait til tomorrow. Someone's getting a bit irritable..

[warbonnetguy]

yeah, zdp's is 3/4" and 5-6g. seems abought right if it's strong enough.

i bet a search for metal hardware manufacturers would work well. if metal hardware brings up too much other crap, searching plastic hardware might work well, as places selling plastic hardware usually sell metal too. i'll look tomorrow if i have time too.

i'm also concerned about the round stock not holding the hitch as well as the wider flat stock of the nine does. who knows though, will have to try.



well you are a tough one to please :rolleyes:

The main problem is with the nomenclature. It is definitely heavily used in the equestrian field. But I think the surcingle is more like a girth belt type thing. This 'clasp' is just part of it (or some of them) so it's kind of hard to find. I also think it's the 'old' way of doing things and so it might be harder to track down. Since this 'belt' is mostly used for horses, they aren't going to be using 1" webbing or leather.
I guess we'll have to find another industry that uses these things. First, I think we have to find a searchable name for what they are called.
But that will have to wait til tomorrow. Someone's getting a bit irritable..

[schrochem]

I haven't hung from the 9 yet but I've been playing with Brandon's 'knot' on the nine. I think if I was to use it the way he has has it, I'd want that V in the nine to hold that piece of the rope in place.
Playing around without the V (I grabbed some piece from the hardware store) I think I would want something a little extra to hold that in place. It does seem to hold quite well but a little slack in the line 'could' wiggle it loose.
If there is a 'could' in my suspension system, I'm going to do something different. What I'd suggest is bringing the weighted line back over the first side (right side) to hold that dood in place. So it kinda becomes a figure eight around the loose end....

Another workable shape is like an Omega. I noticed a trap door handle uses a round handle with the ends bent back to swivel.
At work today, I realized there was a new shop within walking distance called Metal4U. Well they have a plasma cutter and plenty of metal :)
So I might pursue that if I settle on a shape.

[warbonnetguy]

yeah, i guess you could wrap the weighted end over the v again.

my v is not a v anymore, but a u that the rope runs smoothly through.once tension is applied, all slack is removed, and the weighted line will not move, so i don't think thats necessary, but if the scrungicle thing doesn't have as much bight, another wrap of the weighted end would increase holding power as well.

[ZDP-189]

I won't represent that the buckles are work or are strong enough, but they fitted your description, so I wondered if the two of you would like to try them, rather than fabricate them from scratch.

Anyway, gunn parker has asked for them, so if it's OK by you I will mail them to him today.

[warbonnetguy]

yeah, fine with me. why didn't you try them yourself?


I won't represent that the buckles are work or are strong enough, but they fitted your description, so I wondered if the two of you would like to try them, rather than fabricate them from scratch.

Anyway, gunn parker has asked for them, so if it's OK by you I will mail them to him today.

[ZDP-189]

I am happy with the cleat and pulley for my HH and to be perfectly honest, I'm not sure cleats, buckles or most other attachment rig is necessary or that it adds all that much value. There are plenty of good hitches and knots that'll do the job.

[schrochem]

Here's another way to use the 9 with a simple tie to what WBG did.
I just followed the lasered in directions....... :D
Haven't tried it yet. It weighs about 10.5-11g (EDIT: weighed here at the lab it's actually 11.97g) and what just one simple cut on the 9 to get just the handle.
http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/5/6/8/figure9_01.JPG

[schrochem]

I started looking into other things made in the climbing industry that might apply this new style of attachment. They weigh a bit more than using the nine but will be rated.
Top pf my list is the PMI PED
(http://www.onrope1.com/store/index.php?p=product&id=166&parent=58) I emailed them about the weight but I found elsewhere it weighs 1.5oz

the other two I found (http://www.onrope1.com/store/index.php?p=catalog&parent=58&pg=1) were the CMI ultra8 (1.9oz) and the smc personal escape (2oz)

Right now I have a cinch buckle (1oz) and a carabiner (1oz) plus all that webbing. If I use the PMI PED, I'd shave 0.5oz there and then probably more using rope instead of webbing.

Also, I found this site. (http://storrick.cnchost.com/VerticalDevicesPage/VerticalHome.shtml)
Loads of stuff in there......
Lots of ideas come flying in...

[stoikurt]

Aren't those going to require larger ropes possibly negating any weight or space savings?

[slowhike]

i'm still interested in the anchor shaped deal that WBG was talking about making.
i think that's got to work well.
same principal as this... http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/2/5/9240.jpg

[warbonnetguy]

who did you ship with? GPO, never heard of them?


I am in Hong Kong, but shipping is no problem at all. On another forum (http://www.britishblades.com/forums/showthread.php?t=41744) I recently shipped pocket knives to the UK for under a dollar. In fact the cost for the first 30g is only 50¢ and these weigh 5.9g.

Shipping time was 4 days for the fastest deliveries. Most of the 20 recipients got theirs within 6 days. A few took longer, but that was because they shipped to addresses that they didn't visit to pick up from for a week or so.

The mail process is roughly like this:

Delivery to GPO (upto 1 day depending on time of day)
Sorting and security clearance (1 day)
Flight (1 day)
Customs clearance (upto 1 day)
Sorting and delivery (1 day)

Depending on the union coffee breaks and unfortunate timing coincidences like missing flights, you might add a day at any one or more steps, but not usually.

Give it a try, it will cost you nothing and you will get a feel for international shipping.

[schrochem]

Aren't those going to require larger ropes possibly negating any weight or space savings?

I still think you can use smaller diameter rope (I use 1/8" spyderline). I think it will hold in there fine. After fiddling with the 9 I noticed we just need a couple of friction points. After perusing around it looks like there are lots of ways to do that. Finding something in the climbing world that's rated is a bonus I think. However, that PED isn't all that cheap....

[warbonnetguy]

wow, can't believe we didn't figure that one out before now. let us know if it holds



Here's another way to use the 9 with a simple tie to what WBG did.
I just followed the lasered in directions....... :D
Haven't tried it yet. It weighs about 10.5-11g (EDIT: weighed here at the lab it's actually 11.97g) and what just one simple cut on the 9 to get just the handle.
http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/5/6/8/figure9_01.JPG

[warbonnetguy]

those belay devices will need to be tied off in order to hold. they are designed for 9mm rope or larger, and will cause even much less friction than they would with climbing rope.



I started looking into other things made in the climbing industry that might apply this new style of attachment. They weigh a bit more than using the nine but will be rated.
Top pf my list is the PMI PED
(http://www.onrope1.com/store/index.php?p=product&id=166&parent=58) I emailed them about the weight but I found elsewhere it weighs 1.5oz

the other two I found (http://www.onrope1.com/store/index.php?p=catalog&parent=58&pg=1) were the CMI ultra8 (1.9oz) and the smc personal escape (2oz)

Right now I have a cinch buckle (1oz) and a carabiner (1oz) plus all that webbing. If I use the PMI PED, I'd shave 0.5oz there and then probably more using rope instead of webbing.

Also, I found this site. (http://storrick.cnchost.com/VerticalDevicesPage/VerticalHome.shtml)
Loads of stuff in there......
Lots of ideas come flying in...

[warbonnetguy]

i guess you could thread them differently than for rappeling purposes, so they would hold with the proper hitch, but since it's a closed system, you can't wrap the rope and would have to physically tie the hitch, untie the hitch, adjust line, retie the hitch. if you are going to do all that tying, you could just tie straight to the webbing.



those belay devices will need to be tied off in order to hold. they are designed for 9mm rope or larger, and will cause even much less friction than they would with climbing rope.

[schrochem]

Okay, I have attached a possible workup of the PED.
I think this is the same principal as we have been investigating.
I found some specs on that thing and it's 1/2" thick.

[warbonnetguy]

ok i see. that is a pretty simple hitch. something like that could be made really easy by drilling some holes in an alum plate, it could be made really
light too, and since it's closed it would be stronger, and could be made even lighter still.


Okay, I have attached a possible workup of the PED
I think this is the same principal as we have been investigating.
I found some specs on that thing and it's 1/2" thick.

[schrochem]

ok i see. that is a pretty simple hitch. something like that could be made really easy by drilling some holes in an alum plate, it could be made really
light too, and since it's closed it would be stronger, and could be made even lighter still.

I looked at it after I posted and essentially there is an anchor in there!
Yea, it would be easy, just a triangle piece with three holes drilled.
Oh man, this might not be hard at all.
We could adjust thickness of the plate and the size of the holes....

Also, looking at the attachment, I think it's better to tie it the way you did the nine, with the free end out so there could be a half hitch or two. See updated attachment.

[schrochem]

and there were other ways (http://www.gearshop.com/item_detail.aspx?ItemCode=REKPIG36000207.5MM) to tie that thing of course

okay, I've got to look busy....

[warbonnetguy]

that thing looks cool, but i can't believe anyone would actually buy one as a belay/rapell device. i've never seen a b/r device that you had to thread your whole rope through instead of just clipping it in. it would be such a pain to thread 200' of rope through before each rappel.



and there were other ways (http://www.gearshop.com/item_detail.aspx?ItemCode=REKPIG36000207.5MM) to tie that thing of course

okay, I've got to look busy....

[schrochem]

that thing looks cool, but i can't believe anyone would actually buy one as a belay/rapell device. i've never seen a b/r device that you had to thread your whole rope through instead of just clipping it in. it would be such a pain to thread 200' of rope through before each rappel.

Yea, that's what this (http://storrick.cnchost.com/VerticalDevicesPage/Rappel/MiscDescPages/MiscDesc545.html) dood thought also

[schrochem]

the connector could actually go lighter (see attached), but I bet the triangle shape is stronger. Perhaps a circle shape with three holes is even stronger than that??

[Dutch]

I made a three holed triangular piece last night. I work 3rd shift and we have a tool shop with plenty of aluminum. Anyhow it only weighed 2 grams and was able to pick up 289 pound mold with no problem. I didn't want to go higher because the rope I was using isn't rated for that much. I am going hiking today and will be trying them out in the field. I do question if I can get them tight enough. I will be using a bridge hammock so it has to be tight but I can always remove the spreader bar, tighten it a little and put the spreader back in. I have to quit rushing out and buying the next support craze. If this works I'm going to have SMD rings, buckles, and large figure 9s laying around. At 2 grams there is no way I'm going to carry around buckles and 18 feet of strapping.

[schrochem]

I made a three holed triangular piece last night. I work 3rd shift and we have a tool shop with plenty of aluminum. Anyhow it only weighed 2 grams and was able to pick up 289 pound mold with no problem. I didn't want to go higher because the rope I was using isn't rated for that much. I am going hiking today and will be trying them out in the field. I do question if I can get them tight enough. I will be using a bridge hammock so it has to be tight but I can always remove the spreader bar, tighten it a little and put the spreader back in. I have to quit rushing out and buying the next support craze. If this works I'm going to have SMD rings, buckles, and large figure 9s laying around. At 2 grams there is no way I'm going to carry around buckles and 18 feet of strapping.

Wow Dutch, 2g is pretty **** light!
Any details on how thick, wide, etc.?
We also haven't heard from you on the Bridge thread. Any insights to add?
Let us know how the tritri works out.

[Rapt]

Just some thoughts...

Fig 9's look cast to me. I'd bet that they are, forged would be the only other alternative for the seamed edges and with the low strength ratings they give them its highly unlikely since its a much more expensive manufacturing technique

Modding the Figure 9's... Open loops are much weaker than closed ones, check the ratings on biners open and closed.

Drilling holes for lightening will significantly weaken anything, and smaller holes means stress concentrators that can trigger failures, especially fatigue related ones. Be very careful lightening your Fig 9's this way without a complete retesting of the strength... I'd suggest lifting a lawn tractor, or something similar if you want it to take something even close to the theoretical maximums of around 1000 lbs.

Fatigue is a problem with Al. It can lose almost all its strength given enough load cycles. Unlikely in this application, but its possible they may see hundreds of cycles.'

Proper analysis of a part this complex would be done by FEA, but rough working strengths could be solved by hand. Allow a safety factor of at least 2 to 3 for hand calculations.

For those of us not familiar with where to buy these, are there Canadian retailers?

[warbonnetguy]

the 2 hole looks unstable, but the 3 hole circle looks very promising




the connector could actually go lighter (see attached), but I bet the triangle shape is stronger. Perhaps a circle shape with three holes is even stronger than that??

[warbonnetguy]

Just some thoughts...


Fatigue is a problem with Al. It can lose almost all its strength given enough load cycles. Unlikely in this application, but its possible they may see hundreds of cycles.'


For those of us not familiar with where to buy these, are there Canadian retailers?

climbers load biners hundrerds of times, i've never heard of trashing them after a certain number of falls or bodyweight loadings, only when they get too grooved out.

not familiar with where to buy what?

[warbonnetguy]

2g are you kidding, thats almost weightless!

remember forces on a tightly hung hammock may exert 2 even 3? times your bodyweight on such a device. you should test in the actual application, with more bouncing than you will likely ever do in a real situation, or lift more weight in your shop. be careful this weekend.

that said, details man, details. how thick, how wide, size of holes?
i gotta see a picture.




I made a three holed triangular piece last night. I work 3rd shift and we have a tool shop with plenty of aluminum. Anyhow it only weighed 2 grams and was able to pick up 289 pound mold with no problem. I didn't want to go higher because the rope I was using isn't rated for that much. I am going hiking today and will be trying them out in the field. I do question if I can get them tight enough. I will be using a bridge hammock so it has to be tight but I can always remove the spreader bar, tighten it a little and put the spreader back in. I have to quit rushing out and buying the next support craze. If this works I'm going to have SMD rings, buckles, and large figure 9s laying around. At 2 grams there is no way I'm going to carry around buckles and 18 feet of strapping.

[Rapt]

True, but the actual load on a biner is a fraction of the rated load so they're safe (the number of cycles to failure is related to the percentage of the maximum load). In some cases it may be 1000's of cycle to failure... They routinely replace ropes after a number of falls....

And it was if there was a Canadian retailer of the Figure 9's.

[warbonnetguy]

right, and the load on a device used for hanging a hammock would be much less than the minimum breaking strength as well. if the fig nine has a safe working load of 150#, the min breaking strength has to be signifigantly higher, maybe near 1000 right?

the #'s on biners are the min breaking strength. if you calculated a safe working load from those #'s, i'll bet forces of many routine climbing falls exceed the safe working load.

what % of breaking strength is a typical safe working load for hardware?

it's funny you comment on retiring of rope. there is no example of rope breaking in a climbing fall (cutting yes, breaking no) but i know a guy who is about 250-275 and has broken 2 biners by falling on them. gate flutter is often blamed where the vibration causes the gate to vibrate and the biner to break under a open gate scenario which has lower forces. wire gates are supposed to experience less of this phenomena. the biner can also get loaded across it's minor axis as well, decreasing it's strength.




True, but the actual load on a biner is a fraction of the rated load so they're safe (the number of cycles to failure is related to the percentage of the maximum load). In some cases it may be 1000's of cycle to failure... They routinely replace ropes after a number of falls....

And it was if there was a Canadian retailer of the Figure 9's.

[turk]

And it was if there was a Canadian retailer of the Figure 9's.


Rapt ... the closest place for you that sells Figure 9's that I am positive have them
in stock is Bass Pro, at the Vaughan Mills mall just up the 400 from 401.

They are tucked away down one of the fishing supply aisles of all places.
Hung on a rack, middle of the aisle, just past the GPS kiosk desk. Forget asking for assistance.
I asked 3 people there if they had them ... all gave me that blank 1000 yard
stare and mumbled something incoherent. I eventually found them myself.

Anyways thats your best bet.

[Rapt]

I can't comment on the minimum breaking strength of the Fig 9's... depends on their engineering and design folks... And how much margin they want for manufacturing. Because its not intended for personal support there is no standard to dictate to them what to use. I'd bet a significant number of tested samples would fail at considerably less than 1000lbs though. The design has significant stress concentrations which can easily reduce the effective strength by a factor of 3 from the straight sectional area strength.

I'd be inspecting and testing any I intended to use for loads over 150 lbs very carefully and be even MORE careful if I intended to modify it or hang my body from it.

As always its your body and your choice what you consider "safe enough".... All this from a guy (me) who rides motorcycles routinely over 100 mph and has sailboarded in gale force winds and thunderstorms.... :) Had to give up climbing because of severe tendonitis....


Thanks Turk... Next time I'm in T.O. ai'll head that way.

[warbonnetguy]

well i hung from the small 9. rated to 50#. i hung the hammock with moderate sag, and i weigh 160. this means just me in the hammock was likely putting double my bodyweight or more on the device. thats 320 then i did some moderate bouncing increasing the forces to even more, how much more i don't know, but seeing as how forces are likely doubled by the angle of the hang, 400 # might not be that unlikely. thats 8 times the listed strength to cause failure. 150 x 8 gives me a very unscientific 1200#.

i tested 2 mini's and they seemed to hold up to about the same amount of force.





I can't comment on the minimum breaking strength of the Fig 9's... depends on their engineering and design folks... And how much margin they want for manufacturing. Because its not intended for personal support there is no standard to dictate to them what to use. I'd bet a significant number of tested samples would fail at considerably less than 1000lbs though. The design has significant stress concentrations which can easily reduce the effective strength by a factor of 3 from the straight sectional area strength.

I'd be inspecting and testing any I intended to use for loads over 150 lbs very carefully and be even MORE careful if I intended to modify it or hang my body from it.

As always its your body and your choice what you consider "safe enough".... All this from a guy (me) who rides motorcycles routinely over 100 mph and has sailboarded in gale force winds and thunderstorms.... :) Had to give up climbing because of severe tendonitis....


Thanks Turk... Next time I'm in T.O. ai'll head that way.

[skar578]

i hope the fig 9's work well enough, i would love to get a couple

[Dutch]

I just got back from hiking and I successfully used the three holed triangle. The dimensions are 7/8ths wide 1/8th thick with 3/16ths holes. I made it out of 7076 (I think) aluminuim. It held great. With the closed holes it was plenty strong enough and I am 190 pounds. I wound up using my ubla because I don't think I have my bridge perfected yet. It would help if Griz would quit coming up with a new design every day so I could just copy his. I was able to get it very tight. I used tree huggers and pulled it through the one hole then put it through the hole beside it leaving a little loop for the tail to wrap around and go through. I haven't added pictures yet but I will figure that out next. My opinion is that the holes were a little small for the spectra and the spectra is kind of ridged. It didn't really save much time versus tying it. Even if it did it only takes 90 seconds at most to tie. However it was a breeze to adjust and there was a time savings there because you just loosen it and retighten without undoing anything. I don't know how it would hold on core plus cord because it is slippier than the spectra. After one night in it there was no signs of stress. I still want to try to figure something out that the holes aren't closed. I know it will be heavier, but how heavy could it really be.

[Dutch]

Ok, here is my first attempt at adding picture. The first on is of the triangle attatched to my suspension. The second hows how it is tied, it isn't pulled tight.
http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/4/0/9/ATT00028.jpg
http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/4/0/9/ATT00001.jpg

If this works I want to thank Schrochem and Slowhike for posting instructions. If it doesn't work I will blame them and JustJeff for not being around when I need him.

[slowhike]

LOL... well it worked. good job on the triangle.
i'm just guessing that the reason the pictures are a little blurry is that if you were using a point & shoot, auto focus, type camera, you may have had the triangle closer to the camera than the camera's shortest focus range.

[Dutch]

Slowhike
The reason the picture is blurry is I was using the camera on my phone and it focused on the background. Like me it looks better blurry.

[schrochem]

I just got back from hiking and I successfully used the three holed triangle. The dimensions are 7/8ths wide 1/8th thick with 3/16ths holes. I made it out of 7076 (I think) aluminuim. It held great. With the closed holes it was plenty strong enough and I am 190 pounds. I wound up using my ubla because I don't think I have my bridge perfected yet. It would help if Griz would quit coming up with a new design every day so I could just copy his. I was able to get it very tight. I used tree huggers and pulled it through the one hole then put it through the hole beside it leaving a little loop for the tail to wrap around and go through. I haven't added pictures yet but I will figure that out next. My opinion is that the holes were a little small for the spectra and the spectra is kind of ridged. It didn't really save much time versus tying it. Even if it did it only takes 90 seconds at most to tie. However it was a breeze to adjust and there was a time savings there because you just loosen it and retighten without undoing anything. I don't know how it would hold on core plus cord because it is slippier than the spectra. After one night in it there was no signs of stress. I still want to try to figure something out that the holes aren't closed. I know it will be heavier, but how heavy could it really be.

Alright Dutch!
Cool, so you seem pretty happy with it? I take it that was the stock HH spectra you used?
I just saw the pictures and it looks pretty solid.
So you spent a whole night right?
Did you throw in some half hitches or just the basic lashing WBG came up with?
I've got to figure out a way to make a set of these.

[slowhike]

Slowhike
The reason the picture is blurry is I was using the camera on my phone and it focused on the background. Like me it looks better blurry.

LOL... i hear ya<g>.

[warbonnetguy]

hey dutch, since you've got the time and the tools, here's what i have been trying to find time to make.

i was gonna use 3/16" since it is has open hooks, and that's what the fig. 9 uses, i made one already, but the stem was too short and it looked like the device would tilt way too much when loaded b/c of that. (the shorter the stem the more tilt and vice versa), and it was only 1/8" b/c that's what i had laying around. i didn't even try it out b/c i was planning on making a better version, but haven't got around to it yet. if i can find it in my mess of a garage i will test it today.

p.s. i use uncovered vectran, which is as slick as uncovered spectra, and i've had no problems with the hitch slipping yet.

[Dutch]

Alright Dutch!
Cool, so you seem pretty happy with it? I take it that was the stock HH spectra you used?
I just saw the pictures and it looks pretty solid.
So you spent a whole night right?
Did you throw in some half hitches or just the basic lashing WBG came up with?
I've got to figure out a way to make a set of these.
__________________

I did spend the whole night in it and it left me with very little doubt that it will not slip and it is strong enough. The way it is lashed is all that was done, there was no half hitches or other knots. It was stock HH spectra. I never realized how ridged that stuff was until I tried to bend it into a hole 1/4 inch away. I'm going to make another set only about 25% bigger. The holes were just a little small. Not that the rope didn't fit, but it would be quicker and easier. So if I make the holes bigger I will have to make the outer diameter bigger. 1/8th thick aluminuim seems to be fine. Actually it being small seems to add to it's strength. It harder to bend something 1 inch long versus 1 foot long. I made mine by drilling the holes in the corner of some bar stock and then cutiing off the corner with a hacksaw. Than I ground down all the edges on a grinding wheel. At first I was trying to get rid of sharp corners, but then I kept grinding to reduce weight. It only took about an hour and a half to make 2 and I think my work kept interupting me. If you send me your address I will make you a set. Give me about a week, I never know if I'm going to be busy at work or not. I still want to work on an anchor shape so I don't have to thread it though holes. I know it will weigh more but it is still way better than buckles and 9 feet of webbing. WBG is a genius for coming up with the lashing.

[Dutch]

hey dutch, since you've got the time and the tools, here's what i have been trying to find time to make.

i was gonna use 3/16" since it is has open hooks, and that's what the fig. 9 uses, i made one already, but the stem was too short and it looked like the device would tilt way too much when loaded b/c of that. (the shorter the stem the more tilt and vice versa), and it was only 1/8" b/c that's what i had laying around. i didn't even try it out b/c i was planning on making a better version, but haven't got around to it yet. if i can find it in my mess of a garage i will test it today.

p.s. i use uncovered vectran, which is as slick as uncovered spectra, and i've had no problems with the hitch slipping yet.
Attached Thumbnails
That is exactly what i envisioned and if I get time tonight will work on it. I also thought 3/16 would work. How long do you think the stem should be. The stem worries me because that is the weak spot. I also concidered a hook on one side with a hole on the other. You would still have to tread it through a hole but it would make it conciderably stronger and readjustment would be a breeze.

[schrochem]

Thanks Dutch for the offer to make me a set. I might take you up on it, but I'll try to make my own first.
As far as an anchor design. I think we just need something to hold the crossover. I've attached a design that might work with most of the mass in the center and it has a shorter stem..

[schrochem]

Also, if anyone has solid tube and can bend it, you could make an 'omega' shape like the one attached.

[warbonnetguy]

from my destroying the mini 9's, the failure will probably occur by the hook that the weighted end hangs off of will tear from the stem. the only problem is that the hook which holds the weighted part of the line would be the most convenient one to use a hook on. the other one doesn't seem to recieve as much force, so a hole would probably not be needed there.

i think if you just use 3/16" it will likely be strong enough as the large nine's have all held up so far. using a bit thicker stock (thicker than 1/8)will only add a tiny bit of weight, but will be worth the added convenience of using hooks.

hey, test it with more weight if you can next time. it would be interesting to test to failure if possible. sounds like you have a overhead lift and some weights.

you should see how much the large 9's will hold too, since there has been so much speculation and the 150# obviously isn't the breaking strength. it would also be intertesting to see how much the large nine holds with the the weighted line comming off either side.(i think they will be much stronger with the weighted end coming over the notch that places the line closer to the stem(the origional v-slot) instead of the origional way i tied the hitch, with the weighted end coming off the round hook side instead. seems like the closer to the stem the weighted line sits, the less leverage will be applied to the hook.

seems like you are the only one with a descent testing facility. it's up to you to see how strong all this stuff really is. you d man dutch.

as for the length of the stem, it is really the distance between the top attachment point and the point where the weighted line runs over the hook.

but also has to do with the design of the hook as well, the closer the weighted line sits to the stem the shorter the stem could be before tilt becomes too much.

look at the pic of my 8g mod to the large nine. you can see where i cut the top of the stem off. as long as the rope came off the closer v-slot, tilt was ok. when i wraped so it came off the hook side, tilt was borderline too much.

if notches are right at the stem, the stem could be just as short as the 8g mod, maybe a bit shorter. i think the shorter you go, the more tilt and thus the more leverage placed on the hook, and thus the weaker the device.

i just checked the 8g mod, and the distance between the upper attachment hole and the bottom of the v-slot is 7/8" you might be able to make it a tiny bit shorter depending on the strength of the device, but who really knows.



That is exactly what i envisioned and if I get time tonight will work on it. I also thought 3/16 would work. How long do you think the stem should be. The stem worries me because that is the weak spot. I also concidered a hook on one side with a hole on the other. You would still have to tread it through a hole but it would make it conciderably stronger and readjustment would be a breeze.

[schrochem]

some off the shelf stuff that 'might' work would be an 'eye plate', a wing nut, or perhaps a 'jaw'
Of the wing nuts out there the beer nut (http://www.northernbrewer.com/pics/fullsize/beer-nuts.jpg) looks interesting.
Not sure if it would work even if it was strong enough.

[warbonnetguy]

ok, i had a better one partially made, so i went ahead and finished it.

it's 1/8" thick, and the stem distance (length between where the short rope attaches(very top of the big hole) and the bottom of the hook notch) is by coincidence, the same as for the 8g 9 mod. (7/8").

weighs 7g (8g before small holes were added) and passed the bounce test. (i'm only bouncing light to moderately now because i'm worried about the garage celing.:eek: )

only a hair lighter than my 9 mod, but it feels good to make it out of some scrap metal i had laying around. would like to put more weight on it though.

[schrochem]

will any drill bit work to drill through aluminum?
Is there a jigsaw blade that would be able to cut through aluminum?

[warbonnetguy]

i wish i hadn't drilled those small holes yet, b/c now i can't really shave much more weight off the bottom portion. :(

i would be more motivated to see how light i can get it but i don't think one with hooks is ever gonna come anywhere close to dutch's 2g tri plate.

4-5g might be possible depending on how strong these things are. regardless, it's many ounces lighter than buckles and webbing.

[warbonnetguy]

will any drill bit work to drill through aluminum?
Is there a jigsaw blade that would be able to cut through aluminum?

a hacksaw blade with fine teeth works good for cutting. a vise was helpful for holding it. a bench grinder and/or a file is good for final shaping. i bet you would be less accurate with a jig saw blade, but alum would cut with any blade designed for metal. the alum is softer than steel and faster/easier to cut/drill

i just bought a regular drill bit. but there were several different options as to what they're made of. i spent a dollar or two more and got the more expensive ones at home depot. made by Rigid. tip is made of cobalt i guess. (says, for faster cutting and longer life of something) they seem to drill holes really fast, and work much better than some old bits i've also got laying around. i also noticed the nice sharp bits make it much easier to drill your holes just where you want them. the dull ones move around some before they dig in.

[warbonnetguy]

hey dutch, if you used softer line like uncovered vectran or spectra it might work a little better than the covered does in those small holes.

are you sure your scale is right? that thing looks big for 2g. (a nickel should weigh 5g if you want to test a scale's accuracy.)

[Dutch]

hey dutch, if you used softer line like uncovered vectran or spectra it might work a little better than the covered does in those small holes.

are you sure your scale is right? that thing looks big for 2g. (a nickel should weigh 5g if you want to test a scale's accuracy.)
Man you two are hard at work on this. I'm sure my scale is good, it is calibrated by the quality dept every 6 months, but I have several scales to double check. I will try to make a 3/16th anchor type tonight. There are plenty of heavy molds that an eyebolt can be attatched to test. I also have a pallet scale that I can weigh the molds up to 1000 pounds. The best rope I have is coreplus from BPL. I have tested it up to 585 pounds. I'll post something in the morning. I think if we get a good design down I will order some Titanium. I know it is heavier but it is so much stronger it can be thinner and ultimately lighter. Well time to go to "work". I hope my employer never reads HF.

[warbonnetguy]

ok, just seemed too light to be true, but i'll take your word for it.

you need to get some 3mm~1/8" vectrus 12. rated to 2000#. very thin, very strong, and handles superbly, and probably alot cheaper than the bpl. www.apsltd.com



Man you two are hard at work on this. I'm sure my scale is good, it is calibrated by the quality dept every 6 months, but I have several scales to double check. I will try to make a 3/16th anchor type tonight. There are plenty of heavy molds that an eyebolt can be attatched to test. I also have a pallet scale that I can weigh the molds up to 1000 pounds. The best rope I have is coreplus from BPL. I have tested it up to 585 pounds. I'll post something in the morning. I think if we get a good design down I will order some Titanium. I know it is heavier but it is so much stronger it can be thinner and ultimately lighter. Well time to go to "work". I hope my employer never reads HF.

[gunn parker]

Just to get this right in my head, does the new system work this way?

A tree hugger of some type attached to the tree, then some cord running from the hugger down to one of the new items and from there to the hammock?
Is that the way it would work? thereby saving weight on all of that webbing?
thanks

[warbonnetguy]

yeah basically, device is permenently attatched to one loop of a tree strap via the shortest piece of line you can use. support line is attatched to the hammock like normal, and is "tied" to the device instead of the webbing.

alternate method:
device is attatched directly to end of hammock via short piece of line, suspension line is permanently attatched to tree strap instead of hammock. this "strap/line" is girth hitched to the tree just like a regular tree strap and then "tied" to the device .

alot of weight is saved by replacing much of the webbing with lighter line, but the devices themselves are much lighter than the ~2oz for rings or cc buckles. about 1.5 oz lighter so far. dutch's tri plate only weighs 2g. the thing i just made weighs 7g

didn't zdp send you that anchor looking buckle? are you gonna use it for this? did you get it yet?



Just to get this right in my head, does the new system work this way?

A tree hugger of some type attached to the tree, then some cord running from the hugger down to one of the new items and from there to the hammock?
Is that the way it would work? thereby saving weight on all of that webbing?
thanks

[gunn parker]

didn't zdp send you that anchor looking buckle? are you gonna use it for this? did you get it yet?
Yes he has sent it but I have not seen it yet, maybe some time this week I think.

[Dutch]

I made three anchors last night and had one revelation. I start with 3/16 stock and made one as we planned. It picked up 300 pounds with no problem.
http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/4/0/9/straight300pounds.jpg
Then I tried a 569 pound mold. It almost got off the ground lifting one side up. Then the rope slipped. I tried wrapping it many different ways but it always slipped. So I put a half hitch to see if the hook would carry the weight. It picked it up no problem. It weighs 5.22 grams.
http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/4/0/9/Straight5.22gms.jpg
It got me thinking about having the long stem so it doesn't pull to one side. Then it hit me, put the support hole above the weight bearing hook. That is esentially what the figure 9 does too.
http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/4/0/9/crookedholding569pounds.jpg
That took off about a gram as you can see.
I still had to put a half hitch in it to hold 569 pounds though.
http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/4/0/9/crooked4.22gms.jpg
The BPL coreplus is very slippery plus I had a round slot instead of a V making it easier to slip. Here are the two showing scale.
http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/4/0/9/scale.jpg
I then made one out of 1/8 stock just because I wanted to see something break. It broke at the base of the stem but almost picked up the mold. The base of the neck was 1/4" wide. Here is a picture of all three after I broke the 3rd.
http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/4/0/9/allthree.jpg
By this time the rope was in very bad shape. I am going to order the rope that WBG suggested and try more weight, but I think the 3/16th is strong enough. I held the mold up for an hour and a half with no fatique. I am sure if I used the HH spectra the line would not have slipped at all. Even so I don't think we really put 569 pounds of pressure on the supports. the weight of me never distorted the coreplus the way this was stretched and tearing. On the third version (the one that broke) I had more of a v instead of a rounded hole to see if it would slip. It did and I had to tie it again so it would take the full weight. I have to order some new large figure 9s so I can test the strength of them. All in all I think it was really a success. The best breakthrough I had was making the stem off center so the supporting hook and the hole are in line. At 4 and 5 grams they are light enough. What am I gonna do with all the webbing I bought for Speer?

[schrochem]

This is awesome Dutch!
I've been waiting for your report.... :D
It's great that you access to tools to test this stuff. I'm going to get a hold of some 3/16" and see what I can make.
I like how you found the 'offset' to hold a nice line.
I think more weight could be saved (and possibly make it stronger??) by making the neck shorter.
Also, how important do you think the 'hooks' are at the tips of the anchor? Could that just be straight like I drew in post#167?
This is pretty darn cool!

[warbonnetguy]

you are the man dutch.

that is awesome. did my wrap slip too? the one in the top pic looks different than mine. i did figure it would eventually slip with enough weight though.

so, a stem made of 1/8" alum and 1/4" wide almost held 569#? that's pretty amazing.

i think by "leaning" the stem like that, you are creating more leverage on the stem, which might make it weaker (i'm no engineer though) but, SCH is right, if you get rid of the tilt, you can make the stem shorter, and save more weight, but at 4g whose even counting anymore.

looks like the 3/16 is the way to go. could you test some of these stronger ones including the nine to failure? i think alot of people are concerned about the strength, and the common idea is that a 200# guy can put at least 400-500 lbs on his support ropes due to the sag angle of the hammock.

if you can test to failure, could i send you a couple to break? if we all make a couple designs with signifigant differences and break them all, it would be easier to find the design with the best strength to shape ratio.

hey, does your shop have the ability to cut these things out without having to do it manually? like a water jet cutter or similar?

i'm surprised about the line slipping at 569, but not during bodyweight bouncing.

conventional wisdom says that the angle of the hang can cause the force on each rope to be more than double the weight of the occupant. then when you figure in bouncing, that 569 should have been reached or at least close by me or turk or whoever did some bounce testing, and nobody reported rope slipping.

i wonder if the forces on the hammock and the suspension are indeed less than everyone thinks?

for a while i've been trying to figure out a way to test the actual load for different amounts of sag. so far the best i've come up with is using "screamers" on the hammock. they are special runners designed to rip their stitches when loaded to a certain weight, absorbing force as they rip, reducing the impact force of a climbing fall. once they are activated and the stitches rip, they become just a regular loop runner. pretty ingenious idea.

they have several different models which are designed to activate at 400# and 600# i think. it would be interesting to see what sag scenarios would generate 400 and 600 lbs of force from a regular weight person.

check them out here: http://www.yatesgear.com/climbing/screamer/index.htm#1

listed forces are in kn. 1kn~225# (i think).

i'm going out to buy some 3/16" alum.

[schrochem]

Well i just got back from buying a 12' bar of 6061 3/16" aluminum. $12
There is a shop just behind my building that sells all sorts of stuff.
They also have a CAD plasma cutter.
So if we ever figure out a nice design we could have them cut out many of these from a sheet. We can supply a design made in a editing program (I have photoshop) and that makes things precise and easy.

As far as the loads on the hammocks, spreader bars, etc. I always wondered if anyone had access to a large fish scale. Like the one they string up the big salt water fish. I figure if you put that in line with the suspension, it give you an idea what kind of force is being pulled.

[Rapt]

I can create a CAD file of any design you'd like... It may take a week or two for me to fit it in between my "real" work, but I'd be happy to help out once you've decided what you want.

And yes, putting the "curve" in the shaft of the "anchor" increases the stresses on it, on the inside. It increases the bending moment on it.

I suspect that with some care in wrap styles we could find a wrap that works and centres the load on a "straight" tab style. Or something like that....

[warbonnetguy]

just got back from colorado iron and metal. i had to choose between 1/8 and 1/4. they didn't have 3/16. i got one foot of the 1/4". i figure i can make the device narrower since it will be thicker. it's also 6061 alum i believe. 60 something anyway.

hey SCH, wanna sell me a couple short pieces of your 3/16"?

[Rapt]

Hey guys I did up a sketch (drawing).

Assuming the thickness is .188" (3/16), the anchor estimated weight is 5g. I figure failure strength is somewhere around 1000-1500lbs with 6061-T6. (Wet finger calculations of weakest section... no time to do full analysis.)

I have a PDF that I attached.

[warbonnetguy]

Rapt,
thats amazing how you can do that and calculate the strength based on dimensions and type of metal!

looks like a stem that short is gonna have alot of tilt, and need steeper hooks. the hooks themselves look a little long for 3-4mm line.

what do you think about this?

p.s. my drawing may have exaggerated the amount of tilt a little though.

[schrochem]

just got back from colorado iron and metal. i had to choose between 1/8 and 1/4. they didn't have 3/16. i got one foot of the 1/4". i figure i can make the device narrower since it will be thicker. it's also 6061 alum i believe. 60 something anyway.

hey SCH, wanna sell me a couple short pieces of your 3/16"?

Sure, no problem. I have 12' of it! It is 1.25" wide.
How much you want?
Btw schrochem is just an old internet name I came up many years ago. It's a fusion of my last name (Schroeder) and job (chemist), so just call me Scott ;)

[schrochem]

Hey guys I did up a sketch (drawing).

Assuming the thickness is .188" (3/16), the anchor estimated weight is 5g. I figure failure strength is somewhere around 1000-1500lbs with 6061-T6. (Wet finger calculations of weakest section... no time to do full analysis.)

I have a PDF that I attached.

Sweet, looks nice.
I have 3/16" X 1.25"
Maybe I'll try this out tonight, but I doubt I can come anywhere close to getting those measurements.

[Rapt]

I did the classic design thing for hooks its called TLAR (That Looks About Right)...

Of course it may not really be right. Size is pretty small, I made the hooks long so they wouldn't tend to dump the wrap off if they tilt. Also they get wider to the end so the wrap doesn't want to slide off if under tension. I wondered about making the 'angle' on the hooks a little steeper but didn't get around to sketching it that way.

The inner diameter of the "groove" as shown is about 2.5mm so a 3mm cord should (I hope) jam in the bottom of the groove, right at the base of the stem and hold nice and tight and its only going to be pulling about an eighth of an inch off centre so tilt should be pretty small.... Again won't know until its made, might need a tighter radius in the bottom to jam the smaller cords. and it won't take much over a .25" (5.5-6mm cord)....

The weight calc is an advantage of using a CAD system. It just has to know the density of the material and it can spit out the weight.

Strength is less simple... :) As usual working strength should be about 1/3 of failure strength. So about 300-500 lbs based on my 1000-1500 lb failure estimate.... If it was made from 7075-T6 then the failure strengths would be 1300-2000lb and working strengths closer to 400-650lbs...

[schrochem]

Hey Rapt,
if it's not too much trouble could you do that drawing at life size?
And printable on 8.5X11.5" (i know that's american stuff......)
That way I'll just trace it on and get 'pretty' close.
Thanks

[Rapt]

No sweat.... I'll send you the bill... ;)

*Watch this space for the file...*

BTW you can cut out the paper pattern very roughly, and stick it (or them) to anything you want and then cut to the line to get a reasonably accurate and easy way to transfer the shape. Wood is a common choice to make a more permanent pattern, as is poly carbonate or other strong plastics.

[Rapt]

Oh and if you want to use larger than .25" rope then the size needs to increase all around... Drilling a larger centre hole signifcantly compromises strength. As will deepening the "grooves" on each side, or making them "sharper" at the bottom. If you want to do any of these things let me know and I'll readjust the sizes to compensate.

[schrochem]

No sweat.... I'll send you the bill... ;)

*Watch this space for the file...*

BTW you can cut out the paper pattern very roughly, and stick it (or them) to anything you want and then cut to the line to get a reasonably accurate and easy way to transfer the shape. Wood is a common choice to make a more permanent pattern, as is poly carbonate or other strong plastics.

SWEET!
THANKS Rapt, that was mighty swell of ya.
I'm going to have to play tonight!

[Dutch]

Rapt which is stronger 7075 AL or 6061 AL. From what I tested WBG has the amount of tilt correct. You can draw a staight line between the load bearing side and the top hole and figure that will be the tilt. You either need a long stem, an offset stem or large hooks to compensate for the tilt. I agree the offset stem adds stress. I am going to order some Large 9s and test them. I had some but sent them to my father. WBG the 1/4 inch will be a little harder to work with, but there is no doubt it will be strong. I was amazed and how strong the 1/8 was. All the tools I used were a drill press, hacksaw, vise, dremel, round and straight files. It is incredable Rapt has a CAD file already. A conversation that start by Turk asking about this new figure 9 product turn into this.

One more thing to add; it is easy for me to use my hoist to lift the mold and get rid of slack, but in the field it is more of a challenge to get them really tight. What I learned with the three holed triangle it to pull it throught the first hole and pinch it with my thumb, then thread it though the second hole and pull it tight from the backside. There is still a little (about 1/2 inch at most) slack pulled back toward the load bearing side. So the the tightest you can get it is and tight as you can pinch with your thumb minus a half inch. I'm sure it is very simular for a knot.

[hangnout]

Rapt which is stronger 7075 AL or 6061 AL.

7075 is stronger and harder. 6061 is plenty strong and easier to machine. Make sure you get the heat tempered with the designation of 7075-T6 or 6061-T6.

[warbonnetguy]

so is the "cad file" what is needed to run a plasma or water jet cutter?

if so, i bet the cost of having them made would be alot cheaper if the machine company didn't have to write up the file for us.

i hear it's expensive to have stuff machined like that, but maybe if we can get enough people who want a set, it won't cost too much.

[schrochem]

so is the "cad file" what is needed to run a plasma or water jet cutter?

if so, i bet the cost of having them made would be alot cheaper if the machine company didn't have to write up the file for us.

i hear it's expensive to have stuff machined like that, but maybe if we can get enough people who want a set, it won't cost too much.

Well the shop behind me said they are trying to be competitive so they are going for 50/hr. They can do the file themselves, scan in a drawing, or your provide it. Of course a CAD drawing is perfect, but other files can be imported. If you stack the pieces all together in the file the cutter will just follow the lines. He did say some things about the hole diameter limitations and looking nice, etc.
If you aren't looking for 'exact' precision,etc. it takes them less time (which of course costs less money).
When I showed him the anchor type thing at the time (4 days ago LOL!) he said that would probably take 1/2 hour with prep, etc.
The price of the aluminum is small in comparison.
The aluminum I got is from ALCOA 6061-T6511

[warbonnetguy]

so a half hour to cut 1 piece?

[schrochem]

so a half hour to cut 1 piece?

The actually cutting doesn't take long. The prep takes a little time.
But it would be a SHEET, and it would cut out as many pieces as we could place on a sheet. The more pieces, the longer the cutting time.

[Dutch]

I took my hh in to work last night and set it up using the anchors. It was the same two that was in the pictures. The set up was a snap. These things are the bomb. There was no slippage at all on the stock spectra. I'm going to make some more with the offset stem only a little bigger hooks. The one I made was a little short on th nonload bearing side. I recommend the longer stem than what the cad file shows. It really adds stability, but if it works for you, HYOH (hook your own hook). You just need about 1 inch from the top of the hole to the bottom of the crotch of the hook. Anybody that shows up at a campout with rings, buckles, and strapping should be laughed right into a tent. That stuff is so last week.

[gunn parker]

Did you take any photos?

[Dutch]

Did you take any photos?__________________
All the photos I have are on page 18

[NCPatrick]

Anybody that shows up at a campout with rings, buckles, and strapping should be laughed right into a tent. That stuff is so last week.

I'm confused then about the way ya'll are using the suspension system here. Are you using straps/tree huggers at all on the trees?

[schrochem]

Anybody that shows up at a campout with rings, buckles, and strapping should be laughed right into a tent. That stuff is so last week.

LOL Dutch.......
I started to work on the cad piece last night but I need to get a vice. It was just too hard to fiddle with. I still have quite a bit of material to get rid of but the piece right now weighs 15g. It's easily gonna be half that if not more.

[Rapt]

Scott,

If you have a sturdy table or bench then you can use a clamp to hold the piece while you work on it.

With small pieces the other thing that you can do when you want to do finer finishing is clamp the tool (like a file) and move the work piece instead. Its easier to see what you're doing then since the file isn't hiding the cut.

[NCPatrick]

Ok then, fine. I'll just go with the flow. I thought it might be good to get an update on what the entire suspension system might look like, especially considering Dutch's last comment (that this suspension system is so radical that everything else pales in comparison...).

The last "big picture" picture was quite a few iterations ago. And yes, I did just go back and read this entire thread. Apparently, you are still talking about using a bit of strap/hugger for the trees, but rope or line everywhere else...?

[schrochem]

Ok then, fine. I'll just go with the flow. I thought it might be good to get an update on what the entire suspension system might look like, especially considering Dutch's last comment (that this suspension system is so radical that everything else pales in comparison...).

The last "big picture" picture was quite a few iterations ago. And yes, I did just go back and read this entire thread. Apparently, you are still talking about using a bit of strap/hugger for the trees, but rope or line everywhere else...?

Yep, still a hugger. You could minimize the size of the hugger to whatever the largest tree you think you'll use. With two loops on the hugger, you can lark's head one through the other around the tree. The free end will have some light rope attached (I think 1/8" spyderline or vectrus 12 seem to be popular). The hook can be either at the hammock or at the hugger.
For the 'current' model of the bridge hammock, I'd have it where the two suspension lines meet (instead of a ring or a cinch buckle). Then I would have a line going to the hugger. To adjust, pull line through hook/anchor/thingie and use wrap to tighten.
This should save quite a bit of weight in two places, webbing and ring/buckle without giving up the ease and flexibility.

[schrochem]

Scott,

If you have a sturdy table or bench then you can use a clamp to hold the piece while you work on it.

With small pieces the other thing that you can do when you want to do finer finishing is clamp the tool (like a file) and move the work piece instead. Its easier to see what you're doing then since the file isn't hiding the cut.

I tried a few things and my clamp didn't want to cooperate. I think I might buy one of those tungsten tips for my dremel. If I can get close I have a grinding wheel that can bring it to the finished shape (except the two inner channel areas).

[Rapt]

My temptation is to use 4mm static cord... Its plenty strong even accounting for wear and loss of strength from binding around things... And its a little easier size to use/handle than the finer ones...


I use diamond tips on my dremel they come in inexpensive sets of a bunch of shapes and work well on everything. The outside large curves will shape faster with a good sized file than with a dremel. I work on stuff like this while watching TV...:) So time is less critical than noise. Use a small saw to get close in cutout.

[stoikurt]

I don't know, I'm just not convinced this is better than rings or buckles.

Yeah, you can save some weight but certainly not time. If you'r still using huggers without the biner you have to thrread one end of the hugger thru the other end. The smaller the tree - then the longer piece of hugger extending towards the hammock - meaning you have to choose trees farther apart - the farther apart the trees the higher up the tree you have to wrap the hugger.

So far the only advantage I see is the weight and I'll gladly carry the extra couple ounces for the added convenience.

[Rapt]

Should be less bulky too... 4mm cord takes up a lot less space than 1" webbing.... Now you only need 3' of webbing at each end instead of 12'... the rest can be cord.

The idea being its as easy and fast as rings or buckles.... :) Of course you'd need to to side by side testing to verify...

[GrizzlyAdams]

Should be less bulky too... 4mm cord takes up a lot less space than 1" webbing.... Now you only need 3' of webbing at each end instead of 12'... the rest can be cord.

The idea being its as easy and fast as rings or buckles.... :) Of course you'd need to to side by side testing to verify...

I've enjoyed watching the figure-9 thread take off and lead to metal being cut. But I likely will not use these...I could mod a large figure-9 to kinda sorta join the party, but I won't.

Minimizing setup time is not my objective. Safety, functionality, weight, ease of use are my priorities, more or less in order of importance. I won't say the anchor hooks are unsafe. But there is an aspect of "consequences of misconfiguration", a.k.a. user error, that does weigh in. The rings can slip we're told, and in a heart-beat one can throw a hitch in to protect against that. Even if they do slip they won't abruptly, it would be more of a glide to the ground. The cinch buckle might jam if you pull things too tightly, but that's not a safety issue. I imagine that a Hennessy knot that is "close" might slip, but it wouldn't be a flat out drop. The hitches that seem to work for the anchor are simple, but look to me like if something went wrong it would be a bad kind of wrong. I've not thought about it enough to be able to point out the kind of user error I'm talking about, perhaps they are so simple that the only kind of hitches that look right are right. Perhaps there is something like the extra hitch for safety that could be thrown in for the anchor to provide a fall-back solution if the hitch on the anchor gives way for some reason. I'll leave it to the anchor guys to kick that around if they want to.

I'm all for the weight and bulk savings of using cord rather than webbing though, and have started doing that. Means something else plays the role that the anchor or rings or cinch buckle plays. I like using mechanical advantage to take the pressure off the final point of attachment, and there are posts about that; that's as easy as rings and buckles. I know I can do what I'd like using an SMC ring on the (short) webbing and a ring on the line....that's 4 for the hammock at a weight cost of 1.6 oz, shoot, make that 2 oz because I'd use a little more cord than an approach that doesn't use mechanical advantage. I get a connection with lower consequence of failure (short of rope failure), it is very easy to adjust, and is light. It isn't the lightest or the fastest, but those are further down my prioritized list of objectives.

but have at it anchor gizmo guys. Maybe if Dutch sees me with cord, and rings used differently for mechanical advantage it won't be so last week, maybe only so yesterday, and I won't have to huddle, well you know, Down There. :)

Grizz

[Rapt]

For me speed isn't about "racing" through anything its about convenience. I also have safety high up my list, :) .... But generally I'm happy to rely on me as being mostly reliable... And yes an extra hitch would be a feasible safeguard with these....

That said, I'd probably be just as happy using a couple rings and biners and using a Klemheist type locking knot... I think at least one ring in the sequence with a drip tail permanently attached is a must have...

Because keeping dry is part of safety for me. Especially since I solo trip (canoe) a fair bit. When you're days from anywhere and by yourself where you're not likely to see another person, keeping healthy is keeping safe.

I just like design exercises :) I'm personally playing around with asym design ideas and cat cut tarps right now (along with building my next canoe.)

[slowhike]

sorry guys... but rings & clips ain't obsolete yet:cool:
i'm watching & liking what yall have cooking, but i still like the convenience & security of my ring buckles just fine:)

[FanaticFringer]

sorry guys... but rings & clips ain't obsolete yet:cool:
i'm watching & liking what yall have cooking, but i still like the convenience & security of my ring buckles just fine:)

Could'nt agree more. Love my cinch buckles and webbing. You guys can have those tree huggers.

[stoikurt]

I've enjoyed the thread and by no means do I intend to discourage anyone from continuing to experiment. I think that's what a lot of it is all about; just experimenting and trying different things. If we don't continue to do that then we can't advance science of hammock hanging. I'm just not there yet on this idea, but keep going.:)

[Dutch]

I have been laughing and laughing at the last few posts. I'm not out to convert anyone from jingling through the woods with your rings and buckles. Actually every suspension is fast and easy including knots. When I strung up last night I was over concrete and didn't have 100% trust in them yet either. I tied off the loose ends just to be certain. I think one of me biggest concerns is that you can set it up good, but get out and without weight on the hammock it could come undone. I think if I was in a race with rings, strapping and biner hanger I would lose by about 20 seconds. And I trust the buckles 100%. I just hate putting a suspension system in my pack that weighs the same as the hammock. Although we are getting a little crazy and should probably make them a little bigger in the hook area for safety.

Some of the posts sound like my ground dwelling friends....I don't wanna fall....A tent isn't that heavy....I like the convienence of my tent.

And of course if you really don't like the anchors it was all Turk's and Warbonnetguy's idea.

[FanaticFringer]

I have been laughing and laughing at the last few posts. I'm not out to convert anyone from jingling through the woods with your rings and buckles. Actually every suspension is fast and easy including knots. When I strung up last night I was over concrete and didn't have 100% trust in them yet either. I tied off the loose ends just to be certain. I think one of me biggest concerns is that you can set it up good, but get out and without weight on the hammock it could come undone. I think if I was in a race with rings, strapping and biner hanger I would lose by about 20 seconds. And I trust the buckles 100%. I just hate putting a suspension system in my pack that weighs the same as the hammock. Although we are getting a little crazy and should probably make them a little bigger in the hook area for safety.

Some of the posts sound like my ground dwelling friends....I don't wanna fall....A tent isn't that heavy....I like the convienence of my tent.

And of course if you really don't like the anchors it was all Turk's and Warbonnetguy's idea.


I find your post quite amusing as well.:rolleyes:

[GrizzlyAdams]

...

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


I don't want to fall! (http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/4/2/3/HHP-6-thin.jpg)

Grizz the coward

[Nest]

I don't want to fall! (http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/4/2/3/HHP-6-thin.jpg)

Grizz the coward

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

[Dutch]

I don't want to fall!

Grizz the coward


Griz point well made

[GrizzlyAdams]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[schrochem]

If done right, I think the whole system could be kept together. The loop end of the rope could 'catch' on the first loop of the hugger so it wouldn't com off. To attach to a tree, the hugger would be put around the tree, the loop passed through the second loop, then brought back to the anchor, the anchor moved till lines are tight.
Of course for the Bridge, I'd be back to putting a ring in there to join the lines.
Unless....
Okay, I need to sleep on it. :D

[Rapt]

Looks good Scott.

Interesting. You took it in a whole other direction by permanently threading it on to the line like that.

Basically it looks like you could put a permanent loop in the end of the line that goes over the "anchor" part and just slide the ring portion until everything is where you want. Solves the slipping without load issue AND the coming undone issue.

I can make the ring part slightly bigger, or even give it a flat spot...

Of course this application makes it act very much like a traditional guyline tensioner plate, but with a bit more bite ... I think I'd opt for putting it on the line with a full turn like you have, and then using this knot (http://www.animatedknots.com/alpinebutterfly/index.php?LogoImage=LogoGrog.jpg&Website=www.animatedknots.com) to make the loop that goes over the hooks. Gives dual adjustment.

So many choices... And I have no intention of falling either. :D

[Dutch]

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?
Attached Thumbnails
Scott I'm gonna try this and pick up a mold or two. If it don't slip this solves the problem of all the weight being on one side. Does that design tilt when you use WBG's hitch.

[schrochem]

Scott I'm gonna try this and pick up a mold or two. If it don't slip this solves the problem of all the weight being on one side. Does that design tilt when you use WBG's hitch.

Dutch if you look at the 3rd picture on post 225 it has the hitch. That's what it looked like under load as well.

[schrochem]

Looks good Scott.

Interesting. You took it in a whole other direction by permanently threading it on to the line like that.

Basically it looks like you could put a permanent loop in the end of the line that goes over the "anchor" part and just slide the ring portion until everything is where you want. Solves the slipping without load issue AND the coming undone issue.

I can make the ring part slightly bigger, or even give it a flat spot...

Of course this application makes it act very much like a traditional guyline tensioner plate, but with a bit more bite ... I think I'd opt for putting it on the line with a full turn like you have, and then using this knot (http://www.animatedknots.com/alpinebutterfly/index.php?LogoImage=LogoGrog.jpg&Website=www.animatedknots.com) to make the loop that goes over the hooks. Gives dual adjustment.

So many choices... And I have no intention of falling either. :D


Yea, I think that's the best thing about having the physical pieces in hand, new ideas sprout.
Yes, the permanent loop on the end, then over ther anchor, then adjust the anchor is what I had in mind.
Th only thing is the loop around the ring and as Grizz mentioned using a clove hitch. It certainly seems with the forces going the way they do that the clove would hold but animatedknots.com says the clove can slip. I'm not that knowledgeable about knots and want something that isn't going to slip.

[GrizzlyAdams]

Yea, I think that's the best thing about having the physical pieces in hand, new ideas sprout.
Yes, the permanent loop on the end, then over ther anchor, then adjust the anchor is what I had in mind.
Th only thing is the loop around the ring and as Grizz mentioned using a clove hitch. It certainly seems with the forces going the way they do that the clove would hold but animatedknots.com says the clove can slip. I'm not that knowledgeable about knots and want something that isn't going to slip.

you won't be able to use the clove hitch to slide very far comfortably. Basically what you have to do is to create a bit of slack on one side of the hitch, and "push" the slackened rope all the way through the turns of the knot. That's OK for a couple of inches, but gets real old real fast.

Rapt's analogy with tension tighteners though is a good one. Think about what a honking great tension tightener capable of carrying several hundred pounds would look like.

Grizz

[Rapt]

The round turn through the ring is very unlikely to slip while under load around an essentially square section, as here (http://www.animatedknots.com/tensionless/index.php?LogoImage=LogoGrog.jpg&Website=www.animatedknots.com). There's essentially no "tension" on the tail of the rope. I'd bet your loop will fail under increasing load by eventually causing a failure of the rope at one of the corners rather than by slipping.

Most rope looses a LOT of strength as it gets bent in tighter and tighter curves. Spectra is notorious for losing more than half its strength when knotted, because of this effect and its typically very small diameters. The corners on the anchor make it lock really well, but also give very tight radius bends.

Re:Grizz'z honking grate tension tightener..... It'd be about like this>>>> Sketch to follow...

[schrochem]

Well I weighed it on a more official balance and it's 6g.
I need to recalibrate that home balance...
Okay, I'm listening to the engineers.
I looked up the spyderline tensile strength and it looks like the vectrus 12 (http://www.apsltd.com/Tree/d3000/e829.asp) WBG has been pushing is much stronger.

On the way in to work I thought of a way to 'catch' the loop end on the first tree hugger loop. If the loop was made with two pieces of webbing, the rope could be put between the two. The knot in the rope loop would catch.

[Rapt]

I'm glad it weighed 6g... Otherwise my calculations were WAY off... :)

As for other rope options consider Excel d12 (http://www.foghmarine.com/2006Catalogue/Page%2052%20to%2055%20lo%20res.pdf) its VERY strong for its size...

And similarly priced to Vectrus12....

Finally attaching a loop to a loop is easy, as is attaching it to an end. Just larks head it over the end which has a stopper knot of some sort in it. They routinely do it with kites (http://members.aol.com/goodheavens/lark.html) like kiteboarders use. Those kites can generate more than enough force to lift a person (been there, done that, broken bones...) Its pretty much self locking, if the line is larger than the loop line. The stopper knot is just insurance.

[schrochem]

I'm glad it weighed 6g... Otherwise my calculations were WAY off... :)

As for other rope options consider Excel d12 (http://www.foghmarine.com/2006Catalogue/Page%2052%20to%2055%20lo%20res.pdf) its VERY strong for its size...

And similarly priced to Vectrus12....

Finally attaching a loop to a loop is easy, as is attaching it to an end. Just larks head it over the end which has a stopper knot of some sort in it. They routinely do it with kites (http://members.aol.com/goodheavens/lark.html) like kiteboarders use. Those kites can generate more than enough force to lift a person (been there, done that, broken bones...) Its pretty much self locking, if the line is larger than the loop line. The stopper knot is just insurance.

Okay, I just saw the new sketch you did.
Yes, the link you have for the larks head is what I did on the anchor.
Are you suggesting 'snaking' the main line through two holes to create tension and then larks head over the end 'nub'?
The piece should slide just going through 2 holes...I think.
How bout two holes and an anchor. Or did you loose me? :D

[Rapt]

Not sure if I lost you or you lost me...:D Sorry the tensioner was just a regular one, but it could easily be modded to have the end be an anchor and larks head onto the end. I'd probably much abbreviate the flukes of the anchor if it was going to be used that way.

I was talking about larksheads in general. Could be used to attach line to webbing etc...

[schrochem]

Not sure if I lost you or you lost me...:D Sorry the tensioner was just a regular one, but it could easily be modded to have the end be an anchor and larks head onto the end. I'd probably much abbreviate the flukes of the anchor if it was going to be used that way.

I was talking about larksheads in general. Could be used to attach line to webbing etc...

Earlier in this thread I asked about using ONLY friction knots. I guess this would fall into the same arena. The link you had would be pretty light and without hardware. Would it hold?

This new suspension possibility opens some new and old doors. Perhaps in the climbing industry one of the ascenders or descenders could be placed on the main line. Then the line is passed through the huggers and attached to the ascender via a larks head or a biner. Then the ascender is moved to adjust. I think that Petzel tibloc could work like that (but pricey).
Sorry folks just thinking out loud.

I don't think I'm too concerned about making my own piece out of 6061 aluminum. If it's a solid design and overbuilt I'll feel comfortable. Sure a rated climbing piece would be better but I don't think I'm gonna sweat it. I bet years ago people thought you crazy if you used 1.9oz ripstop for a hammock..... I can imagine the apprehension 'is it gonna hold.'

[Dutch]

Scott,
I set up my HHULB in my basement this morning the way you have pictured. I took a nap for an hour and a half. The Spectra didn't feel like it was going to slide at all. My through hole is barely big enough to fit the spectra through. It wasn't super easy to adjust it and the spectra could be the problem. I ordered some of that fancy sailor's rope of WBG yesterday. They advertise it holds knots well so I think it will act like the spectra, but we'll see. If I am getting this correct. Close to the hammock there is a single wrap around the through hole, then the line travels though the huggers and and back to the anchor with a larks head (or some other loop). The loop is hooked on the anchor and the adjustment is made by sliding the anchor up and down the rope. Correct me if I'm wrong.


I've fallen and I can't..... It was nice today so I set up my hammock to read a book this afternoon. I used my three holed triangles since they were already on. As soon as I put my weight on it I was on the ground. They held up fine last friday but maybe I gained weight in 5 days. Well lesson learned and they need to be beefier. They were only 1/8 Aluminium that the holes were 1/8th from the edge. It is clear that is just not enough metal to hold me and a book. Luckily I landed on my yard and not over one of Grizz's rock slides. I hope this doesn't discourage experimentation, but I found a limit and thought I would share. Well the triangles we're so last thursday anyhow.

[GrizzlyAdams]

Scott,
I set up my HHULB in my basement this morning the way you have pictured. I took a nap for an hour and a half. The Spectra didn't feel like it was going to slide at all. My through hole is barely big enough to fit the spectra through. It wasn't super easy to adjust it and the spectra could be the problem. I ordered some of that fancy sailor's rope of WBG yesterday. They advertise it holds knots well so I think it will act like the spectra, but we'll see. If I am getting this correct. Close to the hammock there is a single wrap around the through hole, then the line travels though the huggers and and back to the anchor with a larks head (or some other loop). The loop is hooked on the anchor and the adjustment is made by sliding the anchor up and down the rope. Correct me if I'm wrong.


I've fallen and I can't..... It was nice today so I set up my hammock to read a book this afternoon. I used my three holed triangles since they were already on. As soon as I put my weight on it I was on the ground. They held up fine last friday but maybe I gained weight in 5 days. Well lesson learned and they need to be beefier. They were only 1/8 Aluminium that the holes were 1/8th from the edge. It is clear that is just not enough metal to hold me and a book. Luckily I landed on my yard and not over one of Grizz's rock slides. I hope this doesn't discourage experimentation, but I found a limit and thought I would share. Well the triangles we're so last thursday anyhow.

ouch!
Moral of story : Don't try reading "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" in a hammock. ;)

Grizz

[schrochem]

Dutch, yea that's how I had it hung last night. That's so last night though :D
I think there is a possibility there if we can find an easier way to slide with it still being safe. I went back here (http://storrick.cnchost.com/VerticalDevicesPage/Ascender/SemiMech.html) and it seems like there are some ideas to be had.
I'm not a climber so I don't know how they would adjust something like we're trying to.

It sounds like your into safe :)
Yep, it must have been that darn book!

[Rapt]

I just checked out that link to the semi-mechanical ascenders and the problems I see are basically the same as we're playing with.

Either they large/bulky complex, or the knot is. Or they can be replaced by a prusik knot or similar The real issue with prusiks is they require a fairly significant size difference between the main rope and the locking knot to work properly. Ideally at least 2-1 size ratio.

Then there's the whole issue of ease and speed of tyying and untying.

[schrochem]

I was thinking along the lines of this sliding anchor.....
If there was a way to have a 'toggle' (like on a stuff sack) this would be quick and easy. I'm not sure of a design but I've attached a drawing of what I'm talking about.
The toggle would be attached to the main rope, the rope goes through the huggers, then goes through the toggle. To adjust, pull free end through toggle to where you want it. If the toggle were friction only that would be it. Perhaps we'd have to tie it off.
Also, it could be cinched up tight against the huggers (like we would a toggle on a stuff sack).

[Rapt]

I'm not sure. I like the hardware idea and I feel like there's an idea right on the edge of my mind, but its not coming for me right now. It keeps dead ending as something that's no better than what we have now.

That said, the more we play with this the more I think you can easily achieve the same effect by simply passing a bight through the webbing and then take a couple half hitches around the main line and secure them with another bight through the loop and a couple more half hitches. Same effect just as "adjustable" and no hardware to carry... Easy to pop undone...

I dunno guess I'll have to set up a test with some anchor pieces and see.... Pardon my thinking out loud as it were.

[Dutch]

I was thinking about a kind of buckle for rope such as a thumb wheel on a tapered slot that tightens on way but loosens the other of a cam and lever. I know we are talking more weight and it isn't something we can make with a hacksaw, but I would think there is something in the sailing or climbing industries that would fit the bill. Of course we are talking more weight so this is probably a dead end.

Rapt why does the main rope have to be bigger, there is something I am missing.

[Dutch]

http://www.hammockforums.net/gallery/files/4/0/9/cam.jpg