# knot used to make a come along?



## woodville (Jan 6, 2007)

I used to know of a knot that involved using three loops in the line to make an easy to untie come along but I can't remember how to tie it. Set up is I've got a running bolin attached to the tree and now I'm taking a 1/2 wrap around a nearby tree and trying to make a loop in the line in front of the 1/2 wrap so I can feed the end of the line through the loop to wrench the tree I'm cutting over. Man I just can't remember that knot!


----------



## WRW (Jan 6, 2007)

You mean a trucker's hitch? 3:1 advantage?

http://www.animatedknots.com/trucke...ge=LogoGrog.jpg&Website=www.animatedknots.com


----------



## ddhlakebound (Jan 6, 2007)

I use a butterfly for midline attachments. Its probably easier to run a search here to see how to tie it, describing knot tying isn't my strength. 

When I do this, I attach a biner and micro pulley to my midline knot, and a block at my anchor point, so you are not fighting friction as you are trying to pull. It's also handy to attach a prussic loop at your anchor, to hold your tension, so once you pull it to where you want it, slide the prussic up, and it holds itself.


----------



## WRW (Jan 6, 2007)

ddhlakebound,

Yours is the better way and is easier on the rope as well.


----------



## Mike Barcaskey (Jan 6, 2007)

quick and easy, put a bowline in the line, carabiner in the loop to run the end through. bowline unties easy.
though I much prefer to use a couple of pulleys


----------



## begleytree (Jan 6, 2007)

woodville said:


> I used to know of a knot that involved using three loops in the line to make an easy to untie come along but I can't remember how to tie it. Set up is I've got a running bolin attached to the tree and now I'm taking a 1/2 wrap around a nearby tree and trying to make a loop in the line in front of the 1/2 wrap so I can feed the end of the line through the loop to wrench the tree I'm cutting over. Man I just can't remember that knot!



around here that knot is called a 3 ring circus.
-Ralph


----------



## Climbah in Mass (Jan 6, 2007)

*Sounds like the butterfly to me*

Great Midline hitch when come along to pull over trees.


----------



## beowulf343 (Jan 6, 2007)

Bowline on a bight.


----------



## BostonBull (Jan 6, 2007)

Bowline on a Bight or a Butterfly.


----------



## begleytree (Jan 6, 2007)

the butterfly is not the same knot as the 3 ring circus, close though. neither is the rope saddle/ bowline on a bight.
-Ralph


----------



## Tree Machine (Jan 6, 2007)

It's honestly easier to slap an ascender on, midline, and clip a biner and a pulley to the bottom of the ascender. It's immediately adjustable and removable. 

I prefer a petzl protraxion as the midline pulley as it is a pulley / internal cam, all-in-one, that when you tension the rope, it grabs the rope, preventing it from going backwards. This is real important in pulling over trees with a mild back lean. It's quicker in setting up and disassembling than a series of knots, and it's the right piece for the place your talking about. However, it's not at all what you're talking about.

As far as a knot, for ease and quickness of setup, and bombproof security and ease of disassembling, a classic truckers hitch as described in WRW's link above, but create your *midline fig 8 with sticks*. Create a big bight in the rope, do a simple overhand knot, keep it real loose. Find two dead sticks, pinkie diameter, each more or less the length of your hand. Insert the two sticks through the body of the knot, then tighten it down. When using 2:1 or 3:1 systems, you can apply a lot of force to an inline knot, making it really difficult to untie. By simply snapping the sticks in two you release the knot and can move on to better things. On a tree job site, there are always going to be dead sticks at hand, so this is a nice one to add to your bag of tricks.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jan 6, 2007)

This is of curse 3x Input - Friction. So, a krab rather than rope in redirect positions would give 20% less friction; but still be ~30% at 1st redirect? The accumulated friction effects from multiple redirect points in system would be a more geometric/multiplying than additive accumulation. If given choice i think redirect closest to input (dynamic redirect) should be most efficient position/pulley etc.

Pulleys have different efficiencies. The slip of bushing around axle not quite as efficient as bearings; but bearings more impact sensitive. Then the sheave to axle diameter ratio; gives leverage over the bushing or bearing frictions. In larger sheaves, the efficiency between bushing and bearings is expen$ive; as for just a few more percentage points of efficiency, the bearing pulley can be ~2+ times the cost of the less delicate bushing. But, in especially multi pulley systems with the accumulated multiplying frictions; people pay well for the bearings for lifting/pulling. If using Z-Rig for lowering/ extending jig to control load and not lifting/compressing jig; we want the frictions; as helping us (until they are hard on rope.

Tight bights of redirects of rope reeved thru self or krab; weaken rope by taking the inner part of the redirect bight out of pulling service. Cam grabs can damage ropes and are usually made more for bodyweight than load weights. Can also have a one way grab with  a prussik on output end of a redirect point. Then can relax between pulls, and/or impact into them. But, if prussik (or checking cam) is placed at the dynamic redirect (not on anchor), the pull is 3x, but the hold of prussik is only 2x. Likewise prussik on static redirect of anchor in Zrig would only hold 1x. Especially if using cams for the hold; these points not bearing more than the 1/3rd of load that your hand pull takes, can be easily overlooked, and damaging. Also, the rig will stretch out more at the hold point; for each leg of line now bears more load; especially noticeable at full extension/ more line area to stretch more.

If we Zrig; with tail of load line as shown; the line 'below' dynamic/moving redirect that goes to static redirect on anchor; gets skinny from stretch from stretch of 1x effort, and more chance of slippage. A Butterfly etc. instead does not 'worry' about this point. But, then no adjust-ability; only 1 pull length. Better is to piggy back a Butterfly bearing system onto a prussik etc. on load line; then the part of load line 'below' the prussik is relaxed and 'fat' so less chance of slippage.

The Z-rig gives 3x-Friction; with 2x pull on anchor(open 'circuit' gives different pulls on load, and anchor pivot). But can be 2Handed for 4x pull of 1 hand; but then 4x on anchor also (2Handing closes the 'circuit' of force flow and thereby makes the load and anchor pulls equivalent/ no opening in circuit to change loading between these 2 points in the closed circuit). But, the Frictions reductions to force potentials will be less with 2Handing than same force or force multiplier with non-2Handing methods; for less loss.

At finish of tightening Z; can anchor input away from dynamic redirect and sweat more purchase from it usually; to then be tripled by the system. If using as a tie down for transport, now all lines in Zrig are tight/ will resist bending; so can bend whole jig with perpendicular force; for really, really leveraged tightening.

i tell ya; i'm knot crazy!


----------



## woodville (Jan 6, 2007)

Thanks for the help it appears to be a butterfly just the way I learned or forgot how to tye it is diffrent.http://www.animatedknots.com/alpinebutterfly/


----------



## jmack (Jan 6, 2007)

woodville said:


> Thanks for the help it appears to be a butterfly just the way I learned or forgot how to tye it is diffrent.http://www.animatedknots.com/alpinebutterfly/


yeah i saw an old timer make it, it was rope on rope though, the loops took the stress and made the knot easier and possible to untie


----------



## NickfromWI (Jan 6, 2007)

The knot you're thinking of, with 3 loops and easily removable:

Slip Knot on a Bight...then run the running end through all three loops of the slip knot.

love
nick


----------



## digga (Jan 7, 2007)

hi very interesting topic as I use the truckers hitch sometimes when cutting alone to pull over the tree I'm cutting am interested in what’s been said about using a petzl protraxion to keep the tension on the rope as i normally just end up tying off with a knot which is a pain if you want to take up some more slack in the rope. Could someone please explain how you set the petzl protraxion( or similar device ) up and where you put it to keep the tension on the rope and allow you to pull more slack up?


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jan 7, 2007)

A prussik lock/safety is similar. Only spreads grab along more line, and on outside, sets by pulling away from redirect point. Cams concentrate grab in one area, and pinch thru rope; better when the core is the force carrier as opposed to the sheath. Toothed cams can be fairly aggressive to rope. 

Where the prussik sets by pulling away from redirect point, the cam sets by pulling into the redirect, so is set on the opposite side of it's pulley than you'd set a prussik. In the Zrig/ Truckers; you can set Traxion on krab by its becket at butterfly position, with red cam button on the hand pull side. Reeve rope thru Traxion pulley. Close cam on rope.

Now should give a 1 way, 3:1 pull. Notice, your hand pull is 1/3rd the load pull; but when the cam holds it has 1 leg less of pull on load than hand pull has; so cam is holding 1/2 the load pull; not 1/3rd, so watch safety ratings; just the same as prussik in same position; but on opposite side of sheave (so cam sets pulling into its pulley, prussik sets pulling out of it's pulley/ tended by the pulley.


----------



## Tree Machine (Jan 7, 2007)

I tend to use the ProTraxion to pull over small trees. Generally I go 1:1, upper tree, out to the anchor, through the ProTraxion and back to the base of the tree being cut. The advantage here is you can pre-tension, make your cuts, set the saw aside and your pull rope is right there. Place your boot against the backside of the trunk, push with your foot, pull with your rope. But that's because I generally work alone. If I have help, I'll set the rig as drawn on page 1, a 2:1 Z.

May I repeat that I do this on small fells where I can't trust it to be a simple fell over or a push-fell. The proTraxion is a rated device, but as Spidey point out, too much force can have a damaging effect on ropes.

On larger trees where there is actually room to fell it (rare where I work)I've come to set two ropes, one on the ProTraxion system, the other to a come-along. If there's chance of damaging ANYTHING, you should not trust the pullover to a single rope. Felling a tree is generally considered faster than chunking it down...... unless an accident happens. Two ropes is good practice and the extra time, if it prevents even a minor occurance, is worth the time spent. An accident can make a professional look like a fool in a hurry.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jan 7, 2007)

Also with a tension hold; a flexible line becomes stiff. The stiffness gives resistance to bending. This makes the rope now leverageable not just by redundant inline pulls; but now leverage able by perpendicular pull or push (when usually rope only gives inline force usage and outputs, but also rope usually only takees pull and not push as an input). But only for a short distance; but of very high leverage. Another plus of a hold is our ability to impact the system. Without a rope hold, we must hold rope and then pull, can't use impact force as an input as well.

So if tree etc. as load will not move and cannot place any more inline force into 1:1 or 3:1 etc.; might not have to cut more. If it is close enough to bending hinge; you can pull across tightend line for a very high leverage return (but of a short distance\ arc of bend. The sudden change in force also has impact force; applying it even more quickly\sharply creates even more of a sudden impact of change. All in all if this works, less cutting, less work and stronger hinge. Just by applying lesser known perpendicular force to line.

We only think of inline force and pull for rope; cuz mostly that is what works; and we envision rope as its more familiar non-tensioned\relaxed form. Where only inline pull works. But once tensioned the rope has charachteristics of both a flexable and non-flexable\levergeable device; only inline forces can be used on the former; both on latter; but inline force on non-flexable gives no advantage(cannot go around pulley etc.).


----------



## clearance (Jan 7, 2007)

beowulf343 said:


> Bowline on a bight.



Yup, simple, works good.


----------



## rahtreelimbs (Jan 7, 2007)

Girth Hitch with a 'biner or pulley works good midline also!


----------



## appalachianarbo (Jan 7, 2007)

I use a directional figure eight so the direction of pull on the knot is in line with the load. I've never had a problem with untying, even with machinery as the "muscle." The butterfly also accomplishes the same thing. I have also used triple wrap prussiks (not just a girth hitch) instead of a knot. As compared to an ascender, the prussiks will start to slip at max load, not simply pop off or break the rope like an ascender, and like others have said, they do less damage to the rope (no teeth or pinching). The prussiks are also easier to adjust than a knot. I have used the prussiks in rescue situations, and the knots in tree pulling situations.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jan 7, 2007)

i like prussiks, but quiet fairly; if the prussik is grabbing down the length of the mantle only; and the force flow is down the inner kern; there can be a problem; you are not grabbing the force flow. At these and dirty rope times, cams are more appropriate; to girp/pinch thru the line and grab the force flow down the inner kern.

Double Braids that dividee the force flow to both layers can sometimes have such problems too i think.


----------



## booboo (Jan 8, 2007)

Bowline on a bight works fine. Add a pulley if friction is going to be problem, add a dead stick to help untie it if you're going to really load the knot. Simple but effective.


----------



## Tree Machine (Jan 8, 2007)

Friction is what steals from the force you're applying. A 3:1 run through bights alone, by the time all the friction is accounted for, may only yield you a net force equal to a 1:1 through a pulley. Friction is multiplied as force is increased on the friction points. In pulling over a tree, if you set up a 3:1 through bights, the force you're applying by pulling the rope is 'eaten' to a large degree by the first, second and third bends. Whatever force is left is applied to the actual pull on the tree. The folly here is that an involved system without the use of pulleys won't produce the degree of leverege you intend on getting. This is the 'accumulated friction' effect that sSpidey covered in detail.


The reason I bring this up again is that friction should always be viewed as a problem when you're trying to _create_ a force. It is an asset when trying to _overcome_ a force (namely, gravity).


----------



## CoreyTMorine (Jan 8, 2007)

I've had mixed luck with a "cats paw". Sometimes the twists will creep down, and cause the loop to become smaller, eventually binding on the biner/krab or rope passing through it. But it is super easy to tie and untie. 

If i need a lot of pull i often use the rope in conjunction with falling wedges. As Treemachine points out, friction is multiplied by tension, so the tighter the pull rope becomes the more force you lose to tension. The other side of this coin is that as the tension is decreased (by hammering the wedges and thereby lifting the tree) you get more pull on the rope.

So, if you only need to tension the rope, then no hardware is necessary. Just take a 1/2 wrap, tie your midline knot, pass the working end through the loop, and pull. Friction will eventually kill the mechanical advantage, but not before you get the line pulled fairly tight.

If you need more tension spyder mentioned the solution at the end of his post. You just tie off the gearless z-rig, and run the remaining working end around another tree so that it is perpendicular to the pull line, then pass the working end over the pull line, in effect making another z-rig. Now you can get some serious tension on the pull line. But remember it will change the direction of pull, and is not very adjustable. 

So, in answer to the original question, the cats paw might work, its very easy but does have a learning curve. I don't like the slip knot, as the overhand portion can sieze on the bight making it hard to untie. So my personal standard for the gearless tension z-rig is the alpine butterfly with a stick stuck in the bridge of the tension side.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jan 8, 2007)

A very good point just came up..........

It is all ways safer to back up pulls with wedge. This can be to add force; or just as a backup/safety.

Also, make sure there are no unintentional dutchmans to face!!!!

In tree pulling, we can do 2 things steer and / or place more force on hinge. Hinge strength is just a passive reflector of the active pulls/pushes on hinge; so we are making hinge stronger with non-steering forces applied/ forces applied to forward face.

In good wood, i try to use tapered hinge for steering; and apply only forward force, to strengthen hinge, which makes the tapered hinge stronger, and let it steer. If you steer directly with rope direction, you skip the multiplier of the tapered hinge with your applied forces. The hinge force is autonomous, passive force of teree effort, not yours. A lot of times steering directly with wedge/rope direction (that counters sidelean); is just you working to replace what the tree would give. This is a judgemeant call as to whether the leverages of the tapered can handle the steering; but very real. Direction is a very important part of Force that should be realized and accounted for in all examinations; in deed without direction; there is no force. Force is power X distance; power/force is the only thing that can overcome distance; so that if their is force it must try to prevail in a certain, plottable direction; without direction/ no force! All ways consider direction of forces as part of fine tuning!


----------



## CoreyTMorine (Jan 8, 2007)

Spyder, I say "working end" because that is currently what we are working with. But would you say "Bitters" because the real working end is up in the tree to be pulled, far from the dregs on the gound. Thanks for the clarification.

quote_So, if you only need to tension the rope, then no hardware is necessary. Just take a 1/2 wrap, tie your midline knot, pass the working end through the loop, and pull. Friction will eventually kill the mechanical advantage, but not before you get the line pulled fairly tight._


----------



## Bermie (Jan 9, 2007)

I have two lengths of prussic cord set aside just for this situation and have used them on several occasions.
Pulling rope is tied to the tree, led back to a pulley on the anchor tree, one distel hitch is tied on the first leg and clipped down by the pulley to prevent creep back, rope goes through pulley then back up to another pulley that is held on the line with a second distel.
You can slide the second distel up as far as you need to get the length of pull you want. Once you tension it up, it stays right there.
Everything is self tending and friction is minimised, knots are avoided in the main line. The limiting factor is if the tree were to sit back or get caught by a gust, would the distels hold if it is a big tree? Do your calculations and adjust accordingly!


----------



## appalachianarbo (Jan 9, 2007)

Bermie...Good description of a Z-drag (3:1) with a progress capturing device (distel or prussik at first pulley). This is a very common rescue MA system, but is used with 2 triple wrap prussiks at each location instead of just one. 

And like Spyder said, using pulleys greatly reduces friction, thereby maintaining your pulling power.


----------



## Bermie (Jan 10, 2007)

Yup, I learned it in the UK, works just fine!


----------



## Tree Machine (Jan 10, 2007)

CoreyT said:


> Spyder, I say "working end" because that is currently what we are working with. But would you say "Bitters" because the real working end is up in the tree to be pulled, far from the dregs on the gound.


There's the standing end, and the bitter end. 'Working end' is not an industry term, nor is 'bitters'. We don't make up terminology, unless the trerminology plain doesn't exist. We use rope terms from the standpoint of the ropes industry, rigging industry and especially sailing. Ropes have been used since the beginning of time and we tree climbers follow the already-established terminology handed down from the parent industries that make ours ours. Bitters is not a term. And if I'm tying a knot in a rope that has a limb already attached to it, which is the working end?


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jan 10, 2007)

i picked up Bitters along the way from someone else. i work in regions of the line; and i'd heard Bitter part and Bitter End mixed in with the confusion of knotting terms; so clung to the term Bitters as the regions after the 'Frictions' (a common sense term i kinda came up with to include turns on capstan etc. as compared to force reductions in line as it went thru a knot; and likewise define a region between the Standing Part and the Bitter Part/End).

What's in a name; if we understand the communication?

Working End, is very definitively and Goooogle-able normal speaking people term

i kinda don't like "Standing Part" because it is meant as it implies as the Standing, slack end that you aren't tying the knot with. What i don't like is after we place tension on the line; the Standing Part is no longer this lazy; just standing there thing; but can in fact be the initiator of the force; that reduces through knot frictions and frictions on host/mount to be reduced very much in the "Bitter End" of it's force. So, sometimes i like to say Standing Tension Part; because most of my examinations are of the forces in the line while it is working, not just being tied. Also, at that point both ends are working, not just 1. So forgive me, if i try to outgrow some of the bounds hear.

One of my characterizations, is a Bus pulling the Standing (Tension) Part, and the frictions of turns on a tree reduce the bus pull force to such a point a Baby could hold a Bus. Or we could trap the lesser Bitters force, under the more intense Bus pull force to then trap it securely, trapping what a baby could hold, under bus tension.

Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr something like that!


----------



## digga (Jan 22, 2007)

hey guys just wanted to say thanks for help interesting thread this info will be coming in handy on the next tree that needs a little persuasion but isn’t big enough to set the winch up for


----------



## woodchux (Jan 22, 2007)

Tree Machine said:


> There's the standing end, and the bitter end. 'Working end' is not an industry term, nor is 'bitters'. We don't make up terminology, unless the trerminology plain doesn't exist. We use rope terms from the standpoint of the ropes industry, rigging industry and especially sailing. Ropes have been used since the beginning of time and we tree climbers follow the already-established terminology handed down from the parent industries that make ours ours. Bitters is not a term. And if I'm tying a knot in a rope that has a limb already attached to it, which is the working end?



Arbormaster training teaches that you have the "working end" which is the part that you are using, The opposite end is the "running end", and everything in between is the "standing part".


----------



## Tree Machine (Jan 22, 2007)

And if I'm tying a knot in a rope at one end, whose far end I have a limb tied to, I'm 'using' both ends. That means both ends are the working ends.

OK, I'm not the terminology police, nor do I really care much about local slang. I do get irked when a shot bag is referred to as a shot ball, but really, does it even matter?

But it does matter. As professional ropemen, using conventional rope terms allows us to differentiate similar things, like a knot vs a hitch vs a bend and we understand a bight is not a loop is not a bend in the rope. A whoopie is different from a loopie. I can go on, but won't.

Arbormaster, of all groups, creating terms _as logical as they may be_, as tight and professional and respected as they are, to mix established terms and their own chosen working terms surprises the heck out of me. Now it has us all in a conundrum, which is different than a snafu.


Please pardon this derail. We were talking about.... oh yea, a knot used to make a come-along.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn (Jan 22, 2007)

Tree Machine said:


> There's the standing end, and the bitter end. 'Working end' is not an industry term, nor is 'bitters'. We don't make up terminology, unless the trerminology plain doesn't exist. We use rope terms from the standpoint of the ropes industry, rigging industry and especially sailing. Ropes have been used since the beginning of time and we tree climbers follow the already-established terminology handed down from the parent industries that make ours ours. Bitters is not a term. And if I'm tying a knot in a rope that has a limb already attached to it, which is the working end?



Industry terminology is still very coloquial. So everyone is right here, if that is what you learned from the old guy who taught you. 

I was talking about this with a client who allways used tip rope for tag line. I had heard it beofre, but learned tag line and find it easier, since you cannot use a tip rope to tag the but. 

A bit is a small woodden tie-off on an old ship, the bitters is the bight, or round turns on the bit.

The bitter end is that which is after the bit, on the deck.

"A Bitter is but the turne of a Cable about the Bits, and veare it out by little and little. And the Bitters end is that part of the Cable doth stay within boord."​
Captain Smith
Seaman's Grammar, 1627


----------



## Lonnie (Jan 22, 2007)

begleytree said:


> around here that knot is called a 3 ring circus.
> -Ralph


Same here altho i never used it i have seen it tho.


----------



## Tree Machine (Jan 22, 2007)

John Paul Sanborn said:


> Industry terminology is still very coloquial. So everyone is right here, if that is what you learned from the old guy who taught you.
> 
> I was talking about this with a client who allways used tip rope for tag line. I had heard it beofre, but learned tag line and find it easier, since you cannot use a tip rope to tag the but.
> 
> ...


I'm not attempting to be right, or anything. It's more about the respect for the centuries of ropemen before us, mainly the sailors and seamen.

Thanks for that, JP.


----------



## knudeNoggin (Jan 23, 2007)

Tree Machine said:


> Friction is what steals from the force you're applying. A 3:1 run through bights alone, by the time all the friction is accounted for, may only yield you a net force equal to a 1:1
> ...
> The folly here is that an involved system without the use of pulleys won't produce the degree of leverege you intend on getting.


Amen! It's instructive to set up some of these rope systems that are promoted
as "powerful" (e.g., the Versatackle) and to test them with dead weights,
to see what moves what (or not!). And if one has to choose among the
sheaves (pulley points) as to which to give the best pulley device to (say,
a choice among 1 block, 1 'biner, and pure rope eye), it should be the
one nearest the fall/haul line.

Further, using rope eyes alone can result in severe damage to the rope;
one canyoneer reported giving his new trim rope a nasty "core shot" on his
efforts to tighten a line. ouch!

-------

As for "bitter end" and associated rope terminology, I understand that term
to refer rather generally to the rope at the bits, but not to the very end of
it (though "bitter" can have such a connotation). (So I think that Capt. Smith's
"within board" meant just "aboard", "on the boat", in contrast to being out over
the water and ultimately at the opposite "end" of the operation.)
Some of the other historical terms seem to have a rub in referring to parts
of the rope only during the tying process, and not beyond that to the parts of
the tied object. "Working end" being what one is supposed to be working with
in forming a knot.

Spydey, as wee no, has his own weigh with wirds, esp. gnu wons he maid. 
 

*kN*


----------



## TheTreeSpyder (Jan 23, 2007)

Pretty good find there Big Guy. Now i think we have metal bitts, chocks etc. on pier too. Nice old version ya got thar!

i guess i'm guilty of a few play-ful miss-spellings for illustration; as well as borrowing terms from related things to fill voids i see in the models.

One of the voids is these points of referance/ perspective sighted. An immediate failing of the terms to working models to examine the working mechanics; and view tying mithods as illustrative of strategies to invoke these working mechanics; is shown by TreeMachine and KnudeNoggin. In a system analysis; of a rope in real action being pulled and pulling as a link; 1 knot's Bitter End is the opposite hitching's Working End; and vice-versa; depending on the perspective of which not you are taking. The terms are defined as KnudeNoggin says; in a relaxed line; you holding 1 end; and following description. The Standing Part is just laying there, not as i like to illustrate a Standing (Tension) Part; empowered and being the initiating force, causing forces in the hitch/knot to trap it's ownself and do other work to etc. So, i look at Standing Part as Standing Tension Part, pulling actively at each knot on either end; an lose the Running End at that point.


i all ways see part of physics as philosophy; and note some of the earliest philosophers were phycists in the 'western' tradition; and the sages of wisdom came with maximizing the physics through your own body in the eastern. Nature with a promised equal and opposite force to tap into; to a positive atitude mind? In the versatackle and z rig frictions i see this; that i use almost every day. With no/ low friction redirects end of the spectrum; we tension lines inline with pulley(s). When things are reversed; and we have frictional redircet(s) (but still in a workable/ dynamic range); we reverse strategy and give perpendicular input to the lines; capitalizing on the friction(s); that once thwarted us.

The best description of this is Brion Toss's well t-old, grisly tales of men at sea for months and sweating purchases from lines to empower lines to sail etc. We can grab perpendicular on a tensioned line; and use it's new found resistance to bend as leverage; then the friction(s) as walls/buffers to keep a purchase of line behind/ to leave the other side tighter/lift sail etc. So, we now have a winning strategy possible, on bringing tensioned lines to higher tensions or lifting; without friction or with friction (as long as in a dynamic/ moveable state). So; we can indicually sweat each line of the versa if we need. Also, the many legs of line doing less work per; lowers their elasticity; so we can then bend the whole jig after all tightening to leverage tension even higher (especially good for tiedowns etc.).


----------



## Tim Krause (Jan 30, 2007)

*flying dutchmen*

bowline in a bight and a beaner if you want to keep it simple and not spend 10 minutes mess'n around


----------

