# Termination Knots



## emr

After seeing the thread on friction hitches, I was wondering what termination knots you are all using. Personally I use an anchor hitch backed up with a fishermans knot.


----------



## Sunrise Guy

I've trusted my life, literally, to an anchor hitch for the complete time I've been an arborist, and it has never let me down, literally! I always tie a figure eight on the tail.


----------



## 046

here's what I use: 

triple fisherman is possibly the most secure bend known and the only termination knot recommend for spectra. 







figure eight backed up by double fisherman


----------



## Climb020

Achor hitch here as well but I don't back it up just leave a 6" tall. But anymore I am just splicing the ends. When I don't have to worry about untying the knot I will use a double fishermans but that is just for my lanyard.


----------



## 046

the ONLY termination knot I would not backup is a triple fisherman. Your mileage may veri... much better to error on the safe side. 

there's been instances of termination knots failing due to not tied correctly or what ever reason. if a backup knot like double fisherman had been used... high probability those dead climbers would still be alive.

please note I have the same view about splices. don't use splices due to fact I don't know if person did the splice was having a bad day or not. if I tie a knot... I KNOW knot is tied properly. please look carefully at picture posted above. notice all knots are tied perfectly symmetrical. that's part of test if knot is tied properly. 

again your mileage may veri..




Climb020 said:


> Achor hitch here as well but I don't back it up just leave a 6" tall. But anymore I am just splicing the ends. When I don't have to worry about untying the knot I will use a double fishermans but that is just for my lanyard.


----------



## John Paul Sanborn

I use a fishermans and tie it new every time. I like how it tails up, vs out and falls apart eaily once the carbiner is out.

BTW a Dbl fishermans has two of them, tied opposing so the tails match up.


----------



## gitrdun_climbr

*anchor knot here*

I use anchor knot backed up with two or three half hitches. I like that it cinches the biner for proper axis loading everytime and I was just taught to back it up from the beginning which meant to me someone must have had one slip in the past.

Seems there are several good attachment knots out there though.

046 I feel much the same way as you about splices. I know they're very popular and probably quite secure. I know that knots increase rope bend and therefore reduce strength...splices are less bulky...etc. I just haven't been able to make the change yet. Somehow I find great comfort and reliability in a well tied, inspectable knot. Has anyone heard of a splice failing?


----------



## 046

yes... splices have failed. but then so has badly tie knots. 
difference is I'm in control of how my knots are tied. then factor in a backup knot. 

I feel much safer than a splice done by someone I have no control over. 

new standards require cinching bends for termination knots. 
triple fisherman fits right in!


----------



## Yeahman

Triple fishermans, i like how it slides tight around biner, reducing the risk of side load.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

The anchor knot has the disadvantage of the tail exiting the knot to the side, which becomes an advantage if you're old schooling it with a blakes or taughtline hitch.
The bend radius becomes a non-issue when you consider the most loaded and first bend of a termination knot is around the carabinner or snap, and both a splice and a knot have to make this bend. 
Plus, splices are not as good at cinching up on the hardware.
And when we are terminating a tress cord, a knot can be re-tied to adjust the length of the cord, where with a splice, you're stuck with the length you got. This is a definite disadvantage because many of the hitches are so cord length sensitive.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder

i all ways preferred the way a DBY (on a snap) served the 'tail' up/over for Tautline and Blake's; finding the pull up from under an Anchor as rather diconcerting. Snaps are self righting compaired to krabs when loaded, whereby the pull must stay on the long axis; so the non-shrinking eye of the Bowline is not a concern in a snap IMLHO. MTL Bowline to Krab Warning

Classically an Anchor Hitch (really called a Bend; because olde sailors would Bend a line to a spar etc. as well as to another line in their terminology) is always backed up with a Half Hitch. This gives it the same exact structure as my thumbrule /simple base Hitch security of a RoundTurn and 2 Half Hitches; except the RoundTurn sits on the 1st Half Hitching for more security.

As we take the Anchor Bend/Hitch and tie it back to it's own self to form an eye we have a/n Double Overhand, Double Noose, Scaffold, Fishermans . The Round Turn sitting on it's own bootstrap still mechanically serves as a Round Turn and 1 Half Hitch i think; then the preceding Turn on the krab/mount further buffers force and vibration to about give as fair a security as a trailing Half Hitch? To about equal this baseline Round Turn and 2 Half Hitches?

i think as a line under tension apporaches a mount it is stretched, then the frictions of the mount reduce the force and thereby stretch, also the gripping action helps reduce stretch too. This gives a sudden, untapered change in the line; a weakness. Further as the Bitter End comes around to bend it's own Standing Part, the forces are leveraged higher; the kind of leveraging that you get from barely bending a straight line, to radically increase tension, and thereby stretch(?) Once again an untapered change. All this going on in one area is destabilizing to form, function, strength etc.

But as our Scaffold etc. Hitch comes around to bend it's own Standing Part; it takes several, stacked Turns, to perform a more stabilizing action; using the force remaining in the Bitters to spread out the change in bend and stretch over a longer, not so sudden distance; by firming the Standing Part i think. Note, if we take a RoundTurn on the krab/or other mount first; the effect is lost/ less force to use in the firming and gripping line; and the strength tests go down to reaffirn this theorized pattern.

The leveraging of the line around the mount is a diffeent matter; this leveraging is not of the slight bend in a straight bend sort; but rather a tight U shape bend. This leveraging is from compressing the inner part of the tight arc. Compression is push; and rope is only working when pulling; so this part of the line excludes itself from tension/pull; then the layer of fibers above it are kinda relaxed and jsut a leveraged multiplier/distance to the outside fibers; so not tottally working either. Then finally the outer fibers are arched and singled out as the real tensioned/ pulling fibers carrying the load. So this type of leveraging raisies the tension in the fibers too, but jsut a few of them. Both leveraging scenarios reduce the reamaining useable rated tensile; but by different means. The grip of the Anchor to self also seems to afford here a more 2 legs of line support into 1 of a splice; once again disappearing as tension is reduced going to the Anchor (to self) has a RoundTurn on the mount preceding it.

This configuration does have something over an eye splice; inj that in an eye splice you can't see the Bitters; but a bright piece of tape sticking out on end of line in a Scaffold etc. Hitch does give more of a visual check of it's integrity.

i generally go with a Triple, but don't feel tooo bad about a double, especially if the line is bent/compromised elsewhere, and this end link only need to be about as strong as that other compromised link/bending. i like my wraps on it not crossed though, for a smoother flow of firming force, over larger area, that is more mechanically and visually tapered.:deadhorse<-Maas Proofing Voodoo)


----------



## 046

treesypder, what a wealth of critical information. Your posts have an incredible amount of depth. thanks for sharing!

very interesting test results for double fisherman. his theory for why it's so strong is how double fisherman cinches into itself. this of course dissipates energy from fall. only a 5% loss of strength. 



TheTreeSpyder said:


> i all ways preferred the way a DBY (on a snap) served the 'tail' up/over for Tautline and Blake's; finding the pull up from under an Anchor as rather diconcerting. Snaps are self righting compaired to krabs when loaded, whereby the pull must stay on the long axis; so the non-shrinking eye of the Bowline is not a concern in a snap IMLHO. MTL Bowline to Krab Warning
> 
> Classically an Anchor Hitch (really called a Bend; because olde sailors would Bend a line to a spar etc. as well as to another line in their terminology) is always backed up with a Half Hitch. This gives it the same exact structure as my thumbrule /simple base Hitch security of a RoundTurn and 2 Half Hitches; except the RoundTurn sits on the 1st Half Hitching for more security.
> 
> As we take the Anchor Bend/Hitch and tie it back to it's own self to form an eye we have a/n Double Overhand, Double Noose, Scaffold, Fishermans . The Round Turn sitting on it's own bootstrap still mechanically serves as a Round Turn and 1 Half Hitch i think; then the preceding Turn on the krab/mount further buffers force and vibration to about give as fair a security as a trailing Half Hitch? To about equal this baseline Round Turn and 2 Half Hitches?
> 
> i think as a line under tension apporaches a mount it is stretched, then the frictions of the mount reduce the force and thereby stretch, also the gripping action helps reduce stretch too. This gives a sudden, untapered change in the line; a weakness. Further as the Bitter End comes around to bend it's own Standing Part, the forces are leveraged higher; the kind of leveraging that you get from barely bending a straight line, to radically increase tension, and thereby stretch(?) Once again an untapered change. All this going on in one area is destabilizing to form, function, strength etc.
> 
> But as our Scaffold etc. Hitch comes around to bend it's own Standing Part; it takes several, stacked Turns, to perform a more stabilizing action; using the force remaining in the Bitters to spread out the change in bend and stretch over a longer, not so sudden distance; by firming the Standing Part i think. Note, if we take a RoundTurn on the krab/or other mount first; the effect is lost/ less force to use in the firming and gripping line; and the strength tests go down to reaffirn this theorized pattern.
> 
> The leveraging of the line around the mount is a diffeent matter; this leveraging is not of the slight bend in a straight bend sort; but rather a tight U shape bend. This leveraging is from compressing the inner part of the tight arc. Compression is push; and rope is only working when pulling; so this part of the line excludes itself from tension/pull; then the layer of fibers above it are kinda relaxed and jsut a leveraged multiplier/distance to the outside fibers; so not tottally working either. Then finally the outer fibers are arched and singled out as the real tensioned/ pulling fibers carrying the load. So this type of leveraging raisies the tension in the fibers too, but jsut a few of them. Both leveraging scenarios reduce the reamaining useable rated tensile; but by different means. The grip of the Anchor to self also seems to afford here a more 2 legs of line support into 1 of a splice; once again disappearing as tension is reduced going to the Anchor (to self) has a RoundTurn on the mount preceding it.
> 
> This configuration does have something over an eye splice; inj that in an eye splice you can't see the Bitters; but a bright piece of tape sticking out on end of line in a Scaffold etc. Hitch does give more of a visual check of it's integrity.
> 
> i generally go with a Triple, but don't feel tooo bad about a double, especially if the line is bent/compromised elsewhere, and this end link only need to be about as strong as that other compromised link/bending. i like my wraps on it not crossed though, for a smoother flow of firming force, over larger area, that is more mechanically and visually tapered.:deadhorse<-Maas Proofing Voodoo)


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

046 said:


> very interesting test results for double fisherman. his theory for why it's so strong is how double fisherman cinches into itself. this of course dissipates energy from fall. only a 5% loss of strength.


Don't forget, he's using poyester cord. Results would be significantly different with HMD core cords or cords.


----------



## moray

TheTreeSpyder said:


> Both leveraging scenarios reduce the reamaining useable rated tensile; but by different means.
> 
> This configuration does have something over an eye splice; inj that in an eye splice you can't see the Bitters; but a bright piece of tape sticking out on end of line in a Scaffold etc. Hitch does give more of a visual check of it's integrity.



Is all this attention to the weakening effect of a knot really important? My climbing ropes and prusik cords are all spliceable, and I use splices instead of knots for terminations. But I don't do it because the rope is theoretically stronger. I would still do it even if the rope was theoretically weaker.

The weakest, crappiest knot is going to require so much force to break, assuming you have a decent rope/prusik cord, that the person attached to that knot will no longer be with us. It seems to me that for knots there are several important issues (I still have to tie them sometimes): is it easy to tie? is it easy to see that it is tied correctly? is it easy to dress and set? is it easy to untie? is it secure against unrolling, inverting, slipping, etc.? 

The world of splices is a bit simpler:did you make the splice well in the first place?

I did two destructive tests on 5/16 in tenex (rated tensile, 4700 lb.) a couple of months ago. One piece was a 30 in rope with a small eye in each end. The other was a loop with and end-to-end splice. There were 4 splices altogether, all made according to Samson's on-line instructions. And I must say, since I knew the ropes were going to be destroyed, I did not lavish the care on the splices that I normally would--I more or less threw them together.

The results were very impressive. The local professional arborist, a real old-timer, helped me break them with his 4X4 3/4 ton pickup. We needed a 2 to 1 pulley setup to break the straight rope, and we needed a 4 to 1 setup to break the loop. In the latter test, one of the big blocks went flying after the rope broke, knocking over a nice little maple 6 inches in diameter. We had no dynamometer to produce actual numbers, but it was obvious that a terrific amount of force was involved.

Where did the ropes break? Right where they are expected to break, at the very end of the buried part of the splice. None of the splices slipped, and both breaks were precisely at the end of the buried taper. I no longer worry about either the strength or the security of my splices. I don't worry about knots much either, but I don't think they are anywhere near as secure as a properly made splice.


----------



## KentuckySawyer

046 said:


> the ONLY termination knot I would not backup is a triple fisherman. Your mileage may veri... much better to error on the safe side.
> 
> there's been instances of termination knots failing due to not tied correctly or what ever reason. if a backup knot like double fisherman had been used... high probability those dead climbers would still be alive.




What this tells me is that knowing your knots and how to dress/set them is the critical thing. Backing up a perfectly secure knot like a buntline hitch or a scaffold (dbl fisherman) with ANOTHER knot is impractical and cumbersome.

I always terminate with a buntline on my climb line. Scaffold on the lanyard.


----------



## 046

totally agree backing up a perfectly secure knot with another secure knot is a cumbersome and a pita. 

but totally disagree it's impractical! 

a backup knot is exactly that... a backup. it's a fail safe cover your A** tactic. very much like taking out an insurance policy. hope like hell you never will use it.... but as we all know insurance is a good thing to have. 

why do you think they call it an accident?

again... this is my take. your mileage my veri. 



KentuckySawyer said:


> What this tells me is that knowing your knots and how to dress/set them is the critical thing. Backing up a perfectly secure knot like a buntline hitch or a scaffold (dbl fisherman) with ANOTHER knot is impractical and cumbersome.
> 
> I always terminate with a buntline on my climb line. Scaffold on the lanyard.


----------



## gitrdun_climbr

*knots v. splice*

In the past I thought I would 'upgrade' to splices for termination but these days I'm not so sure for a couple of reasons. 1) With a splice there is no option for back up, if the splice slips, you die (and I don't know if this even happens). If my anchor knot slips I have backup. 2) My anchor knot cinches the biner tightly keeping the load consistently along it's major axis...this is not a feature I want to surrender in the name of saving 15 seconds of knot tying time, nor do I want to spend the time visually checking the biners everytime I place load on them to ensure one hasn't shifted ajar. 3) A knot and it's backup are easily inspectable whereas the mechanics of a splice are more hidden. 4) My split-tails can be used from either side for the friction hitch, wearing them more evenly and increasing life (though this isn't a huge deal at under $1/ft).

I know there are a few ADVANTAGES to using splices as well but spending the time to tie a simple knot and slightly less bulk aren't compelling enough to switch over for me personally at this time. And this is coming from someone who has never used splices, please someone correct me if I'm wrong...they do cinch...highly inspectable...bombproof...whatever it may be.

MM, am I that 'old school' for using a blakes hitch to work off? Is the VT good for working the tree with? Is there an even more efficient/effective friction hitch? Thanks in advance.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder

i like a Scaffold etc. hitch because with bright tape on end i have a visual inspection cue instantly as to it's status. Also a splice stiffens more line and can't start friction hitch so close to the krab, nor wear as evenly. Bending the stiffrer region would leverage it more, because resistance to bend is what gives leveraging. i've had a professionally done splice come apart.

A lot of what we say are backup knots; are really standard stopper knot type strategies used for millenniums by sailor's trusting their lives to them for months at a time. then there are some like a Square/Reef Knot that are actually backed up by Dbl. Fisherman's when used as a bend. the double Fisherman's provide security but can jam, but here keep the Square Knot (not meant to be used as a bend) square, and this won't jam.

Examining the knots i think is good; especially in ones you use all the time and are familiar with; so as to be able to see them clearly and take their lessons to other knots etc. Let alone understand what you trust your life too, new things that come along, not to mention separating the wheat from chaff with all the conflicting knot names and info that abound. The models i propose can lead to making sense out of using a 'Long Eyed Cow' to mount a pulley or brake on more confidentally; or a similar Timber; but with a Double Round Turn (3 turns) around the Standing, rather than just a BackHand Hitch (Muenter not on krab, that begins both a Cow and Timber) etc. for more strength and security; but not doing same with Cow, as it is more likely to jam (but is stronger and more secure). Heavy tarps over possible breaks help save bystanders; whether wooden or flesh.

The theory of the Scaffold in the article is that persons; but i think that the releif in the coil(extra line to draw on) and slide(dissipate force) would help in dynamic situation to provide relief; but in the test they did; it always seems to me that a static/slow draw test; jsut provides extra length that has to be drawn for the test. Perhaps some stabilizing for the more static situation too; but i have high hopes for it functioning dynamically, and wanted to toss that link out first without biasing opinions my way.


----------



## Climb020

Gitrdon you in a way are both correct and wrong in your thinking. I also to think like you until I started splicing and then after a month or 2 of practicing a began to trust splices.
Though you cannot adjust the splice to cinch down on the rope, if it is a smaller eye splice it will just fit a biner or if it is a larger splice you can use the blue bandit from sherrill to cause it do lock down and hold better.
Also splices are backed up themselves. Once the splice is made that is not it. Though it would hold weight you still have to do a lock-stich on the throat of the splice to prevent the splice from coming undone. And just like every piece of equipement the splice should be inspected before and after each use.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

gitrdun_climbr said:


> MM, am I that 'old school' for using a blakes hitch to work off? Is the VT good for working the tree with? Is there an even more efficient/effective friction hitch? Thanks in advance.


Yes, you are climbing "old school". Not that there's anything wrong with that, a lot of guys do it and do just fine.
We're not just talking about a hitch, it's a whole system that changes. It makes life easier, more versatile, and ultimately faster.
The progression goes something like this:
1. You change from tying you hitch with the tail of your climbing rope, to a split tail.
2. Then you add a fair lead pulley. This allows you to advance the slack in your rope with one hand.
3. You change the split tail to a prussic cord and tie a VT because it's too hard to advance the Blakes with one hand.
4. You add a friction mover. Now taking up and letting out slack is very easy. Working the tree is no longer a fight with your rope.
5. The whole system stays tied together and bagged. No more tying and untying your hitch.
6. The stupid micro ascender on your lanyard gets tossed in the no longer used stuff bucket and replaced with a system exactly like your climbing line, only shorter. Now your lanyard goes in with one hand AND out while weighted.
Good luck!


----------



## gitrdun_climbr

*i see*

020 I figured you splicers would have a few tricks up your sleeve for the cinching issue and such. Though I will continue climbing on knots for now I think I'll also start fooling around with splicing to keep my options open should I progress into using them later. I must admit I haven't heard of anyone falling because 'their spice fell apart'. Two of my instructors at this year's PNW-ISA Training Conference splice everything...themselves...so I know it's not like a dangerous practice or something, just my own mental inhibition I guess.

MM thanks for that info...I found the friction hitch thread which gave me alot of info about the VT and other hitches folks are using. Also read big johns thread on his variation, though some of it is still over my head having not used one (I think it was big john).


----------



## KentuckySawyer

046 said:


> there's been instances of termination knots failing due to not tied correctly or what ever reason. if a backup knot like double fisherman had been used... high probability those dead climbers would still be alive.



If these climbers didn't tie their primary termination knot correctly, what is to make us think that they could tie the back-up correctly?


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

gitrdun_climbr said:


> MM thanks for that info...I found the friction hitch thread which gave me alot of info about the VT and other hitches folks are using. Also read big johns thread on his variation, though some of it is still over my head having not used one (I think it was big john).


I suggest, if you're interested in the new hitches, you look some pictures, get what you need and set up a lanyard. Tie off the end of the rope to the back of your saddle so you can't fall, and try it out until you have confidence to try it out on a climbing line.


----------



## beowulf343

Bowline with yosemite for me. Usually work with snaps so I don't need anything that continually tightens down on the eye. Tried my split tails with a spliced end for the last year but don't like how they are sloppy on a carabiner. Ended up going back to the snaps. For extra security the bowline's tail can be tie back onto the rope with a double fishermans.


----------



## knudeNoggin

Climb020 said:


> Achor hitch here as well but I don't back it up just leave a 6" tall. But anymore I am just splicing the ends. When I don't have to worry about untying the knot I will use a double fishermans but that is just for my lanyard.


Hmmm, you might wanna re-orient your "dble.fish." (=> "Strangle knot")
into the Anchor hitch then--i.e., tie the Anchor around the LINE instead of
the Strangle. This will give you the same security, maybe more strength
(though, as noted, that's a non-issue unless you're in a rope-break contest),
and the ability to untie the knot after loading it. See the TreeSpyder's
My Tree Lessons site for some images of this, if it's not obvious.



> by 046:
> there's been instances of termination knots failing due to not tied correctly or what ever reason. if a backup knot like double fisherman had been used... high probability those dead climbers would still be alive.
> & in response:
> If these climbers didn't tie their primary termination knot correctly,
> what is to make us think that they could tie the back-up correctly?


Yeah, it's a sort of logical rub in asking for a "back-up", sometimes. I was
amazed to hear one rockclimber remark that her Strangle sometimes came
untied--holy smokes, the whole POINT of that knot is to stay tied! But in
tying knots, some folks just go through the motions w/o much interest.
046 isn't backing up his Scaffold hitch (Dbl. Strangle Noose (but not "fish")),
and I doubt anyone backs up the single; most rockclimbers I think don't
back up a Fig.8; some gyms *require* that, though. blah blah, YMMV.
(Incidentally, one fellow test-broke some Fig.8 loopknots in Spectra-cored
cord; they didn't slip. (kinda surprises me, actually) )
OTOH, the Bowline should be backed up (or, preferably, some more secure
variant of it used, such as the End-Bound Dbl. Bowline).



> do a lock-stich on the throat of the splice to prevent the splice from coming undone.


Also, whipping can help, and it might be a good way to _fine tune_ an eye
splice's _snug fit_ to a 'biner (i.e., using the whipping to tighten the choke)!?
(Mason line--break strength about 150#--would work well in seizing the eye
legs a bit.)

*knudeNoggin*


----------



## 046

triple fisherman is the ONLY termination knot I don't use a backup on. further... I'll only use triple fisherman in terminations that will not be untied again. 

triple fisherman is possibly, most secure bend known and only knot recommended for spectra. 

will always backup a figure eight with double fisherman. 

totally agree... bowline should never be used as a lifeline termination without a backup like double fisherman. 

again.... your mileage may veri



knudeNoggin said:


> 046 isn't backing up his Scaffold hitch (Dbl. Strangle Noose (but not "fish")),
> and I doubt anyone backs up the single; most rockclimbers I think don't
> back up a Fig.8; some gyms *require* that, though. blah blah, YMMV.
> (Incidentally, one fellow test-broke some Fig.8 loopknots in Spectra-cored
> cord; they didn't slip. (kinda surprises me, actually) )
> OTOH, the Bowline should be backed up (or, preferably, some more secure
> variant of it used, such as the End-Bound Dbl. Bowline).
> *knudeNoggin*


----------



## moray

046 said:


> triple fisherman is the ONLY termination knot I don't use a backup on. further... I'll only use triple fisherman in terminations that will not be untied again.
> 
> will always backup a figure eight with double fisherman.
> 
> totally agree... bowline should never be used as a lifeline termination without a backup like double fisherman.



With all due respect, I find all this backup talk a bit weird. Backing up a knot just creates a bigger, more complicated knot. Do you back it up as well? Would you back up a double fishermans with a double fishermans? Would this count as a quadruple fishermans?

Why not pick the simplest knot that you trust to do the job for the time required--say one day for the climbing rope. Triple fishermans would fill the bill for almost anyone, I would think. Almost any other termination knot, followed by a "backup" knot, is going to be more complicated and slower to tie. I also wonder if it is really any more secure. The main knot has a real load on it, and it cinches down on itself. The "backup" is unloaded, and seems to offer poor protection against the tail slowly creeping right through it.

A better backup option might be to apply a thick whipping or backsplice to the end of the rope that would never be able to creep through the main termination knot. With this method, even a crappy termination knot becomes secure.

Better yet, if the rope permits it, use a spliced eye!


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

You can go edit you're post, select delete, and the double can go away. Unless it's the first post of a thread, then the most you can do is delete the words, the post will stay.


----------



## 046

totally see your point of view. 

but I respectfully disagree about not using a backup. again.. it's like an insurance policy, your paying premiums every time a backup is used. 

triple fisherman is not a good general purpose knot. sets too hard to come back apart easily. that's why I'll use figure eight backed up by a double fisherman for terminations that needs to be untied. figure eight takes all the tension, while double fisherman only sits there. 

don't trust splices due to fact I don't have control over built them and there's no way for me to inspect a splice. 

lots of different ways to do things. for instance, some swear by using a bowline for a termination knot w/no backup. been doing it for 20+ years. yada, yada, etc. well there's documented failures for bowlines. I would never use a bowline without a double fisherman backup for a termination knot. 

here's a sad thread about someone that used no backup..
http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=12827

again... your mileage may veri



moray said:


> With all due respect, I find all this backup talk a bit weird. Backing up a knot just creates a bigger, more complicated knot. Do you back it up as well? Would you back up a double fishermans with a double fishermans? Would this count as a quadruple fishermans?
> 
> Why not pick the simplest knot that you trust to do the job for the time required--say one day for the climbing rope. Triple fishermans would fill the bill for almost anyone, I would think. Almost any other termination knot, followed by a "backup" knot, is going to be more complicated and slower to tie. I also wonder if it is really any more secure. The main knot has a real load on it, and it cinches down on itself. The "backup" is unloaded, and seems to offer poor protection against the tail slowly creeping right through it.
> 
> A better backup option might be to apply a thick whipping or backsplice to the end of the rope that would never be able to creep through the main termination knot. With this method, even a crappy termination knot becomes secure.
> 
> Better yet, if the rope permits it, use a spliced eye!


----------



## moray

*Splice vs Knot*

_don't trust splices due to fact I don't have control over built them and there's no way for me to inspect a splice._ 


I agree, 046. I make my own. 

I must say, after making quite a few, I began to appreciate how well they hold. Even during the construction process you get a sense of how much friction is developed by a slight pull, how much it takes to lock the cover over the buried part, and so on. I have made quite a few Loopies from Tenex, in which the buried part is free to move within the cover. Even here, where the mechanics is a lot less favorable for the "splice" holding, you can pull the buried part with one hand and the cover with the other (essentially trying to pull the core out of the cover) and it will hold. In actual use, you don't load it that way, but it is nice to know it holds even with very unfavorable mechanics. In climbing rope, especially, the throat is so tight it is almost unimaginable that the buried part could come out under load. In something looser, like Tenex, this prospect would seem more worrisome. In an earlier post, I described destructive testing of Tenex splices--in two separate tests the rope broke but the splices held with no sign of slippage.

But still, I agree. In the case of a splice, you are trusting something you can't really see the way you can see a knot. Whether it is actually trustworthy or not is another issue.


----------



## knudeNoggin

046 said:


> totally see your point of view.
> 
> but I respectfully disagree about not using a backup. again.. it's like an insurance policy, your paying premiums every time a backup is used.
> 
> triple fisherman is not ...


... going to get the knot you mean by it when using Google, e.g.;
I do hope that arborists can come to disavow whatever bonehead author
adopted this name for this structure by ignoring established useage--it makes
for awkward dialogue between knotting arenas (such a _neighboring_ ones
of caving, SAR, & rockclimbing).



> here's a sad thread about someone that used no backup..
> http://www.arboristsite.com/showthread.php?t=12827


Or who did, and botched it: as I remarked in that thread, there was nothing
left in the untied rope to reveal what knot might have been there.
But in any case, it's a matter of inattention to knotting ("if you can't tie knots,
tie lots").
At least one orientation/dressing of the Fig.8 loopknot can be seen to be
a further back-tucking securing of an old (fisherman's) ganging knot,
where the end would finish alongside the legs of the eye (as it does in a
Bowline, e.g.); and the final tucks then can be seen as "back-up" to that
(as the "Yosemite tie-off" is regarded for the Bowline (I don't like it, much)).

As for the triple overhand knot and setting too tight,
here again I suggest tying it as an Anchor hitch around the mainline instead
of that "dble/trpl fish.": the coils will be tightened from nearest to farthest
away, meaning that the awaymost coil will remain easily pried back over
the mainline, and the knot loosened--by express, deliberate effort; but no
way is the end going to somehow on its own slip through all that material,
esp. as it's pressed down against the metal/'biner. So you get your security,
your strength, and still can untie it. --what a deal!
:bday:


----------



## TheTreeSpyder

Most knots were devised to be used in less slippery stuff than our synthetics; and religiously backed up for millenniums. the backups making rattle proof and provide stopper to big for where it would have to squeeze thru.

My base, minimal secure knot model to compair others to, is the simple RoundTurn and 2 Half Hitches. A Round Turn for force reduction by division because of the full choke around is first available; and gives serious force reduction across board, to be more than the nominal friction footprint 'inch' of Turn that has open side. By employing the choke of the RT pushing directly back into itself/ inline to exhaust force more (and grip); we tap into a very powerful machine mechanic; at the first real level it appears IMLHO.

The 1st HalfHitch should hold; the 2nd making it dead sure/ overkill for underkill! Now; that is for most things, but the model of a moored boat in waves testing that at every angle,speed, pattern etc. will find it's way out after the many series of tests to pick this 'lock' avails itself too. But, for most other things, this is a good model to judge the strategies/ mechanics by.

The Anchor Bend/Hitch itself was considered mighty, but always got a back up of a single Half Hitch as standard/at minimum. Mens lives depended on the Anchor Hitch being strong and sure to stay put as the drifted for months at a time without electricity radio etc. In this Anchor Hitch + Half Hitch standard; we have equal/better than our RT + 2HH standard (Proper abbreviations Knude/everyone?); for the Anchor +HH is really a RT +2HH with 1st HH thcked under the RT; standing on it's own bootstrap to be better; then final HH! So, with this standard RT+HH model, we can weigh these decisions. Even though it is also kind of just an Overhand Knot with extra Turn / Half a Marl with extra Turn mechanic. A Halyard Hitch is real secure, a 3 Turn Anchor folded back over the 1st Turn, then back again underneath the other 2 Turns (that are the 2 more immediate/ greater pressure Turns).

A Scaffold/Noose takes this a step further (than Anchor Hitch + HH) and breaks/buffers some force around a krab, before the Anchor to self; and the Turn is not a hanging Turn, but one pinching back into itself around krab; as the Anchor Hitch to self seats into the krab. So, effectively weighing this strategy with RT+HH minimal security model; we can see effectively dropping the 2ndHH of original RT+HH model in a lot of materials. i like mine with bright tape as signal sticking up, to show it passes constant spot inspection at every glance.

KN & KC all ways seem to recommend the Turns on Anchor to self to form eye (Scaffold/Noose etc.); and others cross. 1 of my observations is; that uncrossed and neat, the tail as it rides up under the Turns of Anchor, pinches directly back into krab more squarely. But if crossed, usually a Turn is brought down lower to seat at krab and the tail sits beside or higher than the krab, so as to have less pressure to secure it IMLHO. 

Also, i think there is a smoother flow of force, that firms the Standing better to 'stabilize'; where other knots; 'destabilize'. Also the flow is more inline; towards Bimini Twist, splice etc. that flow up the line, rather than single leg of force across line. . If we just have a construction of a single Turn choking across Standing; i think an RT around krab etc. previous buffer force low more is good generally. But, with Scaffold/Noose etc. knot; we are using the remaining forces in the 'tail' to our benefit/ to stabilize the Standing, so a RT instead of Turn on krab is undesirable by contrast; because of this different mechanic.

i will caution that a Clove should still get 2HH; even though the 2 Turns around your paw when making in da'bight would constitute a Double Round Turn as Knude taught; then crossed on itself. The pull on Standing lifts the 1st ring; that really wouldn't be a Hitch in my terms; because Standing is under it's Bitters so a Crossed Turn(?); then the lift of that Turn can also lift the pressure off the next mechanic; that would be a Hitch/HH type strategy with the initiating/ Standing tension on top of the Bitters to secure. So, even though it is another Turn towards our RT+HH baseline; i'd still not consdier it as complete with 1HH becasue of the reliefs/lifts; and would go with the standard 2HH that we see in a lot of knots as backup. Cow does similair lift, but also employs a BackHand Hitch. In each trapping tail under most immediate Standing tension that pinches into spar, which could be considered opposite side of spar as in HH with better nip; which is kinda like Timber without extra Turns around self like loose braid inbetween (just 1 'tuck' about "7 o'clock").

i do think the Y tieoff for Bowline is effective in our flexible lines. KN can tell you why/when it's knot in materials and operator error; as well as how a Double/RT/Mountaineering Bowline can actually have that 2nd ring as a liability in stiffer line or operator error situations. 2 good lessons, that i all ways have in mind to form my DBY right; even if making blindfolded.

Guess my dime is up; hope ya don't feel short changed!


----------



## 046

a good test to see if you know knot well enough, for your life to depend upon... is to tie knot blindfolded. 

this will not ever eliminate operator error, but establishes a bar to gauge operator proficiency. this is why I've always recommend using a backup, even for super secure knots. possible operator error... when fatigued, under pressure, etc, etc. 

technical details refers to which knot to use and resulting loss of strength, ease of untying, how secure, etc. etc. which rope to use, ease of forming a knot, breaking strength, durability, etc. etc. 

it's always a challenge arriving at which knots and ropes to use. Really grateful for getting access to folks with huge knowledge base.

disclaimer: never use internet as your only source of information. find an experienced climber to learn from. several different names can be used for same knot. when in doubt always ask for poster for a picture or a link to picture of knot in question. 

this is a triple fisherman. note lashing doesn't improve strength/security









TheTreeSpyder said:


> 2 good lessons, that i all ways have in mind to form my DBY right; even if making blindfolded.


----------



## moray

*??*



046 said:


> this is a triple fisherman. note lashing doesn't improve strength/security



It doesn't?? Why not? I thought the whole idea of this backup knot business was to make it harder for the tail to start sliding through the knot.


----------



## 046

please read posts above... triple fisherman is not a good general purpose knot. sets too hard to be easily untied. 

it's the only knot I will use without a backup and only in situations where it doesn't need to be untied. 

you are confusing a stopper knot with a backup knot



moray said:


> It doesn't?? Why not? I thought the whole idea of this backup knot business was to make it harder for the tail to start sliding through the knot.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder

We use Double/ Triple Scaffold/Noose/Fisherperson's etc. hitch on krab; to cinch down and not shift on krab and because it can be slipped off that mount and untied if need be. i wouldn't tie it to a closed eye device like a snap unless i wanted permanent connection.

i recommend tying knots over and over; observing, L-earning their secrets, until 2nd Nature/ not all ways looking at it/ copping a feel for it! One of my favorite ways is to have piece of line to watch tv with, and tie and retie knots around thigh, on Hand etc.; watching knot less and more and more tv. i don't actually tie knots blindfolded when really testing and getting final 'feel' for knot (which is constant process); i must shamefully confess. Most of the time i tie them behind my back like this DBY (Double Bowline w/Yosemite tie off) tied with the Slip Knot Method. A very slick and multipurpose way to make a Bowline, let alone the Double Bowline/ Round Turn Bowline/ Mountaineering Bowline (all same thing) or the Water Bowline(Clove instead of Round Turn as choke on Bight of SheetBend to self to form eye that equals Bowline). The Water Bowline is more secure at the cost of some strength. The Threading of the Multiple Turn Bowlines/ bringing the Mountain to Mohamed instead of the rabbit running around the tree/mountain (for Slip Knot/Noose method of tying Bowline ) makes the Bowlines mucho easier to tie. Also, gives a stopping point half way thru, so can make the Noose, get rope swung to you and quickly finish Bowline around it etc. i 1st saw it listed as "Climber's Bowline" in a book when younger, so of course had to l-earn it! They'd lower a line from helicopter or overhead ledge if you were clinging to side of mountain. You make knot around chest with 1 hand, in it's 2 parts, Noose, then finish in other hand. If you gave out at last phase/second; you just make sure to keep tail pinched off at itself after reeving thru Noose; not makes itself and you are secure! IN tree work, iv'e let the weight of the line hanging out of tree give that pull to make knot, or some pull from other event on line or just lean back some oif other end is tied off; makes it smoother/ easier; breaks knot into 3 easy stages.


----------



## knudeNoggin

046 said:


> a good test to see if you know knot well enough, for your life to depend upon... is to tie knot blindfolded.
> 
> this will not ever eliminate operator error, but establishes a bar to gauge operator proficiency. this is why I've always recommend using a backup, even for super secure knots. possible operator error... when fatigued, under pressure, etc, etc.


Although not every knotted structure one will tie will be done under such
circumstances; there can be cases where you are assured of having time
to do something rather more complicated. --as you took to nicely seize
the end of your _Dbl.Strangle noose_.



> disclaimer: never use internet as your only source of information. find an experienced climber to learn from. several different names can be used for same knot. when in doubt always ask for poster for a picture or a link to picture of knot in question.


Hmm, disclaimers about the Net in favor of in-person instruction beg the
question of how said person can be judged knowledgeable, etc.. At least
on the Net, used with a bit of savvy, one can often receive/find enough
discussion/opinion to get an idea of where reality might lie (or that it's
not as black'n'white as that experienced guide led you to believe). Folks
don't loose their expertise by posting to the Net; and incredible nonsense
has been published between hard & soft covers commercially, so there's
no guarantee on that path, either.
Best advice is to seek _rationale's_ for opinions, and to understand that
knot schemas result in different physical entities with differing behaviors in
different cordage. (Sure, there are many old timers who shake their heads
at the suggestion that the venerable Bowline needs the slightest assistance
in function; there are sadly some who learned the hard way, in different
materials, that it can.)



> this is a triple fisherman. note lashing doesn't improve strength/security


No, a Triple Fisherman's knot (better "Dbl.Grapevine"--where the modifier
"double" matches the number of securing wraps (2)) is a rope-to-rope joint,
recommended by some vendors for the joining of HMPE-cored cord to form
slings. And, with the seizing done well, hmmm, it'd be interesting to see
how it broke, as it might hold the end to take the brunt of the tightening
part's pressure and so give the mainline some more life. (Btw, I think
that Paolo Bavaresco's testing in 1/2" line put the hitch at around 75%;
I don't know where the break came. Report cited above was IIRC Bluewater
II nylon low-elongation 8mm rope around 10mm metal--not polyester.)

(-;


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

knudeNoggin said:


> No, a Triple Fisherman's knot (better "Dbl.Grapevine"--where the modifier
> "double" matches the number of securing wraps (2)) is a rope-to-rope joint,
> recommended by some vendors for the joining of HMPE-cored cord to form
> slings.
> (-;



Here's a common version of a Fisherman's knot:






And here is a Double Fisherman's knot, double, because two Fisherman's knots are used to join two lines. Double in the name has nothing to do with the number of loops.






This knot was popularized by our industries to make loops for various purposes or to join two ropes. 

The Fisherman's knot, and the Double Fisherman's knot are fishing knots, while the Triple Fisherman's knot is climbing knot, and triple does reflect the number of loops.


----------



## moray

*Mea Culpa*



046 said:


> please read posts above... triple fisherman is not a good general purpose knot. sets too hard to be easily untied.
> 
> it's the only knot I will use without a backup and only in situations where it doesn't need to be untied.
> 
> you are confusing a stopper knot with a backup knot



You are right--I was lumping the two knots together in my mind as if they were the same thing. Uhh... but what's the difference? I know the "backup" is made by tying the bitter end around the main line, and the stopper is just an in-line knot in the bitter end. But don't they do the same thing, that is, prevent the main knot, should it start to slip or creep, from coming completely undone?

The backup/stopper is completely unnecessary if you have a system where you know the main knot cannot come undone. Even though I mostly use spliced eyes, I still have to tie a termination knot now and then. My own concern with such a knot, and that of everyone else in this thread, is primarily whether you can rely on the knot not to slip. Everyone seems to know that the bowline is not entirely reliable, but the triple fisherman's is really bullet-proof. Because we really don't trust most of these knots, we tie a backup/stopper. I still don't trust them after doing that, because the backup/stopper is unloaded and can easily come undone. Engineering-wise, it seems like a really bad "solution" to what people apparently consider to be a really important problem (I know I do!). 

A far better, simpler, easy to apply, and permanent solution is to apply a seizing to the end of the rope to increase its diameter by 10% or so. There is no way on this earth that a seized end is going to pull through a loaded knot. The whole security problem just goes away.


----------



## Tom Dunlap

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using backup knots/hitches. That said, I rarely use them...

Mark Twain said, "Never trust a man who wears a belt and suspenders, he doesn't trust anything." If the belt isn't doing the job why wear suspenders, visa versa...

For rope terminations I've used a scaffold knot for YEARS with no problems. Sometimes I'll stitch or seize the end. Most times, like my brudda Spydey, I use tape or keep track of how long a tail comes out of the hitch. At least four times the diameter should exit. 

If I use any of the HDPE cords I'll use a triple wrap scaffold and secure the end because they are so slippery. 

No matter how I terminate a rope I monitor it constantly. 

Tie Dress Set


----------



## TheTreeSpyder

i kinda go with TDS & I (inspect). Know your knots well enough to tell at a glance if they need re-stabilized/ dressed etc.; trying to spot check per use. The colorful 'flag'/tape on ends is part of this; even remotely.

Our lives and those under us trusting us here; have depended on knot knowledge; that gives quiet intense lessons; some even marching further with it. It can be hard, hair splitting things to correctly capture knot names; as they do blur some over time and between peoples; sometimes by use. A SheetBend to self, forming an eye is a Bowline; a bight placed on a mount becomes a Turn, a Crossed Turn pulled the other way forms a type of Hitch; placed on a line may only be a Half Hitch etc.

i don't think anyone hear; has researched through the ancient volumes and practices to scrutinize knot names etc. like ye ol'knudeNoggin; an authority in his own write.

Heare his prescriptions of Fisherman's/Double/Triple, Grapevines match those that he re-searched in hard text of:
Geoffery Budworth-"Knots & Ropework" (cofounder Knot tyer's Guild, past president)
Colin Jarmon- "Top Knots"
Dr. Cyrus Day "The Art and Scince of Knotting and Splicing"-Naval Insititue Press
Padgett & Smith-"On Rope" (climbing bible)
Randy Penn-"Everythings Knots" (hometown boy here; editor of No. American Knot Tyer's Guild periodical)
Clyde Soles-"Outdoor Knots Book" (Mt. & Ice climber, mag. editor and thanks knudeNoggin 1st for help in his acclaimed book)

Ashley's ABoK bible makes no direct referance to this in index (uses Englshman's, Angler's, Waterman's/ Water, True Lovers, Grapevine etc.) but in text he gives Fisherman's as knudeNoggin does. This includes Triple, Double etc. as numbers denoting Turns. All these books give a generous dose to knot addicts worldwide.

KN is just trying to keep the rest of ye straight, as he has tried with me(quite an undertaking in it's own self!)! i think tieing to eye of device/krab; is better de-scribed as Noose, Scaffold etc. rather Fisherman's to be more exact; and able to trade/expand with other disciplines as he lends.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

TheTreeSpyder said:


> i Ashley's ABoK bible makes no direct referance to this in index (uses Englshman's, Angler's, Waterman's/ Water, True Lovers, Grapevine etc.) but in text he gives Fisherman's as knudeNoggin does. This includes Triple, Double etc. as numbers denoting Turns. All these books give a generous dose to knot addicts worldwide.
> 
> KN is just trying to keep the rest of ye straight, as he has tried with me(quite an undertaking in it's own self!)! i think tieing to eye of device/krab; is better de-scribed as Noose, Scaffold etc. rather Fisherman's to be more exact; and able to trade/expand with other disciplines as he lends.



I think somebody should grab credit for the knot and name it, because I think we can all agree it's not a Noose, Grapevine, Scaffold, Barrel or Fisherman's knot.
Maybe it's a three looped running grapevine.


----------



## knudeNoggin

Mike Maas said:


> Here's a common version of a Fisherman's knot:


Yes, of an "Improved Clinch" or "Locked Half Blood" knot, to be precise
--which is just one of many such angler knots. [Sosin&Kreh, Vic Dunaway, Geoff Wilson]



> And here is a Double Fisherman's knot, "double", because two Fisherman's knots are used to join two lines. "Double" in the name has nothing to do with the number of loops.


By this revisionist logic, I'd like to see what a "Triple Fisherman's" knot is
--tic-tac-toe, three knots in a row? (Well, in fact, just such an application
of this name HAS been made, by Jost Gudelius, re an abseil-ropes joiner!
His was a sequence of (single) Overhands, forming an offset bend.)



> This knot was popularized by our industries to make loops for various purposes or to join two ropes.


It was in use by anglers long before it was adopted elsewhere, to join gut
fishlines. Rockclimbers first used the (single) Fisherman's knot, among
others, moving to the Double FK ("double", because of the extra turn, the
"overwrap") after the advent of nylon cordage. [Wright&Magowan, Alpine
Journal, 1928]



> The Fisherman's knot, and the Double Fisherman's knot are fishing knots, while the Triple Fisherman's knot is climbing knot, and triple does reflect the number of loops.


And "Fisherman's" doesn't reflect any of them, either! So why use this most
ill-fitting moniker?

In fact, Ashley presents the dble.overhand version as Poacher's knot (#409,
and elsewhere), and the one sparking this debate as Scaffold knot (#1120).
They are certainly _nooses_, as the knot is tied around its own rope.
(To judge "noose" by behavior is to subject the name to the vagries of
variance in material, knot-setting, & load--any of which factors can determine
whether a knot slides. I prefer to judge objectively, by the structure.)

Knots nomenclature is a study in conflict, inconsistency, & nonsense. I hope
to move it to higher ground, and I don't mind choosing a novel direction if it
is what works best. So, I argue in favor of "Grapevine" (for the rope-joining
"bend") & "Strangle" (for this noose hitch), as those names are pretty well
attached to structures with a dbl.overhand knot oriented with an overwrap
(as contrast, e.g., with the Anchor Bend/hitch, where the dbl. overhand is
otherwise oriented), and thus make a sensible starting point for a nominal
series varied by the number of overwraps--where the name's qualifying
terms "Double, Triple, ..." will match intuitively to the knot's observable
feature.

Why choose a name that (1) conflicts with apparent members of its series,
(2) doesn't indicate structure, & (3) makes no sense even on its own?
--three strikes, throw the bum out!
 

*kN*


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

So it's a Triple Grapevine Strangle?


----------



## trimwizard

*I throw myself to the wolves *

I terminate both my climb line and split tail into a snap with an Anchor Hitch/knot backed up with what I call a fishermen's knot (overhand stop knot tied around standing part of line) and tape the tail (bitters?).
Whatever anyone wants to call it, I like the extra turn and will start using it next time I retie my climb line.
I like to use knots as I change ends on my climb line every week or so to avoid constant wear in the same spot all the time.
I always use a back-up knot as it is my habit and the insignificant amount of time it takes to tie one or take it loose is well worth the extra security to me personally, but thats just me.
:help:


----------



## TheTreeSpyder

If using an Anchor to krab and not to self to form noose might try a more of a Halyard. Make a 3 Turn Anchor on krab and bend the tail at finish backwards over itself. You can't slip it under the Turn it just came out of without losing that Turn as trap on tail/ Bitter(s), so go over that 1Turn and under the next 2. Which are really the 1st 2 that carry the most choking force on the Bitter(s).

Grapevine as a Bend; Strangle as Hitch i think KN meant?

Another point in favour of a 3 (or 4) Turn Strangle/ Noose/ Anchor to self to form Eye; is a heavier, but still compact/ dense throwing knot for repositioning TIP or line path to TIP. Heavier knot or krab making it easier to throw rope; knot weight is non-lethal though. Once thrown over branch; weight makes it easier to 'Flirt' rope around and down over on a given branch; or 'walk the dawg' from 1 branch to another- sometimes higher branch (to take a 'bad' throw and make it good; easier/livelier with throw bag as shown in Bob Weber tape).


----------



## SRT-Tech

I terminate my rope with a sewn eye termination, consisting of a steel rope thimble, sewn eye termination (like the petzl lanyards) covered with a siezing whipping, (both the sewn and siezing whipping are 100lb test polyester sailcord), and finally everything is covered with 2mm thick industrial shrinktrubing to protect the cord form abrasion. 

sewn eye and siezings are considered by many to be stronger than a splice....100% of the rope strength is maintained , right thru the bend in the eye, to the end of the rope. 

Had a bunch of these tested at on a pull test machine. the sewn eye temrination was on arborplex. broke at 6900lbs, and NOT at the sewn part but at the rope above the sewn eye. 

good enough for me, simle and quick to do, and looks neat and tidy. Bombproof too.


----------



## emr

TreeSpyder, I learn much better with pictures, so is there any chance you can show your 3 turn Anchor?


----------



## moray

*picture please?*



SRT-Tech said:


> I terminate my rope with a sewn eye termination, consisting of a steel rope thimble, sewn eye termination (like the petzl lanyards) covered with a siezing whipping, (both the sewn and siezing whipping are 100lb test polyester sailcord), and finally everything is covered with 2mm thick industrial shrinktrubing to protect the cord form abrasion.



Any chance you could show a picture of your sewn-eye termination? Sounds cool.


----------



## Tom_Scheller

*Girth Hitch*

So... am I a moron for just girth hitching spiced ends to snaps and biners?

TS


----------



## emr

Not a moron, I am just too cheap to pay for eye splice, and to scared to learn for myself.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

Tom_Scheller said:


> So... am I a moron for just girth hitching spiced ends to snaps and biners?
> 
> TS


You're ok with the snap, it's just expensive and ends up being as big as a knot. The biner is a problem, it's not ANSI compliant, or safe, because it doesn't stay cinched on the biner.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder

i guess a 3Turn Anchor would be a Double Anchor; if Anchor is based on Round Turn sitting on own bootstrap; then Dble Round Turn (3 Turns) would be Double Anchor(?).

This animation starts off with the Halyard (or at least the version i find most consistent/ correct); then Dbl. Anchor. Goes on to show the relationship between Overhand Knot, Strangle, Anchor, Halyard etc. The slider is draggable; some logistics problems, but fairly smooth. Can enlarge to full screen with no quality loss; can even right click and zoom in for 10 or so levels.

i'd like to see SRT's science; but don't think Bitters seized with thread on outside and a steel thimble inside are conducive to hitch cinching up on krab.


----------



## emr

thanks for the animation, i think i will try it out.


----------



## knudeNoggin

SRT-Tech said:


> I terminate my rope with a sewn eye ...protect the cord form abrasion. ... broke at 6900lbs, and NOT at the sewn part but at the rope above the sewn eye.


Good show!
How far above the sewing/seizing did it break?

*kN*


----------



## SRT-Tech

i covered the sewn eye with a siezing whipping, then another layer of siezing whipping, using 100lb test polyester sailthread (Petzl only uses 10 lb test poly thread). I then placed a sleeve of 2mm THICK lowtemp shrinktubing to protect the whipping. Broke at 6900lbs pull about 3" above the entire sewn/whipped area.

my next one had a steel rope thimble and looks incredible (pics soon) and works great.


----------



## SRT-Tech

moray said:


> Any chance you could show a picture of your sewn-eye termination? Sounds cool.



i gotta find a camera to boorw, but yes i will post pics soon


----------



## 046

nice job animating!

how do you do that?



TheTreeSpyder said:


> i guess a 3Turn Anchor would be a Double Anchor; if Anchor is based on Round Turn sitting on own bootstrap; then Dble Round Turn (3 Turns) would be Double Anchor(?).
> 
> This animation starts off with the Halyard (or at least the version i find most consistent/ correct); then Dbl. Anchor. Goes on to show the relationship between Overhand Knot, Strangle, Anchor, Halyard etc. The slider is draggable; some logistics problems, but fairly smooth. Can enlarge to full screen with no quality loss; can even right click and zoom in for 10 or so levels.
> 
> i'd like to see SRT's science; but don't think Bitters seized with thread on outside and a steel thimble inside are conducive to hitch cinching up on krab.


----------



## SRT-Tech

TheTreeSpyder said:


> i'd like to see SRT's science; but don't think Bitters seized with thread on outside and a steel thimble inside are conducive to hitch cinching up on krab.



   


huh?

i thinkyou might have misunderstood what i did. There is NO cinching up onto a carabiner.

I did a sewn eye termination, just like PETZL does on all their lanyard end and many rope companies on their rope ends (see pic).





i then did a siezing whip to COVER the sewn termination, then another siezing whip just for kicks and giggles, then the entire works was coverd with two layers of industrial low temp shrink tube to protect from abrasion (just like Petzl does).






however instead of using 10lb test poly thread , i used 100lb test polyester sailthread, for both the sewn portion, the siezing and the whipped covering. The thimble does'nt move, it is stationary, held extremely tight inside the sewn eye.

(the photos are from Petzls website, when i get access to a camera i will post my rope end.)


----------



## NickfromWI

gitrdun_climbr said:


> I know there are a few ADVANTAGES to using splices as well but spending the time to tie a simple knot and slightly less bulk aren't compelling enough to switch over for me personally at this time. And this is coming from someone who has never used splices, please someone correct me if I'm wrong...they do cinch...highly inspectable...bombproof...whatever it may be.
> 
> MM, am I that 'old school' for using a blakes hitch to work off? Is the VT good for working the tree with? Is there an even more efficient/effective friction hitch? Thanks in advance.



An eye splice in a climbing line won't cinch, but if done properly, it won't slide around the biner, either. I use a tiny eye on mine, and it does NOT slip around the carabiner. 

As far as inspectability, you just have to inspect that that haven't cut any fibers of the rope near the splice. You can't "back up" a splice. You don't HAVE to back it up. If done properly, you don't even have to think about the splice.

For me, the front of my harness is some high-value real estate. There always isn't room for everything. This is not the place to be cluttering up with bulky knots and backup knots.

No not can come close in strength retention to a splice.

I'm on the other end of the spectrum....I only use knots when I don't have spliced pieces available.

love
nick


----------



## NickfromWI

SRT-Tech said:


> I terminate my rope with a sewn eye termination, consisting of a steel rope thimble, sewn eye termination (like the petzl lanyards) covered with a siezing whipping, (both the sewn and siezing whipping are 100lb test polyester sailcord), and finally everything is covered with 2mm thick industrial shrinktrubing to protect the cord form abrasion.
> 
> sewn eye and siezings are considered by many to be stronger than a splice....100% of the rope strength is maintained , right thru the bend in the eye, to the end of the rope.
> 
> Had a bunch of these tested at on a pull test machine. the sewn eye temrination was on arborplex. broke at 6900lbs, and NOT at the sewn part but at the rope above the sewn eye.
> 
> good enough for me, simle and quick to do, and looks neat and tidy. Bombproof too.




I've seen the pictures of his work, and it's nicely done. I'm looking forward to the new batch of pics.

It's worth mentioning that there currently are no manufacturers that endorse hand-sewn terminations. ANSI does not yet have a rule on it, either. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be done...it just means it hasn't been considered yet.

What happens if you nick the whipping twine with the ol' handsaw?

Bring us more pics!

love
nick


----------



## 046

Nick, you have an unfair advantage to most of us that don't splice regularly. splices when done properly are very strong. problem is most of us don't know who doing the splice. 

as you pointed out, there's no way to inspect a splice. it would be interesting to see strength loss of triple fisherman VS a splice. I'm thinking it would be real close. 

a knot that I tied and inspected to be correct. hands down, without question is trustworthy enough to trust my life to. could not say the same for a splice. 



NickfromWI said:


> An eye splice in a climbing line won't cinch, but if done properly, it won't slide around the biner, either. I use a tiny eye on mine, and it does NOT slip around the carabiner.
> 
> As far as inspectability, you just have to inspect that that haven't cut any fibers of the rope near the splice. You can't "back up" a splice. You don't HAVE to back it up. If done properly, you don't even have to think about the splice.
> 
> For me, the front of my harness is some high-value real estate. There always isn't room for everything. This is not the place to be cluttering up with bulky knots and backup knots.
> 
> No not can come close in strength retention to a splice.
> 
> I'm on the other end of the spectrum....I only use knots when I don't have spliced pieces available.
> 
> love
> nick


----------



## SRT-Tech

pic from the FIRST batch of sewn eye terminations: 

*(NOTE: *_first batch did;nt have steel thimbles or 2 layers of 2mm thick shrink tubing over them)_

the rope is 1/2" arborplex (not splicable, hence the sewn eye)

what you see here is the OUTER siezing that COVERS the inner siezing, which in turn covers the sewn portion. Thread is 100lb test polyester sail thread, all wraps were done with 80lbs of pull on each wrap. The cord itself was tested on its own and it broke at 130lbs average (straight pull on bollards). 







please note these are my REC climbing lines and not my work lines.


----------



## moray

*gorgeous!*

Very slick, SRT. I bet even without the sewing, the seizing alone would give a splice of nearly full strength. Make it a few inches longer, sans sewing, and I would be amazed if it didn't reach full strength.

The standard splice (on rope where it can be used) does have one advantage: it is fairly flexible. This is nice if you need the spliced end to wrap around a limb and clip to itself, as in SRT (not you, the technique!).

Any chance you could do a break test on a splice with whipping only?


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

Cut that tail at an angle and whip all the way over it, so you have a nice taper.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

Sewn eye splices are more and more common. 
I tore into an old sewn eye splice done by Petzl, and it was a major task just to cut it apart with a knife.


----------



## knudeNoggin

Nick, against concerns about accidental cutting of (part of) the seizing
(_seizing_, here, folks--not _whipping_), the seizing could be done
in three parts, each independent of the others; or it could be done in the
form of French Whipping--a sequence of Half-hitches (with perhaps the
occasional Constrictor (or Strangle) knot put in as a surer *rip-stop*.
And recall that over this seizing (which is over the sewing) comes the
double plastic guard.

Given the strength of that seizing cord (100+ #) and, what, over 50 wraps,
that's some 10_000# of binding in place!

To those who somehow doubt the splice on account of some inability to
_inspect_ it, I wonder what it is you'd like to see that you think might
occur inside the cover? If the concern is simply that the bury might be
coming out, some stitching should provide all the assurance one needs:
if the stitching's in place & unbroken, then there has been no movement
of the bury for worry.

(-;


----------



## 046

good point about stitching combined with splices. 

there's been documented cases of commercial splices coming apart. so the real issue was the splice done properly to begin with. since there's no way to inspect....



knudeNoggin said:


> To those who somehow doubt the splice on account of some inability to
> _inspect_ it, I wonder what it is you'd like to see that you think might
> occur inside the cover? If the concern is simply that the bury might be
> coming out, some stitching should provide all the assurance one needs:
> if the stitching's in place & unbroken, then there has been no movement
> of the bury for worry.
> 
> (-;


----------



## SRT-Tech

version 2 pics:


----------



## moray

TreeCo said:


> Looks good but you will not find me hanging on it.
> 
> For the person who suggested that just the whipping would probably hold.............oh boy!..........Imagine hanging 60ft. in the air looking at a splice that was ony whipped.



Thats me. Yesterday I was hanging 60 feet in the air looking at a splice that wasn't even whipped--it was merely buried.

Experience shows that such a splice will hold, but it doesn't even begin to work until the rope is under tension, thereby causing the outer rope to squeeze the buried part. It is nothing but the friction of these two chunks of rope squeezing against each other that keeps one from slipping past the other. It's not at all self-evident that this should work, and it's not an idea I would ever have come up with on my own.

With the whipping, on the other hand, the two chunks of rope are already tightly bound together before any tension is applied. There is a whole lot of friction uniformly applied over as great a distance as you choose to whip. The only question is how much distance is enough for a given type and tension of whipping twine.

The Achilles heel of the whipping, assuming it is made from one continuous piece of twine, is that a single cut to the twine will destroy the whole thing. By using several pieces of twine, and/or by shrink-wrapping the finished splice, this weakness could be overcome.

A termination knot also works because of friction. Only some parts of the knot supply any friction at all, and they do so in a highly non-uniform manner. Imagine hanging 60ft. in the air looking at a nothing but a knot!!!


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

I still think you need some taper on the stubby end. Even running the shrink wrap over the end would give you some. You could put a wedge of something and shrink wrap up an inch or two past the end, it will snag less and last longer.


----------



## moray

knudeNoggin said:


> Given the strength of that seizing cord (100+ #) and, what, over 50 wraps,
> that's some 10_000# of binding in place!
> 
> (-;



This is very interesting, KN. Might be closer to 8000# holding the splice together if he did his wraps at 80# tension. Either way, it seems like tremendous overkill. But your comment suggests an interesting experiment, based on the notion from physics that friction between two surfaces is proportional to the normal force between the surfaces. We just squeeze two pieces of rope together with a known weight, using some suitable fixture to hold the ropes while allowing them to slide. Then we measure the force needed to make them slide. 

We could test this using a series of weights to see if the principle of proportionality holds. From the data, you could calculate some reasonable numbers for a seizing to hold a splice together.

I suspect that the seizing is actually a lot more efficient at producing a splice than the mere pressure of the wraps would indicate. The seizing twine bites into the surface of the rope like skidder chains bite into the ground...

Hmm... I think this experiment would actually be easier to do with seizing twine. With a pulley and a dumbbell one could produce a few wraps of seizing with uniform tension. Then you could use a spring scale to measure the force needed to make the ropes slide apart. If my garage ever warms up, I may give this a go...


----------



## SRT-Tech

Mike Mass, wait for the next one i sew/sieze/whip/cover with shrinktubing!!! i'll cut the rope end with the hotknife, at a sharp taper. 

i normally have that side of the termination facing me when i climb, it has never snagged on anyhting yet (i tend to be a surgically precise climber) 

i may be getting a used industrial lockstitch machine in the future, big ol beast , all cast iron.


----------



## Kneejerk Bombas

Cool. 
Petzl has a performed, transparent cover with a taper built in. It really helps when you pull the rope back through crotches.
My name is Maas, by the way, not Mass.


----------



## SRT-Tech

^ oops, my apologies! 

i'm getting a can of the urethane dip that they use for the ends of some military ropes (F.R.I.E.S.) 

the rope ends, once dipped , will look similar to this:



< this is NOT my rope, it is what my rope WILL look like when dipped.


----------



## TheTreeSpyder

Wow! Very nice SRT-Tech! My only reservations are the securing of direction of force flow on long axis of krab; so as to not sideload krab per Not cinching up on krab warnings. i think in the arena of personal support/ live moving cargo suspended for lengths of time this is more critical than single use set, then immediately lowered; loading operations in this reguard.

046-The animations are done in Macromedia/now Adobe Flash; a right click will show the familiar menu. i've re-disorganized so many drawings and animations that i've lost some over time it seems. So; i've been trying to gather the Flash-Rope/Knot ones onto a page of it's own: 

Some knot and rope force Flash animations; which are a far cry from the humble beginnings of 1st Rope Archive of Drawings or the Infamous Maaslovian Warning. The Flash vehicle offers vector drawings strategy, which lose no definition on enlargemeant(can make full page size, and then right click and zoom in about 10x and still have same quality), no larger file size for this enlargemeant and smaller files to begin with. The regular drawings archive and the animated .gif/Warning are usually much bigger file size, smaller pictures of less quality and way less information.

Minor Draw Backs: Flash does need a plugin, and is more processor intensive; but these are minor drawbacks, and mostly mute at today's level of electronics and web browsers. The 1st 6 or so knot animations are from the newer Flash8; so non-mainstream browsers; or those without newest plugin may have some trouble seeing them.


----------



## SRT-Tech

not sure what you mean? the carabiner is loaded properly , the thimble rests along the spine, there is no side loading....its no diffe3re3nt a spliced rope end that we all use...and besides, the minimum breaking strength of the steel OSHA/ANSI biner i'm using is well over 11 250 lbs.

???????


----------

