Is this appropriate for a canopy anchor ?
- Thread starter Saddle
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
is that a rated link?
I just tie a running bowline personally
I just tie a running bowline personally
Bango Skank
ArboristSite Operative
So long as the link is rated high enough for life support, it’s fine.
The magic number you want is 5,000 lb. MBS.
Some of them are stamped not with MBS (minimum breaking strength), but with a WLL (working load limit) or SWL (safe working load), a lot of the modern stuff is WLL, but I think they’re the same. To get the safe working load, I think they’ll use 1/5 or 20% of the MBS and that’s intended for static lifting or suspending loads. I’m not sure if this is OSHA/ ANSI gospel but in tree climbing and rigging, our WLL is 1/10th or 10% of MBS, because we see greater risks of shock loading which is a huge force multiplier.
If it’s rated in Kn (kilo-Newtons) the magic number is 23kn. Carabiner’s and a lot of rescue type gear is in KN.
What’s stamped or etched on that link?
The magic number you want is 5,000 lb. MBS.
Some of them are stamped not with MBS (minimum breaking strength), but with a WLL (working load limit) or SWL (safe working load), a lot of the modern stuff is WLL, but I think they’re the same. To get the safe working load, I think they’ll use 1/5 or 20% of the MBS and that’s intended for static lifting or suspending loads. I’m not sure if this is OSHA/ ANSI gospel but in tree climbing and rigging, our WLL is 1/10th or 10% of MBS, because we see greater risks of shock loading which is a huge force multiplier.
If it’s rated in Kn (kilo-Newtons) the magic number is 23kn. Carabiner’s and a lot of rescue type gear is in KN.
What’s stamped or etched on that link?
As stated, load ratings matter. Don’t just think about the weight, think about the force if you fall several feet and shock load the anchor. Speed is a force multiplier and can quickly cause bad situations especially if hardware is side loaded. Personally I wrap the tree several times and capture the wraps. It puts more load on the rope instead of your hardware. Plus if the hardware fails it takes a lot to overcome the friction to pull the rope around the tree, slowing my unplanned descent.
I assumed your using a base anchor instead of a canopy, since there is no way to retrieve it.
I assumed your using a base anchor instead of a canopy, since there is no way to retrieve it.
It's not double locking. With movement against the tree it could easily come unscrewed.
Thanks. Can you recommend one that is?
I believe Ansi does allow quick links like that HOWEVER they must be tightened with a wrench and be semi permanant (i.e attaching a snap to a flipline)
My z133 book is out in the truck but I can look if you want, should be in there
My z133 book is out in the truck but I can look if you want, should be in there
Steel carabiner is the better option for something like this that will get a side load
However I've never bent or broke an aluminum one, they are tougher than people think
However I've never bent or broke an aluminum one, they are tougher than people think
Not a fan of side loading why not just use a Bowline like mentioned?
Was adding onto jollys comment, forgot to quote him
I don't like to side load anything either, hence the bowline although anyone that's watched my videos knows I don't exactly play 100% by the book on that stuff sometimes
+1 on using an eye sewn or spliced end. Running bowline is great but a little more work/ time. I use a steel double locking carabiner as a choke on the line on the stick. Petzl makes the ones I use and man they are tough. Still not sold on the aluminum ones for that application.
Quickie was, in my opinion, the best way to do this. I don't have one yet, but it sure looks like the ISC UltraLink is a great improvement on the quickie:
Edit: for now I'm removing the link to the ultralink. Hearing rumors that it opens too easily and unintentionally, so maybe not such a great option.
Edit: for now I'm removing the link to the ultralink. Hearing rumors that it opens too easily and unintentionally, so maybe not such a great option.
