Tom Dunlap
Addicted to ArboristSite
CoreyTMorine said:re onrope; im not disputing their data, just some of their conclusions. ie "girth hitching as a general rule is unacceptable as a rigging technique" p.65 fig 4-17. and page 115 they state about a figure 8 "unfortunately, this level of control is acheived entirely with the friction against the rappellers hip and the squeezing of the brake hand."
its a good book that i have learned much from reading, but statements like those above are misleading or incorrect, so i take everything from that book with a grain of salt.
After reading all of what you refer to I come to a different conclusion. There are much better rigging systems available that don't comprimise the strength like girth hitching. Minimizing strength loss is the issue. In the text that accompanies the girth hitch they do mention some uses. Arbos aren't as trained in how to account for all of the forces and loads in the systems. With a better understanding of dynamic loads it's pretty clear that there is room for improvement.
Figure eights are one of the poorer choices for descending. A Munter hitch develops more friction in most of the usual configurations. Can't get any simpler than using just a biner for descent. The rope hockling isn't any worse using a Munter or an eight in my experience. Neither of them have much friction and need to be monitored closely.
OUtside of the arbo world proper rappel procedure is taught where the brake hand is kept just behind the hip as a backup. Arbos don't seem to have brought this bit of procedure over from the rest of the vertical rope world.
The setup in 5-34 is a nice, compact and inexpensive rappel setup. It's a mystery to me why racks aren't as popular considering the tradeoffs using figure eight type devices. The only reason that I can see is that racks have a very low "Cool Factor". How can they compete against really cool looking anodized shapes like the Piranha and Cardiac Arrestor? Are the P and CA rated for arbo ropes?