On Rope 1 - new website

[chrismc]

Looks nice! I especially like the MythBusters section ( http://onrope1.com/mythbusters.htm ).

[brrrdog]

I find myth number 7 very interesting. I'd love to hear comments on this....[/url]

[NZcaver]

I find myth number 7 very interesting. I'd love to hear comments on this....

You'll find this discussed here and there in previous On Rope threads.

Note the disputed myth in this instance states, "Racks should be used with the bars facing the user."

Despite what the "original designer" intended, racks are frequently used in BOTH orientations by people - quite happily and safely. Also remember there's more than one rack design (and designer), and the logic behind that designer's intention does not apply to all types of racks. Think micro-racks and other types of U-racks, for example.

So by saying "racks should be used" that way, the statement IS a myth and adding it to their list is perfectly appropriate. But it would ALSO be a myth to state racks should be used the other way! Personal preference is a wonderful thing.

[NZcaver]

By the way, I think On Rope 1 have done well with their Myth Busters list. Great idea!

It's quite thought-provoking. I've got another one for their list:

Myth #21: You should use a left-handed ascender with a Frog system, because if a right-handed one becomes jammed with your chest ascender it will be more difficult to free.

If your ascenders become jammed together while climbing, the problem is your footloop length - not which ascender you're using. With practice, a jammed right-handed ascender in this situation should be no more difficult to correct than a jammed left-handed ascender. Which handled ascender you use with your Frog system should purely be a matter of dexterity and/or personal preference.

On Rope 1 actually mention this myth on their website, but strangely it's not on the Myth Busters page...

Anyone have any other myths to add?

[brrrdog]

I suppose it's the same sort of personal preference that allows one to pick a right handed frog over a left .

I think this might be the discussion you are referring to.

Either way I'm glad it's a preference because I think I prefer seeing the rack bars and that they are properly locked in ;).

However what interests me is the reason Cole gives. Is it really that much harder to pull a rope back and forth vs. left and right? I can see you getting a little extra power going left/right but enough to make a noticable difference?

[ek]

Myth #5: Dressing a knot makes the knot stronger.

Truth: Dressing a knot allows the knot to be easily inspectable, not necessarily stronger. This allows for easy verification that the knot is tied correctly.

Not necessarily stronger. It's not clear to me why this is on the list. They're not making the (controversial and almost certainly false) claim that dressing knots is never a boon to strength. They seem to be saying, "the reason you dress knots is to make them recognizable," but this is not widely disagreed with.

As an example of a knot that is verifiably weaker when improperly dressed: the Prusik. (I'm also pretty sure that if, when tying a double fisherman, you push one double overhand *over* the other before setting it, the resulting asymmetric dressing is weaker. If you do this with a single fisherman, the knot will slip apart when you pull on it lightly with your arms.)

[NZcaver]

Myth #5: Dressing a knot makes the knot stronger.

Truth: Dressing a knot allows the knot to be easily inspectable, not necessarily stronger. This allows for easy verification that the knot is tied correctly.

Not necessarily stronger. It's not clear to me why this is on the list. They're not making the (controversial and almost certainly false) claim that dressing knots is never a boon to strength. They seem to be saying, "the reason you dress knots is to make them recognizable," but this is not widely disagreed with.

A number of these dispelled myths seem like just the basic rope stuff to me. But I guess this doesn't apply to everyone.

Your Prusik hitch example is interesting, and might be worth testing. For me, tying and dressing a knot is like eating and swallowing - one naturally leads to the other.

[hank moon]

Is it really that much harder to pull a rope back and forth vs. left and right?

If you have to change the number of bars engaged, it is easier to do so with the Cole-recommended orientation. It does make a difference. However, it is a bit silly to insist on this orientation for general recreational use b/c most folks rarely change bars or have significant rope weight to deal with.

[copelandcaver7]

The onrope website is looking great, I think we are very lucky to have such great websites like onrope, innermountain outfitters to choose from. keep up the good work.

[Mike Rz]

Myth #5: Dressing a knot makes the knot stronger.

Truth: Dressing a knot allows the knot to be easily inspectable, not necessarily stronger. This allows for easy verification that the knot is tied correctly.

"Dressing...Neglecting this activity may result in an additional substantial reduction in knot strength" (fig. 3-1). On Rope Smith and Pagett 1996. p41

reminds me of the standard answer of the worst professor I ever had: He'd put the left hand over his chin and say "maybe...maybe not". At that point hand would then flip toward the questioner with fingers splayed.

On second thought maybe he was the smartest professor I ever had.

[GypsumWolf]

Myth #5: Dressing a knot makes the knot stronger.

Truth: Dressing a knot allows the knot to be easily inspectable, not necessarily stronger. This allows for easy verification that the knot is tied correctly.

Not necessarily stronger. It's not clear to me why this is on the list. They're not making the (controversial and almost certainly false) claim that dressing knots is never a boon to strength. They seem to be saying, "the reason you dress knots is to make them recognizable," but this is not widely disagreed with.

As an example of a knot that is verifiably weaker when improperly dressed: the Prusik. (I'm also pretty sure that if, when tying a double fisherman, you push one double overhand *over* the other before setting it, the resulting asymmetric dressing is weaker. If you do this with a single fisherman, the knot will slip apart when you pull on it lightly with your arms.)

It depends on how you tie the double fisherman. I do it two ways, one where you do need to push the loop over and one where you do not have to do that.

[Bobatnathrop]

Cool site

I find myth number 7 very interesting. I'd love to hear comments on this

I agree with the other poster, doesnt really matter how it is put on the rope. I prefer having the bars faceing me, but my brother likes it the other way. Guess it really doesnt matter.

Myth #21: You should use a left-handed ascender with a Frog system, because if a right-handed one becomes jammed with your chest ascender it will be more difficult to free.

Correct me if I am wrong, but dont Basics only come in right handed design? Eh seems like a nother preference thing to me.

Not necessarily stronger. It's not clear to me why this is on the list. They're not making the (controversial and almost certainly false) claim that dressing knots is never a boon to strength. They seem to be saying, "the reason you dress knots is to make them recognizable," but this is not widely disagreed with.

Myth #5: Dressing a knot makes the knot stronger.
Truth: Dressing a knot allows the knot to be easily inspectable, not necessarily stronger. This allows for easy verification that the knot is tied correctly.

The myth says "not necessarily stronger". That leaves it open to what kinda of knot is being used at that time.
Take a Figure 8 or a square knot, if you didnt dress either of those knots I really dont think it would affect the strergth.
But if you have a prusik or a bowline or somthing like that I can definitelly see that it's strength would be affected.
Seems just like a wide open statement just for filling some space, I dont see anythign wrong with it though. If I saw a knot that wasnt dressed I would go back and retie it but I wouldnt freak out cus someone was endangering my life.

[NZcaver]

Correct me if I am wrong, but dont Basics only come in right handed design? Eh seems like a nother preference thing to me.

Correct. I think the original myth stems from the handle of the right handed Ascension blocking access to the cam of the Croll, when the two ascenders are jammed together. I've tried to duplicate this problem many times, but always found I can extract myself without undue difficulty. At worst, I can thumb the Croll cam by reaching through the handle of the Ascension.

Of course the Petzl Basic cam has no handle to get in the way. I assume it was primarily designed to be operated right-handed, as there was never a left-handed version (at least one made by Petzl, that is). Crolls are also designed for right-handed operation when attached to your body, although of course the front of the ascender faces away from you in this position.

I suppose if you wanted to use the Basic/Croll configuration left-handed, you could just swap them around so the Basic is connected to your harness and the Croll is in your (left) hand. In my experience, this setup causes the rope to drag on the top edge of the Basic, making it less than ideal. But it should still work.

[knudeNoggin]

Mythbusting might just be the vogue touch of irreverence deemed apt
to spice up the site!?


On the knots myths presented:

#4, Frictionless Hitch: I'm happy to see the inefficiency of tying time and materials pointed out;
many times I've seen it used for TR anchors and I just shake my head, imagining the user's
defence of it ("strongest...") just begging the question What is tied at the other end?
The use of a locking 'biner--even of any 'biner--might also be put up for critique.
As for using it on an I-beam, that seems like asking for some rope stress (vs. using some
eye or double-eye knot, to load more parts of rope over the sharp edges).

#6 A Fig.8 loopknot tied "backwards" is 10% weaker.
There's a lot to discuss on this. Firstly, "10%" here I think refers to 10 %-points, as in 60% vs 70%
(and not 60% vs. 66%--which is 10% greater); I've seen such an assertion, presumably
with some testing behind it (Ontario Rock Climbing Assoc. Safety Manual, 1985).
What is laughable (incredible, really) about On_Rope1's presentation of the Fig.8 is
the flat layout of it!
Who would think that material with a round cross section could ever hold that form?!
Yet, that was in the 1st edition of their book (and is copied all over, alas); I'm not sure if this was
redressed in the 2nd, but it reappears here. (In contrast, the O.R.C.A. images show a carefully
dressed knot, leading one to believe they might have a clue! Lyon Equipment however had
much of this clue yet different results. One can then wonder at how the knots were set.
I'd say: set by loading the end, principally, in opposition to the eye.

Usually the Fig.8 and other trace knots are presented w/o indication of even which
end to load, or of how to "properly dress (and set)" the knot. So no precise right or wrong
way is articulated, to which a myth might attach.

Btw, take a look at the image given for the double-eye Fig.8 in Myth#18: THIS is how
I think the knot should be dressed (loaded twin part is that running to the extreme end of the
knot body, and so it bears against (is padded by) its twin).

Which feeds right in to:
Myth#5 Dressing a knot makes it stronger.
That the fine points of dressing/orienting & setting a knot aren't usually discussed for rope
--one does see thing for fishing line, though--, we're again left to wonder at how to go about
testing such a hypothesis.
On the flip side, "an undressed knot" is an even more ambiguous, ill-defined thing,
and reports that some undressed knots tested stronger (I've seen such assertions made
for some AMGA testing) cannot be interpreted as "dressing isn't important"
--maybe, rather, as "dress them that way" would be better!

And we're left to wonder at how each of the Fig.8 & Fig.9 knots were dressed and set
in whatever testing led to this myth's assertion of Fig.9 superiority.

Finally, back to the (stupid) application of some asserted weakenings; I'm really amazed
to see this put up on-line!? Myth#15, Rope strength can be determined by ... [vendor lit.].
The final line is a laugh--one doesn't add such precentages but multipy them!
Otherwise, an old rope w/but 50% of its new strength tied with a 50% knot would
just break--ridiculous!!!
--but you read it on-line On_Rope1, so it must be true?
(One might also doubt some vendor lit.)

Moreover, if you read rope makers' advice, they expressly state that such factors
as knots are NOT "allotted for" by a safety factor (or by a "WLL", Working Load
Limit), but that such a limit must be reduced to account for them.

*knudeNoggin*

[Bobatnathrop]

Dude, your post just confused me. Maybe it is too late at night to be reading this kind of stuff...