Dr Storricks new tree devices

Tree Machine · 7th September 2007, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brettslawnservice

try using an ATC they work wonders.

Hey Brett's Lawn, welcome to Treeworld.

Thanks for your input.

The ATC, for those unfamiliar with it, stands for Air Traffic Controller. It's a belay device by Black Diamond, here is a pic of the common, original ATC being used for single rope technique and static doubled rope technique:

They don't show the dynamic doubled rope method, as rock climbers wouldn't have the need for that.

gdstorrick · 8th September 2007, 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tree Machine

Unicender.

Here it is on the Dr. Storrick "Miscellaneous Ascenders" board.
It's in the middle, at the bottom and gives reference to it's size as compared to other ascenders.

Can't seem to get you to drop the "Dr. Storrick" nonsense and call me "Gary" now, can I?

I'm looking at a catalog from Repetto Sport in Genoa, Italy, and noticed the C.T. Kaiser. It reminds me of some of the ideas we were discussing at convention. Maybe I'll stop by next month, since I'll be in nearby Pisa on business anyhow (someone has to make the sacrifices to get the job done). Want me to pick one up for your if I can?

----> Gary

Tree Machine · 9th September 2007, 07:40 PM

All right, Dr Gary. No more Dr Storrick.

You lucky Dawg, going on a trip to Italy! Do you need an assistant?

I think it's very supportive to all the readership that you're planning a trip to Italy, just so you can pick me up a device.

Tree Machine · 9th September 2007, 07:44 PM

But before we get into the CT Kaiser device, I would like to stay on track with Brett's ATC idea.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brettslawnservice

try using an ATC they work wonders.

And we pulled an image off the ATC package of the one I just bought a couple days ago:

This is not very expensive, really. This $22.50 is for the XP version of the ATC.

Tree Machine · 9th September 2007, 07:53 PM

Belay Devices 2, belay tubes

Tree Machine · 9th September 2007, 08:01 PM

As you can see, a lot of past research and field-testing and device manufacturing has been done in the area of belay tubes, just so we don't have to do it ourselves.

Check out this tube device. It is the Trango Jaws. Both Gary and I like this tube because of the profile, the one little camel hump in the center creating the dual V grooves, it's a groovy device, man.

Tree Machine · 9th September 2007, 08:17 PM

Let's briefly explore this one:

Tree Machine · 9th September 2007, 08:23 PM

Click below for an excellent summary of three similar devices;
one that we looked at, one that we're looking at and one that we're gonna look at.

Ekka · 9th September 2007, 08:44 PM

Be difficult to advance those? Like think about body thrusting technique pulling on rope tail.

Tree Machine · 10th September 2007, 06:14 AM

Great point, Ekka This gives us an opportunity to get very, very clear on this mechanically-based manner of rope control.

Regarding going up:

You advance ascenders. You tend slack with a descender.

While going up using a descender, you are climbing the tree, not climbing the rope. This is where most of the climb time is spent. Your job is to keep your lifeline taught and free of slack. Going down, the line is always taught. Going up, you have to tend the slack, mechanical OR friction hitch, this does not change.

For everyone, especially the noobs out there, there is one central theme in ropework as it applies to climbing and working in trees, you must keep your lifeline slack free. To do this, you must more or less continuously advance or pull along your friction control.

This is why one of our main Requirements was for the descent device to cooperate and move up the rope freely, and control 100% of the friction when going downward. One would thing that if it applied 100% friction on the down, you would have to fight that same 100% to get the device to go up the rope. Not the case. We should be able to move the device up the rope with very little resistance, whether on static doubled or single.

Body thrusting, as long as it has been mentioned, it has something to offer here.

In a 2:1 friction hitch system, on ascent, there is a body technique called body thrusting, or 'air humping', it where you thrust your hips upward while at the same time pulling the tail of your rope downward. Hips go upward, rope tail goes downward. The rope is advanced over the (crotch or limb) tie-in point and through the hitch, and you pull 50 cm of rope over those two points of friction for every 25 cm of gain in altitude. At the same time you get to look like something freaky, laying back and humping the air. Very professional. Not. Quite efficient. Not. Swift and straight-forward. Definitely not. It works because in 2:1 you have one line going up and one line going down. This is a classic old-school technique, one that should be revered, honored, acknowledged, and then thrown in the shitcan.

In 1:1, body thrusting does not work because the doubled line stays static, does not move up or down. A body thrust, while suspended 1:1 on rope takes real timing, effort and precision. You would have to lurch your body upward and at the same instant, advance your ascenders. Your maimum vertical gain can only, at most, be whatever distance your hips can travel upward. If you can advance your hips and ascender up 25 cm, you get the entire vertical gain of all 25 cm. But in 1:1, you don't generally choose to body hump when you can get 50 cm or better on a single, good footlock while advancing your ascender in a nearly frictionless manner. Dual static ropes lacing over your feet make footlocking very certain, much easier and straight-forward. Gaining vertical in a 1:1 manner is very gratifying, like, how it should be.

Our goal here is to make tree climbing easier. Therein lies the joy.

Tree Machine · 10th September 2007, 06:29 AM

And remember, we're not suggesting you seasoned veterans change over on how you climb. This is not a challenge to your manhood, rather a challenge to your ingrained beliefs that 2:1 is the ant's pants

What's important here is just to realize that we're comparing and contrasting different climbing systems, becoming clear on what works, what doesn't, and why. There's no bashing, no competition, no personal bias; just objective data and our collective creativity and the open-minded willingness to explore new possibilities.

Tree Machine · 10th September 2007, 06:31 AM

So, back to the briefing on belay tubes?

Tree Machine · 10th September 2007, 06:37 AM

These are not 'new' devices, they've been on the market awhile. They are new in the sense of how Black Diamond has up-graded the common belay tube into something more than just the raw tube. This is a baby-step in our direction, but significant nonetheless. It all lies in the cleats. They really help.

The first set of images is the ATC XP

This next set is the ATC Guide. See how, turned one way, the devices act just as the classical, old belay tube. Turned the other way, it is new and improved.

Tree Machine · 10th September 2007, 06:45 AM

But there is something missing on these two devices that would make them potential candidates for tree work. What is missing? Key point here. Anyone?

TreeCo · 10th September 2007, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tree Machine

But there is something missing on these two devices that would make them potential candidates for tree work. What is missing? Key point here. Anyone?

They are not 'hands free' devices.

Tree Machine · 11th September 2007, 05:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TreeCo

They are not 'hands free' devices.

That's exactly right.

These devices, though improved over earlier versions, evn though they'll do static doubled, dynamic doubled and single rope technique, they're still not hands-free devices.

You can make them hands-free, but our requirements say that the device needs to have the soft/hard lock ability intrinsic in the device.

I would bet that ten of us would find ten completely different, though effective, means of attaining lockoff. But we don't really want improvisation here. We want the device to posess it's own ability to drop into a second stage of friction that DOES make it, at that point, a hands-free device.

Other requirements were that you should be able to soft or hard lock one-handed, either going in or coming out of lockoff, and be able to adjust your position while in soft lock, also one-handed. In a perfect device world, you should be able to work the crown and tend slack while in soft lock. You wpouldn't necessarily have to live in soft lock while up in the tree as going in and coming out, as mentioned, should be one-handed and take about one second, either way, since in and out of soft lock is nearly as common as slack tending.

So any ideas on how to create an intrinsic soft-lock in these devices? This might be a great time for a digital design. Describe it, and I will 'build' it.

9th September 2007, 07:53 PM	#230 (permalink)
Tree Machine Over mature heritage tree Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Indianapolis Posts: 697	Gary's ATC boards Belay Devices 2, belay tubes

9th September 2007, 08:23 PM	#233 (permalink)
Tree Machine Over mature heritage tree Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Indianapolis Posts: 697	ATC Family Click below for an excellent summary of three similar devices; one that we looked at, one that we're looking at and one that we're gonna look at.

9th September 2007, 08:44 PM	#234 (permalink)
Ekka Admin - Dip Arb & Hort Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane Posts: 7,636	Re: Dr Storricks new tree devices Be difficult to advance those? Like think about body thrusting technique pulling on rope tail. __________________ Arborist Training in Australia\| Your Free Helping Guide Free Tree and Green Industry Link Directory .... Yes, I also SEO (Optimize) and build websites that fly high in Google Qualified Brisbane Tree Lopping \| Stump Grinding and Stump Removal Brisbane Brisbane Tree Care, Consultations, Developer, Tree and Arborist Reports Forum Sponsors

10th September 2007, 06:14 AM	#235 (permalink)
Tree Machine Over mature heritage tree Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Indianapolis Posts: 697	very key point Great point, Ekka This gives us an opportunity to get very, very clear on this mechanically-based manner of rope control. Regarding going up: You advance ascenders. You tend slack with a descender. While going up using a descender, you are climbing the tree, not climbing the rope. This is where most of the climb time is spent. Your job is to keep your lifeline taught and free of slack. Going down, the line is always taught. Going up, you have to tend the slack, mechanical OR friction hitch, this does not change. For everyone, especially the noobs out there, there is one central theme in ropework as it applies to climbing and working in trees, you must keep your lifeline slack free. To do this, you must more or less continuously advance or pull along your friction control. This is why one of our main Requirements was for the descent device to cooperate and move up the rope freely, and control 100% of the friction when going downward. One would thing that if it applied 100% friction on the down, you would have to fight that same 100% to get the device to go up the rope. Not the case. We should be able to move the device up the rope with very little resistance, whether on static doubled or single. Body thrusting, as long as it has been mentioned, it has something to offer here. In a 2:1 friction hitch system, on ascent, there is a body technique called body thrusting, or 'air humping', it where you thrust your hips upward while at the same time pulling the tail of your rope downward. Hips go upward, rope tail goes downward. The rope is advanced over the (crotch or limb) tie-in point and through the hitch, and you pull 50 cm of rope over those two points of friction for every 25 cm of gain in altitude. At the same time you get to look like something freaky, laying back and humping the air. Very professional. Not. Quite efficient. Not. Swift and straight-forward. Definitely not. It works because in 2:1 you have one line going up and one line going down. This is a classic old-school technique, one that should be revered, honored, acknowledged, and then thrown in the shitcan. In 1:1, body thrusting does not work because the doubled line stays static, does not move up or down. A body thrust, while suspended 1:1 on rope takes real timing, effort and precision. You would have to lurch your body upward and at the same instant, advance your ascenders. Your maimum vertical gain can only, at most, be whatever distance your hips can travel upward. If you can advance your hips and ascender up 25 cm, you get the entire vertical gain of all 25 cm. But in 1:1, you don't generally choose to body hump when you can get 50 cm or better on a single, good footlock while advancing your ascender in a nearly frictionless manner. Dual static ropes lacing over your feet make footlocking very certain, much easier and straight-forward. Gaining vertical in a 1:1 manner is very gratifying, like, how it should be. Our goal here is to make tree climbing easier. Therein lies the joy.

10th September 2007, 06:29 AM	#236 (permalink)
Tree Machine Over mature heritage tree Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Indianapolis Posts: 697	summary And remember, we're not suggesting you seasoned veterans change over on how you climb. This is not a challenge to your manhood, rather a challenge to your ingrained beliefs that 2:1 is the ant's pants What's important here is just to realize that we're comparing and contrasting different climbing systems, becoming clear on what works, what doesn't, and why. There's no bashing, no competition, no personal bias; just objective data and our collective creativity and the open-minded willingness to explore new possibilities.

10th September 2007, 06:45 AM	#239 (permalink)
Tree Machine Over mature heritage tree Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Indianapolis Posts: 697	(hint, intrinsic soft/hard lock) But there is something missing on these two devices that would make them potential candidates for tree work. What is missing? Key point here. Anyone?