/ yosemite eight

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
JonJavlin - on 04 May 2012
been thinking about knots lately and the buddy system as we get out and do bigger and better things. We did MFB at the weekend.

this thread got us thinking: http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=503455&v=1

so, my mate does the figure of eight with an upward facing stopper. I do the figure of eight with a yosemite finish.

this one (apologies, he is american after all ;): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCbUpul1R6w

seemed like a better system for me. When i did the stopper before, it always came undone.

with the yosemite; at the wall and the crag (and now the mountain), it has always stayed as it should, and also out of the way.

good? bad? indifferent??

cheers
J
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to JonJavlin: Of course then there is the argument that with a fig, the stopper knot is superfluous anyway and you don't nee to tie it in the first place, and that instructors teach it as a belts and braces type thing. But I'll let everybody else argue that one out ;)
The Ex-Engineer - on 04 May 2012
In reply to JonJavlin: I assume you are well aware that neither is required. The only safety requirement when tying a fig-8 is a moderately long tail, normally 10 or 12 rope diameters is quoted as the absolute minimum. It just happens that this is rather similar to what is needed for both a very neat, tight stopper knot or a Yosemite finish.

The issue with a fig-8 is that when the loop is cross loaded (i.e. not the normal load in a fall but what often happens at belays or when belaying) the knot will 'roll' at fairly low forces (2-3kN) and if the tail is to short the knot could fail quickly rather than have the opportunity to progressively tighten.

As such, it is a really case of picking what you prefer.

Two additional points:
- how well stopper knots 'seat' does depend heavily on the rope. Stoppers never sit well and stay tied with my superdry 8.5mm ropes but on my soft and pliable 10.5mm Lanex Altea they cinched tightly every time.
- very badly tied stopper knots are DANGEROUS. There have been several documented accidents of novice climbers clipping the extra loop formed between a badly tied stopper knot and the main knot which has then slipped/failed when loaded.

HTH
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to The Ex-Engineer: Which brings us neatly to whether you use an alternative knot which forms a loop and cannot roll, and therefore requires no stopper in any circumstance. I submit to the court: http://i1.tinypic.com/2z3z8ts.jpg

Neat, brings the rope out pointing down from your harness and close to the harness so it's easier to grab, like the bowline; no stopper required, even a trained chimp can tie a granny knot, it's not as hard to untie after loading, it doesn't use as much rope as an 8 and stopper, it's easier to adjust the initial knot if you tied it in the wrong place - need I go on? Been using it for a couple of years now and absolutely love it.
JonJavlin - on 04 May 2012
In reply: thanks Guys...seems like either is good. both are safe. down to personal preference and rope size.

don't fancy anything other than a figure of eight yet Mike. I'd need to see someone using that in action and have anything else demonstrated to me in a live situation to even think about using anything other than trusty old eight...

cheers
J
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
Al Randall on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann: Thanks for that but I can't see any advantage to this knot other than it takes ups less rope which is not really a big deal. It also looks as though it would be difficult to untie after loading?

Al
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Al Randall: Ok: here are the advantages:

1: uses less rope
2: you don't need to tie a stopper knot, because it forms a ring, i.e. it can't roll when cross loaded (as in when you tie in at a belay)
3: it is EASIER to untie than a figure of eight
4: it doesn't come undone like a bowline
5: its a small neat knot i.e. its less bulky on your harness
6: it places the rope closer to your waistband which makes it easier to grab hold of than a fig 8.
The Ex-Engineer - on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann: If you are submitting the ring bend as an option, I suppose I should submit the ultimate in completely unjammable tie-in knots, the Zeppelin Loop http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zeppelinloop.html :-)
Mr Lopez - on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:
> (In reply to The Ex-Engineer) Which brings us neatly to whether you use an alternative knot which forms a loop and cannot roll, and therefore requires no stopper in any circumstance. I submit to the court: http://i1.tinypic.com/2z3z8ts.jpg

Errr... The water knot is only supposed to be used with tape, as it slips on rope and even on tape if loaded repeatedly. I got no figures at the moment to back that up, so it could be another case of an 'urban myth'. I'll have a look around and report back. :-)

Another knot that is safer than the classics, very easy to untie and unjammable, and which doesn't roll or change shape under load is the zeppelin loop. A bit harder to learn and prone to mistakes, but once you learn it is much superior to 8's and bowlines. http://notableknotindex.webs.com/zeppelinloop.html

To the OP, as Mike points out the Yos8 rolls when loading the loop, in addition, the way you thread the tuck makes a big difference, so be sure you follow the right path http://www.vimeo.com/40767916
Mr Lopez - on 04 May 2012
In reply to The Ex-Engineer:

Oi!
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to The Ex-Engineer: That's hideous - I just tried tieing it - it'd be SOOOOOOOOO easy to screw up if you're tieing in in a hurry/tired. The beauty of the ring bend is that it's essentially a variation of an overhand which is the first knot you learn to tie. Not as a climber but as a human being. As far as I can tell you'd have to be a know weirdo to like the Zeppelin knot.
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Mr Lopez: As I say - been using it in earnest for a couple of years and still here to tell the tale. Had plenty of whippers on them...
Mr Lopez - on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:

Testing on slings and the mechanisms of failure http://user.xmission.com/~tmoyer/testing/Water_Knot_Testing.pdf I'll keep checking for rope data.
Al Randall on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann: All valid comments. I would also suggest that it is easy to spot that it is tied correctly so it's surprising that indoor walls don't adopt it. It probably also easier to teach than an F8. I've never really got that and always thought the bowline the easier. You see you can teach an old dog new tricks although it is unlikely that I will change from bowlines and F8's at this stage in my climbing career. And then there was always the Tarbuck which I think was a recommended knot for attaching to hemp waist bands. KISS is what I say though.

Al
Mr Lopez - on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:
> (In reply to Mr Lopez) As I say - been using it in earnest for a couple of years and still here to tell the tale. Had plenty of whippers on them...

Oh, i'm sure i could tie on with a simple overhand or an un-stoppered bowline for years with no problems. But you only need to score that 1 in a thousand chance and it's game over.

As i said though, at the moment is only an unbacked statement, and the paper above could only really be an argument for checking your tied slings as i doubt anyone would load their tie on knots 800 times. Other than that it's only a suggestion that could be unsafe or be part of climbing folklore myths.

beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Mr Lopez: http://user.xmission.com/~tmoyer/testing/Water_Knot_Testing.pdf

Just found this which suggests failure by high cyclical loading and that this failure was easily avoidable by using a longer tail - tie-in knots you tie at the bottom of each route and inspect every time. It's a very different use to a sling, especially as the loading is on one of the tails.
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Mr Lopez: Haha - snap. You might test it that many times if your were really piss weak and dogginh a route ;)
Mr Lopez - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Mr Lopez:
> (In reply to mike kann)

> To the OP, as Mike points out (...)

That was meant to say ex-eng, not Mike BTW.

Beaten to it twice! Grrrrr....
Mr Lopez - on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:

Re: Zeppelin loop. It's not that complicated when you 'understand' the knot. It is simply 2 overhand knots (one in each strand) which interlock. Best to learn the bend and then the loop becomes obvious.

Bend http://www.animatedknots.com/zeppelin/index.php?LogoImage=LogoGrog.jpg&Website=www.animatedknots...

Bend and Loop http://davidmdelaney.com/zeppelin/Zeppelin-bend-and-Zeppelin-loop.html
ads.ukclimbing.com
Mr Lopez - on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:

And a long discussion from 'the experts' on the merits http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1872.0
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Mr Lopez: I've read some other threads off that forum. The posters seem to be the spawn of the riddler and yoda. Try speaking english...
Marcusk - on 04 May 2012
In reply to everyone:
Good to see all the different views on which knots are best

As Jon says I use the fig8 with a up stopper because thats what I am confident in using. Not wanting to re-harsh the other thread but it also about what you are comfortable and confident to do successfully! Learning whatever knot is important, concentrating when doing and getting your mate to check them is crucial. I always look at mine or Jons knot and always check his belay (hope you check mine sir?!)
The potential of knots to undo is scary but how many failures are the users failing to actually tie the knot properly?
M.
Mr Lopez - on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:

Ha, ha. Yes, those guys are certainly special. However i found these threads invaluable as a resource of knot information and referrals to real tests which may not show up when using the humble Google.
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Marcusk: Most of them. Which is why keeping it simple is important. Hence me saying you've got to be a knot weirdo to think the Zeppelin knot is anything but a PITA.
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Mr Lopez: Might be worth talking to DMM and seeing if they would set up a test for us?
Mr Lopez - on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:

I've been wanting to contact them for a while, as there's loads of data simply not available or that has not been tested. Got a list as long as my arm of stuff i want to see results for. Fancy chipping in for a days 'pull test machine' hire? ;-) I wonder if they would hire the rig out...

Right, after some more research it seems you are in the clear, and the Myth that the water knot is unsafe in rope is not so. Another example of the motivations for not using a knot being simplified to the ubiquitous "it's unsafe".

Apparently the problem with it is that it can jam badly, but otherwise it is a perfectly safe knot.

Discussed by bondage lovers here http://www.craftbanter.com/showthread.php?t=13410 (Roo and Dan Lehman are some of the most knowledgeable out there)

And also here http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1238.0 (Have some Paracetamol at the ready before starting with this one)
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Mr Lopez: Already sent Chris Rowlands an e-mail. You never know he might do it for us!
Mr Lopez - on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:

Cool. Let me know what his response is in regards allowing other people to run a test. Been planning one for a while which is rather extensive and doesn't really apply to any products DMM manufactures.
Fraser on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:
> (In reply to Al Randall) Ok: here are the advantages:
>
> ....
> 4: it doesn't come undone like a bowline

I've tied many a bowline and it's never come undone. Am I doing something wrong?
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Fraser: No - but I bet you still tie a stopper knot. I've also used the bowline for years before I changed to this knot. I still use it sometimes. My point was that you don't have to worry about tieing the stopper knot with the competition knot...
Fraser on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:

And my point was, with a properly-tied bowline, you don't either. ;)
Al Randall on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann: For want of a better way to describe it, it looks like a re-threaded overhand on the bight. Is that a fair description?

Al
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Fraser: Indeed. ;)
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Al Randall: No. If it was on a bight the tail and the live rope would exit the knot at the same point. With a water knot, you rethread it but the tail and live rope leave at opposite sides of the knot, i.e. if you look at the loop it is round, not a teardrop shape.
JonJavlin - on 04 May 2012
In reply to mike kann: That's great Mike! Like it.....will investigate! trying and tying as we speak :-) Thanks for doing the vid!!
GeoffRadcliffe - on 04 May 2012
In reply to JonJavlin: Like others, I have never had a problem with a bowline coming undone.
I use it because:
It is safe, particularly if a stopper knot is added.
It is easy to undo after a fall.
It's easy to see if it is tied correctly.
I've never tied it incorrectly.
It's quick to to tie.
I can tie it blind-folded.
I can tie it using just one hand (good in an emergency).
There is no danger of pulling the rope up out of reach with half a knot still tied in it (something I've seen done a few times with a figure of eight). LOL.
knudeNoggin - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Fraser:
> (In reply to mike kann)
>
> And my point was, with a properly-tied bowline, you don't either. ;)

If you really believe this, then you've not been paying close enough attention to the many testimonies that in fact, you DO (or you need to use some other securing method, such as some extension, further tucking of the tail). The bowline can loosen and come untied, even when it was "properly tied" --where that expression refers simply to the forming of the basic knot (some consider it to refer to using a stopper or other securing method, too).

*kN*
knudeNoggin - on 04 May 2012
In reply to Al Randall:
> (In reply to mike kann) For want of a better way to describe it, it looks like a re-threaded overhand on the bight. Is that a fair description?
>
Al, no --look again. (I assume you're referring to http://i1.tinypic.com/2z3z8ts.jpg .)
This eye knot bears the same relationship to the infamous "EDK" (offset water knot --nb "offset"!) as the "overhand on the bight" (aka "overhand loop") does to the water knot (aka ring bend). (Note that in this latter case, there are two loadings possible --which end is tail, i.e..) And, as it is an eye knot --loaded on 3 of 4 ends, not just 2--, the testing done by Tom Moyer of the end-2-end knot ("EDK") is rather irrelevant; one overhand component is loaded on both ends, and so cannot "roll". (You can prove the difference by trying to UNtie the knot w/o using its ends --nope, it's not tied in the bight!)

And an overhand knot isn't a "granny" --that is an end-2-end knot like the square /reef knot.


*kN*

David Coley - on 04 May 2012
In reply to The Ex-Engineer:

> The issue with a fig-8 is that when the loop is cross loaded (i.e. not the normal load in a fall but what often happens at belays or when belaying) the knot will 'roll' at fairly low forces (2-3kN) and if the tail is to short the knot could fail quickly rather than have the opportunity to progressively tighten.

Are you sure that's true? If used to join two ropes, yes; but at a belay it isn't cross really cross loaded, more pulled a bit to one side. The pulls will be through the knot and to the first anchor, back from the second anchor and into the the rope loop (which will slide around so the line is against the knot), and from the belay plate.

To roll, I think the fig8 needs to be pulled 180 degrees apart.

Jim Titt might be the best person to answer this.
ads.ukclimbing.com
beardy mike - on 04 May 2012
In reply to David Coley: Ah yes but lets not let the real world situation get in the way of things. In theory, it could destroy itself in an instant. Never mind that people use the 8, the bowline and maybe the competition knot thousands of times a day and nobody seems to be dying. The important result is what comes out of a mind exercise.
Mr Lopez - on 05 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:
> (In reply to David Coley) Never mind that people use the 8, the bowline and maybe the competition knot thousands of times a day and nobody seems to be dying.

Are you sure about that?

jimtitt - on 05 May 2012
In reply to JonJavlin:

The German Alpine Club and Austrian Alpine club safety commission as well as the Swiss Alpine Club strongly recommend not using the Yosemite finish due to potential ring-loading issues after tests done by Mammut.

The recommended and taught tie-in knots in the German speaking world are a)fig 8 with stopper b) re-threaded bowline. The re-threaded bowline is the knot of choice for most sport climbers I know and is immune from ring load failure, easy to tie and untie and very easy to see if it is tied correctly which is more than one could say for the Zeppelin loop!
r0x0r.wolfo - on 05 May 2012
In reply to JonJavlin: What is ring load failure?
Morgan Woods - on 06 May 2012
In reply to JonJavlin:

I have also heard it called a sport eight since it's easier to untie after being weighted. i tend not to bother and just leave a reasonable tail and pull it tight.
knudeNoggin - on 06 May 2012
In reply to r0x0r.wolfo:
> What is ring load failure?

It's a nifty term from the Germans meaning the loading of an eye knot's eye as though it were a round sling --e.g., clip two krabs into the eye and pull them in opposite directions.

> The German Alpine Club and Austrian Alpine club safety commission as well as the Swiss Alpine Club strongly recommend not using the Yosemite finish due to potential ring-loading issues after tests done by Mammut.

Jim, are these Mammut tests available on-line (where)?
Isn't the issue of ring-loading NA when the tie-in rope is used for anchoring?
(As has been argued here and elsewhere.)


*kN*
jimtitt - on 06 May 2012
In reply to knudeNoggin:
> (In reply to r0x0r.wolfo)
> [...]
>
> It's a nifty term from the Germans meaning the loading of an eye knot's eye as though it were a round sling --e.g., clip two krabs into the eye and pull them in opposite directions.
>
> [...]
>
> Jim, are these Mammut tests available on-line (where)?

No idea, maybe ask Mammut themselves.

> Isn't the issue of ring-loading NA when the tie-in rope is used for anchoring?
> (As has been argued here and elsewhere.)
>
Probably but if one doesn´t exclusively use the tie-in rope then it could be an issue which is why they made their recommendation.

Mr Lopez - on 06 May 2012
In reply to knudeNoggin:

I posted this video above with some pull tests on ring loading various knots http://www.vimeo.com/40767916

The ring loading weakness becomes an issue when you use the rope loop to attach yourself to a belay/anchor or to belay your partner.

I do wonder how many accidents attributed to the 'badly tied bowline' are really the result of clipping to an anchor through the rope loop of an unstoppered knot and then slumping on to the ropes. After all, it is not really possible to tie a bowline wrong, as it will not hold its shape, and it's frighteningly easy to undo a bowline by pulling on the ring even just by hand...
Andy Long - on 06 May 2012
In reply to Mr Lopez:
> (In reply to knudeNoggin)
>
> I posted this video above with some pull tests on ring loading various knots http://www.vimeo.com/40767916
>
>That's a very interesting video. I've never seen cross-loading tests before. Fascinating to see that FO8 unroll as the lurid stories said it would.

It seems to me that one of the reasons for the bowline being so controversial is that whilst in its simple "naked" form it's a very poor tie-on indeed, with a proper locking finish (the stopper knot is only the clunkiest of many) it outclasses most others.

David Coley - on 06 May 2012
In reply to Andy Long:

Just to note, the video doesn't show the fig8 being pulled in the directions it would be at a normal belay, as one of the lines would be taking the force. It shows what would happen if you put a cow's tail on the rope loop.
Fraser on 07 May 2012
In reply to knudeNoggin:
>
> ...the many testimonies that in fact, you DO (or you need to use some other securing method, such as some extension, further tucking of the tail).

I'm not sure what you mean by the bit I've put in bold there. When I said "properly" tied, I meant a standard bowline with a sufficiently long tail. Do you mean something else?

scott titt - on 07 May 2012
In reply to Mr Lopez:
> (In reply to mike kann)
Got a list as long as my arm of stuff i want to see results for. Fancy chipping in for a days 'pull test machine' hire? ;-) I wonder if they would hire the rig out...
>
Talk to Dan Middleton at the BMC. The BMC have a pull tester, I am sure Dan will be interested in proposals for testing.
Andy Long - on 07 May 2012
In reply to David Coley:
Indeed. Which is why the ring-loading issue is a bit of a red-herring as regards normal anchoring systems. The "Euro-death knot" specifically refers to the FO8 used to link abseil ropes.
JonJavlin - on 08 May 2012
In reply to jimtitt: Great info Jim. Many thanks. Will now go back to stoppers on the 8 and will keep practising the others!
knudeNoggin - on 09 May 2012
In reply to Fraser:
[You asked re my : ]
> you need to use some other securing method, such as some extension, further tucking of the tail

Yes, I do : by "extension", I mean doing something with that long tail, such as the Janus or Yosemite or "Re-threaded" or End-Bound or Edwards finishes; and another securing method would be adding a "stopper" knot.

So, you've had no issues with merely a simple (non-"double", not "water") bowline and a long tail? Certainly I'm glad that you have not been hurt; but I think that in some ropes the knot will loosen sufficiently to put its integrity into question (vulnerable to capsizing into a pile-hitch noose, if not coming completely untied).
.:. So, I'd prefer to do something with that tail's length --to knot it further, in some way (which will have the added benefit of keeping the tail out of the way).

*kN*
jon on 09 May 2012
In reply to knudeNoggin:

I'd have thought Fraser would have taken 'bowline' in a climbing context to include a stopper knot, but he'd have to confirm that or otherwise. I don't know any climber who would use a 'naked' bowline. A bowline and stopper is the only knot I ever use. It is much maligned with misinformation and I guess always will be, which is a great shame.
knudeNoggin - on 09 May 2012
In reply to jon:
> (In reply to knudeNoggin)
>
> I'd have thought Fraser would have taken 'bowline' in a climbing context to include a stopper knot, but he'd have to confirm that or otherwise.

And I take him to have done just that, a couple posts prior --to wit:
> When I said "properly" tied, I meant a standard bowline with a sufficiently long tail.

*kN*

knudeNoggin - on 10 May 2012
In reply to Andy Long:
> (In reply to David Coley)
> The "Euro-death knot" specifically refers to the FO8 used to link abseil ropes.

Let's get this right : "EDK" refers to the OFFSET WATER KNOT (aka "Overhand"/...);
it is commonly recommended for abseil-ropes joining, with either "long tails"
or some stopper knot. (So, yes, the sense of "EDK" was an initial fear overcome
by experience & testing; it remains the name.)

The offset F08 is PROscribed commonly, now, after evidence of its greater
vulnerability to rolling came to light (and defeated the simplistic thinking
of "if an overhand's okay, a Fig.8 must be better"). Sometimes this is called
the "EDK-8".

("offset" is the proper way to refer to these knots, vis-a-vis the axis of tension;
they are not "flat" or "abnormal" --or "double", for that matter.)

*kN*
Andy Long - on 10 May 2012
In reply to knudeNoggin:
Well, that's me told...
deepsoup - on 10 May 2012
In reply to Andy Long:
Actually, confusingly, "EDK" has been used to refer to both knots at one time or other.

In the one case the "death" in the name is ironic, in the other not so much. ;O)
Thelongcon - on 10 May 2012
In reply to All:

http://www.vimeo.com/40767916

In this video, what are the second and third knots from the left?
jimtitt - on 10 May 2012
In reply to Andrewmorts:
> (In reply to All)
>
> http://www.vimeo.com/40767916
>
> In this video, what are the second and third knots from the left?

Amazingly enough the one the OP asked about! With different strands as the tail.
beardy mike - on 15 May 2012
In reply to JonJavlin: Just to follow up - have been speaking to DMM and it sounds like they might be up for some trials - not definate at the minute and it might take some time to arrange. So it might be useful to make this thread a discussion of what we really want to see tested. The crossloading in various guises seems to be a common theme for worry for example...
David Coley - on 15 May 2012
In reply to mike kann: well done.
scott titt - on 15 May 2012
In reply to mike kann:
Copy of my post higher up:-
"Talk to Dan Middleton at the BMC. The BMC have a pull tester, I am sure Dan will be interested in proposals for testing."

beardy mike - on 15 May 2012
In reply to scott titt: I'll follow up DMM for the minute and if they can't help then we'll get the BMC involved. I mean heck - if it comes to it I've got a load cell and some hydraulics I could rig up in a couple of months or so...

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.