It would be good to see one taken to 90% of it's rated load a number of times to see how near maximum cyclic loading affects it. Also things like water. Everyone knows that making these things wet weakens them, but is it a common falacy, and if not how much weaker do they actually get? Also, UV... How does that degrade them over time? Would be interesting to see a stress/strain curve for them and compare that to the material they're made from without the bends and knots.
Also, what does the lab have to say about the way these things are loaded in their rig vs out in the wild? These things are basically plastic. How you load and unload them in the time domain has to make some difference I would have thought? Loading them that slowly would allow heat generated through friction to dissipate throughout the material, where loading them suddenly (such as with a snatch strap) doesn't allow the time for that to happen. Are they fused when you unload them before failure in that rig, or is it only the load coming off as they fail causing them to fuse?
@@L2SFBC I wasn't trying to suggest you break them faster. That would be a logistical nightmare. Just talk to those guys about what the differences are. I'm sure they'll know. There's bound to be an engineer there who can talk for hours on the subject...
As you mentioned, for the test you kept the manufacturers' names confidential. However it would have been interesting to know the the type fibre used in the straps. The red strap was interesting in that it appeared that the PE at failure was converted more to heat (and melting) than to KE. I am looking forward to you follow-on tests.
Great work. Not the sensationalist presentation style as many others in this space but doing the detailed, hard yards… agree 100% that either the regulators or the industry itself should develop standards for MBS on recovery gear, unless the item already has a WLL.
Thanks...this is just the start, I wanted to understand the test rigs and process. I'm planning more tests over time, trying to make them realistic. Never interested in sensationalism, just data.
Great video again Thanks Robert. I think one of the key things is age deterioration of the shackles, how many uses before we consign them to the bin, what impact various storage methods have on a shackle. (Expensive, take a lot of time and harder to qualify) My concern is always the impacts of UV degradation, sitting under a weighty item in the back of the 4wd, water and mud erosion etc etc.
Hey mate, I'd love to know the breaking strain of the 5/8 pin in a hitch receiver. As far as I'm aware it's never been tested which makes it an unrated breaking point. Thanks for the video, you're the man.
@@L2SFBCJust watched a US analysis of a fatality from a fractured drop hitch tube. Stated hitch pin ratings cropped up, but there was confusion on working limits and failure limits on soft versus solid shackles. I gave you a plug.
how about some testing or links to manf testing of steel shackles, as well as pulleys, wheels, and other parts for use with steel cable and the syn ropes. including in field re wrapping of the ropes.
I would love to see knot placement as a test variable. Is it better in the middle or near the end? Exciting testing as always. Thank you for always bringing safety to the forefront
Has anyone tested a soft shackle constructed by use of smaller diameter rope and using many loops to accumulate a similar cross section size? While it is true that this requires more fiddling in the rigging in order to equalize the loads, the result is lower load on the knot and the neck around the knot. This also might have a benefit to some of having a soft shackle that is somewhat adjustable in length for other (lighter) applications by using fewer loops, even down to using it as a normal rope of useable length. A third advantage is that the D/d ratio is effectively less because of the bend radius of smaller diameter components on the inside of the bend radius means that the 'd' in the D/d ratio is smaller. This does require care to equalize the loads, but the advantages may be worth the effort. Maybe some sailors have techniques for adjusting lashed points...
I'm doing exactly that - small strops comprised of multiple loops in thinner cordage, to reduce the actual length of Bury, but not the 'multiple of diameter'. These are enclosed in antichafe tubing which should also give some UV shielding.@@L2SFBC
Maybe testing at rated temperature and also simulating hot summer ambient and solar gain (at say 50 deg C?) might show need for an outback downrating coefficient. Not fair to demand sub zero Arctic temperatures also, but I bet that also applies maybe more.
Always love your videos, they are full of good information to use as a base for operating safely in the wild. I agree with many of the others, fatigue testing would be my #1, Stress/Strain curves, but if you can test a hard shackle or two as well I think that would be helpful. Everyone talks about how the soft shackles are rated really high, but hard shackles typically have a safety factor in the 4 to 5 range. If you can find some old ones that haven't been used, vs brand new ones (some materials might weaken with age even when not exposed to UV much), that would be informative to see as well. I keep both soft and hard shackles in my kit, hard shackles are much more durable and long lasting, but they are also much more dangerous when something goes wrong.
Thanks EA, yes I'm planning to test some of my old and well-used gear. The next test will have elongation stress/strain curve. Fatigue is something I'd like to do but need to look at costs.
Definitely planned. It seems to me that the bend radius used in testing soft shackles is unrealistically large, so we'll use a flat piece of steel instead. Be interestng to see if the shackle then breaks somewhere other than the knot.
Excellent explanation of your test findings. Thank you for sharing.
Thank you!
Great videos! Love the technical details by someone who is so data driven. Keep it up!
Thanks Steve, will do. Please share!
It would be good to see one taken to 90% of it's rated load a number of times to see how near maximum cyclic loading affects it.
Also things like water. Everyone knows that making these things wet weakens them, but is it a common falacy, and if not how much weaker do they actually get?
Also, UV... How does that degrade them over time?
Would be interesting to see a stress/strain curve for them and compare that to the material they're made from without the bends and knots.
Also, what does the lab have to say about the way these things are loaded in their rig vs out in the wild?
These things are basically plastic. How you load and unload them in the time domain has to make some difference I would have thought?
Loading them that slowly would allow heat generated through friction to dissipate throughout the material, where loading them suddenly (such as with a snatch strap) doesn't allow the time for that to happen.
Are they fused when you unload them before failure in that rig, or is it only the load coming off as they fail causing them to fuse?
Great points Daniel.
Stress/strain elongation curve definitely on the way. I'm looking into fatigue too, but it's expensive. Also plan to muddy a few!
The test machines can only do slowly, unfortunately. I'd need a D10 dozer to do it faster...I wish!
@@L2SFBC I wasn't trying to suggest you break them faster. That would be a logistical nightmare. Just talk to those guys about what the differences are. I'm sure they'll know.
There's bound to be an engineer there who can talk for hours on the subject...
Really loving this information. Great testing. Would be cool to see different knot positions, and different types of coating etc.
More tests planned....
Thanks for testing these and sharing. It would had been nice to know the manufacturers of each shackle tested.
For the future...
As you mentioned, for the test you kept the manufacturers' names confidential. However it would have been interesting to know the the type fibre used in the straps. The red strap was interesting in that it appeared that the PE at failure was converted more to heat (and melting) than to KE. I am looking forward to you follow-on tests.
Coming soon!
Thanks for posting your videos. Good info.
Thanks Susan glad you enjoyed it please share 😀
Excellent!!
Many thanks!
Great work. Not the sensationalist presentation style as many others in this space but doing the detailed, hard yards… agree 100% that either the regulators or the industry itself should develop standards for MBS on recovery gear, unless the item already has a WLL.
Thanks...this is just the start, I wanted to understand the test rigs and process. I'm planning more tests over time, trying to make them realistic. Never interested in sensationalism, just data.
Great video again Thanks Robert.
I think one of the key things is age deterioration of the shackles, how many uses before we consign them to the bin, what impact various storage methods have on a shackle. (Expensive, take a lot of time and harder to qualify)
My concern is always the impacts of UV degradation, sitting under a weighty item in the back of the 4wd, water and mud erosion etc etc.
I'll be testing my own older shackles!
Hey mate, I'd love to know the breaking strain of the 5/8 pin in a hitch receiver. As far as I'm aware it's never been tested which makes it an unrated breaking point. Thanks for the video, you're the man.
Planning that...
@@L2SFBCJust watched a US analysis of a fatality from a fractured drop hitch tube. Stated hitch pin ratings cropped up, but there was confusion on working limits and failure limits on soft versus solid shackles. I gave you a plug.
Thanks
Wound really be cool to see in ultra slow motion.
how about some testing or links to manf testing of steel shackles, as well as pulleys, wheels, and other parts for use with steel cable and the syn ropes. including in field re wrapping of the ropes.
Stay tuned...
I would love to see knot placement as a test variable. Is it better in the middle or near the end? Exciting testing as always. Thank you for always bringing safety to the forefront
It doesn't make much difference according to people who have broken a lot of them.
Very interesting!
Has anyone tested a soft shackle constructed by use of smaller diameter rope and using many loops to accumulate a similar cross section size? While it is true that this requires more fiddling in the rigging in order to equalize the loads, the result is lower load on the knot and the neck around the knot. This also might have a benefit to some of having a soft shackle that is somewhat adjustable in length for other (lighter) applications by using fewer loops, even down to using it as a normal rope of useable length. A third advantage is that the D/d ratio is effectively less because of the bend radius of smaller diameter components on the inside of the bend radius means that the 'd' in the D/d ratio is smaller. This does require care to equalize the loads, but the advantages may be worth the effort. Maybe some sailors have techniques for adjusting lashed points...
Thank you, really appreciate the post. No testing to my knowledge.
I'm doing exactly that - small strops comprised of multiple loops in thinner cordage, to reduce the actual length of Bury, but not the 'multiple of diameter'. These are enclosed in antichafe tubing which should also give some UV shielding.@@L2SFBC
Maybe testing at rated temperature and also simulating hot summer ambient and solar gain (at say 50 deg C?) might show need for an outback downrating coefficient. Not fair to demand sub zero Arctic temperatures also, but I bet that also applies maybe more.
Good ideas, more to come!
I would also wonder if the inside stands closest to the knot break first due to friction caused by the tighter radius and contact with the knot,
Yes I think that's part of it too.
Always love your videos, they are full of good information to use as a base for operating safely in the wild. I agree with many of the others, fatigue testing would be my #1, Stress/Strain curves, but if you can test a hard shackle or two as well I think that would be helpful. Everyone talks about how the soft shackles are rated really high, but hard shackles typically have a safety factor in the 4 to 5 range. If you can find some old ones that haven't been used, vs brand new ones (some materials might weaken with age even when not exposed to UV much), that would be informative to see as well. I keep both soft and hard shackles in my kit, hard shackles are much more durable and long lasting, but they are also much more dangerous when something goes wrong.
Thanks EA, yes I'm planning to test some of my old and well-used gear. The next test will have elongation stress/strain curve. Fatigue is something I'd like to do but need to look at costs.
@@L2SFBC yeah fatigue is a pain to test, and can get very costly very quick. Thanks again!
Thankyou
You’re welcome 😊
Having some tests with to se the impact of mounting point sthat are not nicely round would be great
Definitely planned. It seems to me that the bend radius used in testing soft shackles is unrealistically large, so we'll use a flat piece of steel instead. Be interestng to see if the shackle then breaks somewhere other than the knot.
This may be a dumb question but what is the difference between a “core” soft shackle and a “connect” shackle?
Never heard of either!
These all appear to be button knot soft shackles, not diamond knot. Is that correct?
so what does all this add up to in english? standard? imperial? or what ever name you use for what us non metric peoples use.
Just shows where soft shackles break and how.