You were correct twice over, Ryan. What you tied with the wraps is most specifically a "hitch." However, you must understand that a "hitch" is a type of "knot." It is always best to use the most accurate term. So, although it is a knot, the type of knot is a "hitch."
@@SaltNBattery It would. However it's not always easy to take sinched up knots from carabineers, as those are often thicker in place, where there is a bend.
Is there a knot breaker tool for mountaineering? In sailing you can use that metal spike (knotbreaker) on your swiss army knife. Depending on your rigging, 1k of force on certain knots might be low. Heck, its becoming common to replace the braided stainless standing rigging with dyneema. Those are generally rated around 20k lbs for the sort of boats you and I might have.
In theatrical/stunt rigging, we use a variation of this hitch to break into a 12 strand hollow braid line rather than splicing an eye (simply for reusability). We learnt it from a chinese wire crew in 2014 on Crouching Tiger 2 and call it the chinese whip. It is very similar to the idea of a pile hitch. In our knot discussions we often wonder: 1, would one or two roundturns on the carabiner change the strength. 2, how does it compared to our other method being 3 or 4 single strand roundturns on the biner and two half hitches with the tail bight clipped off.
If you are going to calculate strength reduction, I would suggest starting by doing a test with a tensionless hitch to a tensionless hitch so you can get your own measure of the innate strength of the cord. You can't directly compare your test with a knot to the MBS, since there are other variables involved due to your testing protocol inevitably being different to theirs.
" You can't directly compare your test with a knot to the MBS, since there are other variables involved due to your testing protocol inevitably being different to theirs." The HowNOT2 folks have addressed this point in the past. It boils down to "MFR testing protocols don't matter if the rope fails at a lower value in the field". If the MFR testing protocols are so different from the way people are actually USING the ropes and tying their knots, then the test protocol is worthless. if the paper says "tie a retraced figure 8 and expect 20% load reduction" then what matters is whether the rope performs as stated when tied in what the USER thinks is a retraced figure-8, not the MFR testing lab.
@@ShuRugal But here they aren't testing at what strength it breaks but rather what the percentage reduction in strength is. A good experiment only changes one variable at a time. That means you need a denominator that is consistent with the numerators except for the knot, which is what they are testing. There is no way to know whether their testing protocol is more representative of any given user's real world conditions than the manufacturer's testing protocol is and it doesn't really matter for this experiment, since it is the percentage change they are interested in. As long as you compare two values from the same testing protocol, it shouldn't matter to much what protocol you use, but here they are comparing values from two different protocols, which is pretty much useless.
Any plans to test the new Mammut Core Protect Rope? I'm curious to see how much better that is compared to other ropes. Speaking of mammut, any plans in the future to get mammut in the store?
In the triple fishermans loop, when it failed did the dyneema core pull out of the knot, leaving just the sheath behind in the knot? Or did the core actually break? It looked like in your other tech cord tests with a double fisherman the core pulled out, and was the reason I thought a triple fisherman was recommended.
I think the best way to "untie it" would be to open the gate and slide it off the carabiner. That works the best for really tight clove hitches for me.
That knot is a wierd cousin of the prusik IMHO - your argument that "it's a hitch not a knot" has validity. Great video. Now I'm gonna have to go watch the fisherman's knot video. 😋
Is a Palomar knot ever used in climbing? It would have limitted (at best) applicability I'd imagine, but that is generally considered one of the strongest knots for fishing line. Stress tests on fishing line tend to support that, with a Palomar retaining more line strength without slipping than other common terminal knots, but I wonder if that's still true when you upsize the rope being used.
you should put watermarks over your images in the shop. At least over your test results because that is an extra service that only you can provide and other shops should pay you if they use these results.
Would love to see this test repeated in a wet canyon envirement, because only know this "knot" from the canyoning world. Maybe something for the next canyoning video?
@@HowNOT2 just wondering if it would still unty under big loads when cooled down like in an aquatic canyon. The audio in the canyoning video's weren't that bad;)
I'd like to see you test some unadequate stuff that can be used in emergency situations, like belt from trousers, or (denim) trousers themselves...Also, I have some really small carabiners used for hammoct (rated for 6kn) - would like to see that tested also :) if possible of course :)
That's a very similar knot that we use to tie leader to our fly line. Because of the two mediums they're not just typically tied together. Instead of using a carabiner the only difference is you're folding your fly line and that becomes the hook like your caribbeaner.
On an unrelated note: Have you ever considered measuring the stretch of ropes new versus old when breaking them to see if there is a clear behavior change in stretch? I.E. could you proof test a rope and measure the stretch and use that to retire the rope.
@@HowNOT2 You don't need to go around the d-shaped bend in the carabiner. You just have to cut the carabiner away to eliminate that bend. Your unwillingness to do what was necessary doesn't mean it's not still a hitch that will fall apart when you remove the carabiner. Please replicate this with a sacrificial carabiner. Just cut the carabiner and wiggle the hitch off to demonstrate it is, indeed, without permanent form when the object it's tied around is removed. Then, update video! 😁
It would be great to see you do a video on Jean Daniel Pession and his girlfriend, Elisa Arlian, who just fatally fell about 2,300 feet from Mount Zerbion in Italy. Your take on what went wrong would be valuable to the community. I bet you have saved more lives than you know with your videos.
You were correct twice over, Ryan. What you tied with the wraps is most specifically a "hitch." However, you must understand that a "hitch" is a type of "knot." It is always best to use the most accurate term. So, although it is a knot, the type of knot is a "hitch."
2:15 life hack the way we get nuts undone from straps when they stretch and tight like that as you take a hammer and you hammer the nut that you spend the nut and that will actually loosen the rope as it's clenched onto itself kind of like massaging a bruise on your leg.
I understand there is most likely an answer to this, either in your available texts or another video, but if you could: is there a standard Kn guide to refer to for safety? / Are these tests to compare products/knots to one another? I would presume all of your products are "safe & effective with proper use". I have been here watching things go *snap* and would appreciate context to the numbers. Thank you, love the content ❤
I'm curious if you've seen a difference between the "two ways" of tying a figure 8 (i.e. load strand on top or not) in how easy it is to untie, as suggested by Hard Is Easy and my own experience?
I did tests, can't remember what video it would be in atm. It doesn't affect strength and if you want a knot that is easier to untie you just use a bowline. You can untie those every time no matter how hard you pull them.
@@HowNOT2 Any difference in how strong and easy they are to untie when using a different finish for a Bowline? e.g. A Yosemite finish vs a Fisherman's around the loop portion vs just a longer (sailing usage) tail without a finish?
th-cam.com/video/QAr-uHd8h8o/w-d-xo.htmlsi=hMyO1TcW6-jyYcFC Hard is Easy did a bunch of testing. Near the last 1/4 of the video he tests tying it both ways. It unties much easier for him if you tie it where load strand is in middle of structure, also makes an inline 8 if you untie the tail one bit.
Have you ever considered talking in maximum energy absorbed before rupture instead of maximum force (That would be the area under the curve)? I mean a more elastic system is able to distribute the force over a longer distance. That would reduce the maximum force endured by the cords/knots/relay etc for a given fall. So the maximun force is not always the best metric ? Thanks a lot for your work, it is realy apreciated. Regards.
Catspaw would do the same job and be easy to untie, but it's hard to feel good about hanging something important off it. Edit: now that I think about it, you could probably slide that right off an oval carabiner like my steel Petzl ones
The figure 8's you are tying for the test are NOT figure 8's. They are very poorly tied versions of a figure 8. You have cross-overs in the knot which means they are not properly tied. If you are going to test the strength of a knot, it needs to be tied correctly. Eliminate cross-overs and pre tension the knot by holding the knot and pulling out on all 4 strands individually, one at a time. Then test. When you look at the video during the test, you have sections of the knot blowing out because it was neither correctly tied or tensioned. Love the channel, keep up the good work!
sanhneux (wich is a french language trick, as it sound as "sans noeud" meaning knotless) is also know by caver as noeud "polonais" (polish knot), and in the double twist version as noeud "russe" (russian knot), very handy for rebelay or horizontal progression. I use sanhneux for maybe 10 years when cleaning anchors on sport climbs (In france we mostly use ring/ quicklinks big enough to pass a bite of rope trough, so no need to fully retie in to get lower off). As in this scenario you are 1 or 2 meters from the end of the rope without stopper, I was interest to know if it could sleep, so I did testing: th-cam.com/video/zz2BRUqs8zA/w-d-xo.html
Looking only at the ”knot” , my question is ”does it create a redundant anchor”? Not after using it to lift a car, bit after tidying it the way you would any knot. Also, what is the pro of this method? In my book, a knot is a tangle that can easily be untangled after use. This seems awfully hard to undo.
You should apply yourself to a lot more research first; resins are a category of chemicals either natural or synthetized. Nylon is by far the most used polymer, but new cross-linked polyethylenes like Dyneema are far stronger, with lower melting points, and way less stretchy, confusing their optimal uses. Aramids like Kevlar are also very durable, but less stretchy. If you're thinking of the resins used in art materials, nothing really has shown any value to this point.
Many comments suggesting a marlin spike. I have several and I like 'em but that looks like 1-5 minutes with a spike. IMO disqualifying it from "easy to untie" status. The tool you did successfully undo it with is known in some rigging circles as a "knot wrench".🔪
Similar to „polish knot” in Alpine Caving Techniques: A Complete Guide to Safe and Efficient Caving G Marbach B Tourte which is simpler not much ties justhalf around. So maybe you tested also?
I bet it would be a little easier to untie if it was a shock load, but probably not a lot easier. If you're ruining $5 of cord at every anchor that's not great... and you can't really re-use it unless the bolt spacing/equalization is the same at every anchor.
As the Girth Hitch (w/o magic X twist?) was 24kN, I would not bother with this other hitch, that takes a lot more material and is not as easy to adjust, equalize, etc. If a simpler system more than satisfies the requirements for a bombproof belay that simply has not been found to fail in use, other methods just don't really come into play as practical, in much the same way as cumbersome or odd tie-in knots that might slightly exceed the old Figure 8 just aren't worth the marginal gains.
Is there a reason people tie things like this to get redundancy rather than just using two short slings? Two slings are obviously independent of each other.
@@perplexedon9834 Is equalisation that important? The use of two bolts is for redundancy rather than because one bolt might not be strong enough. If there is a very large difference in height, shock loading could be an issue, but using anything with even a small amount of stretch will resolve that.
@@thomasdalton1508 the shock loading is the big one, but you're right that it's most important with traditional gear where you aren't sure any one piece is strong enough, but spreading the load across pieces is good enough. Shock loading matters a lot more on trad gear too. He biggest idea though is that carrying two specialised short slings I carrying two separate pieces of gear with limited application. On medium slight is super versatile, and the knowledge to use it as an equalised anchor weighs zero grams
@@perplexedon9834 You can carry two medium slings and double them up to make them shorter. That is an extra piece of equipment, certainly, but not a heavy one.
@@thomasdalton1508 I don't really see what your point is. If you can commit a system to memory, and it simplified your rack, even in sport that is a reason enough to do it. You didn't address the most important point, equalised the load across your pieces actually matters when on trad pieces with limited placement quality. Like there are small nuts and cams put there that are rated about 6 kN. If your only option for making an anchor are a bunch of tiny cracks or nuts, then you are going to want to make sure that none of them ever see more than a kN. If there's more than a couple of centimetres of slack, the slack piece may not see any load until well over 1kN is applied. You could safely hang on a bunch of sewing thread if there were enough of them, properly equalised. That's how much equalisation matters. I honestly can't pick what your motivation is here. Are you some gung ho hardcore climber who calls a single micronut an anchor, saying "Equalisation never mattered for me, people make too big a deal of it" or are you making purely theoretical arguments having not left your basement in that last year? (Not trying to be insulting or mean spirited, I just find the extremes funny) While there are concrete examples of when equalisation matters, such a the above, I think that learning and regularly applying rope and anchor systems trains you to effectively reason about safety, and thus safely break the rules in an emergency. Even if you never used a system like the one in the video, having an interest in understanding it and investigating its safety improves your insight. I don't think everyone should belay off a munter, but after accidentally leaving my belay device on my partner harness, I was able to safely belay two followers up at once because I had the know-how. I honestly wouldn't be comfortable guiding people less experienced than me if I didn't have the knowledge to still get out of the situation safely even if I found myself on lead halfway up a cliff with no harness and just the end of the rope in my hand. If your leader took an awful whip and was knocked unconscious, could you get them to safety all alone, and then safely lower back down? If you were on lead and your belayer got knocked out, could you safely get down? Obviously these are separate skills and systems from anchor building, but the kind of person who has learnt how and why to build an equalised anchor is the kind of person who can figure out safe technical work, even when they've never been taught that specific situation. It's about learning how to think, and then practicing that, not learning particular systems. When I teach new climbers how to build an anchor on bolts at the end of a single pitch sport climb, I could either tell them "just clip these two loops in. If they're attached then they're safe enough!", or I could teach them the principles of equalisation and then have them tell me why a quad is better. When it comes to later teaching them how to safely clean a sport anchor, then you don't really need to teach them the step by step. Simply say "there's a way to remove all this gear and end up being held by the rope through the bolts. It'll involve untying and retying, using one or two extra carabiners, and one extra sling. You can do it in such a way that there is no point where the belayer wouldn't catch you in a fall." That'd be enough for someone who understands how to think about rope systems, where the alternative would be "attach self to bolts with sling. Take rope slack through the anchor. Form fixed midline loop and attach to harness belay loop. Have belayer take. Untie climbing knot. Thread rope both rap loops or chain master point. Retie knot. Undo midline loop. Have belayer take. Remove. Anchor material. Untie sling. Have belayer lower." If someone memorised that they'd probably be safe in that particular scenario, but I didn't have to memorise it. I reason it out from first principles every time because it's intuitive, and that kind o knowledge makes you a lot more safe, flexible and versitility if things ever go wrong. It also makes you do things like load test your systems before going off of safety, it makes you know when to let your partner know thingS, etc. I get very uncomfortable when I go climbing with someone who knows how to lead climb and belay, but "forgets" to hold the brake strand on a grigri, or seems to do things off of muscle memory, or so on. If you understand how the belay system works, it is simply not possible to forget to hold the brake strand. I don't think climbers should see technical work as just a means to the end of doing real climbing: technical rope work IS climbing. You seem interested enough that you asked the question, but I think your question is kind of like "why do people indicate while driving with no-one else around" or "why do people put the handbrake on when parked on flat ground?" So on. First there are easy to imagine, concrete reasons why you would do those things even if they seem superficially pointles. Maybe there is a cyclist or motorbike you didn't see, and your lack of indicating risks hitting them. Maybe the ground isn't as flat as it seems to you. But second of all, cultivating good habits and reasoning about road safety should be considered an important instrumental value, because generalising safety principles improves safety, and understanding safety gives you the flexibility to break the rules when you need to.
Can anyone help with this, please? I'm trying to find out how much a bowline on a bight reduces the strength of the rope by % wise? Ideally, it would be a bowline on a bight tied near the end of a rope and the short end is used to tie a stopper knott around the longer piece of rope. I was told that this is as strong or stronger then a rethreaded figure 8 with a stopper..... which would make this a more desirable knot to use as it's so much easier to undo then the rethreaded figure 8/stopper. If Ryan can't test this, does anyone in the community have the figures for this, please? Thanks peeps 😊
Many bowline variations have been tested, I think there have been many on hownot2 over the years, and many other places. Often compared to a figure-8 loop. In some tests one is stronger, in some tests the other is, in most comparison tests their is enough variation that both overlap a lot. I think weather various bowlines are stronger or weaker than a figure-8 depends mostly on the cordage used. The difference is always quite small.
This might be a dumb question, but why do you call it minimum breaking strength or MBS? In several videos I have seen you do three or more tests, find the average value and then compare that average to the listed "minimum breaking strength" from the manufacturer. If we are talking about the minimum breaking strength don't you just need to compare the lowest value you found in your tests instead of the average? Also why do I never hear you talking about the ultimate tensile strength or UTS?
MBS is supposed to be the minimum load you can expect a product to fail at, but how it's arrived at is a little tricky. Normally it's determined without knots, on a machine that has the rope wrapped around two large drums, so you get a "true strength" of the material/composition. I put it in quotes because no one uses ropes like that, so testing them like Ryan does can give us some better ideas of how the ropes will perform how we actually do use ropes, but means his numbers will always be different from what manufacturers publish, and will vary more, as the dynamics of the rope inside the knots are complicated, and change based of how you tie the knots (which is another reason they're avoided for MBS testing in industry) MBS is also not an ISO defined test or anything, so every MFG has a slightly different method of determining what it would be. The most common method I have heard of is to use the 3rd standard deviation below the mean (aka average) of 5 or more break tests. They're using statistics, but it's not too complicated, basically they're calculating a load where they predict 99.73% of breaks in the double drum set up will occur above. In terms of just using the lower number from the tests, I think because of the variability due to knots, etc, I think it does make sense to use averages, it would probably make the most sense to use an average, along with a std deviation (ie 12.3 +- 1.3 kN), because the tests are not actually MBS, they're something else. But these numbers are meant mostly just to provide insight into how strong things are, you should never buy/use gear expecting to put it under loads even close to half of MBS when yourlife depends on it. UTS is basically what Ryan is finding in his tests, for his setup with the knots, it's just the load stuff breaks at. But since ropes and safety gear in general are sold by an MBS, he's basically just relating that to the numbers we see on packaging. I hope my ramblings were able to help connect some dots, lol.
@@AllinDemopolis That was an impressively knowledgeable answer to my question. That makes total sense to use the standard deviation and not blindly take the minimum value. Thank you!
Wouldn't you just slide it off the carabiner and it would untie easily? Or were you not able to get it off the carabiner? (Only 2 minutes in, will delete this comment if you later figure it out).
What you need to untie those knots is a marlinspike. I don't know how you were going to use a hammer to untie a knot, but it is definitely the wrong tool for that job.
Rock climbers tend not to carry things that could stab them in a fall. There have already been cases where someone's knife unfolded itself and stabbed them. Aid climbers will often have a hammer however, and hammering a tight knot like a figure 8 can sometimes loosen it enough to get it apart. I've also seen people use a carabiner nose as a makeshift marlinspike. Depends on the size of rope whether that works well enough or not.
1:02 "Both these knots will result in approximately 20% reduction" 3:29 You math is good for a single knot but since both knots reduce the strength by 20% it wouldn't be 80% of the listed strength but 80% of 80%. And 10.8 x 0.8 = 8.64 that is much closer to your result, and they did say approximately.
You do not lose 20% for every knot tied. I thought that once but it's just one reduction in strength. Tying 5 knots in the cord would not make it 0% strength for example.
@@Vaasref The important thing in any maths problem is not doing the maths right (a calculator will do that for you), but doing the right maths. You need to understand why you are doing the maths you are doing so you can know it is the right maths. Multiplying by 0.8 twice is the wrong maths. A chain is as strong as its weakest link and the same is true for a rope. We calculate the overall strength by calculating the strength of the weakest point.
Oh I hate the clickbait titles! I understand the statistics and I am sad about it.. maybe you could put a real title or something substantial in the thumbnail? Or do a title card at the beginning of the video or give a verbal introduction at the beginning? The system sucks..
It's not clickbait, it's vague bait. If I posted the name of the knot as the title and on the thumbnail said "Tested" only 10,000 people would watch it. However, 100,000 people will watch if it's somewhat vague. However, i try to make it pretty obvious you're signing up to watch a knot video with the image of the thumbnail and I try to add a lot of value to each one. There is a balance that needs to be managed. Verbal introduction? The first 5 seconds you understand that we are testing a knot that I show the image of. I try to get right to the point so you know if it is something you are interested in.
@@HowNOT2 thanks, yes I understand. The numbers leave you no choice.. You're doing great work! We will get used to it I hope 😅 I just feels off to see a video from you with this kind of title..
Tbh I'm also not a fan regardless of what you want to call it. It's too bad that you're forced to do it because it feels really gross. I get this channel's videos in my feed sometimes still, but I unsubbed because the click bait got too ridiculous
![⭐️( ลอยกระทง 2024 ) Ver. แดนซ์ Remix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rMWOLhgXUHc/mqdefault.jpg)
I would 100% call that a hitch
Not
You were correct twice over, Ryan. What you tied with the wraps is most specifically a "hitch." However, you must understand that a "hitch" is a type of "knot." It is always best to use the most accurate term. So, although it is a knot, the type of knot is a "hitch."
100%
I'm confused about the untyability though... Why can't you just remove it from the carabiner? Wouldn't it collapse then??
@@SaltNBattery It would. However it's not always easy to take sinched up knots from carabineers, as those are often thicker in place, where there is a bend.
I really appreciate all of your info on these high-tenacity cords. I have been wondering about them for years.
Is there a knot breaker tool for mountaineering? In sailing you can use that metal spike (knotbreaker) on your swiss army knife. Depending on your rigging, 1k of force on certain knots might be low.
Heck, its becoming common to replace the braided stainless standing rigging with dyneema. Those are generally rated around 20k lbs for the sort of boats you and I might have.
It’s funny because I knew this knot but was thinking that it was written « noeud sans noeud » in french which means « knot without knot ».
J'ai buggé aussi ptdr
In theatrical/stunt rigging, we use a variation of this hitch to break into a 12 strand hollow braid line rather than splicing an eye (simply for reusability). We learnt it from a chinese wire crew in 2014 on Crouching Tiger 2 and call it the chinese whip. It is very similar to the idea of a pile hitch.
In our knot discussions we often wonder:
1, would one or two roundturns on the carabiner change the strength.
2, how does it compared to our other method being 3 or 4 single strand roundturns on the biner and two half hitches with the tail bight clipped off.
If you are going to calculate strength reduction, I would suggest starting by doing a test with a tensionless hitch to a tensionless hitch so you can get your own measure of the innate strength of the cord. You can't directly compare your test with a knot to the MBS, since there are other variables involved due to your testing protocol inevitably being different to theirs.
" You can't directly compare your test with a knot to the MBS, since there are other variables involved due to your testing protocol inevitably being different to theirs."
The HowNOT2 folks have addressed this point in the past. It boils down to "MFR testing protocols don't matter if the rope fails at a lower value in the field".
If the MFR testing protocols are so different from the way people are actually USING the ropes and tying their knots, then the test protocol is worthless. if the paper says "tie a retraced figure 8 and expect 20% load reduction" then what matters is whether the rope performs as stated when tied in what the USER thinks is a retraced figure-8, not the MFR testing lab.
@@ShuRugal But here they aren't testing at what strength it breaks but rather what the percentage reduction in strength is. A good experiment only changes one variable at a time. That means you need a denominator that is consistent with the numerators except for the knot, which is what they are testing.
There is no way to know whether their testing protocol is more representative of any given user's real world conditions than the manufacturer's testing protocol is and it doesn't really matter for this experiment, since it is the percentage change they are interested in. As long as you compare two values from the same testing protocol, it shouldn't matter to much what protocol you use, but here they are comparing values from two different protocols, which is pretty much useless.
I’m liking the way you’re going with the channel. Keep it up 🙏🏼🥂
Any plans to test the new Mammut Core Protect Rope? I'm curious to see how much better that is compared to other ropes.
Speaking of mammut, any plans in the future to get mammut in the store?
You can also watch Hard is Easy's video on it in the meantime 😊
In the triple fishermans loop, when it failed did the dyneema core pull out of the knot, leaving just the sheath behind in the knot? Or did the core actually break? It looked like in your other tech cord tests with a double fisherman the core pulled out, and was the reason I thought a triple fisherman was recommended.
I think the best way to "untie it" would be to open the gate and slide it off the carabiner. That works the best for really tight clove hitches for me.
It's hard to see, but he tried that in the speedup but couldn't get it around the bend of the carabineer
That knot is a wierd cousin of the prusik IMHO - your argument that "it's a hitch not a knot" has validity. Great video. Now I'm gonna have to go watch the fisherman's knot video. 😋
Is a Palomar knot ever used in climbing?
It would have limitted (at best) applicability I'd imagine, but that is generally considered one of the strongest knots for fishing line. Stress tests on fishing line tend to support that, with a Palomar retaining more line strength without slipping than other common terminal knots, but I wonder if that's still true when you upsize the rope being used.
That would be an interesting pull test
you should put watermarks over your images in the shop. At least over your test results because that is an extra service that only you can provide and other shops should pay you if they use these results.
Classic American perspective. They are doing it for the greater good of the community
You can do both.
Also someone named Martin Krafft is likely German, not American.
Would love to see this test repeated in a wet canyon envirement, because only know this "knot" from the canyoning world. Maybe something for the next canyoning video?
So the knot was wet, or so the audio would be bad? lol
@@HowNOT2 just wondering if it would still unty under big loads when cooled down like in an aquatic canyon. The audio in the canyoning video's weren't that bad;)
I'd like to see you test some unadequate stuff that can be used in emergency situations, like belt from trousers, or (denim) trousers themselves...Also, I have some really small carabiners used for hammoct (rated for 6kn) - would like to see that tested also :) if possible of course :)
Can you test technora rope otherwise know as PSS rope or personal escape system rope.
That's a very similar knot that we use to tie leader to our fly line. Because of the two mediums they're not just typically tied together. Instead of using a carabiner the only difference is you're folding your fly line and that becomes the hook like your caribbeaner.
That "hitch knot" is used in fishing a lot to attach lures or hooks to the line. Meaning it needs to function like a knot
Super interesting video, I would love this stuff to resling my hexes.
On an unrelated note: Have you ever considered measuring the stretch of ropes new versus old when breaking them to see if there is a clear behavior change in stretch? I.E. could you proof test a rope and measure the stretch and use that to retire the rope.
After pulling, is it too tight to just wiggle off the carabiner to undo it? Guessing so, since he didn't do that?
It is basically melted together. It is no longer flexible enough to do anything with it.
I couldn't get it around the D shape bend. I was trying to rotate the carabiner but didn't work.
@@HowNOT2 You don't need to go around the d-shaped bend in the carabiner. You just have to cut the carabiner away to eliminate that bend.
Your unwillingness to do what was necessary doesn't mean it's not still a hitch that will fall apart when you remove the carabiner.
Please replicate this with a sacrificial carabiner. Just cut the carabiner and wiggle the hitch off to demonstrate it is, indeed, without permanent form when the object it's tied around is removed. Then, update video! 😁
It would be great to see you do a video on Jean Daniel Pession and his girlfriend, Elisa Arlian, who just fatally fell about 2,300 feet from Mount Zerbion in Italy. Your take on what went wrong would be valuable to the community. I bet you have saved more lives than you know with your videos.
You were correct twice over, Ryan. What you tied with the wraps is most specifically a "hitch." However, you must understand that a "hitch" is a type of "knot." It is always best to use the most accurate term. So, although it is a knot, the type of knot is a "hitch."
Is it accurate to say that every hitch is a knot but not every knot is a hitch?
What if you did an HMS before swinging it around the rope and clipping back in. Just guessing that would be easier to untie?
MMO - munter mule overhand?
uhhh so close to see the pile hitch being tested. sucha close call
I'd be interested in seeing a test on how a zeppelin bend performs and unties.
I think that was in a video some years ago on this channel.
Search "hownot2 zepplin bend" and you'll find the break tests at least
Would it be able to test the difference between a flat sling and the alpine runners from blue ice?
Keep a small marlin spike on your key chain ! Also a leather wrapped hardwood maul ,for softening that rope. Cheers 💚
Instead of trying to untie it on the carabiner if you took it out of the carabiner would it just fall apart like other hitches?
2:15 life hack the way we get nuts undone from straps when they stretch and tight like that as you take a hammer and you hammer the nut that you spend the nut and that will actually loosen the rope as it's clenched onto itself kind of like massaging a bruise on your leg.
Do you think you can slide the tightened knot off the end of the carabiner? It should just fall apart at that point.
I understand there is most likely an answer to this, either in your available texts or another video, but if you could: is there a standard Kn guide to refer to for safety? / Are these tests to compare products/knots to one another?
I would presume all of your products are "safe & effective with proper use".
I have been here watching things go *snap* and would appreciate context to the numbers.
Thank you, love the content ❤
Would love to see this cord tested in a quad anchor.
I am quite sure it would be ridiculously strong enough
Would a Munter mule knot hold and be easy to untie
I'm curious if you've seen a difference between the "two ways" of tying a figure 8 (i.e. load strand on top or not) in how easy it is to untie, as suggested by Hard Is Easy and my own experience?
i’m pretty sure he did test that if my memory is right, results were close i think. largely inconclusive or “super close enough”
I did tests, can't remember what video it would be in atm. It doesn't affect strength and if you want a knot that is easier to untie you just use a bowline. You can untie those every time no matter how hard you pull them.
@@HowNOT2 Any difference in how strong and easy they are to untie when using a different finish for a Bowline? e.g. A Yosemite finish vs a Fisherman's around the loop portion vs just a longer (sailing usage) tail without a finish?
th-cam.com/video/QAr-uHd8h8o/w-d-xo.htmlsi=hMyO1TcW6-jyYcFC
Hard is Easy did a bunch of testing. Near the last 1/4 of the video he tests tying it both ways. It unties much easier for him if you tie it where load strand is in middle of structure, also makes an inline 8 if you untie the tail one bit.
Soooo... would it be super good enough to tie a single loop (terminated with a DBL fisherman's) to replace the sling on a cam!?
Just wondering if that cord diameter is large enough for a petzl tibloc to hold on to it?
Have you ever considered talking in maximum energy absorbed before rupture instead of maximum force (That would be the area under the curve)? I mean a more elastic system is able to distribute the force over a longer distance. That would reduce the maximum force endured by the cords/knots/relay etc for a given fall. So the maximun force is not always the best metric ?
Thanks a lot for your work, it is realy apreciated.
Regards.
10:24 one wood call that about a fathom 😂
Catspaw would do the same job and be easy to untie, but it's hard to feel good about hanging something important off it.
Edit: now that I think about it, you could probably slide that right off an oval carabiner like my steel Petzl ones
I think this would be a trivial knot, but that is just a theory. A knot theory.
Damn, that's an awesome invention I think.
The figure 8's you are tying for the test are NOT figure 8's. They are very poorly tied versions of a figure 8. You have cross-overs in the knot which means they are not properly tied. If you are going to test the strength of a knot, it needs to be tied correctly. Eliminate cross-overs and pre tension the knot by holding the knot and pulling out on all 4 strands individually, one at a time. Then test. When you look at the video during the test, you have sections of the knot blowing out because it was neither correctly tied or tensioned.
Love the channel, keep up the good work!
isnt thant basically one of the knots for hook for fishing?
not one I am aware of
sanhneux (wich is a french language trick, as it sound as "sans noeud" meaning knotless) is also know by caver as noeud "polonais" (polish knot), and in the double twist version as noeud "russe" (russian knot), very handy for rebelay or horizontal progression. I use sanhneux for maybe 10 years when cleaning anchors on sport climbs (In france we mostly use ring/ quicklinks big enough to pass a bite of rope trough, so no need to fully retie in to get lower off). As in this scenario you are 1 or 2 meters from the end of the rope without stopper, I was interest to know if it could sleep, so I did testing: th-cam.com/video/zz2BRUqs8zA/w-d-xo.html
Looking only at the ”knot” , my question is ”does it create a redundant anchor”? Not after using it to lift a car, bit after tidying it the way you would any knot.
Also, what is the pro of this method? In my book, a knot is a tangle that can easily be untangled after use. This seems awfully hard to undo.
I'm confused about the untyability though... Why can't you just remove it from the carabiner? Wouldn't it collapse then?
Are you planning on testing the new Petzl Neox ?
Have they tested Decathlon gear in the past? What would the video title be?
that's definitely a hitch, it's pretty similar to the mariner's hitch in how it works.
Could you test some stuff from china like rope acender, tuber and rope pullys...?
2:33 how did I know it wasn't going to break😭😭
Hi, first question I make in this very informative channel
Is there any climbing rope that is *based on resins?* Is it even possible?
You should apply yourself to a lot more research first; resins are a category of chemicals either natural or synthetized. Nylon is by far the most used polymer, but new cross-linked polyethylenes like Dyneema are far stronger, with lower melting points, and way less stretchy, confusing their optimal uses. Aramids like Kevlar are also very durable, but less stretchy. If you're thinking of the resins used in art materials, nothing really has shown any value to this point.
what if this tested with 5 mm nylon core and nylon sheath, i wonder what the result is
Why try to untie it while one can slip out the carabiner first?
Have you seen the sewn anchor system by black diamond? Would love to see what you test with that!
as it's a hitch, you do not "untie" it, you should unclip! :))
(great video, as usually)
Cool - like it!
It's a hitch that performs like a knot. But it is a hitch. Apparently a knife hitch.
For an easy untie, why not slip the hitch off the carabineer? That's usually how I remove a clove hitch, rather than trying to loosen it first.
Many comments suggesting a marlin spike. I have several and I like 'em but that looks like 1-5 minutes with a spike. IMO disqualifying it from "easy to untie" status. The tool you did successfully undo it with is known in some rigging circles as a "knot wrench".🔪
Who makes it ?
Similar to „polish knot” in Alpine Caving Techniques: A Complete Guide to Safe and Efficient Caving G Marbach B Tourte which is simpler not much ties justhalf around. So maybe you tested also?
Surely any knot that has to be removed by blade is a Gordian.
I bet it would be a little easier to untie if it was a shock load, but probably not a lot easier. If you're ruining $5 of cord at every anchor that's not great... and you can't really re-use it unless the bolt spacing/equalization is the same at every anchor.
a little quick math says I've put a thousand pounds on an anchor, so...
The difference between a knot and a hitch would be "If you take the thing its tied around out, is it still tied?"
So it’s a hitch when it’s loose and a knot when it’s tight, got it
@@thedownwardmachinecompletely wrong
@@thedownwardmachineremove the object (at this time carabiner), it does not stay tied.
@@corower No it definitely stays tied, it's in the video
Were you not able to just slip it off?
Love these videos! 👍👍
Modified pile hitch???
8:07
knife knots require rope wrenches😅
Any more arborists gear testing coming down the pike?
As the Girth Hitch (w/o magic X twist?) was 24kN, I would not bother with this other hitch, that takes a lot more material and is not as easy to adjust, equalize, etc. If a simpler system more than satisfies the requirements for a bombproof belay that simply has not been found to fail in use, other methods just don't really come into play as practical, in much the same way as cumbersome or odd tie-in knots that might slightly exceed the old Figure 8 just aren't worth the marginal gains.
Is there a reason people tie things like this to get redundancy rather than just using two short slings? Two slings are obviously independent of each other.
Equalization when the bolts or protection are very different heights
@@perplexedon9834 Is equalisation that important? The use of two bolts is for redundancy rather than because one bolt might not be strong enough. If there is a very large difference in height, shock loading could be an issue, but using anything with even a small amount of stretch will resolve that.
@@thomasdalton1508 the shock loading is the big one, but you're right that it's most important with traditional gear where you aren't sure any one piece is strong enough, but spreading the load across pieces is good enough. Shock loading matters a lot more on trad gear too.
He biggest idea though is that carrying two specialised short slings I carrying two separate pieces of gear with limited application. On medium slight is super versatile, and the knowledge to use it as an equalised anchor weighs zero grams
@@perplexedon9834 You can carry two medium slings and double them up to make them shorter. That is an extra piece of equipment, certainly, but not a heavy one.
@@thomasdalton1508 I don't really see what your point is. If you can commit a system to memory, and it simplified your rack, even in sport that is a reason enough to do it.
You didn't address the most important point, equalised the load across your pieces actually matters when on trad pieces with limited placement quality. Like there are small nuts and cams put there that are rated about 6 kN. If your only option for making an anchor are a bunch of tiny cracks or nuts, then you are going to want to make sure that none of them ever see more than a kN. If there's more than a couple of centimetres of slack, the slack piece may not see any load until well over 1kN is applied. You could safely hang on a bunch of sewing thread if there were enough of them, properly equalised. That's how much equalisation matters.
I honestly can't pick what your motivation is here. Are you some gung ho hardcore climber who calls a single micronut an anchor, saying "Equalisation never mattered for me, people make too big a deal of it" or are you making purely theoretical arguments having not left your basement in that last year? (Not trying to be insulting or mean spirited, I just find the extremes funny)
While there are concrete examples of when equalisation matters, such a the above, I think that learning and regularly applying rope and anchor systems trains you to effectively reason about safety, and thus safely break the rules in an emergency. Even if you never used a system like the one in the video, having an interest in understanding it and investigating its safety improves your insight. I don't think everyone should belay off a munter, but after accidentally leaving my belay device on my partner harness, I was able to safely belay two followers up at once because I had the know-how. I honestly wouldn't be comfortable guiding people less experienced than me if I didn't have the knowledge to still get out of the situation safely even if I found myself on lead halfway up a cliff with no harness and just the end of the rope in my hand. If your leader took an awful whip and was knocked unconscious, could you get them to safety all alone, and then safely lower back down? If you were on lead and your belayer got knocked out, could you safely get down?
Obviously these are separate skills and systems from anchor building, but the kind of person who has learnt how and why to build an equalised anchor is the kind of person who can figure out safe technical work, even when they've never been taught that specific situation. It's about learning how to think, and then practicing that, not learning particular systems. When I teach new climbers how to build an anchor on bolts at the end of a single pitch sport climb, I could either tell them "just clip these two loops in. If they're attached then they're safe enough!", or I could teach them the principles of equalisation and then have them tell me why a quad is better. When it comes to later teaching them how to safely clean a sport anchor, then you don't really need to teach them the step by step. Simply say "there's a way to remove all this gear and end up being held by the rope through the bolts. It'll involve untying and retying, using one or two extra carabiners, and one extra sling. You can do it in such a way that there is no point where the belayer wouldn't catch you in a fall." That'd be enough for someone who understands how to think about rope systems, where the alternative would be "attach self to bolts with sling. Take rope slack through the anchor. Form fixed midline loop and attach to harness belay loop. Have belayer take. Untie climbing knot. Thread rope both rap loops or chain master point. Retie knot. Undo midline loop. Have belayer take. Remove. Anchor material. Untie sling. Have belayer lower." If someone memorised that they'd probably be safe in that particular scenario, but I didn't have to memorise it. I reason it out from first principles every time because it's intuitive, and that kind o knowledge makes you a lot more safe, flexible and versitility if things ever go wrong. It also makes you do things like load test your systems before going off of safety, it makes you know when to let your partner know thingS, etc.
I get very uncomfortable when I go climbing with someone who knows how to lead climb and belay, but "forgets" to hold the brake strand on a grigri, or seems to do things off of muscle memory, or so on. If you understand how the belay system works, it is simply not possible to forget to hold the brake strand. I don't think climbers should see technical work as just a means to the end of doing real climbing: technical rope work IS climbing. You seem interested enough that you asked the question, but I think your question is kind of like "why do people indicate while driving with no-one else around" or "why do people put the handbrake on when parked on flat ground?" So on. First there are easy to imagine, concrete reasons why you would do those things even if they seem superficially pointles. Maybe there is a cyclist or motorbike you didn't see, and your lack of indicating risks hitting them. Maybe the ground isn't as flat as it seems to you. But second of all, cultivating good habits and reasoning about road safety should be considered an important instrumental value, because generalising safety principles improves safety, and understanding safety gives you the flexibility to break the rules when you need to.
Very interesting that the “extra strong” stuff loses so much real world capacity at the knots.
Can anyone help with this, please? I'm trying to find out how much a bowline on a bight reduces the strength of the rope by % wise? Ideally, it would be a bowline on a bight tied near the end of a rope and the short end is used to tie a stopper knott around the longer piece of rope. I was told that this is as strong or stronger then a rethreaded figure 8 with a stopper..... which would make this a more desirable knot to use as it's so much easier to undo then the rethreaded figure 8/stopper. If Ryan can't test this, does anyone in the community have the figures for this, please? Thanks peeps 😊
Many bowline variations have been tested, I think there have been many on hownot2 over the years, and many other places. Often compared to a figure-8 loop. In some tests one is stronger, in some tests the other is, in most comparison tests their is enough variation that both overlap a lot. I think weather various bowlines are stronger or weaker than a figure-8 depends mostly on the cordage used. The difference is always quite small.
@@mountainmandoug Awesome, thank you!!! 😊👍👍👍👍👍
This might be a dumb question, but why do you call it minimum breaking strength or MBS? In several videos I have seen you do three or more tests, find the average value and then compare that average to the listed "minimum breaking strength" from the manufacturer. If we are talking about the minimum breaking strength don't you just need to compare the lowest value you found in your tests instead of the average? Also why do I never hear you talking about the ultimate tensile strength or UTS?
MBS is supposed to be the minimum load you can expect a product to fail at, but how it's arrived at is a little tricky.
Normally it's determined without knots, on a machine that has the rope wrapped around two large drums, so you get a "true strength" of the material/composition. I put it in quotes because no one uses ropes like that, so testing them like Ryan does can give us some better ideas of how the ropes will perform how we actually do use ropes, but means his numbers will always be different from what manufacturers publish, and will vary more, as the dynamics of the rope inside the knots are complicated, and change based of how you tie the knots (which is another reason they're avoided for MBS testing in industry)
MBS is also not an ISO defined test or anything, so every MFG has a slightly different method of determining what it would be. The most common method I have heard of is to use the 3rd standard deviation below the mean (aka average) of 5 or more break tests. They're using statistics, but it's not too complicated, basically they're calculating a load where they predict 99.73% of breaks in the double drum set up will occur above.
In terms of just using the lower number from the tests, I think because of the variability due to knots, etc, I think it does make sense to use averages, it would probably make the most sense to use an average, along with a std deviation (ie 12.3 +- 1.3 kN), because the tests are not actually MBS, they're something else. But these numbers are meant mostly just to provide insight into how strong things are, you should never buy/use gear expecting to put it under loads even close to half of MBS when yourlife depends on it.
UTS is basically what Ryan is finding in his tests, for his setup with the knots, it's just the load stuff breaks at. But since ropes and safety gear in general are sold by an MBS, he's basically just relating that to the numbers we see on packaging.
I hope my ramblings were able to help connect some dots, lol.
@@AllinDemopolis That was an impressively knowledgeable answer to my question. That makes total sense to use the standard deviation and not blindly take the minimum value. Thank you!
Is it a knot or a hitch? Sounds like a “niche”
20% per knot
Super Top 👍
Toothless devices?
Looks a bit like a Palomar
That is alot of slackkkkkk for an anchor. Not sure if that is a bonus or something you don’t want
29kn yes think thst is enough
its knot a hitch i mean its hitch but knot if you can't untie it. its a yep not
interesting!
Wouldn't you just slide it off the carabiner and it would untie easily? Or were you not able to get it off the carabiner? (Only 2 minutes in, will delete this comment if you later figure it out).
@3:40 idk much about the maths but wouldn’t two figure 8’s be 40% since 20+20 so you got the correct 8kn .
🍀🍀
Definitely a unknot
Seems to not offer any real advantages over a girth hitch, which is way easier to tie.
What you need to untie those knots is a marlinspike. I don't know how you were going to use a hammer to untie a knot, but it is definitely the wrong tool for that job.
Rock climbers tend not to carry things that could stab them in a fall. There have already been cases where someone's knife unfolded itself and stabbed them.
Aid climbers will often have a hammer however, and hammering a tight knot like a figure 8 can sometimes loosen it enough to get it apart. I've also seen people use a carabiner nose as a makeshift marlinspike. Depends on the size of rope whether that works well enough or not.
1:02 "Both these knots will result in approximately 20% reduction"
3:29 You math is good for a single knot but since both knots reduce the strength by 20% it wouldn't be 80% of the listed strength but 80% of 80%.
And 10.8 x 0.8 = 8.64 that is much closer to your result, and they did say approximately.
Nope. Those knots are far enough apart to be considered independent. The weakest point in the rope should be mbs*0.8 in the 8 to 8 configuration
You do not lose 20% for every knot tied. I thought that once but it's just one reduction in strength. Tying 5 knots in the cord would not make it 0% strength for example.
@@LeifMahoney I agree with you, I was just going for taking it as a pure math problem.
@@Vaasref The important thing in any maths problem is not doing the maths right (a calculator will do that for you), but doing the right maths. You need to understand why you are doing the maths you are doing so you can know it is the right maths. Multiplying by 0.8 twice is the wrong maths. A chain is as strong as its weakest link and the same is true for a rope. We calculate the overall strength by calculating the strength of the weakest point.
Looks a bit like a palomar fishing knot...
Knitch
Hitch, not knot
Wow, I literally learned 50 YEARS AGO, yes FIFTY years ago, that a knot weakens a rope by 40%. Welcome to 1974...
Oh I hate the clickbait titles! I understand the statistics and I am sad about it.. maybe you could put a real title or something substantial in the thumbnail? Or do a title card at the beginning of the video or give a verbal introduction at the beginning?
The system sucks..
It's not clickbait, it's vague bait. If I posted the name of the knot as the title and on the thumbnail said "Tested" only 10,000 people would watch it. However, 100,000 people will watch if it's somewhat vague. However, i try to make it pretty obvious you're signing up to watch a knot video with the image of the thumbnail and I try to add a lot of value to each one. There is a balance that needs to be managed.
Verbal introduction? The first 5 seconds you understand that we are testing a knot that I show the image of. I try to get right to the point so you know if it is something you are interested in.
@@HowNOT2 thanks, yes I understand. The numbers leave you no choice.. You're doing great work! We will get used to it I hope 😅
I just feels off to see a video from you with this kind of title..
Tbh I'm also not a fan regardless of what you want to call it. It's too bad that you're forced to do it because it feels really gross. I get this channel's videos in my feed sometimes still, but I unsubbed because the click bait got too ridiculous
A hitch connects rope to a thing. A bend connects two ropes. A knot is a generic term for all.
First