15401Re: [Hammock Camping] Re: rope vs. tree hugger
- Aug 17, 2006"To cast any
type of rope as tree damaging because certain types of ropes damage
trees is stretching the truth. "
Please note in my post I was specifically referring to the rope on the HH
Ultralight Backpacker hammock. Also, I used the 4-wrap knot during these
tests. The rope may have been less than 30* and a bit taut.
The rain fly on the Hennessey Hammocks are attached to the suspension rope
and not tied to the tree with a different rope. This may or may not help
For me, it is much less hastle to use the suspension rope on the HH than
mess with the huggers. I was just trying to determine if it was
worthwhile. In conclusion, I determined it is worth using the huggers
because the rope on the HH Ultralight Backpacker causes too much damage to
I was simply sharing my results with the group.
On 8/17/06, Dave Womble <dpwomble@...> wrote:
> The ropes on the Hennessy Hammocks are well known to not be tree
> friendly. I don't think anyone intended to imply that those
> particular ropes should be attached directly to trees.
> There are many different types of rope, some of it very small
> diameter for a given strength and non-flattening, some of it tubular
> to the extend that it is almost like doubled-up webbing and of
> course there are many types between those extremes. To cast any
> type of rope as tree damaging because certain types of ropes damage
> trees is stretching the truth.
> There are also many techniques for attaching webbing or rope to
> trees and those can have a significant impact on how much and what
> kind of damage might occur to trees. Ed Speer's multi-wrap
> technique can be applied to rope as easily as webbing and finished
> with two half hitches, the last with a slip loop, for added
> security, especially with more slippery types of rope. This simple
> technique does require longer lengths of rope but will lessen the
> impact for any rope or webbing that is used.
> Some attachment methods are cinching and some are not, some hammocks
> are initially hung at an angle up to 30 degrees reference to the
> horizon and some are initially hung fairly taut-- both of these
> issues factor in to what tree damage might occur as well. A
> cinching attachment applies a strangulation type force around the
> whole circumference of the tree when the friction between the tree
> and the rope or webbing is low enough to allow it and is in addition
> to the force on the back side of the tree... but if there is enough
> friction the forces may be primarily along the sides of the tree
> trying to pull the bark off the tree (not that it is going to do
> that). Hammocks that are initially hung fairly taut are going to
> apply more force onto the trees they are attached to when they are
> weighted by the occupant as compared to a hammock that is initially
> hung at a 30 degree or so angle, maybe by an amount that is up to
> double or triple the force depending of certain factors. Hammocks
> that are initially hung taut are more prone to damaging the sides of
> the trees by pulling the bark off the tree because of the tremendous
> forces generated when the hammock is occupied and then drops to some
> angle... you are starting out with huge forces, something has to
> give and with high friction webbing it might be the tree bark.
> Another thing to keep in mind is that the weight of the occupant
> affects how much force is applied to a tree. It is not necessary
> for someone that weighs much less than another person to have to use
> the same rope size, webbing size or tree hugger width.
> Most folks use small diameter rope to attach their light weight
> tarps to trees to cover their hammocks. These lines can also mark
> tree bark. Again, Ed Speer's multi-wrap technique can reduce that
> by spreading out the forces over multiple wraps... of course I
> realize that all of the anti-rope with hammocks folks wouldn't be
> hypocritical enough to not be using wide webbing to attach their
> tarps to the tender barks of trees. <grin>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>