Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

rope vs. tree hugger

Expand Messages
  • Scott Macri
    FYI: Just out of curiosity I did some testing this past week. I was testing my HH suspension rope, and comparing it to my tree huggers. I was trying to
    Message 1 of 16 , Aug 17, 2006
      FYI:
      Just out of curiosity I did some testing this past week. I was testing my
      HH suspension rope, and comparing it to my tree huggers. I was trying to
      determine if the rope would damage the tree more than the hugger. By the
      end of testing I have determined the ropes caused significant damage to the
      tree when compared to the huggers.

      The huggers barely made any marks, where as, the ropes made several very
      noticeable impressions in the tree bark. Thicker ropes would most likely
      cause less damage than the thin ropes on the HH Backpacker Ultralight.

      --
      Scott A. Macri
      Trail Name: Mowgli
      www.HikeHaven.com
      http://360.yahoo.com/hacktorious


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Bill in Houston
      What kind of tree? ... testing my ... trying to ... By the ... damage to the ... very ... likely ... Ultralight.
      Message 2 of 16 , Aug 17, 2006
        What kind of tree?

        --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Macri"
        <hacktorious@...> wrote:
        >
        > FYI:
        > Just out of curiosity I did some testing this past week. I was
        testing my
        > HH suspension rope, and comparing it to my tree huggers. I was
        trying to
        > determine if the rope would damage the tree more than the hugger.
        By the
        > end of testing I have determined the ropes caused significant
        damage to the
        > tree when compared to the huggers.
        >
        > The huggers barely made any marks, where as, the ropes made several
        very
        > noticeable impressions in the tree bark. Thicker ropes would most
        likely
        > cause less damage than the thin ropes on the HH Backpacker
        Ultralight.
        >
        > --
        > Scott A. Macri
        > Trail Name: Mowgli
        > www.HikeHaven.com
        > http://360.yahoo.com/hacktorious
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • Scott Macri
        Not sure what it was, but most trees in the area were Oak. I also tested it in my back yard, I will have to find out what type of tree that is in my back
        Message 3 of 16 , Aug 17, 2006
          Not sure what it was, but most trees in the area were Oak. I also tested it
          in my back yard, I will have to find out what type of tree that is in my
          back yard.

          --
          Scott A. Macri
          Trail Name: Mowgli
          www.HikeHaven.com
          http://360.yahoo.com/hacktorious

          On 8/17/06, Bill in Houston <zippydooda@...> wrote:
          >
          > What kind of tree?
          >
          > --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com <hammockcamping%40yahoogroups.com>,
          > "Scott Macri"
          >
          > <hacktorious@...> wrote:
          > >
          > > FYI:
          > > Just out of curiosity I did some testing this past week. I was
          > testing my
          > > HH suspension rope, and comparing it to my tree huggers. I was
          > trying to
          > > determine if the rope would damage the tree more than the hugger.
          > By the
          > > end of testing I have determined the ropes caused significant
          > damage to the
          > > tree when compared to the huggers.
          > >
          > > The huggers barely made any marks, where as, the ropes made several
          > very
          > > noticeable impressions in the tree bark. Thicker ropes would most
          > likely
          > > cause less damage than the thin ropes on the HH Backpacker
          > Ultralight.
          > >
          > > --
          > > Scott A. Macri
          > > Trail Name: Mowgli
          > > www.HikeHaven.com
          > > http://360.yahoo.com/hacktorious
          > >
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          >


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Dave Womble
          Scott, 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
          Message 4 of 16 , Aug 17, 2006
            Scott,

            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>

            Dave



            --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Macri"
            <hacktorious@...> wrote:
            >
            > FYI:
            > Just out of curiosity I did some testing this past week. I was
            testing my
            > HH suspension rope, and comparing it to my tree huggers. I was
            trying to
            > determine if the rope would damage the tree more than the hugger.
            By the
            > end of testing I have determined the ropes caused significant
            damage to the
            > tree when compared to the huggers.
            >
            > The huggers barely made any marks, where as, the ropes made
            several very
            > noticeable impressions in the tree bark. Thicker ropes would most
            likely
            > cause less damage than the thin ropes on the HH Backpacker
            Ultralight.
            >
            > --
            > Scott A. Macri
            > Trail Name: Mowgli
            > www.HikeHaven.com
            > http://360.yahoo.com/hacktorious
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
          • Scott Macri
            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
            Message 5 of 16 , 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
              eliminate damage.

              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
              the tree.

              I was simply sharing my results with the group.


              On 8/17/06, Dave Womble <dpwomble@...> wrote:
              >
              > Scott,
              >
              > 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>
              >
              > Dave
              >


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Carey Parks
              Thanks Scott, for letting us know. While some may point out that it was not a scientific study, this piece of empirical data is the result of an actual trial
              Message 6 of 16 , Aug 17, 2006
                Thanks Scott, for letting us know. While some may point out that it was not
                a scientific study, this piece of empirical data is the result of an actual
                trial and while it may not quantify the impact on the tree, and while you
                are not stating that the tree will suffer to any particulat degree, it does
                show that in this kind of use, tree huggers did reduce the visible effects
                of hanging in your hammock.

                I'm pleased that you determined tree hugger use is worth your trouble. I
                find using the huggers easier than tying to the tree, since I can get the
                trees wrapped with the huggers before I take the hammock out, and once hung,
                adjusting the hammock, which requires movement of the rope, is easier when I
                use the huggers than when I have to move all that line around the tree. But
                everyone's different.

                As for the tarp, it's nice to use the supplied clips but I find they allow
                the tarp to sag and slack the pitch when I get into the hammock. Thus I
                prefer to tie the tarp ridgeline clips directly to the tree huggers once the
                hammock is up. Then the hammock does sag a bit lower than the tarp, which is
                actually nice in all but blowing rain. In the case of blowing rain, I'll use
                my larger tarp on the hammock.

                Keep up the field tests!

                Carey



                -----Original Message-----
                From: hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com
                [mailto:hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Scott Macri
                Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 12:21 PM
                To: hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [Hammock Camping] Re: rope vs. tree hugger


                "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
                eliminate damage.

                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
                the tree.

                I was simply sharing my results with the group.

                On 8/17/06, Dave Womble <dpwomble@...> wrote:
                >
                > Scott,
                >
                > 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>
                >
                > Dave
                >

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Dave Womble
                Scott, sorry how my post appeared. I only meant to address the first paragraph specifically to you since you were using the Hennessy rope, the rest of it was
                Message 7 of 16 , Aug 17, 2006
                  Scott, sorry how my post appeared. I only meant to address the
                  first paragraph specifically to you since you were using the
                  Hennessy rope, the rest of it was in response to the accumulation of
                  what has been said in this thread in an attempt to share my opinion
                  on the issue of attaching hammocks to trees.

                  Dave

                  --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Macri"
                  <hacktorious@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > "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
                  > eliminate damage.
                  >
                  > 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
                  > the tree.
                  >
                  > I was simply sharing my results with the group.
                  >
                  >
                  > On 8/17/06, Dave Womble <dpwomble@...> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Scott,
                  > >
                  > > 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>
                  > >
                  > > Dave
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                • Scott Macri
                  Not a problem. That s what I figured. I just wanted to be clear that I wasn t saying all rope is bad. Even the worst rope is still probably better than the
                  Message 8 of 16 , Aug 17, 2006
                    Not a problem. That's what I figured. I just wanted to be clear that I
                    wasn't saying all rope is bad.

                    Even the worst rope is still probably better than the damage caused by
                    tents. In my hike leadership course, which I recently took, the instructor
                    explained that if an area is frequently used by tents over a few days/weeks,
                    the damage can take 10+ years to heal.

                    He then discussed how grass is one of the best surfaces to pitch a tent
                    because it only takes a few weeks/months to recover, sometimes even less.
                    Grass is very robust. LOL

                    --
                    Scott A. Macri
                    Trail Name: Mowgli
                    www.HikeHaven.com
                    http://360.yahoo.com/hacktorious

                    On 8/17/06, Dave Womble <dpwomble@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Scott, sorry how my post appeared. I only meant to address the
                    > first paragraph specifically to you since you were using the
                    > Hennessy rope, the rest of it was in response to the accumulation of
                    > what has been said in this thread in an attempt to share my opinion
                    > on the issue of attaching hammocks to trees.
                    >
                    >
                    > Dave
                    >
                    =


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • jonas4321
                    ... I respectfully disagree that the 4 wrap method reduces the impact, thereby justifying using rope that stays round (as opposed to rope that flattens or
                    Message 9 of 16 , Aug 18, 2006
                      --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Womble" <dpwomble@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > 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.

                      I respectfully disagree that the 4 wrap method reduces the impact,
                      thereby justifying using rope that "stays round" (as opposed to rope
                      that flattens or using webbing). The first wrap is going to apply
                      virtually all of the pressure to the tree. The rest of the wraps
                      impart virtually no pressure compared to the first. The second and
                      subsequent wraps distribute friction along the length of the rope (or
                      webbing) to act like a knot to keep it from slipping or coming
                      unwound, they don't share much of the load. Try wiggling the second or
                      third wraps and they move fairly easily up and down. Try that with the
                      first wrap, and you find that it won't move at all because it is so
                      tight against the tree.

                      I am no scientist, I just have tried this, I am going on empirical
                      information.

                      Jonas
                    • Dave Womble
                      Jonas, I wasn t trying to justify using rope that stays round as opposed to rope that flattens or using webbing to attach hammocks to trees and I don t
                      Message 10 of 16 , Aug 18, 2006
                        Jonas,

                        I wasn't trying to justify using rope that "stays round" as opposed
                        to rope that flattens or using webbing to attach hammocks to trees
                        and I don't believe I said that. I do believe that multi-wrap
                        methods reduce the impact of any rope of webbing that is used. But
                        like you observed, the first wrap may take most or nearly all of the
                        force... and it may not, depending on the ratio of the force applied
                        and the friction between the tree and the webbing (or rope) as well
                        as how tightly the wrap is applied. I think you will find this
                        varies with larger diameter trees with rough bark versus smaller
                        diameter trees with smooth bark. The smaller diameter trees with
                        smooth bark will benefit more since there is less friction per wrap
                        and my guess is that these are the trees that need more
                        consideration.

                        Dave


                        --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "jonas4321" <jonas4321@...>
                        wrote:
                        >
                        > --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Womble" <dpwomble@>
                        wrote:
                        > >
                        > > 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.
                        >
                        > I respectfully disagree that the 4 wrap method reduces the impact,
                        > thereby justifying using rope that "stays round" (as opposed to
                        rope
                        > that flattens or using webbing). The first wrap is going to apply
                        > virtually all of the pressure to the tree. The rest of the wraps
                        > impart virtually no pressure compared to the first. The second and
                        > subsequent wraps distribute friction along the length of the rope
                        (or
                        > webbing) to act like a knot to keep it from slipping or coming
                        > unwound, they don't share much of the load. Try wiggling the
                        second or
                        > third wraps and they move fairly easily up and down. Try that with
                        the
                        > first wrap, and you find that it won't move at all because it is so
                        > tight against the tree.
                        >
                        > I am no scientist, I just have tried this, I am going on empirical
                        > information.
                        >
                        > Jonas
                        >
                      • Dave Womble
                        I looked into the loose wraps that Jonas described in a previous post in this thread and tried to come up with a technique to improve that situation and get
                        Message 11 of 16 , Aug 18, 2006
                          I looked into the loose wraps that Jonas described in a previous
                          post in this thread and tried to come up with a technique to improve
                          that situation and get more uniform loading across the multiple
                          wraps of a multi-wrap hammock knot (also called Ed Speer's four wrap
                          knot). Of course others may have already figured this out, but if
                          they haven't I think I found something worth looking into. I
                          uploaded a file showing how I think this could be done:
                          http://tinyurl.com/magcn . Basically I tried to compensate for each
                          successive wrap being somewhat looser by offsetting the standing end
                          when forming the knot so that the last wraps would have more tension
                          applied due to the reorientation of the standing end when you are in
                          the hammock. (When you form the multi-wrap knot with the standing
                          end horizontal I think the reorientation of the standing end when
                          you are in the hammock contributes to the successive wraps being
                          looser unless you allow for that somehow when you place the wraps.)

                          Dave


                          --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Womble" <dpwomble@...>
                          wrote:
                          >
                          > Jonas,
                          >
                          > I wasn't trying to justify using rope that "stays round" as
                          opposed
                          > to rope that flattens or using webbing to attach hammocks to trees
                          > and I don't believe I said that. I do believe that multi-wrap
                          > methods reduce the impact of any rope of webbing that is used.
                          But
                          > like you observed, the first wrap may take most or nearly all of
                          the
                          > force... and it may not, depending on the ratio of the force
                          applied
                          > and the friction between the tree and the webbing (or rope) as
                          well
                          > as how tightly the wrap is applied. I think you will find this
                          > varies with larger diameter trees with rough bark versus smaller
                          > diameter trees with smooth bark. The smaller diameter trees with
                          > smooth bark will benefit more since there is less friction per
                          wrap
                          > and my guess is that these are the trees that need more
                          > consideration.
                          >
                          > Dave
                          >
                          >
                          > --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "jonas4321" <jonas4321@>
                          > wrote:
                          > >
                          > > --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Womble" <dpwomble@>
                          > wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > 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.
                          > >
                          > > I respectfully disagree that the 4 wrap method reduces the
                          impact,
                          > > thereby justifying using rope that "stays round" (as opposed to
                          > rope
                          > > that flattens or using webbing). The first wrap is going to apply
                          > > virtually all of the pressure to the tree. The rest of the wraps
                          > > impart virtually no pressure compared to the first. The second
                          and
                          > > subsequent wraps distribute friction along the length of the
                          rope
                          > (or
                          > > webbing) to act like a knot to keep it from slipping or coming
                          > > unwound, they don't share much of the load. Try wiggling the
                          > second or
                          > > third wraps and they move fairly easily up and down. Try that
                          with
                          > the
                          > > first wrap, and you find that it won't move at all because it is
                          so
                          > > tight against the tree.
                          > >
                          > > I am no scientist, I just have tried this, I am going on
                          empirical
                          > > information.
                          > >
                          > > Jonas
                          > >
                          >
                        • Jeff
                          ... ... http://tinyurl.com/magcn ... Document not found...bad link, I think. Jeff
                          Message 12 of 16 , Aug 18, 2006
                            --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Womble" <dpwomble@...>
                            wrote:
                            >
                            ... http://tinyurl.com/magcn ...

                            Document not found...bad link, I think.

                            Jeff
                          • Dave Womble
                            It s working for me. It is in the FILES section under Youngblood s folder and is titled Multi-Wrap Knot .
                            Message 13 of 16 , Aug 18, 2006
                              It's working for me. It is in the FILES section under Youngblood's
                              folder and is titled "Multi-Wrap Knot".

                              --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <jwj32542@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Womble" <dpwomble@>
                              > wrote:
                              > >
                              > ... http://tinyurl.com/magcn ...
                              >
                              > Document not found...bad link, I think.
                              >
                              > Jeff
                              >
                            • jonas4321
                              ... Very true, I was thinking more along the lines of 8 diameter and larger trees, which are most often what I have been hanging on when I noticed the effect
                              Message 14 of 16 , Aug 19, 2006
                                --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Womble" <dpwomble@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > ... I think you will find this
                                > varies with larger diameter trees with rough bark versus smaller
                                > diameter trees with smooth bark. The smaller diameter trees with
                                > smooth bark will benefit more since there is less friction per wrap
                                > and my guess is that these are the trees that need more
                                > consideration.

                                Very true, I was thinking more along the lines of 8" diameter and
                                larger trees, which are most often what I have been hanging on when I
                                noticed the effect I described. I would imagine that smaller trees
                                would indeed see more pressure on the subsequent wraps, since the rope
                                or webbing is under more tension past the first turn. Good
                                observation, thank you.
                              • jonas4321
                                ... Very interesting. I will try this method next time out, good idea, thank you. I got to this via the files section, too. The link didn t work for me.
                                Message 15 of 16 , Aug 19, 2006
                                  --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Womble" <dpwomble@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > I looked into the loose wraps that Jonas described in a previous
                                  > post in this thread and tried to come up with a technique to improve
                                  > that situation and get more uniform loading across the multiple
                                  > wraps of a multi-wrap hammock knot (also called Ed Speer's four wrap
                                  > knot). Of course others may have already figured this out, but if
                                  > they haven't I think I found something worth looking into. I
                                  > uploaded a file showing how I think this could be done:
                                  > http://tinyurl.com/magcn . Basically I tried to compensate for each
                                  > successive wrap being somewhat looser by offsetting the standing end
                                  > when forming the knot so that the last wraps would have more tension
                                  > applied due to the reorientation of the standing end when you are in
                                  > the hammock. (When you form the multi-wrap knot with the standing
                                  > end horizontal I think the reorientation of the standing end when
                                  > you are in the hammock contributes to the successive wraps being
                                  > looser unless you allow for that somehow when you place the wraps.)
                                  >

                                  Very interesting. I will try this method next time out, good idea,
                                  thank you.

                                  I got to this via the files section, too. The link didn't work for me.
                                • Rick
                                  Have you tried to get a finger under one of the subsequent loops while someone is in the hammock? They are all pretty tight the way I tie the 4 wrap. If they
                                  Message 16 of 16 , Aug 19, 2006
                                    Have you tried to get a finger under one of the subsequent loops while
                                    someone is in the hammock? They are all pretty tight the way I tie the
                                    4 wrap. If they are tight, they are applying some force, though not as
                                    much as the first wrap.

                                    Rick
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > I respectfully disagree that the 4 wrap method reduces the impact,
                                    > thereby justifying using rope that "stays round" (as opposed to rope
                                    > that flattens or using webbing). The first wrap is going to apply
                                    > virtually all of the pressure to the tree. The rest of the wraps
                                    > impart virtually no pressure compared to the first. The second and
                                    > subsequent wraps distribute friction along the length of the rope (or
                                    > webbing) to act like a knot to keep it from slipping or coming
                                    > unwound, they don't share much of the load. Try wiggling the second or
                                    > third wraps and they move fairly easily up and down. Try that with the
                                    > first wrap, and you find that it won't move at all because it is so
                                    > tight against the tree.
                                    >
                                    > I am no scientist, I just have tried this, I am going on empirical
                                    > information.
                                    >
                                    > Jonas
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.