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

Re: ZHammock Page

Expand Messages
  • Dave Womble
    Rick, I was a little curious about the advantage of using whipped ends. I think you mentioned before that you were not hemming the short ends of the hammock
    Message 1 of 5 , Jul 6, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Rick,

      I was a little curious about the advantage of using whipped ends. I
      think you mentioned before that you were not hemming the short ends
      of the hammock when you used Ed's overhand knot but that you do hem
      the short ends of the hammock when you use the whipped ends. You
      still use less fabric with the whipped ends, but you have added cord
      to the whipped ends. Seems to me the overhand knot is easier to make
      and is known to be trouble free. Any idea of how much weight you are
      saving using the whipped ends versus the overhand knot?

      Dave

      --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, Rick <ra1@i...> wrote:
      > Good Morning Gang,
      >
      > I wrote up a little page on the Z hammock from my previous post.
      It has
      > a picture of the way I do the whipped end of the hammock, the
      attachment
      > of the removable bug net, and the way the hammock tube seals the
      end of
      > the bug net.
      >
      > Here it is for your reading and building pleasure:
      >
      > http://www.imrisk.com/zhammock/zhammock.htm
      >
      > Risk
    • Rick
      ... Dave, Weight saved in cloth is about an ounce. Actually 8/9 of 1.1 oz. The weight of the cords I used is about half of that - half an ounce. Almost all
      Message 2 of 5 , Jul 6, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Dave Womble wrote:

        >Rick,
        >
        >I was a little curious about the advantage of using whipped ends. I
        >think you mentioned before that you were not hemming the short ends
        >of the hammock when you used Ed's overhand knot but that you do hem
        >the short ends of the hammock when you use the whipped ends. You
        >still use less fabric with the whipped ends, but you have added cord
        >to the whipped ends. Seems to me the overhand knot is easier to make
        >and is known to be trouble free. Any idea of how much weight you are
        >saving using the whipped ends versus the overhand knot?
        >
        >Dave
        >
        >
        >
        Dave,

        Weight saved in cloth is about an ounce. Actually 8/9 of 1.1 oz. The
        weight of the cords I used is about half of that - half an ounce.
        Almost all the weight savings could be retained by using a very light
        whipping of heavy fishing line. But weight savings is not the best
        reason to consider whipped ends.

        There is the savings of the cost and bulk of the cloth to consider. I
        bought almost a yard less of material and saved about $4 of material
        cost. When I fold my hammock up, there is a little less bulk to stuff
        into the stuff sack.

        The other advantage is mainly for experimenters like me. It is as easy
        as duck soup to take the whipping off and make a change in the hammock.
        Having untied the overhand knots in hammocks many times, I don't mind
        skipping the 15-30 minutes necessary to untie those nasty knots at all.
        Ray Garlington originally made the suggestion when he was experimenting
        with smooth curves in the end of the hammock with a goal of having
        better edge control. I have not tried those experiments, but can
        imagine how whipping the end of the hammock can make such a process
        much easier.

        I am considering adding a second whipping that incorporates the strap
        and the hammock - that will be purely for the vanity of making the joint
        look finished.

        However, at day's finish, whipping or tying the ends of the hammock is a
        flourish and not worth worrying about. For the addicted hammock
        builder, I suggest trying the whipping route as an experiment. I find
        the improvement modest, but real. Only a year's worth of experience
        will tell me if the whipped end is as durable as the Speer overhand knot.

        Risk
      • Dave Womble
        ... I ... ends ... hem ... cord ... make ... are ... The ... light ... consider. I ... material ... stuff ... easy ... hammock. ... mind ... all. ...
        Message 3 of 5 , Jul 6, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In hammockcamping@yahoogroups.com, Rick <ra1@i...> wrote:
          > Dave Womble wrote:
          >
          > >Rick,
          > >
          > >I was a little curious about the advantage of using whipped ends.
          I
          > >think you mentioned before that you were not hemming the short
          ends
          > >of the hammock when you used Ed's overhand knot but that you do
          hem
          > >the short ends of the hammock when you use the whipped ends. You
          > >still use less fabric with the whipped ends, but you have added
          cord
          > >to the whipped ends. Seems to me the overhand knot is easier to
          make
          > >and is known to be trouble free. Any idea of how much weight you
          are
          > >saving using the whipped ends versus the overhand knot?
          > >
          > >Dave
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > Dave,
          >
          > Weight saved in cloth is about an ounce. Actually 8/9 of 1.1 oz.
          The
          > weight of the cords I used is about half of that - half an ounce.
          > Almost all the weight savings could be retained by using a very
          light
          > whipping of heavy fishing line. But weight savings is not the best
          > reason to consider whipped ends.
          >
          > There is the savings of the cost and bulk of the cloth to
          consider. I
          > bought almost a yard less of material and saved about $4 of
          material
          > cost. When I fold my hammock up, there is a little less bulk to
          stuff
          > into the stuff sack.
          >
          > The other advantage is mainly for experimenters like me. It is as
          easy
          > as duck soup to take the whipping off and make a change in the
          hammock.
          > Having untied the overhand knots in hammocks many times, I don't
          mind
          > skipping the 15-30 minutes necessary to untie those nasty knots at
          all.
          > Ray Garlington originally made the suggestion when he was
          experimenting
          > with smooth curves in the end of the hammock with a goal of having
          > better edge control. I have not tried those experiments, but can
          > imagine how whipping the end of the hammock can make such a
          process
          > much easier.
          >
          > I am considering adding a second whipping that incorporates the
          strap
          > and the hammock - that will be purely for the vanity of making the
          joint
          > look finished.
          >
          > However, at day's finish, whipping or tying the ends of the hammock
          is a
          > flourish and not worth worrying about. For the addicted hammock
          > builder, I suggest trying the whipping route as an experiment. I
          find
          > the improvement modest, but real. Only a year's worth of
          experience
          > will tell me if the whipped end is as durable as the Speer overhand
          knot.
          >
          > Risk

          Thanks Rick, I can appreciate untying the overhand knots as I too
          have wore out my fingers on occasion. I guess any weight savings
          using the whipping instead of the overhand knot will be a function of
          the weight of the fabric and the width of the hammock. I say this
          because the whipping requires hemmed ends and the amount of fabric
          taken up would seem to be independent of fabric weight and hammock
          width, where as with the overhand knot the hemmed end is not
          necessary and the amount of fabric taken up with the knot will change
          depending on the fabric weight and hammock width. What I am getting
          at is that for some combination of fabric weight and hammock width,
          the whipping technique could actually result in a heavier hammock.
          For instance, if you used a single layer of 1.1 oz material for a 4
          foot wide hammock it is not obvious to me that the whipped ends would
          result in a weight savings... actually, when I try to back that out
          using your estimates I suspect that the whipping would result in a
          slightly heavier hammock. Just trying to do a little figuring, and
          thanks again for the info.

          Dave
        • Rick
          Dave, I understand your question about weight. This is what I have done: - I cut the hammock cloth 1 foot shorter - I sew a rolled over hem, a quarter to a
          Message 4 of 5 , Jul 6, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Dave,

            I understand your question about weight.

            This is what I have done:
            - I cut the hammock cloth 1 foot shorter
            - I sew a rolled over hem, a quarter to a third of an inch wide (This
            shortens the hammock about an inch overall, when both ends are considered.)

            So I save a foot of hammock fabric length. I think this almost always
            will be a weight savings when adding back in the weight of whipping
            cord, but not much. For a double bottom hammock it saves two feet of
            length. That is where I got my 8 sq ft of savings (my hammocks, as you
            know, are 4 feet wide). Since a square yard is 9 sq ft, I figured I
            saved 8/9 of the 1.1 oz per sq yard of fabric.

            Seen another way, it can save 1/10 of the hammock material weight for my
            now 9 foot long material that was 10 feet long before. And I get the
            same interior room I had previously.

            Rick

            >
            >Thanks Rick, I can appreciate untying the overhand knots as I too
            >have wore out my fingers on occasion. I guess any weight savings
            >using the whipping instead of the overhand knot will be a function of
            >the weight of the fabric and the width of the hammock. I say this
            >because the whipping requires hemmed ends and the amount of fabric
            >taken up would seem to be independent of fabric weight and hammock
            >width, where as with the overhand knot the hemmed end is not
            >necessary and the amount of fabric taken up with the knot will change
            >depending on the fabric weight and hammock width. What I am getting
            >at is that for some combination of fabric weight and hammock width,
            >the whipping technique could actually result in a heavier hammock.
            >For instance, if you used a single layer of 1.1 oz material for a 4
            >foot wide hammock it is not obvious to me that the whipped ends would
            >result in a weight savings... actually, when I try to back that out
            >using your estimates I suspect that the whipping would result in a
            >slightly heavier hammock. Just trying to do a little figuring, and
            >thanks again for the info.
            >
            >Dave
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.