Screamer in a bridge?

[_Dario]

I thought it would double, similar to the force applied to a tree crotch when utilizing a base anchor.

 

[Fl Canopy Stalker]

Ok as I mentioned above I disagree with the idea of screamers as a bridge and it’s not because of @kyler1945 ’s double force or chaos reasoning (at least not partially). Screamers were created for rock climbers to reduce generated forces by stitching fold overs that are designed to break away individually. This is like a gradual deceleration as opposed to hard braking. These stitches are not created to continuously hold force. Most are designed to begin popping at 500-550 lbs. if you double it over to use as a bridge, you would in fact increase your break strength because the force is applied in basket configuration. That is true. However since the individual stitch section would easily see 500 lbs or more of initial force in a fall, they would break away, BUT most likely not evenly. Which would cause the chaos mentioned because you’d be likely to roll, as it hung in the carabiner. That is a concern. The mother concerns are (and this applies to the mentioned patent of Tethrd as well. These stitches are designed to break away and reduce force. They are not meant to permanently hold the weight of the object. In fact if you are a 250 lbs man and you can also lift 250 lbs, you have enough strength and force to begin popping stitches by simply pushing hard off the tree (think DRT hip thrust). Is it likely you’d pop the stitches by doing this once or twice? No. But repetitive process of constant weight bearing, or extra forces from swinging, hip thrusting any of that, will weaken the stitches. So eventually those stitches will bust from weight alone (and it doesn’t take as long as you might think. Add in friction of the screamer being rolled across a carabiner and yea the screamer as a bridge is terrible. Even the sewn folds on that patent would weaken severely over time and either break away, or fail to do their intended purpose. Screamers are made to catch shock one time in a fall not be continually weight loaded. Now before you say all saddles are stitched bla bla bla what’s the difference….
Saddles are life support. In any life supported device the minimum breaking strength must be 10x the rated weight limit. We saw on the fall video from the thread yesterday, that most impact forces generated in severe falls are still well shy of 3000 lbs let alone the 5000 the ropes and many harnesses are sewn to. Also regardless of condition it is suggested (read: required) that all saddles be inspected before use and all be retired in 5 years or less. Why do you think that is? Why are harnesses built to such a high strength and retired after 5 years? It’s because continuous load bearing AS well as elements (weather, use, sunlight) all wear down the material and especially the threads strength over time. So 550 lbs will be wore out much much faster than 5000 lbs.
Even straps we use for cam buckles are required to be sewn at 3 to 5 times the suggested weight rating of what they are tied to. It’s not just for shock load, it’s also for degradation. So sewing loops in the saddle or using a screamer as a continuous load bearing apparatus is a bad idea

 

[Fl Canopy Stalker]

I thought it would double, similar to the force applied to a tree crotch when utilizing a base anchor.

It will be double for the entire breaking strength, however those individual stitches section will pop long before regardless of the force being doubly distributed. So you and Kyler are right in that sense but missed the bigger picture as far as the problems.

 

[kyler1945]

It will be double for the entire breaking strength, however those individual stitches section will pop long before regardless of the force being doubly distributed. So you and Kyler are right in that sense but missed the bigger picture as far as the problems.

I didn’t miss the bigger picture.

what I said is factually correct.

I’m open to discussion about the issues you raised. Want to chew on it a little.

 

[_Dario]

if you double it over to use as a bridge

I always miss the big picture man. It’s a lifestyle.

maybe I misread the original post, I didn’t think he was using it as a bridge. I thought it was going to untie his adjustable bridge, slide one end of the screamer on and use that to clip into his system. The end goal being still have a screamer in the system but negating some of the cumbersomeness (word?) reported by users including a screamer.

 

[Red Beard]

Screamers were created for rock climbers to reduce generated forces by stitching fold overs that are designed to break away individually. This is like a gradual deceleration as opposed to hard braking. These stitches are not created to continuously hold force. Most are designed to begin popping at 500-550 lbs.

Is it likely you’d pop the stitches by doing this once or twice? No. But repetitive process of constant weight bearing, or extra forces from swinging, hip thrusting any of that, will weaken the stitches. So eventually those stitches will bust from weight alone (and it doesn’t take as long as you might think.

Screamers are made to catch shock one time in a fall not be continually weight loaded.

Why are harnesses built to such a high strength and retired after 5 years? It’s because continuous load bearing AS well as elements (weather, use, sunlight) all wear down the material and especially the threads strength over time.

So sewing loops in the saddle or using a screamer as a continuous load bearing apparatus is a bad idea

Above is an extrapolation of a few key statements you made. So it's not ok to use screamers as some do (between tether and bridge)?

 

[_Dario]

As far as the patent..I really have no idea what their goal is. What will this saddle be used for? One sticking? I think using a full body fall arrest device would be a better object to inherit from from than a single paddle saddle.

 

[Fl Canopy Stalker]

I didn’t miss the bigger picture.

what I said is factually correct.

I’m open to discussion about the issues you raised. Want to chew on it a little.

Yea I guess I worded that wrong. In a sense I don’t disagree with your assessment either, I feel like the reasoning behind it was sort of short sighted. I do not mean you don’t think long term, and I apologize if I offended you with my word selection. I mean more that it’s not just chaos or double the strength that would make it a bad idea. It is more the friction from the carabiner and the accelerated degradation of the individual break away sections that I see as more problematic. I guess “ chaos” would be a great way to describe a fall that was arrested but due to uneven weight distribution, you all of a sudden flip over face first and receive a secondary shock.

 

[Fl Canopy Stalker]

Above is an extrapolation of a few things you said. So it's not ok to use screamers as some do (between tether and bridge)?

Again I can’t tell anyone what to do, I’m simply stating that is not their intended use. Will they work as a tether or bridge? Absolutely. But when you do fall, will they do their intended job of slowly ripping away to absorb shock? Most likely not. If I were to use a screamer. I would use it on a secondary prusik or the end of my tether, where it’s not constantly weight bearing and would only become loaded in a fall- which is it’s intended purpose.

 

[Red Beard]

Again I can’t tell anyone what to do, I’m simply stating that is not their intended use. Will they work as a tether or bridge? Absolutely. But when you do fall, will they do their intended job of slowly ripping away to absorb shock? Most likely not. If I were to use a screamer. I would use it on a secondary prusik or the end of my tether, where it’s not constantly weight bearing and would only become loaded in a fall- which is it’s intended purpose.

Right on. Guess I'm having a hard time visualizing where one would place it so that it's not constantly weighted, yet still inline to aid in a fall.

 

[Fl Canopy Stalker]

As far as the patent..I really have no idea what their goal is. What will this saddle be used for? One sticking? I think using a full body fall arrest device would be a better object to inherit from from than a single paddle saddle.

I don’t work for them, I have no inside knowledge. I hate the idea of speculation. I don’t know where or why this was applied for. BUT if I had to make an educated guess…. And again this is only a guess…. (Ugh speculation) But I would assume it came from that drop testing they did. One of the tests required utilize a 220 lbs dummy that has to be dropped a certain distance. The dummy is connected to a force gauge… (dynameter, force scale, whatever you prefer to call it) the dummy gets dropped and you get a forces generated pass or fail. You must be under 1800 lbs of force to pass. Most harnesses (and saddles) that are tested and pass, pass with a 1650-1750 lbs generated. Perhaps they failed that test or perhaps it’s was close enough of a pass that they started brainstorming ways to reduce shock. This patent idea was probably one of those ways?!?! Again I don’t know? Perhaps they could tell you if you email their customer service? I am only taking a guess and I don’t truly care the reasoning behind it. I know they make great equipment and they do test it. In that regards, they are light years ahead of many….. But something lead to this idea and they felt the need to patent it before someone else had the same idea or possibly perfected it. But no matter what, any fall with a hip based connection is going to hurt. Screamers help that!

 

[_Dario]

I have a ridiculous idea. I’m busting out the sketch pad.

 

[Fl Canopy Stalker]

Right on. Guess I'm having a hard time visualizing where one would place it so that it's not constantly weighted, yet still inline to aid in a fall.

On a secondary prusik with a little slack in it so that it only catches if you fall…. Or tied in along the end of your tether as a just in case my prusik slips too far and tether burns through it? Either of those would work. At least in my mind.

 

[Fl Canopy Stalker]

I have a ridiculous idea. I’m busting out the sketch pad.

Can’t wait to see it! You and @kyler1945 make it really tough not to read y’all’s thoughts and ideas. I need y’all to dumb it down a notch for me so that I can keep up

 

[_Dario]

Again ridiculous idea. No one better turn full Rick Moranis from Honey I Shrunk the Kids and build this unless they know what they are doing. Not even sure what supplies you’d need.

Basically your tether is 2 sections of rope connected by a “gate”.

The gate is a state machine:
-stays intact until x KN is applied.
-Breaks when x KN is applied

The “screamer type device” hangs next to the gate and is never loaded until it is deployed. It is affixed to section A and B of the tether.

On paper the gate would be subject to the same downsides that you would not want to continually load it again and again and would certainly have an expiration date. But the gate is much more sensitive to breaking then the “screamer type device”. When it fails it fails and without hesitation, letting the “screamer type device” do its thing as God intended.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Red Beard]

On a secondary prusik with a little slack in it so that it only catches if you fall

Roger. Still having a hard time visualizing. I'm a picture dude.

Guess I'm having a hard time understanding how you'd have to essentially break your primary [taut] prusik prior to engaging a secondary. Thus, breaking your back prior to engaging a slow-your-fall device.

 

[Fl Canopy Stalker]

Again ridiculous idea. No one better turn full Rick Moranis from Honey I Shrunk the Kids and build this unless they know what they are doing. Not even sure what supplies you’d need.

Basically your tether is 2 sections of rope connect by a “gate”.

The gate is a state machine:
-stays intact until x KN is applied.
-Breaks when xKN is applied

The “screamer” type device hangs next to the gate and is never loaded until it is deployed. It is affixed to section A and B of the tether.

On paper the gate would be subject to the same downsides that you would not want to continually load it again and again and would certainly have an expiration date. But the gate is much more sensitive to breaking then a screamer. When it fails it fails and without hesitation, letting the screamer do its thing as God intended.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like where you’re headed but…… wouldn’t be easier just to use a dynamic rope and a kong kisa shock absorber or perhaps a slyde?

 

[_Dario]

Alright now you’re just trying to piss me off!!

 

[Fl Canopy Stalker]

Roger. Still having a hard time visualizing. I'm a picture dude.

Guess I'm having a hard time understanding how you'd have to essentially break your primary [taut] prusik prior to engaging a secondary. Thus, breaking your back prior to engaging a slow-your-fall device.

Normal set up…short prusik or rope man, carabiner…. (All except who in the heck just sits around with their linesman rope on while on the platform????)
Ok so you slip and fall in this set up, rope stretches, prusik usually slips an inch to 3” depending on force generated potentially more. Rope also stretches at the point of force working upward, hence why bungee cords pull people back up when maximum stretch is reached.

 

[Fl Canopy Stalker]

Roger. Still having a hard time visualizing. I'm a picture dude.

Guess I'm having a hard time understanding how you'd have to essentially break your primary [taut] prusik prior to engaging a secondary. Thus, breaking your back prior to engaging a slow-your-fall device.

In this illustration, it’s much like a back up prusik for your mechanical ascender. Have a prusik above the primary with a shorty screamer. Keep it just slack enough that it isn’t under load but not so slack that it won’t catch after an inch of stretch is introduced… it’ll add secondary catch because it’s above the primary connection yet it is not truly loaded until the fall occurs. (Again who the heck leaves their linesman fully attached while resting on the platform and tethered off?