Distel Tresse?

[jimmyh]

Tree climbers use all sorts of friction hitches, but it seems like they're missing an entire class. The Valdotain Tresse (VT) is cool because it doesn't ever jam, spreads the friction over more rope, and requires little pressure for descent.

The downside is that it can be a bit finicky and the same thing which keeps it from binding (lack of riding turns) can keep it from gripping. This causes bad things like falling and dying, so many don't use/recommend against the VT.

It seems that the obvious solution is to replace the coils at the top with a distel hitch (or michoacan or schwabisch or knut or...) and then keep the braid at the bottom to take load off the distel hitch and keep it easy to move. Since the hitch at the top is secure and has a riding turn to keep it gripping the line, it should support you even if you muck up the braid. And since the braid carries most of the weight, the friction hitch at the top should be easy to move.

Are there any rope climbers out there that use a standard friction hitch on top of a braid? Are they aware of the possibility?

[Benboncan]

Both are used, never seen a combination though. I'll certainly try it out. Bear in mind that the friction hitches used by arborists are used with micro pulleys beneath them to facilitate the hitch to ascend the standing part while the climber manouvers through (up usually) the tree. This should be hands free, fiddling  is just a waste of time and effort.
Thank you for your suggestion.

Edit
This site might be of interest
http://www.sherrilltree.com/Learning-Center

Click on the knots box.

[jimmyh]

Right, they're both commonly used. It's the combination of a self sufficient hitch and the braid that I think should get the best of both - the security of your distel/michoacan/whatever and the ease of movement of the braid.

I'm gonna do my own climbing on it soon, and I look forward to hearing your feedback

Cheers,
Jimmy

[Dan_Lehman]

Friction hitches are perhaps the knots where differences
of materials and forces come into play more significantly
than elsewhere?  --there is the relative rope diameters
and natures (stiff, old/new, ...), and the weights of the
climbers, and ... . !!  whew, many factors, and the advice
"whatever works for you" (aka "YMMV") comes into play.

Another site for references is www.treebuzz.com and
in addition to forum threads there are several articles
about hitches, there.

--dl*
====

[jimmyh]

I finally got around to climbing on it, and it seemed to work as expected - the braids took the load off the distel, allowing it to be easily moved.

I am a bit confused, since the blake's hitch I used for my foot loop seemed quite hard to move, and I assumed it'd be fairly useable now that I'm not using cheap bad rope.

I'm tying onto 9.8mm dynamic climbing rope with 8mm accessory cord. That isn't too much different than what the arborists use to climb, is it?

Thanks for the links by the way

[Dan_Lehman]

I am a bit confused, since the Blake's hitch I used for my foot loop
seemed quite hard to move, and I assumed it'd be fairly useable
now that I'm not using cheap bad rope.

If I'm correct, that hitch (which I like to call "Prohgrip"
in recognition of its earlier discoverer, Heinz Prohaska of
Austria --who'd published about it a decade prior to Jason
Blake's own discovery) is used essentially to support one
half of body weight; maybe that is one factor.  Another
might be the elasticity of your line (see below), which
in theory --maybe forces here aren't great enough--
could diminish the diameter of the hitched line so that
the knot would tighten to fit but when load was gone
the hitched line would swell back to a thicker diameter
(or try to, hence the tight hitch)?!

I'm tying onto 9.8mm dynamic climbing rope with 8mm accessory cord.
That isn't too much different than what the arborists use to climb, is it?

Yes, it's quite different, in terms of elasticity --giving
way too much bounce for arborist (or caver) climbing!
(I will remark that I'm quite skeptical about all of these
rockclimbing-ropes being sized to fractions of a millimeter(!!),
where in other cordage one sees cruder sizings even being
given as approximate, with recommendation to look at
weight per length (100', say) as a gauge!  Really, someone
can note 0.1mm ?!  --bulllllloney !     )

But do check out the Treebuzz.com arborist site and
forums Climbing, Rigging & Roping, and newly SRT;
you should find good information and discussion and
a place for questions.


--dl*
====

[Brocky]

Hello everyone first post here.  I'm an arborist who likes to collect friction hitches.  The Blake's hitch does depend on the type of rope used.  Arborist ropes are much firmer than dynamic ropes used by rockclimbers.  Another factor is the type of climbing system used, a single rope to ascend or one doubled over an anchor point; all your weight on the hitch or just half with the doubled rope.                     
  The Blake's works best when the hitch cord is the same diameter as the climb line.  Another factor is the Blake's is a single eye (attachment point to the harness) rather than two eyes as the V.T.  Two legs coming from the hitch share the load compared to one.

[X1]

  A  different "top" ( two crossed riding turns ) for the rat-tail stopper friction hitch.

[jimmyh]

If I'm correct, that hitch (which I like to call "Prohgrip"
in recognition of its earlier discoverer, Heinz Prohaska of
Austria --who'd published about it a decade prior to Jason
Blake's own discovery) is used essentially to support one
half of body weight; maybe that is one factor.  Another
might be the elasticity of your line (see below), which
in theory --maybe forces here aren't great enough--
could diminish the diameter of the hitched line so that
the knot would tighten to fit but when load was gone
the hitched line would swell back to a thicker diameter
(or try to, hence the tight hitch)?!

Ah, that's why you call it "prohgrip". I knew Blake wasn't the first to discover it, but I didn't know who was.


Yeah, that does sound like a plausible mechanism causing the tight hitch. I just figured that the elasticity in the radial direction wouldn't be as significant.

Brocky say's they are firmer, so that's gotta be it - combined with the diameter differences.

X1, what's the advantage of that top? The extra "no tension friction" helping the other turns take more load with less turns?

[X1]

   More friction per unit length ( that is what is attempted by the different, more dense pattern of the "over"/"under" crossings of the oblique riding turns at the "top" ) would force the hitch to be elongated and grip the line earlier and harder the very moment it will be pulled by the "bottom". However. I am not sure that this mechanism will be triggered each and every time, if the hitch is tied on a rather stiff materiall. I do not propose any climbing hitch here, of course, I am just mentioning an effect that I have seen in this friction hitch ( known as "rat-tail stopper"by seamen and "dog 'n tails" hitch by resque workers (1) ), when we tie it with two legs, which meet at the top in such a way, and not in a square knot.

1. http://cmru.org/rigging/knots/dog-n-tail.html