Derogatory comment by Derek:
Certainly it was not important enough to justify Mark backing himself into a hole and throwing out invective to cover his embarrassment.
This type of comment is an example of a fertile imagination actuated by malice.
The real embarrassment ought to lie with Derek - for failing to read English properly.
I assume that Derek speaks and reads English as a
first language - and if this is true - it only adds to the level of puzzlement over his inability to read properly.
I never attached the word 'direction' to injection of force - instead; merely describing a physical design where the force generating machine is installed
on one side.
Derogatory comment by Derek:
and I doubt that Mark is of a mind to swallow his pride and come and play ball,
This type of comment is another example of a fertile imagination actuated by malice.
The person who should be 'swallowing his pride' is Derek - for failing to properly read and understand his native language (English?) - and to reach false conclusions based on a false premise.
The concept I had advanced being; 'injection of force' - was
directionless. It was simply to describe a physical design where a force generating machine was installed on one side of the test rig. This was to distinguish it from a design where you have two (2) force generating machines - one at each end - both 'injecting' force
simultaneously.
And further to that, I made no comment about a dual force generating machine setup (ie each one pulling at each end simultaneously) being 'bad' or 'no good' - merely hoping to encourage repeat testers to use a similar test rig setup to mine - so as to remove
potential for bias in the tests results (compared to mine).
I had surmised that as force is 'injected' into the test rig - the knot begins to respond according to its geometry. Different rope segments will move at different rates within the knot core. I also surmise that there could be millisecond delays in the response of the knot to load - and that maybe end-point to end-point transmission of force is not instantaneous or precisely equal on account or ratcheting of the knot segments and heat buildup and heat loss by direct radiation and by convection. In other words, it seems possible that some energy pumped into the system is converted to heat and possibly vibration. I don't have all of the answers and I doubt anyone else does either - all I can do is report what I observe.
One way to measure potential losses is to use two (2) load cells - one installed at each end. The load cells would have to be very accurately calibrated and poll at 50hz - with data captured in real time on a laptop. If there is disagreement between the load cells and in millisecond delays - even by the tiniest amount - that would point to something worth following up on with a battery of further tests. I would say that this sort of real-time precision measurement would be beyond the capability of the hobbyist/enthusiast tester.
...
I have noticed that the people who make stuff up and seem willing to sling insults are also the same people who spend more time slinging insults than doing practical testing and publishing their results for others to see.
I also note that it is rare for a knot tester to go into any fine detail about their test rig and to report on observations about which side their knots jammed or broke on. Its simply never reported.
And yet, if you do go the extra mile and report these observations - you risk drawing negative attention for doing so.
I can understand why many on this forum choose to remain silent and not bother to report on their own tests..I mean, why bother when you have people who make stuff up, sling insults and construct meanings from their own imagination...?
It all seems not worth the effort.