The Backhand Hitch Tested In A Real Application

[blgentry]

A couple of days ago, after the hurricane, we went to my dad's hunting property to clear some trees that had fallen across the road.  The last tree we worked on was very strange.  The tree was right beside the road and it had broken off about 10 feet from the ground and the broken part fell straight across the road, extending well into the brush beyond.  It was still joined at the break point 10 feet up and was almost touching the ground at the opposite edge of the road.

After getting the low part cut right at the far edge of the road, we decided to drag it from where it rested and hopefully break it loose from the break point 10 feet up the tree.

We had a boating rope that was at least 1" (diameter) of some kind of soft woven fiber.  Probably nylon or whatever synthetic is used in boating most often.  One end had a sewn loop that we hooked to the trailer hitch on the jeep.  The other bare end I tied to the tree about a foot from the end.

I used a normal backhand hitch and left just a little bit of the tag end past the tie point.  Maybe 3 inches?

I had no idea how heavy this tree was.  Probably 1200 pounds or so.  I also didn't realize that the just sawn end was stuck in the dirt a bit.

Dad hit the gas on the jeep and the rope pulled VERY taught.  I watched the backhand hitch quickly expand out at least 6 or 8 inches and then the turns pulled back somewhat tightly with the tag end slipping back near the turns.  I was sure it was going to pull loose and require me to tie it better the second time.  But to my amazement, it tightened up just fine and the rope remained guitar string tight as the jeep's back wheels spun in the dirt.

We repositioned the jeep for a better angle.  Then, using a very high tech boot, and an even more high tech hammer, we dug some of the dirt away from the sawn end of the tree. 

After hooking the rope around the trailer hitch again, the jeep pulled the rope tight.  This time the tree moved.  It came free quickly, aligned itself with the Jeep's axis of travel, and then ripped loose from the still standing main body of the tree.  Dad drug it another 100 feet trying to position the tree at the edge of the road, so other trucks could get by it.

I wondered how hard it was going to be to untie the hitch.  After all, we probably just tested the break strength of this rope.  At one point I thought it was going to snap, but luckily it held.  So I went to untie it and found the last turn pretty tight.  But just a bit of wiggling for about 10 seconds and it was free.  The second turn easily came out as well and I had the rope totally loose.

Dad asked me to try to move the tree further to the side of the road, but it was WAY too heavy, especially in the dirt.  I couldn't even get it to start to roll using my legs and feet.  He, or someone else, will probably move it with a big lever or something at some point.

I am quite impressed with the backhand hitch.  I use it for nearly all of my hitching tasks.  This is the first time I've done any real load on one and I am pleased.

Brian.

[JohnC]

Good story. I'll have to look that hitch up - I'm not familiar with it.

[blgentry]

Here's a pretty decent video on the backhand hitch:

https://youtu.be/IQDEns_AiP0?si=cn9NUTDzPbShI_TO

He finishes the knot with a "clove hitch" (what he says), which I think is odd.  I finish it like this person does:

https://youtu.be/M4ktpEtz_5c?si=7yXeECA_20kLY8Nc&t=295

I'm not sure if there's much of a difference other than visual.  While I really like knots, I don't claim very much expertise.

Brian.

[Kost_Greg]

Here's a pretty decent video on the backhand hitch:

https://youtu.be/IQDEns_AiP0?si=cn9NUTDzPbShI_TO

He finishes the knot with a "clove hitch" (what he says), which I think is odd.  I finish it like this person does:

https://youtu.be/M4ktpEtz_5c?si=7yXeECA_20kLY8Nc&t=295

I'm not sure if there's much of a difference other than visual.  While I really like knots, I don't claim very much expertise.

Brian.

I think that in both cases (TX Tool Crib, knotting knots), the exact same knot (clove hitch=two half hitches) is used at the second stage as the munter hitch finishing knot.

You might also want to stabilise the munter hitch with some other finishing knot of your own choice, such as a girth hitch, or a barrel knot, or even a constrictor, all tied on/around the standing part of the rope.

As a matter of fact, we call it " the clove hitch", when it is tied around an object(spar, pole), but if it is formed around the SP, then the term "buntline" emerges.

Therefore, one might claim that the backhand hitch is a combo of a genuine munter hitch with a noose- hitch like the buntline.

[certainlysyrup]

As a matter of fact, we call it " the clove hitch", when it is tied around an object(spar, pole), but if it is formed around the SP, then the term "buntline" emerges.
Therefore, one might claim that the backhand hitch is a combo of a genuine munter hitch with a noose- hitch like the buntline.

This is precisely how I felt tying it. I think I really like this little knot, and might have to stop using a slipped buntline for just about every hitch I tie, since it does bind up unpleasantly under heavy loads occasionally. For security, I think I'd tie the second hitch toward the loop (rather than away), unless there's a compelling reason not to do that. I'll have to go out front and drag a tree around the yard with the Jeep to test it.

Picture of it tied very loosely:

[Kost_Greg]

Nice photo certainlysyrup, perhaps i would look for a bit more visibility to the detail of the buntline part.

Moreover, if i assume that you have access to your pole (from the top side i guess), you could have formed the buntline hitch in your hands first, then at a second instance, turned the upper part of your eye to a munter configuration, in TIB fashion, and finally pass the two turns of the munter through your host object.

It is essential, that the crossing knot part of the munter hitch, should always be formed as a direct continuation of the SP, exactly as you show it, in order to absorb most of the load, and the simple turn of the munter, should be formed as the returning structure direct continuation, which completes the knot with the clove part.

This also stands for some munter based bowlines that i have tested.

I'm thinking the backhand hitch as a good option to secure a boat to a ring-like, anchor point, in order to avoid the constant rubbing/friction, between the rope and the metal part of the ring that might lead to rope fraying and damage in stormy weather conditions, compared to a fixed loop (bowline) approach.

However, if the clove is considered to be a tough component at extreme loadings,  in terms of jam resistance, even when formed at a stage where less tension is expected, one might always finish the second part of the knot with just a simple bowline.

[KC]

Backhand Turn is unsung hero.
1 of 3 very common knot bases of 3x arc180 crossings(another ternary, always a binary with a non):
crossing-non:RT, crossing on host/off SPart, crossing off host on SPart that make up many knots.
In all these Mr. Ashley finds 'double bearing' geometry on host, but only need a single pass for that w/Backhand is noted a few times.
.
Typically opposing HHs for more of a Cow fini, are easier untie, but shouldn't be a problem here tho.
>>Cow to me is yet another Backhand Turn base type, but with both legs thru; still can single pass for double bearing/test as part of this fam
>>Girth as same, both legs pulled, but usually not precisely evenly, especially if any angle
>>Choke of round loop is same, only self adjusting to insure both legs pulled evenly
To me Buntline takes the 'outie' form of Clove/2 continuous HHs and makes 'innie', more secure, and easier to seize
>>As a standard for ease of untie i prefer the simple reverse HHs of Cow/outie , or Lobster Buoy form/innie
>>the ease of untie is not a worry here after Backhand Turn pre-fix , but to the focus of doing and looking at things the same and getting more fluent ballet of smooth motions from all the practice etc. this can be the way to go.
.
Mr. Asley would call these 'loose hitches' as final nip/finish of force flow is around SPart/not host.
.
If load backwards/wrong end; the lacing will accommodate and reverse to 'correct'
>>but this is the more deformed/weaker leg it switches to
>>unless can seize/block against reverse to use the less deformed leg/if tweaking strength/efficiency.
To my eye, that is what Dan Lehman's really quick release 'Tumble Hitch' is partially about.
A reverse pulled Backhand Turn, seized against inversion

It does take a turn around the now newer SPart it can maintain, but this Turn around SPart is very nominal force and so not deforming SPart as much as the normal end used for Backhand.  It pops off cleanly, can only lower thru after remove both slips and allow inversion.
.
Backhand Turn fair for boat tie, but has a weak/open side to me and with waves and rising tides can get all angles of tests.  Would prefer to guard that exit with as like another Backhand Turn as if to double guard SPart travel vertically each direction against tides and then single guard to each horizontal side as pre-fix to lock off.  Kinda makes a ringed port swell around SPart; double HHs as common on SPart fini.  Loaded ropes to me are just another material architecture.  But, the material is so easy to rebuild on the fly(no heating, carving, drilling, grinding etc. to make/'machine' a ropePart) and can be the absolute minimal needed for the work chain. Tie off to round host is extremely best.
.
Length, distance is free expression/travel; force is simply the inverse/reciprocal of resisted distance/the non of free travel; so formulas apply to both distance and force as reciprocals of each other; so equally. 
For as my buddy would always say "they are exactly the same, but different!".
.

[Dan_Lehman]

Backhand Turn fair for boat tie, but has a weak/open side to me
and with waves and rising tides can get all angles of tests.
Would prefer to guard that exit with as like another Backhand Turn
as if to double guard SPart travel vertically each direction against tides
and then single guard to each horizontal side as pre-fix to lock off.nt!".

With a complementary backhand hitch, the bearing/turn
of the initial one can be pulled back so to leave the S.Part
coming in nearly directly at a tangent to the pile,
and then the additional wrapping around that pile
gives friction against rotation of the knot.
(I think that this is what you're pointing to?!)

--dl*
====

[JohnC]

I've had a chance to familiarize myself with this hitch now, and I like it a lot.

It's particularly suited to the application described in the original post: i.e. a length-wise pull. If the log (or whatever) is not tracking straight, or the stress on the construction is too great, you have the additional option of adding a half hitch closer to the end.

It does have one weakness in my eyes if used as a normal hitch with a perpendicular pull: say tethering an animal; and that is that at the point that the standing part exits the loop there could be a lot of friction - one might say a sawing action - if loaded and unloaded repeatedly. And this might damage a good rope. Therefore I'd probably stick with an anchor bend or similar for that scenario.

But that's a minor quibble. The backhand hitch is definitely a winner.

Even though I don't have a 4WD jeep, I'll keep some rope in the back of my Reliant Robin in case of fallen trees, since I'll know now exactly what knot to use.

[KC]

Would say yes must use pre-fix of HH/or other for lengthwise pull, as the 90degree turn with single grip on host, puts the pull in 1 dimension/leg of 90 and the grab on spar in another dimension/leg of 90.  The arraignment may try to even slant/teardrop some on host trying to get linearity more towards the pull axis/dimension.  tinyurl.com/abok-chap21 shows that such single arc/bearing around host all pictured as right angle.  tinyurl.com/abok-chap22 immediately states that previous should be for rightangle pulls only, and any lengthwise like this would get (predominately)a HH pre-fix from singe leg pulls etc.  (could go tresse-ish of opposing grips for dual leg pulls as option).
.
Adding the pre-fix HH gives more usable architecture for system to capitalize on, against different angles even dimension of pull.  Can be still used at right angle, or the usual pull or even backwards to cross over own architecture and nip enough to pull , with more of an Awning/Midshipman's type strategy.  It simply has now enough material and positioning to capitalize to support against more angles of pull than it could before.
.
If just choke across and pull 90 degrees to end, SPart is delivering a pull across.
HH pre-fix the force grabs 2 spread points , the linear force i think continues more in linear line to 2nd HH ring than full around the 1st HH ring SPart side.  Like a crossed wire and electric force taking the shorter path to target.  The 2 rings grab the 2 spar spread points and that itself as pulled makes a more linear with an actual hunk of that spar/rest follow.  This pull is now on same directional axis as the load reaction, cleanly in '1 Dimension'.  i've dragged logs etc. for decades like this, it is real evident w/o HH and large load off balanced to side/not telephone pole profile.  Some branches when dragged w/o HH pre-fix can jump around behind truck side to side like dragging a chokered wildcat by neck.  Slip that HH on the 'nose' more purrs as kitten, polite and obedient.  That is just exaggeration to viewable proportions i think; of what is going on all the time, even with lesser multipliers.  Internally, not as clean a mechanic, even if does pull nice some.
.
How i envision the rope forces linear skipping more across 1st grab ring of HH and continuing the line, as like an electric force taking a shortcut to target as presented. 
A> would be the expected force path as eye relates, just following path of rope/wire.
B> would be the skipping  force path as shortcut to end equal/opposite as with electric type force in conducting wire device(as like extended to physical force in 'conducting' rope device), favoring maintaining the linear path as can. :

.
Another form i see close or as Backhand dna is Lesson#1663 Top Nip HH, after opening the right angle chapter with the #1662 HH showing skull warning.
>>if #1663 gets in the door as a Backhand, the right angle HH isn't too far behind, untucked and pulled opposing from input/SPart have Backhand.

Also i try to make a distinction between Backhand Turn vs. w/o last turn as just Backhand, as terminating/non continuous  HHs form are close to i think.
(similarly think RT w/o last turn is just a Round, and Crossed Turn/before Clove final tuck w/o last turn as just Crossed, takes a final Turn after the base mechanic to finish same direction as input SPart).  (chart link).



Sorry did not see this earlier:

With a complementary backhand hitch, the bearing/turn
of the initial one can be pulled back so to leave the S.Part
coming in nearly directly at a tangent to the pile,
and then the additional wrapping around that pile
gives friction against rotation of the knot.
(I think that this is what you're pointing to?!)

--dl*
====

Yes, i think we say the same thing..  Like Backhand around post has SPart w/collar from either single side, that forms a sideways U, and 'guards the castle'; but as single Backhand 'guarding walls' are from only 3 sides tho, leaving the side initiates from open as if from attack.  An opposing collar around SPart now 'defends' horiz axis 1x each direction w/wall against drift angles, and 2x defends each direction on  vert axis against changing tide and wave angles.  To me giving a more swelled/belled grommet  appearance, with yes the SPart serving out proudly as star in center ring, as if from ship port out.  Have seen doubled too, but thinks that smacks more towards Mr. Ashley's "second tablespoonful of castor oil"/as overly redundant.
.
With the one sided Backhand solution, can get more rotational effect i think, even tho w/Backhand structure the reverse is noted as a counter-torque, easier untie etc. that Cow inherits w/off host crossing compared to Clove's on host crossing.  So sits even more purely balanced, and has restrictive lock displacing against forces from either horizontal direction now, feeding out of this full circle grommet/port kinda full belled construction i most remember, as it wanted to show how most bombpruf it seemed.