Author |
|
26-Apr-2012 5:48:21 PM
|
No "look at me" intended - sorry if it came across that way.
I've been keen to get into this stuff for a while and some work has 'enabled' the process to get up.
We'll be trying to get valid and interesting stuff out in the public domain. The focus will be on results - interpretation will generally be left to readers - we are in no position to shout out in public that brand xyz is better that brand abc based on these tests...
If you have a background in rope stuff and a bit of physics, or even just some cool theory around particular aspects of roping that you've never been able to test then please swing by. We're also thinking about having regular-ish open nights for people to come along and try their own ideas out.
Richard
|
26-Apr-2012 5:49:00 PM
|
On 26/04/2012 Olbert wrote:
>Fair enough...I guess I jumped the gun. I thought it was a "look at me
>I've done the same as above" rather than a "I've got some cool stuff, I'm
>doing some cool tests and this is an example of what it can do".
Understatement of the year
|
27-Apr-2012 7:41:14 AM
|
On 26/04/2012 patto wrote:
>Are you sure? Alpine butterfly is supposed to be used as a knot on a
>bight. I've never heard of it being used as a terminating knot.
True, although the fact that they only tested terminating knots isn't particularly relevant, since the test itself (cross-loading the bight) isn't a very realistic situation for a terminating knot to get into. It also doesn't happen to be a realistic situation for a "man in the middle" knot like the Alpine Butterfly to get into either...
>Furthermore given its construction I would have thought that it would roll VERY easily.
If they'd tested it we wouldn't need to guess, would we?
|