Using rock climbing ropes instead of the tree ropes!

[SimplyGreen]

Hey guys,

Have any of you considered using rock climbing ropes instead of using the tree ropes? I dont know how to explain it, properly but I think you guys get the idea.

I would imagine using rock climbing ropes would be a much stronger rope then using tree rope?

I think the highest I'll be going is like 15ft in the air, just to zap myself to something and not fall when I'm doing a fruit tree..

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i like smaller diameter dynamic mountain climbing lines for lighter rigging off of weaker supports to use the elasticity to buffer shock on the supports. Nice, light line to work with.

 

[SimplyGreen]

Yah, I thought so...

I mean rock climbing ropes I would imagine would be much stronger, greater flexiability..

Do you know of any good climbing ropes that I could use? It will be light duty ie) up to 10-15ft only..

 

[SteveBullman]

beal topgun is good stuff. i climbed on it for a year, its a 10.5mm line. you wont be able to use a friction hitch on it though cos it will burn the nylon sheeth too quick. use some sort of ascending/descending device.
i used a shunt with mine. also you must have a cambium saver. preferably with a pulley on it. the more friction you can eliminate when using rock ropes the better.

 

[NickfromWI]

Stronger? Not really. Rock climbing ropes aren't even rated for strength and it can sometimes be difficult to find the MBS (or ABS) of a rock climbing rope. Those ropes, as KC alluded to, are meant for shock absorbtion and the ability to catch a fall over and over.

I don't mean to be sarcastic, but I prefer to use rock ropes for the rocks, and tree ropes for the trees. Rarely do I see crossover.

love
nick

 

[fishhuntcutwood]

I'd have to agree with Nick. I'd rather be in a tree with a tree rope than a rock rope. Dymanic rock ropes stretch, and some stretch alot. Depending on how much rope you have in your system, and how it's routed, it's possible that you'd hit the ground before the rope took your full load, especially if you'r only up 15 feet. And as was mentioned earlier, rock ropes don't respond well to friction, not that any rope does, but enough friction will ruin a rock rope pretty quickly. Plus, you usually buy dynamic rope by the entire rope, and not by the foot. You'd probably have to buy at least 50 meters to get the short amount you want, and that could run you $100 easily.

Just my thoughts.

Take care all,
Jeff

 

[John Paul Sanborn]

The only rock rope I use is Bluewater II for SRT. It's a very low streach so on the end of a 200 ft hank I'm not bungee-ing around.

I've know guys to use rock rope in trees. I don't see the probelm with it for the sole proprietor, if they inspect thier gear daily. You can go down to REI or wherevr and buy it. On long hanks the "modulus of elasisity" would be counter productive.

The practice would not pass ANSI, because now the rope has to be certified by the OEM as made for tree use.

 

[Lumberjack]

I am for tree ropes in trees as well... There is a reason that they are referred to as tree ropes.

I use Samson's Blue Streak myself.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i just use fer rigging, to absorb dynamic loading and keep it off of the support.

 

[Ekka]

There are some reasons why arborist ropes are better.

In rock climbing, you use the rope as a fall security device, you climb by hanging on and if you slip the rope may save you.

The rope has a protective outer core and the strength is in the inner core. This protects your ropes from abrasion etc as you "climb around or rappel". The rope may be either static or dynamic, you choose according to your climbing environment. The rope is generally 10mm to 11mm in diameter.

Arborist rope on the other hand has it's strength on the outside, (some ropes have no inner core). And the reason why is that we want to see our defects. Fat lot of good it would be if you dropped a log on your rope and crushed half the fibres and couldn't see that damage.

The arborist rope is generally larger in diameter at 13mm because we use it in our hands all the time for climbing. We tend to climb the rope or hang on it whilst we are cutting. Also the rope is kinder to the trees than the harder rock climbing ropes.

I personally dislike rock climbing rope, it's too small in your hands and cuts into the limbs as well as your hands.

 

[Tree Machine]

Points well-taken Ekka.

I started out my career on rock climbing rope in the trees. That was because they were all I had, I was a noob, and I just didn't know any better.

After a couple years I moved onto 13 mm lines and never really warmed up to them; bulky, heavy, unaccepting of a lot of devices. Even after 8 years using 13 mm, still felt like I was running a marathon, dragging a small anchor.

Now the arborist industry has provided us with new, advanced hybrid 11 mm ropes that offer you the crossover versatility into the worlds of other aerial disciplines, and the use of their gear. 11 mm has a lot more to offer you in versatility, with less weight, and the ability to incorporate devices. These new 11 mm lines are known as semi-static and the newer ones have very little bounce.

I think New School tree climbing methods will revolve around the use of the 11 mm lines for climbing, though the friction hitch system, I think, does better on 13 mm. Ekka's point on our grippage of the rope by hand is valid, 13 mm giving a better diameter to bare-hand grab, but the use of grippy climbing gloves levels that playing field.

Personally, I will probably never go back to 13 mm ever again, not now that there's exceptional 11 mm lines designed for the tree trade. They're really nice.

If you truly want to climb on rock climbing rope, but want it to be an actual tree-climbing rope, get a hank of New England's Fly. Boing, boing.

 

[Burnham]

Climbing above the safe diameter to use as an anchor point in conifers requires a fully dynamic line for deployment of a self belaying system. That's gonna be a rock climbing rope. Ascender use on long ascents needs a fully static line. That's gonna be a caving/rappeling rope. In neither case is a tree climbing rope the right thing. So it depends on how you define tree climbing. If standard DbRT arborist climbing is it, then there is no use for any other type of rope. But if your scope is broader, so is the range of applicable rope types.

 

[knudeNoggin]

Yah, I thought so...
I mean rock climbing ropes I would imagine would be much stronger, greater flexiability..
Do you know of any good climbing ropes that I could use? It will be light duty ie) up to 10-15ft only..

WRONG on both counts, I think. RC (dynamic/elastic) ropes are certainly not stronger;
they aren't typically given strength ratings, as those are irrelevant to their purpose:
they are to absorb shock, and hence have peak-impact-force ratings.
They are typically about 5,000# in strength for 10.5mm dia., I guesstimate.

Static/low-elongation ropes are typically stronger (6-7,000# for that 10.5mm),
and the 12- & 16-strand arborist climbing ropes cover a range, depending on materials
--lighter ones using polypropylene will usually be weaker than those of pure polyester
& nylon. (But once co-polymers come into play, if ... , the lightness of being might
not see such strength differenes.)

Orrrr, you could say that they're all equally strong, in the sense that they will NOT
break (in expected usage). (In the spirit of "which is deadlier to a person, a stick of
dynamite or a hand grenade--how dead can one be?)

(There was just a silly thread about someone needing to know a strength figure
for RC ropes so to tell kids who ask; 'twould be better to inform the kids that it's
not about strength, per se.)

*knude*

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Some good points.

i too think the elasticity matters in our situations. If you are guarding against highest force in scenario, and there is dynamic movement; that will be the highest force, quite logically. For Burnham's purpose as example; he is not only saving his bod in a fall incident with the extra elasticity; but also would have less chance of violating the support too. Especially in DdRT support strategy. The more elastic line, would deliver much less dynamic force to the support, the support could be weaker and still usable, pulled from more leveraged angle etc.

That is why i like it some for rigging small stuff off even smaller stuff; with a lighter line to carry too. That would be harder to pretighten from ground, elasticity causing extra pulling distance etc. (as in Burnham's long upward climb example with static line)/ but easier to pre tighten by sweating in; by grabbing bigger purchase of line behind 'friction buffer' of limb support (doesn't work with pulley, as you can't trap line purchase as line reequalizes through freewheeling pulley after sweating) to get line tighter.

As the SWL of the line goes up/ less of the tensile percentage is loaded; then the elasticity return from the line goes down. So, the doubled rope in DdRT has less elasticity compared to same rope and load in SRT, for logically the doubled line could hold ~2x as much.

i think the polypropylene is also less heat worthy too our frictional rigging and climbing uses too. i think that is why when they take the color out of True Blue and use the polypropylene as hamburger helper to make ArborPlex it is weaker, and all those stiff broken fiberz stick out over time along it's length while the nylon and polyester kept werking. the nylon is the elastic componenet, the polyester the similar strength etc. static component to mix for different dynamic/static properties along with the chosen braid.

 

[glens]

Kenny, your writing style is particularly lucid today, keep it up!

 

[MasterBlaster]

Kenny, your writing style is particularly lucid today, keep it up!

Hey I'm understanding you, too! Izzz there a full moon out?

 

[JonnyHart]

Plus, MB, I never seen a rock climbing rope that could hold a taughtline. Not that I got alot of experience with them, but the few hanks we had were great for rigging or tagline. zero stretch.

 

[MasterBlaster]

Just more wraps...

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Just a momentary lapse of (t)reason guys; i'm sure this too shall pass!

Previous to the tautline; there was the tarbuck in the natural rope fiber age. Specifically dropped from use just for the way tarbuck messed up on synthetic kernmantle; tautline is very similar construction. Each a round turn grab on host line pulled from 1 end. The double round turn strategies that are pulled from both ends works lots better. Lines that carry load on inside, and the friction hitch grabs the unloaded covering to grip can be a problem for any of these strategies, but were really noted in the tautline's cousin the tarbuck; as it was dropped from service.