New nomenclature for Doubled rope climbing technique.

[CoreyTMorine]

DdRT and DbRT are horrible. They make it difficult to discuss climbing. Tree Machine suggested the alternative of MDRT (Moving Doubled Rope Technique) to replace DdRT because the ropes tail moves as you work, and SDRT (Stationary Doubled Rope Technique) to replace DbRT because the rope remains stationary as you climb.

This works much better, I for one can now visualize exactly what each acronym is referring to; whereas with the old system it always takes me a second to interpret the meaning.

Clear, concise communication is key to any successful discussion or instruction. I think this change would go along way towards clearing up some very muddy water. But it will require some work on the part of anyone who is interested. An established nomenclature is very difficult to change. A lot of people need to see this, and read through it, and make the decision to switch over.

A quick post to show your support would be great, a PM or Email to someone else would be even better. And someone really needs to go over to the buzz and bring this up. I’m a little scared because I don’t know anyone over there, if anybody wants to take on that responsibility please let me know.

The original discussion is here

Thanks for your time.

 

[moss]

One of the challenges for climbers like me is that we came up as rec climbers, never learned as arborist work climbers. So doubled rope footlock climbing is not something we typically use. We're not climbing on the clock so we often get off the ground DdRT and if we want to climb 1:1 usually go to SRT. So all that said... many rec climbers refer to dynamic double rope climbing as DRT and don't even think about secured footlock climbing.

So there's the lay of the land, you have a subgroup of rec climbers that find DRT to be perfectly good terminology for their main climbing technique and have no need to be more specific for doubled rope climbing.

But... the terminology problem is still there. I like what's proposed but have trouble with the word "moving" as in MDRT. Since "static" is such an important word in rope use it seems like its natural opposite "dynamic" shouldn't be thrown out.

Some options for consideration (taking "Moving" out of the equation):

DdRT = Doubled dynamic Rope Technique (no change in acronym)
DsRT = Doubled static Rope Technique

Or:

DDRT = Dynamic Doubled Rope Technique
SDRT = Static Doubled Rope Technique

-moss

 

[CoreyTMorine]

Treeco thanks for the help, I also think that this is a good idea.

Hey Moss, The only images I have of recreational tree climbing are those memories of memories from my youth, climbing trees in the woods behind our house. The whole world of modern recreational tree climbing is a complete unknown for me, thanks for the illumination.

Even though you don’t use DbRT / SDRT, surely there must be knowledge and some discussion thereof or perhaps not; but if the technique is considered at all by rec climbers then having a suitable means to discuss it will be beneficial

A change in this nomenclature would make life better for all of us; imagine a world where people could type just four letters and immediately convey, precisely and accurately, an entire scheme of doing things; a world where a 400 word explanation would not be required every time the letters DdRtDbRT were typed. Oh, how I long for that halcyon day, the enlightenment, HALLELUIAH!!!

Sorry, I get excited about the idea, its like sharpening a saw at night; the next day I can hardly wait to start cutting.

As for Static and Dynamic versus Stationary and Moving, the first two words are already taken. They are certainly great words, but to many people static rope is “low stretch” and dynamic is “high stretch” suitable for fall arrest. These definitions are very important to the vertical world, they need to remain insulated from other words. The danger is that someone reads “Dynamic Doubled Rope Technique” and believes that this system is OK for fall arrest. It is not, there is no mitigation of shock loading inherent in the rope configuration, it is important that people understand this.

The words Stationary and Moving are not sexy; they are not the sleek, sound-bite oriented phrases, so common in our modern vernacular. Rather they are quite old fashion, and quaint, perhaps simple. They bring us back to a simpler mind set, perhaps back to those glorious, sunny days, indescribably blue skies beckoning us on as we reach for the next limb in a tree in the woods behind our homes.

 

[moss]

I don't like trying to make technical tree climbing language overly consistent with other rope disciplines, IMHO there's only something to lose (useful words that convey effective meaning) and not enough to gain. I don't think we need to worry that an acronym is going to lead somebody to use a dynamic rock rope instead of a static arborist rope. People who use acronyms to communicate in critical situations need to have a strong underlying skill base and obviously know where thery are: in a tree, or on a cliff or in a high angle rescue situation on a bridge or building and use appropriate language for that discipline. I know that Tom Dunplap has expressed his concern about trying to get tree climbing language more in line with high angle discliplines, there is a double-edged sword there where we can end up losing day-to-day functional and unique language for our discipline. Anyone who works across disciplines (high angle rescue for instance) needs to be conversant in the unique languages of the various rope disciplines.

Just something to think about...
-moss

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

It seems to me that you need to throw out the old acronym completely and use a new set of acronyms.
If not, you end up with total confusion, and a need to first describe which set of acronyms you are using, which then defeats the purpose of using an acronym in the first place.
This would especially hold true if you were trying to create a set of acronyms that would cross several (or all) disciplines. This would first require experts in all the disciplines to come up with all the systems in use and cataloge them, and then to come up with a system to name them which would allow for new system yet to be invented.
Perhaps using numbers instead of saying single, double or triple, for example. Something along the lines of the difficulty rating for rock climbs.
You could have 3 sets of numbers/letters describing first the anchor and attachment, then describing the climbing rope and attachment, and a third set to describe the back up attachment.

 

[woodchux]

I would like to just use whats already established.
DRT= Dynamic Rope Technique.
SRT= Static or Single Rope Technique
as far as doubled rope technique i would vote to use
SRT2= single rope x 2

 

[beowulf343]

I don't think which acronyms are used really matters. I'd never heard of Ddrt or Dbrt until i joined this site yet i'd learned to climb Ddrt many years ago. We had a different name for it. The majority of the climbers i've worked with would not know what you were talking about if you told them you climbed Ddrt. But tell them that you footlock the tail of your rope and they know what you are talking about.


I'm not a ca so i don't know. But do questions about Ddrt and Dbrt come up on the tests for certification?


What ever you guys decide, i'll probably stick with Ddrt and Dbrt-TM came up with an excellent definition many months ago and i really don't have a problem between the two any more. If we switch now i'll have to take a minute and remember that Ddrt is such and such an acronym and Dbrt is such and such an acronym.

 

[Tree Machine]

Hey Dudes.

Please don't credit me with anything. It was just contributing amongst a group, as were we all.

Granted, there is confusion. DRT has conventionally been Double (or dual) Rope Technique, using two ropes. SRT has never been Static Rope Technique, only Single Rope Technique, conventional throughout all aerial disciplines. There is no static rope technique, nor a dynamic rope technique. I don't even like 'moving rope technique' because a rope is moving with your every motion.

SRT is OK. Everyone knows that and it's clear, conventional and time-tested.

Of the two doubled rope methods, one is a 2:1 system, the other a 1:1 system. The 1:1 doubled system is more closely related to SRT, identical in all respects, except it's a dual line instead of a single. The aerial world, in general, is an SRT world. The doubled rope techniques are pretty much an Arboriculture thing with the 1:1 doubled rope technique almost nonexistent anyway (as are personal aerial friction devices, in general).

The nomenclature is for Arborists to communicate with Arborists.

I would have to go with Mike Maas on this one and have a numerical delineation.

If you were given this list, could you describe how each works?

DRT
1:1 DbdRT
2:1 DbdRT
SRT

This is not a formal proposal, just a general asking of 'Does this make intuitive sense'?

For now, let's not consider things like climbing on two ropes, each one SRT or on two ropes, one a 1:1 doubled and the other a 2:1 doubled or a single and a 2:1 doubled or any variant combo thereof.

 

[CoreyTMorine]

Tree, good job clearing up the whole Double / Single vs Static; people seem to love the word static, why is that? Rhetorical question, let it be. Good job Tree, thanks for the work.

Mike and Moss,
Good points, but I think we will be better served by remaining within the initially established framework of this discussion: Which is to remove the confusion created by DdRT and DbRT, that’s it. I agree with Moss that we don’t need to incorporate the lore and syntax of the other vertical disciplines; this would surely lead to much bigger problems. If we were trying to catalog and define all rope climbing methodologies from all over the world I think Mike’s system would be a good starting point. However, that is a pretty big project, and not one that would show the return on investment of simply reworking 2 confusing, yet commonly used acronyms.

If you were given this list, could you describe how each works?

DRT
1:1 DbdRT
2:1 DbdRT
SRT

Sure; DRT = Double RT, 1:1 DRT = 1 foot push for 1 foot gain, 2:1 DRT = 2 foot push for 1 foot gain, and SRT = Single Rope Technique. But it took me a few minutes to write that, I considered several variations and whyfors. But I think that this system will be further abbreviated to just 1:1 and 2:1, which isn’t that bad really.

Sharp teeth and clean rope make for good days. I hope that our time spent here creates sharp words and clean definitions.

 

[moray]

... further abbreviated to just 1:1 and 2:1, which isn’t that bad really.

I'm glad this thread hasn't died, but it seems not too many people care about it.

I like 1:1 and 2:1. Nice and short and informative. 95% of the time one doesn't care to know any more than that. Rarely it might be necessary to further divide 1:1 into standard SRT or the doubled rope variant. Since SRT already exists, we could dispense with 1:1 and simply continue calling it SRT.

Without confusion, then, we have:
2:1
SRT
SRT on doubled rope.

 

[moss]

Just 2:1 might be too minimal.

I like DRT = doubled rope technique, then add the MA to be more specific:

DRT 1:1 = footlock (or hardware equivalents) doubled rope

DRT 2:1 = dynamic friction hitch climbing on doubled rope "or something like that"

SRT = Leave well enough alone or SRT 1:1 for sticklers

RADS = in a world all its own or SRT 3:1

NRT 1:1 = no rope technique or free climbing

FOT 1:1 = rapid descent or falling out of the tree!

Need an acronym for spurs and lanyard climbing, can't leave Clearance out of this.
-moss

 

[moray]

Just 2:1 might be too minimal.

DRT 1:1 = footlock (or hardware equivalents) doubled rope

DRT 2:1 = dynamic friction hitch climbing on doubled rope "or something like that"

SRT = Leave well enough alone or SRT 1:1 for sticklers
-moss

Sure is interesting how differently people see this. To me there are two main issues. The acronyms should be clearly different from each other to avoid confusion. In order to easily memorize them, or to see at a glance what they stand for, they should convey something about what they mean. Since people on this thread seem to be agreeing that these acronyms are for our own little world, and not intended to be used or understood by outsiders, that gives us an extra degree of freedom. The acronyms should reflect the way WE think about the rope techniques, not how an outsider might view it.

On this basis, 2:1 is not too minimal, though 2/1 might be easier to type.
DRT 2:1 and DRT 1:1, in my view, are straying from good usage because they are getting ponderous and they are entering the realm of explanation.
It would seem that the only time the number of ropes needs to be mentioned is in distinguishing the two forms of SRT. And only the one technique has any mechanical advantage, so we can get away with mentioning it there and only there. Keep 'em short, keep 'em different, and don't make 'em try to explain anything!

 

[CoreyTMorine]

Great input Moray! It’s tough to tackle a project like this precisely because people have other things to do, but I have faith, if we keep at it and find something better that we can agree on I think it will stick. And the point the 2/1 is easier to type than 2:1 is so true.

Moss, I laughed a lot reading your post! Thanks! Perhaps we could call spur climbing the XXX Method. I think that captures the outlaw nature of the technique.

 

[rmihalek]

I think part of the confusion comes from the use of the words "double" and "doubled." I agree with Moss that SRT is pretty a clear description of the process: that is, the climber ascends/descends on a single column of rope.

I'm not clear about the double versus doubled conundrum other than remembering that DdRT is the system I use and that's the one with the 2:1 MA.

I guess "double" is like SRT but the rope is not tied off up on a limb; both tails hang down together.

Maybe there could be:

SSRT: single static rope technique
DSRT: double static rope technique
DDRT: double dynamic rope technique

(This is with apologies to those who wanted to restrict the use of static and dynamic in the abbreviations.)

Peace,
Bob

 

[Tree Machine]

I think part of the confusion comes from the use of the words "double" and "doubled."

I'm not clear about the double versus doubled conundrum other than remembering that DdRT is the system I use and that's the one with the 2:1 MA.

I guess "double" is like SRT but the rope is not tied off up on a limb; both tails hang down together.

Double means using two ropes. 'Doubled' means using one rope, it goes up, over the tie-in point and back down. You use both sides of the rope, hence, doubled.

The 1:1 doubled, both ends of the rope are on the ground, and stay there and you ascend and descend on those two sides, no motion of the rope at the tie-in point. On your 2:1 DdRT, ONE side stays on the ground, the other attaches to your saddle, the rope moves at the tie-in point every time you go up or down.

Each has it's own advantages and limitations.

 

[rmihalek]

TM, If I read what you said correctly, Double Rope Technique seems to consist of two SRT set-ups. Perhaps with an ascender clipped to each rope? If this is the case, I wonder what the advantage of Double Rope Technique is since the time required to set up the two ropes is twice that of SRT.

Once I used two Doubled Rope Technique set-ups (DdRT, 2:1MA), one in each tree to gain access to the canopy of a smaller tree in between the two that needed some dead wood removal. It was pretty cool to be hanging out there in between the two trees about 55 feet up and then lower myself down into the crown of the smaller tree and be able to shift around right and left to gain access to the dead wood.

 

[moss]

TM, If I read what you said correctly, Double Rope Technique seems to consist of two SRT set-ups. Perhaps with an ascender clipped to each rope? If this is the case, I wonder what the advantage of Double Rope Technique is since the time required to set up the two ropes is twice that of SRT.

Oops, getting a little confused here, double rope technique is an artifact from the rock/alpine world. I think TM was just trying to clarify that arborists refer to doubled rope technique and rarely if ever talk about or use double rope technique. The whole terminology problem is how we can do a good job of simply distinguishing between the 2 different doubled rope arborist climbing techniques

Once I used two Doubled Rope Technique set-ups (DdRT, 2:1MA), one in each tree to gain access to the canopy of a smaller tree in between the two that needed some dead wood removal. It was pretty cool to be hanging out there in between the two trees about 55 feet up and then lower myself down into the crown of the smaller tree and be able to shift around right and left to gain access to the dead wood.

What you describe is called double crotching. In rec climbing it is standard practice to climb on both ends of the same rope or double crotch to traverse from one tree to the other or to move horizontally between branches in the same tree. You could also use two ropes to do the same thing. Most work climbers don't double crotch that much to get around the tree, they're too good at climbing to bother. For an arborist double crotching is more likely done when there is doubt about the quality of the TIP or for work positioning.

It is definitely fun to hang out in space between two trees.
-moss

 

[rmihalek]

Maybe there could be:

SSRT: single static rope technique
DSRT: double static rope technique
DDRT: double dynamic rope technique

So, from my previous post, all we'd need to do then would be to change the word 'double' to 'doubled.'

The abbreviations would then be:

SSRT: single static rope technique (1:1 MA)
DSRT: doubled static rope technique (1:1 MA)
DDRT: doubled dynamic rope technique (2:1 MA)

 

[Tree Machine]

TM, If I read what you said correctly, Double Rope Technique seems to consist of two SRT set-ups. Perhaps with an ascender clipped to each rope? If this is the case, I wonder what the advantage of Double Rope Technique is since the time required to set up the two ropes is twice that of SRT.

This is a really great question here. Bob is flushing out a really critical, key concept in arbo rope work. This is outside the nomenclature conversation, but it dictates the nomenclature nonetheless.

For instance, let's talk technical tree climbing, and any nomenclature references will be inside (parenthesis).

Bob is going up to do a cabeling job, dual-spar ash, the tree is 40" DBH and bifurcates at 32 ft. The trunk is in visibly good shape, the issue is the tree is better than a hundred feet tall. New homes have been built in the area, nice ones; your clients' house is right under it and if either of the two leads failed, at least two houses to either side would get whacked. Children live in these homes..... trees are scary.....

You meet them, severel neighbors grouped. Interested in the cost of the matter. They say, "So Bob Mihalek, they tell us you climb like a freegin animal, you're the man to take this tree down." Bob say, "The tree appears healthy and majestic, stout and taaaalllllllll. You've all talked and have decided to remove the tree..... because.....???????"

"Bob, we're just afraid it will split in a storm and it could damage, or hurt someone." Bob looks up. "I understand. Your family and homes need to be protected."

"Taking the tree down will be four thousand dollars, but if you will permit me to offer another possible option, one that will preserve the tree and let it continue to benefit the area."

"Talk on, Treeman,"

"It's a two-stage process. First, we install a dual-cable sytem that protects the tree from splitting, that's the here and now. Then in January, we do a complete crown reduction, making all the overextended parts, more stormproof by selective limb removals and extensive tip-pruning, as well as a full deadwooding. We totally set the tree up for the future."

"And how much is this going to cost?"

Just about half of that four thousand. Twenty-one hundred, that's today's cabeling work AND the Winter crown reduction, and our legendary cleanup. You only need to pay for the cabeling part today."

"And that's how much?"

"Seven hundred today, and twelve hundred in January."

"And you can do the cabeling today?"

"Yup."

"How do I pay you, I've gotta go, but we want you to go ahead and do the work."

"Cut me a check now. You have my promise the work will be done and done in excellence, and cleaned up after ourselves."

"Who do I make the check out to?"

"Make it out to my wife, it's going there anyways. Ha, ha, no. Make it out to Bob Mihalek. Thank You."






"Oh Mr BigShot......"

 

[Tree Machine]

So Bob drains the first shot, about 65 feet up, big, gaping fork, ya shoulda been able to nail that straight off the reel anyway, so quit pattiin yourself on the back and git to work. You bring your 11 mm Velocity out, unclip the weight bag, clip the rope's eye to the shot line and begin pulling shotline, but actually carefully at the same time flaking the line so that the second shot will deploy without any hangup. You don't even watch the rope rise, just fast hands and watching your flaking, in under thirty seconds you have both ends of the climbing rope on the ground. You were careful not to tangle the climbing rope with the shot line. You also cleaned the general area of all sticks before the ground-flaking.

It's time for the second shot, unclip from the line you just set, clip onto the 12 ounce shotbag. You're looking at a crotch at 70-feet up. Hoooo Doggy!. I LOVE this job. You drop the shotbag into the newly designed BigShot, pull back, steady, man, this New BigShot, it felt great on that last Ace...." You pull back further. "I still can't believe I get paid to do this." Pull back, the new rubber tubing on the pull-handle, nice improvement Tobe, full draw, swishsshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh......it's on........"YES! WOoHoooOoooooo! Dang, I wish there was someone here to see that!"

Bob thinks to himself, The new BigShot has proven itself, hands-down for me. I should write Tobe a letter, let him know that the BigShot is largely improved, not that the Mach 1 version wasn't great, it was, it got a solid A as a piece of tree gear. The Mach 2, though, gets an A+.

Maybe I'll shamelessy promote the new BigShot, weave it into a thread in the public forum, acknowlege Tobe Sherrill for another great contribution to our field of Arboriculture. I can subliminally inflect a personal Thank You, between the lines....

___________________________
Tobe Rocks, Thanks for
the improved BigShot.
___________________________

So you pull out your second climbing rope, you've got a green fly, and a Blaze and you're not sure the Blaze will be long enough. OK, Fly it is, Fly and Velocity to help me cable this tree.