I made a video showcasing the various components. A link to it is in this thread, although I think I botched embedding the video into the post. https://www.hammockforums.net/forum/...stem-(54-grams)
No way, your 210lb backside is gonna sleep like a baby!
Yes, you'll surely slip or fall at some point during the night!
I dunno, I think you're crazy but can't decide if it'll be secure!
I made a video showcasing the various components. A link to it is in this thread, although I think I botched embedding the video into the post. https://www.hammockforums.net/forum/...stem-(54-grams)
Even though I'm not a fan of UCRs, I think there are a lot of great ideas here. Ideas that carry over to other systems which makes it all the better.
I agree completely about not using the Brummel-like pass-throughs on any version of a CL. One or two hand stitches where the buries begin is plenty. No other stitching will contribute to strength. I don't know anyone who advocates stitching the tapered end of the bury. Another option is a piece of heat-shrink tubing at the "joint" but that adds a fraction of a gram to each CL!
I like the total modularity for being able to shorten it and pack the suspension separately. I'd think about reversing the male-female connections so that there would be the CLs with the noose (your "infinity") on the hammock. Then alternate suspensions (e.g. a Whoopie Hook) could hook up at the noose.
Can't see any point in color-coding (head-foot) anything other than the components that are "permanently" attached to the hammock itself. These mark the end of the hammock for hanging and, as far as I can tell, all of the other components are the same at either end.
All in all, I think you're well on the way.
Last edited by TominMN; 11-23-2015 at 19:38.
When setting grapplers hitch. Be sure the shrinkable button loop is as small as possible. The easiest way is to put button around tree strap and into button loop. Then pull hard on button loop and tree strap at the same time. This will shrink the button loop down to its smallest possible size. Then allow grapplers hitch to extend while the loop stays small. That way the button can't get back through. If you fail to do this then you will be hanging on an elongated button loop that is large enough to let the button slip back through. Good luck, I show this in YouTube video Phantom Grappler Suspension.
Phantom Grappler: yup, I saw your video showing proper technique. I even link to it in the YouTube video description.
The buries complicate the issue a little bit, as they cause a little bit of a snag where the rope changes diameter, when the hitch is extending back out. I think if I had made the buries more precisely, so that they meet and the tapers overlap then the line would be constant diameter and would not snag. This is a very minor issue though. Just make sure that you don't get into the hammock if the button loop isn't against the button knot (if it's only expanded until it reaches the beginning of the bury.)
TominMN, the color coding can be useful because I intend to keep all the suspension components connected most of the time, when not wet or covered in sap. This makes it faster to figure out head and foot end because the tree straps are the ends poking out. If the suspension is always separate than the hammock then there is no point in color coding.
As for your suggestion about swapping sides so that whoopy hooks can connect to the hammock, it's a good suggestion. Right now you could easily connect a whoopy hook to the button knot CL, but I think having the infinity loop on the hammock would connect more cleanly to a hook.
As for the lock-stitching, you're right, very little is needed. Also this should be done more loosely and not with a sewing machine. However, I used very weak cotton thread which should break well before it damages the amsteel. The dynaglide is not yet lock stitched at all.
The problem with the brummel for a CL is either it is not locked/locking, so why bother, or if it is locked (the "grog loop" way) the brummel carries the entire load. There is no way of creating a locked brummel for a CL such that the buries carry the load. It is topologically impossible.
As I said before, I agree completely about skipping the Brummel-like pass-throughs because they serve no purpose with the typical CL. In a spliced eye loop, all the locked Brummel does is prevent the bury from working its way out, the same thing a locking stitch does. The locked Brummel is pretty weak and a spliced eye loop would be a recipe for failure without the bury.
I have this gut feeling that it actually is possible to do a locked Brummel with a CL. I'm thinking about the ability to do a locked Brummel on an eye splice when there is only access to the bitter end. Something tell me that with the right combination of inversions of the cord that it could be done. The thing is that, if it is indeed even possible, it would not be practical with the result being no stronger than a lock stitch or a bit of heat shrink. In fact, it would undoubtedly be weaker and extremely difficult to do.
I agree completely that using the typical locked Brummel and reversing the buries is probably the worst option.
It can be mathematically proven, I believe. I Have some acquaintances who specialize in the mathematical field of knot theory, I'll ask them to confirm.
Bookmarks