HR shackles can explode

[Training Wheels]

Why not just use low friction rings?

[Matt Johnson]

Originally Posted by Training Wheels

Why not just use low friction rings?

Perfect application for a low friction ring.... high load, but low travel when loaded. And less to bang against your head if flogging.

Matt

[fxykty]

Colligo has their Static Lashing Blocks (what is the difference between ‘standard’ and ‘enhanced’? No mention on their website) that are exactly that. Looks like the cheapest and lightest and lowest profile solution.

Colligo also has Stackers, a more block-like design but still relying on slippery rope.

Will the lashing or standing part eye spliced through the middle and provides the slide stand up to glazing and heat build up?

[Matt Johnson]

Originally Posted by fxykty

Colligo has their Static Lashing Blocks (what is the difference between ‘standard’ and ‘enhanced’? No mention on their website) that are exactly that. Looks like the cheapest and lightest and lowest profile solution.

Colligo also has Stackers, a more block-like design but still relying on slippery rope.

Will the lashing or standing part eye spliced through the middle and provides the slide stand up to glazing and heat build up?

How are your running backs set-up? 2:1? If so- and you're shopping for a block that goes on the end of the runner- wouldn't it be cheaper to go for a dyneema runner now and splice in a cheap low friction ring without any shackles of other metal fittings? Seems you'd about break even vs buying new blocks for your stainless runners that you want to replace anyway.

Matt

[Training Wheels]

I had Harken blocks on my runners, switched to low friction rings. Lighter. Stronger. No maintenance.

[fxykty]

Originally Posted by Training Wheels

I had Harken blocks on my runners, switched to low friction rings. Lighter. Stronger. No maintenance.

Photo please. Do you use covered line?

I’ve got a 2:1 purchase that I need to maintain and the line will have to have a cover to hold in the clutch. Could remove the cover for just the portion that will come under load for the last 10cm of movement to full tension.

[Training Wheels]

Will send pics tomorrow. Mine are also 2:1.

[Training Wheels]

[ATTACH]203055

[ATTACH]203056

[Breaking Waves]

Textile runners are nice - lighter, softer on sail and rig, and just nicer to use all around.

I’m a bit surprised the Outrider had wire. I was using textile back in the 90’s.

Bare Dyneema is going to loose like (very very roughly) 50% of its strength to UV, so make sure you compensate for that when you match to the current system strength.

Low friction rings are great for 2:1. I did a thread here on testing various methods for “capturing” the ring in Dyneema which you might look up if you are interested - but the tapered whipping was best for this application - requires just a touch of marlinspike skill - and just simply doing a tight eye splice was not too bad and required essential no particular skills. I have typically used 3:1 runners/checks and that is a bit messier with rings.

[s/v Jedi]

I don’t like the setup in the picture above. The runner tail makes a 180 degree turn through a non-rotating low friction ring.

How this should be done is the other way around: the runner sliced through the ring with a little piece of plastic in the loop lashed just above the ring to keep the loop open. Now you created a block with the ring being the sheave turning on a Dyneema shaft. Let me find a picture...

[fxykty]

Colligo has a solution with their Enhanced Static Blocks. These provide a much bigger radius than standard LFRs. They can be set up as per this picture. They can also be set up with a becket.



I spoke with a Colligo tech this morning and he validated that this is a good solution for high load low travel use case like a running backstay purchase. Note that he didn’t support using their standard blocks - apparently they are quite a bit weaker than the enhanced blocks.

I’ve ordered four of the enhanced blocks and will post once I’ve completed it.

Basically we can replicate the expensive Ino-Rope blocks with a much less expensive DIY option. Awesome. Go the forum!

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by fxykty

Colligo has a solution with their Enhanced Static Blocks. These provide a much bigger radius than standard LFRs. They can be set up as per this picture. They can also be set up with a becket.

Attachment 203064

I spoke with a Colligo tech this morning and he validated that this is a good solution for high load low travel use case like a running backstay purchase. Note that he didn’t support using their standard blocks - apparently they are quite a bit weaker than the enhanced blocks.

I’ve ordered four of the enhanced blocks and will post once I’ve completed it.

Basically we can replicate the expensive Ino-Rope blocks with a much less expensive DIY option. Awesome. Go the forum!

I think that picture is the standard static block... the enhanced has holes much like the Karver blocks for a lashing that keeps the line from coming off the “sheave”.
The negative is that this is a static block. The good is that you can make it turn by adding a little block like in the picture I posted. I will be making these myself and post about it.

[Matt Johnson]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

I think that picture is the standard static block... the enhanced has holes much like the Karver blocks for a lashing that keeps the line from coming off the “sheave”.
The negative is that this is a static block. The good is that you can make it turn by adding a little block like in the picture I posted. I will be making these myself and post about it.

Your issue with the first example is the 180 bend radius, and your solution is to bend dyneema on the same radius, but this time as an axle? How is that different? In either situation you have dyneema going over the same angle, but with the rotating ring you are concentrating the friction on one point continuously along with the bend radius.

Matt

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by funjohnson

Your issue with the first example is the 180 bend radius, and your solution is to bend dyneema on the same radius, but this time as an axle? How is that different? In either situation you have dyneema going over the same angle, but with the rotating ring you are concentrating the friction on one point continuously along with the bend radius.

Matt

Just look at which way the movement is. As an axle, the contact surface is a fraction of the 180 degree turn pulling the line through the eye. With the plastic piece holding the loop open, it’s just the center of the ring touching. Also, the movement is not at the 180 degrees but just the ring turning on a Dyneema axle.

Edit: the Colligo solution is static because the loop under tension squeezes the sides of the ring. This is where the plastic piece comes in; the picture I posted shows how the loop is kept clear from the ring.

[fxykty]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

I think that picture is the standard static block... the enhanced has holes much like the Karver blocks for a lashing that keeps the line from coming off the “sheave”.

The negative is that this is a static block. The good is that you can make it turn by adding a little block like in the picture I posted. I will be making these myself and post about it.

Correct, the photo shows the standard block. It was the only one I could find of the perimeter setup.

For Dyneema or UHMWPE generically you don’t need the ring to turn - the slipperiness of the line plus the large radius reduces the friction for short high load applications. I will test this with my runners and report back.

The use of a block to keep the anchor line(s) from squeezing the ring and creating a soft axle is a good one and is basically the Ino-Rope solution. But then you do have to keep a close eye on wear of the soft axle and replacement according to Ino-Rope is 10,000 miles. If the ring remains static then you don’t have that issue.