|
majid_sabet
Aug 29, 2012, 7:33 PM
Post #1 of 37
(27340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
Short term or long term effect of humidity on ropes Has any one done any study on the topic ? MS
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Aug 29, 2012, 9:13 PM
Post #2 of 37
(27311 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
Yes.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Aug 29, 2012, 9:29 PM
Post #3 of 37
(27303 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
good,bad or ugly ?
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Aug 30, 2012, 5:42 PM
Post #4 of 37
(27189 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
Well the general opinion seems to be that while the strength of nylon is effected by humidity the treatments used in manufacture, the built-in strength reserves and limited levels of exposure to extreme humidity mean for climbing gear it is irrelevant. The record of broken ropes seems to bear this out. There is something by the CAI out there but their conclusion is as above.
|
|
|
|
|
jowybyo
Aug 30, 2012, 6:07 PM
Post #5 of 37
(27181 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2012
Posts: 20
|
I may be wrong but isn't the decreased tensile strength in nylon from moisture absorption? If it's dried out it should return to near full strength, no? If so, that would make long term storage at high relative humidity irrelevant if the rope is allowed to dry prior to use?
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Aug 30, 2012, 6:19 PM
Post #6 of 37
(27174 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
Well yes but since generations of climbers have been climbing and falling on wet ropes and climbing in humid areas without drying their ropes and they don´t break then it can´t be much of an issue anyway. To "dry" a rope which has been long-term stored in humid conditions would take ages since the moisture uptake is very much slower than most people realise.
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Aug 30, 2012, 6:23 PM
Post #7 of 37
(27171 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
JimTitt wrote: Well yes but since generations of climbers have been climbing and falling on wet ropes and climbing in humid areas without drying their ropes and they don´t break then it can´t be much of an issue anyway. To "dry" a rope which has been long-term stored in humid conditions would take ages since the moisture uptake is very much slower than most people realise. A wet rope is significantly weaker than a dry rope due to the internal pressure effects. Nylon isn't affected by water so humidity really isn't a problem long term.
|
|
|
|
|
jowybyo
Aug 30, 2012, 6:34 PM
Post #8 of 37
(27162 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2012
Posts: 20
|
I'm pretty sure we are splitting hair at this point, at least as applied to climbing. But, nylon's material properties including modulus, glass transition temperature, and tensile strength are affect by it's moisture content. This is true at the filament level.
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Aug 30, 2012, 10:47 PM
Post #9 of 37
(27127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
patto wrote: JimTitt wrote: Well yes but since generations of climbers have been climbing and falling on wet ropes and climbing in humid areas without drying their ropes and they don´t break then it can´t be much of an issue anyway. To "dry" a rope which has been long-term stored in humid conditions would take ages since the moisture uptake is very much slower than most people realise. A wet rope is significantly weaker than a dry rope due to the internal pressure effects. Nylon isn't affected by water so humidity really isn't a problem long term. Rubbish, nylon starts to effectively de-polymerise and weaken. This has been known since the 1930´s when removing all the water was the breakthrough in creating a usable form of nylon.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Aug 30, 2012, 11:27 PM
Post #10 of 37
(27118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
JimTitt wrote: patto wrote: JimTitt wrote: Well yes but since generations of climbers have been climbing and falling on wet ropes and climbing in humid areas without drying their ropes and they don´t break then it can´t be much of an issue anyway. To "dry" a rope which has been long-term stored in humid conditions would take ages since the moisture uptake is very much slower than most people realise. A wet rope is significantly weaker than a dry rope due to the internal pressure effects. Nylon isn't affected by water so humidity really isn't a problem long term. Rubbish, nylon starts to effectively de-polymerise and weaken. This has been known since the 1930´s when removing all the water was the breakthrough in creating a usable form of nylon. Probably something patto read on the internet somewhere and assumed it must be true. Curt
|
|
|
|
|
USnavy
Aug 31, 2012, 4:09 AM
Post #11 of 37
(27071 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2007
Posts: 2667
|
Humidity increases the rate at which the rope swells, that is for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Aug 31, 2012, 7:00 AM
Post #12 of 37
(27060 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
JimTitt wrote: Rubbish, nylon starts to effectively de-polymerise and weaken. From my understanding this does not occur at room temperature or typical rope exposure temperatures. On further research various sources refer to the strength of nylon returning once it drys. I'm no expert here, I may be wrong. But that is my understanding.
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Aug 31, 2012, 7:42 AM
Post #13 of 37
(27055 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
patto wrote: A wet rope is significantly weaker than a dry rope due to the internal pressure effects. Nylon isn't affected by water so humidity really isn't a problem long term. The first part of your post is rubbish as the reduction in strength is nothing to do with internal pressure(whatever that means anyway). The second part of your post is rubbish because nylon is affected by water, the loss of strength being not quite proportional to the amount of water absorbed. Nylon is hydrophilic in that there are free connections on the molecules for water molecules to attatch to the nylon molecules. The water molecules bind onto the nylon molecules and move them apart causing the material to swell, the increased distance between the molecules weakens the secondary forces holding them together which weakens the material. This process is reversible and occurs at normal ambient conditions. Your climbing rope is changing size and strength on a daily basis depending on temperature and humidity which is why ropes have to be conditioned to a specific temperature and moisture content before testing.
|
|
|
|
|
knudenoggin
Sep 4, 2012, 9:00 PM
Post #14 of 37
(26889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2004
Posts: 596
|
JimTitt wrote: patto wrote: A wet rope is significantly weaker than a dry rope due to the internal pressure effects. Nylon isn't affected by water so humidity really isn't a problem long term. The first part of your post is rubbish as the reduction in strength is nothing to do with internal pressure(whatever that means anyway). Assume that what is meant is friction between fibres, then his statement is on target --as far as extended usage in large ropes of mooring or towing systems is concerned.
In reply to: [accident analysis] ... 12-inch circ. [~3.75" dia] 8-strand nylon 6.6 rope stretchers ... The ropes were made up into grommets with soft eyes. [think dogbone] ... would give a new dry strength of about 215 tonnes and a wet strength of about 190 tonnes [88%]. ... Tests showed that the ropes would lose about 4.4% of strength per day in this kind of towing service, due to internal cyclic abrasion of wet nylon. [ Handbook of fibre rope technology] Re the storage issue & long-term effects, I recall mention of "hydrolysis", but find now one assertion that pure water hydrolysis has too small an effect to matter.
In reply to: Your climbing rope is changing size and strength on a daily basis depending on temperature and humidity which is why ropes have to be conditioned to a specific temperature and moisture content before testing. How much can that really matter, in likely conditions (not extremes)? If it's much, then that raises the question of interpretation of such testing for practice --for those varied conditions of usage. (Here I'm thinking not of precipitation but just relative humidity and temps.) (Waiting for the UIAA-approved litmus lines which turn red when they're unsafe for more than abseils ..., green otherwise. ) *kN*
|
|
|
|
|
Kinobi
Sep 29, 2012, 11:54 AM
Post #15 of 37
(25899 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 16, 2009
Posts: 74
|
Yes, CAI (Italian Alpine Club) did some tests. One: http://www.caimateriali.org/index.php?id=16 Two: http://www.caimateriali.org/index.php?id=21 To explain it is very simply: Yes water significantly weaken a rope. Is this "weaker" that much relevant to climbers? May be. If the rope is really soaked, and used (may be abused), it's significantly weaker that I would suggest to take care to try not to fall on it. If it's iced, even worse. With the use with "half" ropes, once you could fall on only one rope, it's better to be carefull. Again if ropes aver very wet or soaked. Still... the ropes (albeit the diameters tested were "fat") tested on Dodero had, in my opinion, a significant strenght, that, unless I have a very worn and abused rope and a belayer to crucify, I will personally not bother too much. But for stats based climbers, they loose at least/around 50% of their strenght. Greetings from Italy. E
|
|
|
|
|
USnavy
Sep 29, 2012, 4:03 PM
Post #16 of 37
(25867 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2007
Posts: 2667
|
Kinobi wrote: If the rope is really soaked, and used (may be abused), it's significantly weaker that I would suggest to take care to try not to fall on it. If it's iced, even worse. I have taken a few big whippers on completely soaked ropes and guess what, the rope did not break (big surprise). Ice climbers have been taking falls on wet and icy ropes for ages. When is the last time you have heard of a rope breaking because it was wet? It's never happened. Majid is just trolling us trying to get info on a topic he never actually partakes in.
|
|
|
|
|
Kinobi
Sep 29, 2012, 4:30 PM
Post #17 of 37
(25862 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 16, 2009
Posts: 74
|
USnavy wrote: I have taken a few big whippers on completely soaked ropes and guess what, the rope did not break (big surprise). Ice climbers have been taking falls on wet and icy ropes for ages. When is the last time you have heard of a rope breaking because it was wet? It's never happened. Majid is just trolling us trying to get info on a topic he never actually partakes in. In reply to: Kinobi wrote: Still... the ropes (albeit the diameters tested were "fat") tested on Dodero had, in my opinion, a significant strenght, that, unless I have a very worn and abused rope and a belayer to crucify, I will personally not bother too much.
|
|
|
|
|
Marylandclimber
Sep 30, 2012, 2:54 PM
Post #18 of 37
(25796 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 3, 2011
Posts: 224
|
And aren't dry ropes treated to keep out water and moisture?
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Sep 30, 2012, 3:55 PM
Post #19 of 37
(25785 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
Marylandclimber wrote: And aren't dry ropes treated to keep out water and moisture? Yes, but it actually wears off quite quickly, especially if the rope is used for rock climbing. Some manufacturers advertise that each strand is dry treated, and these may resist water absorption a bit better, but it still doesn't really keep the rope dry. Dry treatments are meant to reduce the absorption of water to keep the weight of the wet rope down and to try to prevent it from freezing into unmanageable wire. It's not done for strength when wet or to achieve longer storage times. Dry treatment for rock climbing ropes is an unnecessary extra expense imho.
|
|
|
|
|
iknowfear
Sep 30, 2012, 4:13 PM
Post #20 of 37
(25782 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2004
Posts: 670
|
marc801 wrote: Marylandclimber wrote: And aren't dry ropes treated to keep out water and moisture? Yes, but it actually wears off quite quickly, especially if the rope is used for rock climbing. Some manufacturers advertise that each strand is dry treated, and these may resist water absorption a bit better, but it still doesn't really keep the rope dry. Dry treatments are meant to reduce the absorption of water to keep the weight of the wet rope down and to try to prevent it from freezing into unmanageable wire. It's not done for strength when wet or to achieve longer storage times. Dry treatment for rock climbing ropes is an unnecessary extra expense imho. not totally unnecessary. It keeps dirt off, too.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Sep 30, 2012, 4:33 PM
Post #21 of 37
(25776 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
iknowfear wrote: not totally unnecessary. It keeps dirt off, too. Minimally, at best, until it wears off after 10 climbs. Again, it doesn't justify the expense.
|
|
|
|
|
TradEddie
Oct 1, 2012, 3:25 PM
Post #22 of 37
(25706 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2007
Posts: 164
|
I just realized this advantage of a dry rope a few days ago, so strange to see it 'confirmed'. I bought my first ever non-dry rope last year, and despite very, very little use, it is now significantly dirtier than any previous rope I have owned. TE
|
|
|
|
|
USnavy
Oct 1, 2012, 5:47 PM
Post #23 of 37
(25687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2007
Posts: 2667
|
TradEddie wrote: I just realized this advantage of a dry rope a few days ago, so strange to see it 'confirmed'. I bought my first ever non-dry rope last year, and despite very, very little use, it is now significantly dirtier than any previous rope I have owned. TE I own 11 ropes right now, 7 are dry ropes, the others are not. All of them are equally dirty in reference to the type of use and amount of use they have been seeing. The dry coating put onto ropes is mostly a gimmick. It works great when the rope is brand new, but with minimal use even the best dry coatings will wear off very quickly.
(This post was edited by USnavy on Oct 1, 2012, 5:48 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
ptlong2
Oct 1, 2012, 6:19 PM
Post #24 of 37
(25678 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 10, 2010
Posts: 102
|
USnavy wrote: The dry coating put onto ropes is mostly a gimmick. It works great when the rope is brand new, but with minimal use even the best dry coatings will wear off very quickly. In drop tests dry treated ropes consistently hold more falls than otherwise identical non-dry ropes. There is also evidence that they are more durable.
|
|
|
|
|
knudenoggin
Oct 11, 2012, 6:21 PM
Post #25 of 37
(25133 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2004
Posts: 596
|
ptlong2 wrote: USnavy wrote: The dry coating put onto ropes is mostly a gimmick. It works great when the rope is brand new, but with minimal use even the best dry coatings will wear off very quickly. In drop tests dry treated ropes consistently hold more falls than otherwise identical non-dry ropes. There is also evidence that they are more durable. But surely you mean "in drop tests with new ropes", and USN's remark concerns ropes that are used --and that would be the majority of ropes of concern. Are there tests of used ropes that show a general superiority to the dry coating? (Of course, gauging some wear index and also matching the make of rope --and thereby the exact dry treatment (do they differ?)-- could be a challenge.) (I recall the cute summation of a UIAA study done long ago: that the claims for dry treatments don't hold water; as, alas, the ropes themselves do.) *kN*
|
|
|
|
|
ptlong2
Oct 12, 2012, 1:07 AM
Post #26 of 37
(5772 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 10, 2010
Posts: 102
|
Yes, new ropes. I've not read of drop tests done on dry vs. non-dry ropes that are otherwise identical and which have been subjected to equivalent controlled use/abrasion/ageing. That sounds like a lot of work! Even the UIAA study you are referring to did not perform any drop tests, making the conclusion that none of the various dry treatments provide a long-term benefit premature (as the authors themselves acknowledged).
|
|
|
|
|
USnavy
Oct 12, 2012, 4:16 AM
Post #27 of 37
(5760 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2007
Posts: 2667
|
ptlong2 wrote: Yes, new ropes. I've not read of drop tests done on dry vs. non-dry ropes that are otherwise identical and which have been subjected to equivalent controlled use/abrasion/ageing. That sounds like a lot of work! Even the UIAA study you are referring to did not perform any drop tests, making the conclusion that none of the various dry treatments provide a long-term benefit premature (as the authors themselves acknowledged). Well, it sounds like the dry treatment may be good if I want to project a 5.13 move right out of the belay and there are no other pro options. Interestingly enough, you mentioned that the dry treatment increases the number of falls held, yet no manufacturer differentiates specifications between dry treated and non-dry treated versions of any model of rope they make.
(This post was edited by USnavy on Oct 12, 2012, 4:16 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Oct 12, 2012, 6:01 AM
Post #28 of 37
(5755 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
ptlong2 wrote: USnavy wrote: The dry coating put onto ropes is mostly a gimmick. It works great when the rope is brand new, but with minimal use even the best dry coatings will wear off very quickly. In drop tests dry treated ropes consistently hold more falls than otherwise identical non-dry ropes. There is also evidence that they are more durable. Citation and link to the paper please.
|
|
|
|
|
ptlong2
Oct 12, 2012, 6:57 PM
Post #29 of 37
(5725 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 10, 2010
Posts: 102
|
marc801 wrote: Citation and link to the paper please. Citation the paper
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Oct 13, 2012, 4:10 PM
Post #30 of 37
(5691 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
ptlong2 wrote: marc801 wrote: Citation and link to the paper please. Citation the paper So in other words, since you're unwilling or unable to backup your statements, when you wrote:
ptlong2 wrote: In drop tests dry treated ropes consistently hold more falls than otherwise identical non-dry ropes. There is also evidence that they are more durable. ....there is absolutely no reason to believe anything you say on the subject.
|
|
|
|
|
ptlong2
Oct 13, 2012, 11:48 PM
Post #31 of 37
(5671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 10, 2010
Posts: 102
|
marc801 wrote: ....there is absolutely no reason to believe anything you say on the subject. No, there is no real reason. All I can offer you is heresay: a private communication with a well-respected individual in the industry who knows his ropes. It doesn't prove anything. Nothing on this topic in this thread has anything substantial to support the opinions presented. Even the paper that knudenoggin mentioned left a lot unsaid -- they didn't even compare dry ropes with non-dry ropes in that study. If you google a bit you'll find that Clyde Soles was saying the same thing on this topic (dry ropes hold more falls) about 15 years ago; not that that proves anything either.
|
|
|
|
|
bearbreeder
Oct 27, 2012, 7:36 PM
Post #32 of 37
(5515 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
ive never had a dry treatment last more than 1-2 months of daily use on fairly moderate climbs of say 10+ pitches a day, 4-5 days a week ... hell the dry treatment off my mammut phoenixes wore out in around 50 pitches in squamish, the rockies and yosemite ... so if you want dry treatment for all yr climbs youll need to buy 1-2 new ropes per season assuming one goes climbing daily instead of having some intraweb fun on RC ... the reality is that if you go out, and climb a lot, and arent one of those sponsored bums or rich yuppies ... your ropes wont be very dry at all ... if however you spend all yr time doing virtual climbing on RC and go out the occasional weekend, they can be quite dry if you spend the $$$$$ for all that fancy stuff
|
|
|
|
|
knudenoggin
Oct 30, 2012, 5:28 AM
Post #33 of 37
(5479 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2004
Posts: 596
|
ptlong2 wrote: If you google a bit you'll find that Clyde Soles was saying the same thing on this topic (dry ropes hold more falls) about 15 years ago; not that that proves anything either. Weil, he seems to have lost enthusiasm for that assertion ca. 2004, when he wrote The Outdoor Knots Book. There, he only mentions a 2nd PTFE coating as giving some better initial resistance to water permeation, and cites unimpressive testing results --to wit:
In reply to: Recent [2004, mind] tests by the Italian Alpine Club showed that wet ropes, even with a dry treatment, hold only one-third of the test falls as dry [i.e., un-wet] ropes; the thinner the rope, the worse the degradation. [p. 32] Which, yes, leaves possible your claim of superior performance (and just 1/3 of that when wet, but maybe still superior to the non-dry-treatment ropes' count when wet). *kN*
|
|
|
|
|
surfstar
Oct 30, 2012, 6:05 PM
Post #34 of 37
(5464 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 31, 2011
Posts: 206
|
Teflon coated double-dry ropes (core and sheath treated) held up to the sharp edge test (that is not official/used now) better. Perhaps that is where the "dry-treated = more falls" came from.
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
Oct 30, 2012, 6:53 PM
Post #35 of 37
(5452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
marc801 wrote: ptlong2 wrote: marc801 wrote: Citation and link to the paper please. Citation the paper So in other words, since you're unwilling or unable to backup your statements, when you wrote: ptlong2 wrote: In drop tests dry treated ropes consistently hold more falls than otherwise identical non-dry ropes. There is also evidence that they are more durable. ....there is absolutely no reason to believe anything you say on the subject. As a polymer chemist I found this very believable, so I did a quick search. "11mm Drycore™ rope that holds 11 falls dry, holds 7 falls wet. That same rope without DryCore™ may hold only 3 falls when wet." http://www.sterlingrope.com/...ument/techmanual.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
bearbreeder
Oct 30, 2012, 7:20 PM
Post #36 of 37
(5443 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
how about a drycore rope that has seen heavy daily use for 1-2 months vs one with the same use but non-dry IMO its quite useless to talk about about all this dry treatment unless yr basically using barely used ropes all the time ... and for cragging its totally useless as you wont be cragging in the rain with wet ropes and taking factor 2 falls generally
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Nov 12, 2012, 10:29 PM
Post #37 of 37
(5313 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
Jim Titt answered this pretty good much earlier. So as long as we are speculating, let me say, and this is via conventional wisdom and circumstantial speculation but when I leave a rope in my basement, it just seems to stay drier. Really.
|
|
|
|
|
|