|
elcapbuzz
Feb 5, 2003, 9:44 AM
Post #51 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 24, 2001
Posts: 460
|
"J.D: You're welcome, eh? 7000 hits and counting."
Pete, are you so self centered that you have to keep track of how many people read your posts.
That's pretty pathetic.
Now where is that Killfile button???
|
|
|
|
|
taxexile
Feb 5, 2003, 10:06 AM
Post #53 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2002
Posts: 97
|
Time to chill, guys.
Ammon, the post has had 7,000 hits, but 6,346 of these have been mine, trying to work out how to build the @&$££# thing.
Only kidding. It's really very simple. Honest.
|
|
|
|
|
twrock
Feb 5, 2003, 5:33 PM
Post #54 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2002
Posts: 223
|
No way, taxexile. I just personally ran the count from 6966 to 7003 for the fun of it! And those weren't the first times I've "looked" at this thread. I want all the credit coming to me that I deserve for helping to make this thread's count so huge!
(Now if Pete can keep everyone from posting to his index thread, think of all the glory in that one.)
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Feb 6, 2003, 4:48 AM
Post #55 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
Ok, This thing that is being called the Chongo 2:1 hauling ratchet...Isn't it a 3:1??? The way I learned to figure ratio's make's it a 3:1? I mean Both sides of the lower pulley move right? And 1 side of the upper pulley moves right? 3:1? I know that's a crude explanation! SO?
josh
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Apr 16, 2003, 4:23 AM
Post #56 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
It truely [sic] is a 2:1 mechanical advantage.
Truely.
Just bringin' this old chestnut back to the top of the forum. You'll see it in print shortly... [HINT]
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Nov 13, 2003, 6:49 PM
Post #57 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
It truely [sic] is a 2:1 mechanical advantage.
Truely.
Just bringin' this old chestnut back to the top of the forum. You'll see it in print shortly... [HINT]
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Nov 13, 2003, 7:06 PM
Post #58 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
After doing some investigation I discovered that this is truly NOT a 3:1, BUT! It's not quite a 2:1 either. You do get some MA from the upper pulley just not enough for it to be a 3:1.
josh
|
|
|
|
|
ricardol
Nov 13, 2003, 7:07 PM
Post #59 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1050
|
it worked like a charm -- i had the benefit of having my ratchet custom built by the doctor himself ..
pete made sure that it was efficient and would work on the wall ..
pete.. did i tell you that one of the pulleys fell out of it while i was on the belay at-top pitch 6 .. i stupidly removed the jumar off the small pulley .. and left the pulley to dangle on the zed cord .. it fell out 5 minutes later and landed on the only flat spot on that ledge.. **sheesh**
.. once you've seen it in action its not so bad to build yourself ..
-- ricardo
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Nov 13, 2003, 7:55 PM
Post #60 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
Holy frig! It actually landed on the ledge! Dang, you've got horseshoes up your ass, boy. While sheer determination can get you up big walls, a little luck never hurts, eh?
Note:
If you do not have your Wall Doctor available to pre-build your 2:1 Hauling Ratchet for you and show you how to work it, then you will need to build it yourself ahead of time.
Do not do like Ed did, and try it for the first time at the base of the wall, only to learn you don't know how to operate the thing! Building and operating the Hauling Ratchet is neither easy nor intuitive - it takes refinement as the tolerances and orientation are absolutely critical - and it takes practising! I am dead serious when I tell you that you should practise hauling rocks ahead of time at your local crag.
However, once you get the thing pre-measured and fine tuned, it sings like a bird. And you can haul all the beer you want lickety-split.
Geeeeeez, flamer, did that hook hit your brain? You don't have to be Sir Isaac Bloody Newton to know this thing is 2:1. Sheesh.
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Nov 13, 2003, 9:20 PM
Post #61 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: Geeeeeez, flamer, did that hook hit your brain? You don't have to be Sir Isaac Bloody Newton to know this thing is 2:1. Sheesh.
Nope! The hook YOU DROPPED hit my finger.
In discussing this with some die in the wool rescue techno weenies, they stated that it is not a true 2:1 due to the fact that (well one of the fact's) the upper pulley- while still being primarily a change of direct, does in fact drop the actual work needed to lift the load. They were very clear in the fact that it does not turn this into a 3:1, but is not a "true" 2:1 either. There were a bunch of other super techno reason's for it but my eyes glazed over and I started thinking about climbing...
Irregardless the truth is; when you need to lift VERY HEAVY loads chongo's ratchet is a great tool.
josh
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Nov 13, 2003, 9:27 PM
Post #62 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
Good grief!
The Techno Weinies are wrong.
As long as you discount stretch in the zed cord, stretch in the cord holding the upper pulley to the locker, and the thickness of the pulleys themselves, the mechanical advantage is indeed 2:1.
A 3:1 is a completely different animal altogether. You can build a 3:1 Hauling Ratchet with a third pulley, but the more common way is to put the pulleys on the haul line itself, and turn it into a zed.
3:1 hauling is nearly always overkill, and putting the haul line itself through the pulleys is a pain in that ass. Even more aggravating is the need to "reset" the damn thing all the time - you have to open the cam on the holding ratchet and allow the inverted ascender assembly to drop. The worst part is that this involves "unstuffing" the haul line bag, and then restuffing it again afterwards. It just feels like you're not getting anywhere!
It's really simple, mate - when you pull the Zed-cord two feet, the pig raises by one foot, plus or minus.
And "irregardless" is NOT A WORD! Lawsy lawsy lawsy..... [You put that in just to aggravate me, right?]
And I am sorry about your finger. Is there some way I could get my hook back? It's an old friend, one of my favourites....
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Nov 13, 2003, 11:01 PM
Post #63 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
In reply to: Do not do like Ed did, and try it for the first time at the base of the wall, only to learn you don't know how to operate the thing!
Well, not exactly. I used it on the first pitch of Moonlight Buttress and several times on short practice walls. I just hadn't practiced using enough weight. It was set up correctly, but I thought it was tedious, cumbersome, inefficient, and nearly worthless. I was able to rig a 3:1 on Zodiac in a matter of minutes and made quicker progress than with the hauling ratchet. I'm not willing at this point in time to jack around with tweaking the hauling ratchet in order to make it work better. Maybe that will change...maybe not.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
ep
Nov 13, 2003, 11:20 PM
Post #64 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 23, 2003
Posts: 88
|
Sure looks like a classic 2:1 setup to me. I've got an old 1988 Chouinard Equipment catalog and in it is a drawing of a 2:1 wall hauling system that Jay Smith contributed. The system Pete described is essentially the same thing, only a lot better. You could say that it is only 2:1 in the ideal sense, ignoring friction and stretch and other annoying real world factors. Just like a standard haul system isn't really 1:1 either.
And "irregardless" IS a word, it's just considered nonstandard, hillbilly talk:
Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Nov 13, 2003, 11:38 PM
Post #65 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: And "irregardless" IS a word, it's just considered nonstandard, hillbilly talk:
Did you just call me a hillbilly???
Dude! Don't flatter me! I'm just regular old poor white thrash!!
One of the other things the techno weenies said was "it's probably easier to just call it a 2:1, because that's what it's closest to"....I may have had my PTPP treble hook pulling through the water on this one :wink: ...
josh
|
|
|
|
|
ep
Nov 13, 2003, 11:41 PM
Post #66 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 23, 2003
Posts: 88
|
In reply to: I may have had my PTPP treble hook pulling through the water on this one :wink: ...
And here I am, bored and biting today...
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Nov 13, 2003, 11:47 PM
Post #67 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
{Dr. Piton looks at his computer screen and grimaces yet again ... he simply cannot acknowledge that "irregardless" can be a word - anywhere, anyhow. It turns his stomach, and is too terrible to contemplate}
Heh heh - OK, flamer might have hooked me, but I hooked him first.
[DDEL]
|
|
|
|
|
ep
Nov 13, 2003, 11:58 PM
Post #68 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 23, 2003
Posts: 88
|
In reply to: Dr. Piton looks at his computer screen and grimaces yet again ... he simply cannot acknowledge that "irregardless" can be a word - anywhere, anyhow. It turns his stomach, and is too terrible to contemplate
I have a friend who insists that he should be able to invent any word he likes and use it professionally. He's come up with many that are extremely ridiculous, but here's one he's quite adamant about: meritability.
It's not a word, it makes no sense really, and if he uses it professionally (he has), most educated people will consider him a yokel. But he's got a point, and that point is that words become real or correct when enough (idiotic) people start using them. The history of word evolution is filled with such examples. Some day many words which you or I don't personally like may become accepted, irregardless of their meritability.
|
|
|
|
|
scottcody
Nov 14, 2003, 1:28 AM
Post #69 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 27, 2003
Posts: 577
|
two things... neither of which are related to Chongo rachet
First...
"Arguing on the internet is like competing in the Special Olympics; you may win, but you're still retarded."
I about wet myself....
Second, I work in corporate IT and this hits WAY too close to home.
"I have a friend who insists that he should be able to invent any word he likes and use it professionally."
You friend doesn't work for CGEY does he? Our current favorites from them are.
Downages... refereing to a system outage
Taxonomy or taxonomist... used to describe just about any thing that has any resemblance of structure, predefined or otherwise.
Business Artifacts... we are still working on understanding this one... I think they studied too much archeology
sheesh!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Nov 14, 2003, 2:54 AM
Post #70 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
Look, there are really cool words like "comprime" and "wank factor," but "irregardless" ain't one of 'em!
Please consult my glossary.
Anyway, time to hit the freezer and unthaw my supper.
|
|
|
|
|
glockaroo
Nov 14, 2003, 3:14 PM
Post #71 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 28, 2001
Posts: 149
|
I like the adjective Will Ferrell invented when he was spoofing the host of "Inside The Actor's Studio". He described the quality of the guest's acting work as "scrumptulescent". Sounds yummy!
Don't get me started on "disorientated".
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Nov 22, 2003, 6:06 PM
Post #72 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
There seems to be a bit of "confusion" [shall] among the Big Wall Theorists that this thing really IS a 2:1 mechanical advantage.
The Doc wishes to assure you that the preposterous myth is true.
|
|
|
|
|
mikeinidaho
Nov 22, 2003, 6:27 PM
Post #73 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2003
Posts: 20
|
About the drawing...
Here's the skinny:
This image clearly shows what a 2:1 pulley really is! The TOP pulley is just a change of direction, and the BOTTOM pulley is where you get all the MECHANICAL ADVANTAGE. It's the pulley that MOVES.
Also, this yellow cord creates a "Z" shape (or N, or S or ZED depending on your point of view). All the action takes place in the "V" shape (or "C" depending...). But, it would be impractical to pull upward on a big wall, you need to add that change of direction for the comfort of pulling DOWN.
I point this out because some PULLY technicians refer to a Z-pulley as a 3:1 (a different rig entirely) and a C-pulley as a 2:1. (see THE ILLUSTRATED GUIDE TO GLACIER TRAVEL AND CREVASSE RESCUE for more pulley info)
Clear enough?
|
|
|
|
|
pirate
Nov 23, 2003, 10:27 AM
Post #74 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2003
Posts: 106
|
:D Like good day eh?
I would like to assure all you sceptics out there that the 2:1 ratchet is ETS with out it I would still be on Never never land with my dehydrating corpse wasting away!
Pete Told me he has some great pics of me getting one of our seriously fricking heavy pigs humming up that wall with the ratchet just singing.
Im pretty sure I know the spot he took the pics and before we moved to the 2:1 I had JP counter balancing, pulling up and out on the load as i threw everything at that SOB and it would not even budge! No it was not hung up, Jp was right at the load, It was just that fricking heavy! like all that wine cheese beer and other luxuries have like allot of weight to them (Maybe if some people were bad assed enough to come to our party on Timbuck two tower than we wouldnt have like had so much party supplies...funny how we never had any beer left over at the end of the trip despite this.
Oh yeah back to the 2:1, we put my 2:1 ratchet on and I got on that sucker and threw myself at it a couple times ...stand fast as I reset the inverted ascender allowing me to suck the pulleys tight together and throw myself into it...kidneys squishing and ..BUDGE....it moves ......Fiddle ...fiddle adjusting the cord on my harness......Pete giving me some tips he finds helps him (and on this frigging load I needed all the extra edge I could get) So using the tips , getting it a little more honed I was ready to get that MOFO up ..... fast standing while resetting the ratchet as the pulleys come tightly together I continue my upward motion so that I could gain a little slack in my zee cord, then throwing myself down into it I could jump start the load, finishing the pull in a deep squat and then repeating in a good rhythm.
beauty eh? It was like the best thing since like twist off beer caps eh?
Anyway It is in fact the ETS and like carries my wall squid seal of approval.
BTW it is in fact for all intensive purposes a 2:1 (thats like grade 7 science dudes) a redirect pulley only adds some friction it never contributes to mechanical advantage.
For my ratchet I use 7MM static cord (less stretch) and A petzel rescue pulley and a petzel mini P59.
The rescue F=1.05 and the mini F=1.1 if I use the better pulley on top (as I should since there is no mechanical advantage there) and if my load was 100kg it would go like this.
100 kg lifted on Mini in 2:1 configuration F=0.52 so it would be 52kg (100X0.52=52)
52Kg now is the load to be redirected to the rescue pulley on top, which has a friction of 1.05 and since it is in a 1:1 configuration
52kg X F1.05 = 54.6kg
So total load on line is basically 54.6kg versus the actual load of 100kg
On this pedicular eg. 100kg/54.6kg=1.83 so it would be a 1.83:1 system (for all intensive purposes it is a 2:1 principle)
For those of you that use the little fixe pulleys your system is F=1.4
On a 100kg load pulley A in 2:1 configuration F=0.58 (100kgX0.58=58kg)
Pulley B in 1:1 configuration F=1.4 {this is where the big difference comes in on an inefficient pulley used for a redirect} so (58kgX1.4=82.2kg) Thats not so sh!t hot .
100kg/82.2kg=1.22 so A two fixe pulleys used for a 2:1 would actually only give you a 1.22:1 sheesh.
So if your having problems with your ratchet not working good you may have to just adjust the system or upgrade some components at least the top pulley. ie a rescue used on top and a fixe still on the bottom would give you a 1.70:1 instead of the two fixe pulleys giving you a 1.22:1
Thats a hell of a big difference when you apply it to a real world application eh.
alright that enough babbling from me Im like so way over tired eh.
Hope I didnt make any mistakes in my calculations.
Cheers
...UUUSE THE RATCHET LUKE.............UUUSE THE RATCHET..... :wink:
(I just wanted to add that I looked at the pic when I was using the 2:1 and remembered that to get it dialed better I actually used my best pulley at the bottom, this was so that everything lined up snug causing less stretch and not losing as much energy not because it was more eficient regarding friction. Note though that the friction on the P59 pulley is still quite low so that this particular ratchet set up in the configuration we used is still quite efficient. acually 1.78:1)
|
|
|
|
|
passthepitonspete
Nov 24, 2003, 3:44 AM
Post #75 of 79
(24084 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2001
Posts: 2183
|
  shows how to put his b*tchin' bod to work!
In reply to: "...fast standing while resetting the ratchet as the pulleys come tightly together I continue my upward motion so that I could gain a little slack in my zee cord, then throwing myself down into it I could jump start the load, finishing the pull in a deep squat and then repeating in a good rhythm. Beauty eh?
Like, I cannot believe a Hoser said "zee cord", eh? I think I'm going to, like, cry in my back bacon, eh? But Shawn's description of putting a little extra slack in the zed-cord and then using it to get the system moving works really well.
Great photos of Timbuktu Towers [and like, all the beer Shawn hauled up, eh?] are forthcoming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
