Uses for Low Friction Rings

[Elemental]

I love the Bullseye weave, not seen that done before, any links?

Here you go ...
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Bullseye+weave

 

[Neeves]

Looking at the 2 threads, soft shackles and LFRs, I would have predicted a more equal interest. I got that wrong and am fascinated that LFRs have so few proponents. I don't feel I've been left behind as technology moves forward (if LFRs are the measure) but have lost the plot with soft shackles - I am way behind (not using them at all).

I do see application for us with LFRs (barber hauling) - but, really, not soft shackles - so I'm definitely bucking the trend.

Jonathan

 

[thinwater]

I have 10 LFRs. All could be replaced by blocks, although they are the better solution for the bobstay (high load). My last boat had none... unless you count all of the fairleads any boat has.

I have only 3 soft shackles (jib and reacher clew, main tack). Same count on my last boat.

Note that many LFRs replace shackles with a loop. In other words, they eliminated a metal shackle.

I was at the Annapolis Boat Show yesterday. A few race boats used a lot of LFRs, in place on conventional jib control blocks. larger boats with synthetic rigging or lifelines used them for lashing eyes.

For me it is not weight, it is simplicity.

 

[lw395]

I have 10 LFRs. All could be replaced by blocks, although they are the better solution for the bobstay (high load). My last boat had none... unless you count all of the fairleads any boat has.

I have only 3 soft shackles (jib and reacher clew, main tack). Same count on my last boat.

Note that many LFRs replace shackles with a loop. In other words, they eliminated a metal shackle.

I was at the Annapolis Boat Show yesterday. A few race boats used a lot of LFRs, in place on conventional jib control blocks. larger boats with synthetic rigging or lifelines used them for lashing eyes.

For me it is not weight, it is simplicity.

For me it's not always simplicity of the system itself, sometimes a complicated system is simple to use.
E.g, a modern 505 sn't simple. it's a maze of string and blocks and generally running amok with the Harken catalogue, but you can 'simply' pull a string and change the mast rake when you're out on the wire.

I am not very tolerant of controls not working well.
Whatever cures that is great in my book, whether it's a LFR or a plain bearing block used in a better way.

 

[gregcope]

Noelex

Any chance you or your wife could repost the pictures on the sailing anarchy thread as the photobucket images are a little duff of the instructions.

On here: http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?/topic/181554-bullseye-strops-for-low-friction-rings/

Thanks

We use a few.

Simple, cheap, reliable; there is lot to like. They do have reasonably high friction so are best when this not issue. They are ideal for static rather than dynamic loads. When attached to soft a soft shackle version it produces a very short adjustable block.

We use them to feed our snubber, flag halyards, lazy jacks and barber haulers.

These photos might give you some ideas. These are my wife’s work. She developed the Bullseye weave shown. My rope skills are more in line with a granny knot .

 

[Elemental]

Noelex

Any chance you or your wife could repost the pictures on the sailing anarchy thread as the photobucket images are a little duff of the instructions.

On here: http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?/topic/181554-bullseye-strops-for-low-friction-rings/

Thanks

Here you go (next link down on the google search.. :encouragement: )
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...or-low-friction-rings-169764.html#post2170429

 

[gregcope]

Here you go (next link down on the google search.. :encouragement: )
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...or-low-friction-rings-169764.html#post2170429

Doh! Been reading the other one. Many thanks.

 

[Neeves]

In a previous thread on LFRs someone made the comment that they worked better if the internal size (the working part) was twice (?) the diameter of the rope. There has also been mention that LFRs are best used to slightly alter the direction of a line - as opposed to a sharp bend. Contradicting this idea someone else mentioned using them in a cascade system - where the direction change could be 360 degrees.

Any comments?

 

[Elemental]

In a previous thread on LFRs someone made the comment that they worked better if the internal size (the working part) was twice (?) the diameter of the rope. There has also been mention that LFRs are best used to slightly alter the direction of a line - as opposed to a sharp bend. Contradicting this idea someone else mentioned using them in a cascade system - where the direction change could be 360 degrees.

I think the clue is in the name .. They're low friction rings, not zero friction rings so they are useful where you can tolerate some friction - perhaps where winch assist is available, or where adjustments to the line are not constant. I use them for near 180 direction changes at the bow in my gybe preventer system without difficulty, but in this circumstance one generally sets the load, with a winch, then it's locked off thereafter. What's important in this case is a free release which a more frictionful system may not permit

 

[rogerthebodger]

- where the direction change could be 360 degrees.

Any comments?

#60 degrees this is back on its self. Don't you mean 180 degrees.

 

[thinwater]

In a previous thread on LFRs someone made the comment that they worked better if the internal size (the working part) was twice (?) the diameter of the rope. There has also been mention that LFRs are best used to slightly alter the direction of a line - as opposed to a sharp bend. Contradicting this idea someone else mentioned using them in a cascade system - where the direction change could be 360 degrees.

Any comments?

Antal--as good a source as any, since they invented the modern evolution, states 70% of the hole size as an absolute max. That said, I was talking to one of their tech guys a few days ago and he said 1/3 is far better. If the line is only going to be deflected a little, 70% works. For a cascade, 1/3 is what you need.

As Sea_Spray says, they really excel in applications where adjustment is not frequent or under high load. A jibe preventer is a good example, since strength is the thing. Very poor examples would be a mainsheet or davit tackle, or spinnaker turning blocks. Too much friction.

They have become popular as lashing eyes, but I'm not convinced they are better than a quality (not cable) thimble... but those are harder to find.

 

[NotBirdseye]

Just because the tech is there doesn't mean you have to use it. Soft shackles by all means, they're relatively cheap and is really about being resourceful and using what you have to hand (i.e. don't go out and buy extra rope if you have a few standard shackles lying around). If you have managed sailing for a season or two without something, you don't need it and you're spending money for no good reason.

 

[thinwater]

Just because the tech is there doesn't mean you have to use it. Soft shackles by all means, they're relatively cheap and is really about being resourceful and using what you have to hand (i.e. don't go out and buy extra rope if you have a few standard shackles lying around). If you have managed sailing for a season or two without something, you don't need it and you're spending money for no good reason.

Agreed.

But I'm not so sure I really consider soft shackles or LFRs "tech. The basic ideas have been around for centuries.

I've been using these adjustable strops for sail ties and such for years. I got the idea from an old square rigger book.


These go way back:


And running a line through a thimble or grommet to gain purchase is as old as boats. Ball bearings came later.

At most, soft shackles and LFRs are a further evolution of old ideas made possible by modern materials. As before, they are either a good way to do a job... or they aren't. I use them were they work well, and don't want them where they don't.

As for spending money, in most cases they are cheaper. Soft shackles are a bargain if you make your own. I've never bought one. Most are made from trimmings from other projects and cost zero, yeah, nada. LFRs for high load applications are cheap compared to a block with a working load of possibly tons. Plastic balls don't like that. And THAT is why I use LFRs on my bobstay, for example. Same with preventer turning blocks; for equivalent WLL, they may be 5-10 times cheaper.

As for replacing good, functional gear to replace an ounce, that's generally foolhardy. There are MUCH cheaper ways to save a few ounces, like sailing with a teacup less fuel, sawing off 3 links of chain, or skipping that third serving at dinner.

 

[Neeves]

#60 degrees this is back on its self. Don't you mean 180 degrees.

Yes - I actually meant 360, back on itself - or near 360. Like a mainsheet system.

I was thinking of a 360 where the load was fairly constant but the cordage might need to move/slip occasionally - so not a mainsheet system, say a boom vang, back stay (not that we have a vang or can alter backstay (we don't have a backstay).

Jonathan

 

[thinwater]

Myself and others have published friction numbers on plain tackles and lashings; you simply would not want to do a tackle that way. With lashing, the problems is that you really cannot tighten them under load for this reason past about 4:1, no matter the number of passes. This may be in PS., unless it was edited down.

 

[Neeves]

Agreed.

But I'm not so sure I really consider soft shackles or LFRs "tech. The basic ideas have been around for centuries.

I've been using these adjustable strops for sail ties and such for years. I got the idea from an old square rigger book.
View attachment 80958

These go way back:
View attachment 80959

And running a line through a thimble or grommet to gain purchase is as old as boats. Ball bearings came later.

At most, soft shackles and LFRs are a further evolution of old ideas made possible by modern materials. As before, they are either a good way to do a job... or they aren't. I use them were they work well, and don't want them where they don't.

As for spending money, in most cases they are cheaper. Soft shackles are a bargain if you make your own. I've never bought one. Most are made from trimmings from other projects and cost zero, yeah, nada. LFRs for high load applications are cheap compared to a block with a working load of possibly tons. Plastic balls don't like that. And THAT is why I use LFRs on my bobstay, for example. Same with preventer turning blocks; for equivalent WLL, they may be 5-10 times cheaper.

As for replacing good, functional gear to replace an ounce, that's generally foolhardy. There are MUCH cheaper ways to save a few ounces, like sailing with a teacup less fuel, sawing off 3 links of chain, or skipping that third serving at dinner.

What is strange is that soft shackles could be made from any textile as in many applications you simply don't need the strength (and lots of cordage would be adequate for many of the uses). Soft shackles have become trendy simply because of dyneema. As you say Thin the idea is hardly new - people just think its new (and trendy). Similarly with LFRs - the materials have been available for decades - there is nothing special about the aluminium alloy used, nor polishing nor anodising. At the end of the day a LFR is just a fancy sheave, used in a slightly different way.

The marine industry can take an exceptionally long time for inspiration. It also takes an exceptionally long time to adopt 'new' materials.

As an aside - the only technology I can think of that sailing adopted quickly and with fervour is GPS.

 

[Neeves]

Antal--as good a source as any, since they invented the modern evolution, states 70% of the hole size as an absolute max. That said, I was talking to one of their tech guys a few days ago and he said 1/3 is far better. If the line is only going to be deflected a little, 70% works. For a cascade, 1/3 is what you need.

As Sea_Spray says, they really excel in applications where adjustment is not frequent or under high load. A jibe preventer is a good example, since strength is the thing. Very poor examples would be a mainsheet or davit tackle, or spinnaker turning blocks. Too much friction.

They have become popular as lashing eyes, but I'm not convinced they are better than a quality (not cable) thimble... but those are harder to find.

On this basis then the manufacturers are not thinking of using LFRs for particularly large cordage as the largest, based on 1/3, would result in maximum line thickness of 10mm or 12mm, unless the LFR is to deflect only a small amount.

Jonathan