Testing Soft Shackles
IntroductionThis is a reprint of a forum post. This testing is done with 7/64" Amsteel which is an 8 strand product. I caution that this may not transfer to our 12 strand line but based on other tests I have read, I think it safe to assume that a soft shackle is stronger than the line it is made of and probably by a lot.
Tensile tests on loop shacklesI pulled a few loop shackles in an MTS machine to get their failure load. I tested one specimen made from 3mm Lash-It and it failed at about 2,200 lbf. The remaining samples were made from 7/64" Amsteel blue. Failure loads for three samples with diamond knots were consistently around 2,800 lbf. All samples failed at the knot and the spliced loop remained intact. The samples were intentionally made such that they had different sized loops, i.e., the legs of the shackles were made different lengths. The very tight loop showed substantially more damage than the other two, but the knot remained the weak point.
I also tested the "cinch wind" method suggested by lonetracker. While I personally find it less convenient than the spliced loop, the shackle also held to about 2,800 lbf before failure at the knot.
The Ashley stopper knot and the overhand knot failed at between 600 and 700 lbf. The tail was pulled through the knot and the shackles were perfectly intact with no damage after the test, but no longer had the stopper knot in them.
- Use a diamond knot for loop shackles made from Amsteel.
- It is not critical to have the legs of the shackle perfectly balanced.
- The loop shackles have a failure load around 175% of the line's rating for 7/64 Amsteel.
- The Ashley stopper knot and the overhand knot are not suitable for this application.
Reference: Hammock Forums
Ad by Google
The information on this web site has not been checked for accuracy. It is for entertainment purposes only and should be independently verified before using for any other reason. There are five sources. 1) Documents and manuals from a variety of sources. These have not been checked for accuracy and in many cases have not even been read by anyone associated with L-36.com. I have no idea of they are useful or accurate, I leave that to the reader. 2) Articles others have written and submitted. If you have questions on these, please contact the author. 3) Articles that represent my personal opinions. These are intended to promote thought and for entertainment. These are not intended to be fact, they are my opinions. 4) Small programs that generate result presented on a web page. Like any computer program, these may and in some cases do have errors. Almost all of these also make simplifying assumptions so they are not totally accurate even if there are no errors. Please verify all results. 5) Weather information is from numerious of sources and is presented automatically. It is not checked for accuracy either by anyone at L-36.com or by the source which is typically the US Government. See the NOAA web site for their disclaimer. Finally, tide and current data on this site is from 2007 and 2008 data bases, which may contain even older data. Changes in harbors due to building or dredging change tides and currents and for that reason many of the locations presented are no longer supported by newer data bases. For example, there is very little tidal current data in newer data bases so current data is likely wrong to some extent. This data is NOT FOR NAVIGATION. See the XTide disclaimer for details. In addition, tide and current are influenced by storms, river flow, and other factors beyond the ability of any predictive program.