Go with all soft shackles?

[DaveInDenver]

How do you know a steel shackle you pick up is good? Has it been overloaded? Dropped on a hard surface? Is it a quality unit? How do you know.....
A caliper isn't going to tell you the quality of the steel.
I've refused to use, or retired, a fair number of steel shackles......bent pins, bent bodies, corrosion pitting, etc.

You must start with a known shackle, so no, you cannot know any shackle is good. I would trust Crosby, Gunnebo, Columbus McKinnon, Campbell or Van Beest that you can reasonably assume is not counterfeit (this is common to everything, so can we agree to the assumption that a shackle, length of rope, block, etc. is what it says it is?).

26-1.8.5 Removal Criteria
Shackles shall be removed from service if conditions such as the following are present and shall only be returned to service when approved by a qualified person:

​

(a) missing or illegible identification​

(b) indications of heat damage, including weld spatter or arc strikes​

(c) excessive pitting or corrosion​

(d) bent, twisted, distorted, stretched, elongated, cracked, or broken load-bearing components​

(e) excessive nicks or gouges​

(f) a 10% reduction of the original or catalog dimension at any point around the body or pin​

(g) incomplete pin engagement​

(h) excessive thread damage​

(i) evidence of unauthorized welding or modification​

(j) other conditions, including visible damage, that cause doubt as to the continued use of the shackle​

If a shackle is dropped, run over, left on a bumper to rust, whatever and it doesn't meet those criteria it gets replaced. Yup, most of it is subjective just like fuzz on a synthetic rope. But the caliper does not lie on (f). If the body and pin match the same diameter as the catalog says it should and the shackle otherwise appears clean, uncut and the threads engage fully it is absolutely reasonable to assume it will meet the rating.

A qualified person can always proof test a shackle and reinspect against 26-1.8.5. If it passes then it's OK to put back into service, even for safety critical use.

And no, you can't carry calipers all the time. I'm talking about periodic inspection of your recovery equipment. When someone hands me a shackle in the field, regardless if its soft or steel, there's a level of trust. I would offer to use my own gear if there was some doubt.

Bottom line is we all have to come to our own conclusions. I'm not saying you shouldn't use soft shackles if you want. I'm simply suggesting why I prefer what I do. If that means you don't act like an anchor for me that's your option. But the sky is falling, drop every ounce from rigging viewpoint isn't unquestionably correct. There's downsides and upsides both ways.

 

[LandCruiserPhil]

I believe it was one of those receiver hitch to steel soft shackle adapters ( all steel ) , the steel shackle, and then the part of the hitch/welds that failed.
I'd call it 10-15lbs?

A great picture/example for when recovery points go bad. Just imagining what that would do to a human head

 

[Metcalf]

If a shackle is dropped, run over, left on a bumper to rust, whatever and it doesn't meet those criteria it gets replaced. Yup, most of it is subjective just like fuzz on a synthetic rope. But the caliper does not lie. If the body and pin match the same diameter as the catalog says it should and the shackle otherwise appears clean, uncut and the threads engage fully it is absolutely reasonable to assume it will meet the rating.

It is about trust. You trust your own gear, so do I.

I do not trust any random bit of gear I pick up as much these days, that goes for soft or hard gear. I do feel more 'safe' with soft gear these days because less weight and energy.

I trust random recovery points on vehicles the least these days.....that is after all what the recovery gear weight is going to be hanging off of.
Generally, I try and double up recovery points these days if at all possible/practical.

The biggest issue I see is that we have a lot of synthetic recovery gear out there these days, but very few vehicles with recovery points designed to accept it.
This is leading to a lot of 'bad press' for synthetic gear since it is being used with bad recovery mounting point designs.
That isn't doing anyone any favors.

 

[Metcalf]

A great picture/example for when recovery points go bad. Just imagining what that would do to a human head

Exactly.

This is one of the reasons I have personally made a big push to lighten things up.
Everything is going to have a failure point, but if it is light weight when it fails, it will be safer.

 

[hemifoot]

one more reason to use some type of kinetic energy dampener.it's winching 101.learn how to use your gear and things like this are totally avoidable.soft or hard gear makes little difference in energy when it lets go.run your spool all the way out,add a snatch block and you have little to worry about.if it's too heavy or too much work then expect the worst.

 

[Metcalf]

one more reason to use some type of kinetic energy dampener.it's winching 101.learn how to use your gear and things like this are totally avoidable.

The example I posted was not winching, it was a kinetic recovery rope.

While a damper can help in those situations, with 10-15lbs of steel flying through the air.....a 3lb damper isn't going to have much effect....

 

[DaveInDenver]

A great picture/example for when recovery points go bad. Just imagining what that would do to a human head

Which is why exposing as few people to it during a recovery is fundamental.

Exactly.

This is one of the reasons I have personally made a big push to lighten things up.
Everything is going to have a failure point, but if it is light weight when it fails, it will be safer.

I get what you're driving at but I prefer to have things stay put. Lighter is not better if it introduces a new potential point of failure. That's fundamentally what I'm saying. Things can fail so how do you design and inspect to gain trust in the gear that lower the likelihood that it does?

A theoretical conservation of energy calculation is great and yeah a soft shackle weighing less will store less energy. But what if on pull 4 it unknots or breaks? How do you know you should have retired it after 3?

With climbing ropes we log every fall and the UIAA and manufacturers have guidelines (which ultimately just say retire them when you think they are done). We have guidelines for the rope itself or slings - fuzz, kinking, elongation and creep. The UIAA does say to use sewn slings and never knotted ones for non-emergency use. That's for dynamic falls in climbing and not static rigging (although perhaps applicable for recovery straps and ropes). Arborists and sailing, also sort of similar but not. I think overhead rigging is the fall back only because it is the closest to what we do.

B30.9 says a synthetic web sling shall be removed from service if conditions such as the following are present on the sling:

(a) Missing or illegible sling identification.
(b) Acid or caustic burns.
(c) Melting or charring of any part of the sling.
(d) Holes, tears, cuts, or snags.
(e) Broken or worn stitching in load bearing splices.
(f) Excessive abrasive wear.
(g) Knots in any part of the sling.
(h) Discoloration and brittle or stiff areas on any part of the sling, which may mean chemical or ultraviolet/sunlight damage.
(i) Fitting that are pitted, corroded, cracked, bent, twisted, gouged, or broken.
(j) For hooks, removal criteria as stated in ASME B30.10
(k) Other conditions, including visible damage, that cause doubt as to the continued use of the sling.​

Most soft shackles fail on (a) since not all of them even are tagged. But they all fail on (g) by default. If they were simple endless loops and used at hitches maybe I could understand but I'm not smart enough I guess.

 

[hemifoot]

which is why i never use recovery rope/straps.i'm not that lazy.you're asking for trouble.the pic speaks for itself.

 

[Metcalf]

Which is why exposing as few people to it during a recovery is fundamental.

I get what you're driving at but I prefer to have things stay put. Lighter is not better if it introduces a new potential point of failure. That's fundamentally what I'm saying. Things can fail so how do you design and inspect to gain trust in the gear that lower the likelihood that it does?

A theoretical conservation of energy calculation is great and yeah a soft shackle weighing less will store less energy. But what if on pull 4 it unknots or breaks? How do you know you should have retired it after 3?

With climbing ropes we log every fall and the UIAA and manufacturers have guidelines (which ultimately just say retire them when you think they are done). We have guidelines for the rope itself or slings - fuzz, kinking, elongation and creep. The UIAA does say to use sewn slings and never knotted ones for non-emergency use. That's for dynamic falls in climbing and not static rigging (although perhaps applicable for recovery straps and ropes). Arborists and sailing, also sort of similar but not. I think overhead rigging is the fall back only because it is the closest to what we do.

B30.9 says a synthetic web sling shall be removed from service if conditions such as the following are present on the sling:

​

(a) Missing or illegible sling identification.​

(b) Acid or caustic burns.​

(c) Melting or charring of any part of the sling.​

(d) Holes, tears, cuts, or snags.​

(e) Broken or worn stitching in load bearing splices.​

(f) Excessive abrasive wear.​

(g) Knots in any part of the sling.​

(h) Discoloration and brittle or stiff areas on any part of the sling, which may mean chemical or ultraviolet/sunlight damage.​

(i) Fitting that are pitted, corroded, cracked, bent, twisted, gouged, or broken.​

(j) For hooks, removal criteria as stated in ASME B30.10​

(k) Other conditions, including visible damage, that cause doubt as to the continued use of the sling.​

Most soft shackles fail on (a) since not all of them even are tagged. But they all fail on (g) by default. If they were simple endless loops and used at hitches maybe I could understand but I'm not smart enough I guess.

You can WANT everything to stay together all you want, it won't at some point. Everyone loves to use 'rated' this and that.....
How many 'RATED' recovery mounting points have you seen? An off the shelf trailer hitch is about as close as we usually get.

The example I posted was everything basically done right....rated recovery strap/rope, rated shackles, etc.
It wasn't any of that stuff that failed.
Personally, I would rather have all the stuff in the rigging be as light as practical, this even goes for steel shackles ( and one of the reasons I see using overhead lifting standards being a potentially bad idea )

Soft shackles.

A- There are some soft shackles on the market that are rated with tags. There are some that are not.
Generally, I think it comes down to comfort level.
I can see your point to a degree, but I keep going back to vehicle recovery points. Those are not rated....but we hook 'rated' equipment to them to make us feel better.

G- Soft shackles ultimately fail at the noose ( tightest bend radius in the system) , not the head/knot, in my experience and all the research I have seen. Factor 55 does a lot of this testing.
They are also failing predictably close to calculated MBS numbers based on the rope used and the style of construction
I don't believe that steel shackles are individually tested to MBS either. Once a standard is established they are 'rated' and trusted for the batch/name/etc.

There are soft shackle designs that do not use knots. They have never really caught on.

 

[MOguy]

I've never had a winch line or soft shackle fail because of mud.....or sand....or rocks.....or snow...or ice. I've been in lots of all of them.

There are a LOT of Rainforest Challenge competition vehicles running synthetic winch line in some of the nastiest muddiest environments you can imagine.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't give your winch line a wash once a year to help it out, but if that is too much work/bother I can't really help you.

I inspected my steel winch lines back in the day ( and lightly oiled them ) just as often. Steel cable isn't an instant win either.

EXACTLY,


I am not saying they will fail, I am saying I will fail to maintain them properly. If I were using rope in the mud I would wash it every time it got dirty in order to help maintain its integrity, except I wouldn't.

Everything is a compromise. I am not saying not to use rope. I won't but you can.

 

[Metcalf]

which is why i never use recovery rope/straps.i'm not that lazy.you're asking for trouble.the pic speaks for itself.

Yeah, ok......

 

[DaveInDenver]

@Verkstad - I rather liked the idea of using a tire for a damper.

 

[Metcalf]

LoL ! Thats another endless amusement.
Guys and their makeshift dampeners of floormats or filled diapers draped over a tensioned rope. Believing it worthwhile because they saw YouTube or read some pagefiller crap in a 4wheeler ’mag.

To make a damper system work right you need 3 units for just a simple snatch rope/strap operation ( one at each rigging cluster, and one in the middle ) that weigh a significant amount.
When was the last time you saw anyone do that on the trail....

 

[DaveInDenver]

I don't believe that steel shackles are individually tested to MBS either. Once a standard is established they are 'rated' and trusted for the batch/name/etc.

Off the shelf catalog shackles are not individually proof tested. They will carry a serial number on the pin if they were proof tested by the manufacturer. AFAIK any piece of gear that otherwise meets spec could later be proof tested and uniquely numbered, so the process must still be in control. B30.26 requires a proof test to 2 times but no more than 2.2 times rated working load limit for a bow shackle. They must be designed to yield at minimum of 5 times rated working load limit, which is where the 10% under dimension comes into play. That indicates the steel was forced into the plastic region.

 

[MOguy]

When I look at the condition my recovery straps are in after a few years and what condition my cable is in after about 18 years the decision is easy for me. I guess I am lazy and cheap.