Marrying Arbors

bobgaggle

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Location
Philadelphia, PA
Surprisingly, I've never seen it done/done it. Haven't found much in CB about methods, so not sure if it violates rules, but how is this done? There's plenty of material on a standard arbor to u bolt on a piece of steel, but not sure if there's a specific piece of hardware designed for this purpose. I went on Clancy's site and didn't find anything in their products page...

Also, Anyone ever married 2 arbors several linesets away from each other? We're doing a 3d cage/jail cell thing that flies in and probably want it on 2 battens (maybe 4' US/DS between picks)
 

derekleffew

Resident Curmudgeon
Senior Team
Premium Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Location
Las Vegas, NV, USA
No, no, and no, Don't ask, don't tell. And not in Bermuda either. Marriage shall be only between one arbor and one batten. For the good of the (hetero-normative) children.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gafftapegreenia

Amiers

Renting to Corporate One Fixture at a Time.
Joined
May 28, 2009
Location
Phoenix, Az
Why would you want to marry them?

Even if you have to use two line sets to rig it you still need two flyman/women to bring it in anyways. Making it stiff at the pipe would just complicate it to no end and also not allow you to bring it all the way out.
 

bobgaggle

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Location
Philadelphia, PA
points heard, my thought was to make them synchronous so inconsistencies in travel speed between 2 operators could be minimized. Trying to avoid the thing rocking as it comes in. Didn't mention it in the op, but we aren't rigging this. I'm just trying to figure out the problem in my head. We're just building it and shipping it out...
 

RonHebbard

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Location
Waterdown, ON, CA
Why would you want to marry them?

Even if you have to use two line sets to rig it you still need two flyman/women to bring it in anyways. Making it stiff at the pipe would just complicate it to no end and also not allow you to bring it all the way out.
@Amiers You may not need to haul it all the way out. Depending upon the height / length of your load, you may be able to fly it above sight-lines and still be 40' below your 120' grid? As always: It depends.
Toodleoo!
Ron Hebbard.
 

Amiers

Renting to Corporate One Fixture at a Time.
Joined
May 28, 2009
Location
Phoenix, Az
I suppose so. But it’s just easier to take it all the way out and not add more complications to the lineset schedule as is.
 

gafftapegreenia

CBMod
CB Mods
Joined
Sep 24, 2005
Location
Michigan
Why would you want to marry them?

Even if you have to use two line sets to rig it you still need two flyman/women to bring it in anyways. Making it stiff at the pipe would just complicate it to no end and also not allow you to bring it all the way out.
You don’t marry them at the pipe, you marry them at the arbor.
 

RonHebbard

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Location
Waterdown, ON, CA
I suppose so. But it’s just easier to take it all the way out and not add more complications to the lineset schedule as is.
@Amiers Understood. You read like someone who's spent most of his life in spaces with 40' to 60' or 75' grids. (I recall having that same mind-set in those sorts of places) Once your grid is appreciably higher than 100', you'll find yourself not putting pipes in the hole as often.
Toodleoo!
Ron Hebbard.
 

gafftapegreenia

CBMod
CB Mods
Joined
Sep 24, 2005
Location
Michigan
  • Like
Reactions: RonHebbard

Amiers

Renting to Corporate One Fixture at a Time.
Joined
May 28, 2009
Location
Phoenix, Az
I guess we’ll leave it at that then.
 

BillConnerFASTC

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2010
Location
Clayton NY 13624
Balance, balance, and balance. I think each situation is unique and you really need to know what you are doing and know how to analyze the design. One arbor can float if its all designed right.

I'd much rather have enough arbor travel to to tag a trailer to the primary arbor, but then you have to watch out for the loads on each individual component. Just lots of things to watch out for when rigging designed for the weight of one arbor now has more.
 

RonHebbard

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Location
Waterdown, ON, CA
I guess we’ll leave it at that then.
@Amiers @egilson1 @What Rigger? @derekleffew
Here's my take on marrying pipes Vs. marrying arbors, my take MAY not be correct thus come one, come all.
Fire at will, I'll volunteer to portray will.
If / when you marry two, or more, arbors to a single line set, you're potentially over loading the head block for that set, its supporting cables, their attachments to the pipe (Singular) and the pipe itself.
If / when you marry two, or more, pipes (battens if you will), you're sharing the counterweight across multiple head blocks, lift lines and loft blocks, optimistically NOT over stressing any part of your rigging system past its safely designed load limits.
Yes? No? Agree? Disagree? Full of excrement?? No phuquing way?
Comments: Bring 'em on. Let's have an open discussion and not kill anyone in the process.
Toodleoo!
Ron Hebbard.
 

gafftapegreenia

CBMod
CB Mods
Joined
Sep 24, 2005
Location
Michigan
Ah, @RonHebbard, I think we have a misunderstanding.

When I’ve seen linesets married, they are physically joined at the arbor but their individual lift lines and battens are still used.

I haven’t yet seen a situation where a a neighboring arbor is disconnected from its lift lines and used as additional weight on a single line set. That concept to me is the same as hanging sandbags on to the bottom of the arbor. A practice that, as you say, could put a risky amount of stress on single components.
 

RonHebbard

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Location
Waterdown, ON, CA
Ah, @RonHebbard, I think we have a misunderstanding.

When I’ve seen linesets married, they are physically joined at the arbor but their individual lift lines and battens are still used.

I haven’t yet seen a situation where a a neighboring arbor is disconnected from its lift lines and used as additional weight on a single line set. That concept to me is the same as hanging sandbags on to the bottom of the arbor. A practice that, as you say, could put a risky amount of stress on single components.
@gafftapegreenia Understood. I've seen people chain two adjacent arbors together with trim chains, load both arbors but only hang their load on one of the battens. I find this too, too scary, right up there with using lead bricks to load more than the design weight on a single arbor. BTW; I still recall when I first read you, I figured your pseudonym implied you were a young "Greenie" in the IA.
Toodeoo!
Ron Hebbard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ben Stiegler

Amiers

Renting to Corporate One Fixture at a Time.
Joined
May 28, 2009
Location
Phoenix, Az
I could see marrying two arbors next to each other but a 4-5 lineset gap marry would be pretty complicated. I have been thinking about it all day and it still would involve some pretty in depth setup to accomplish and not break everything or someone.
 

RonHebbard

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Location
Waterdown, ON, CA
I could see marrying two arbors next to each other but a 4-5 lineset gap marry would be pretty complicated. I have been thinking about it all day and it still would involve some pretty in depth setup to accomplish and not break everything or someone.
@Amiers "I have been thinking about it all day". Is your head sore yet?
Toodleoo!
Ron Hebbard.
 

lwinters630

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 12, 2011
Location
west of Chicago
i have married adjacent arbors and battens after getting a professional who designed the arbor involved. Even so, a good marriage takes two people [opeators] to Tango. A long distance marriage will have a lot of impediments to deal with. . . . . . And i haven't a Clew.
Best weshes to the OP