Do we think this would last the test of time, or the actual use?

https://www.row2k.com/features/5824/rowing-hack--carabiner-clipped-heels/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl07122023

I like the thought of a simple heel restraint swap ability - happens so often in club boats.

You (the club) could control the length and control the knot tying - I would not trust individuals, but concerned it could deteriorate over time!

James

On 13/07/2023 08:04, James HS wrote:
> Do we think this would last the test of time, or the actual use?
>
> https://www.row2k.com/features/5824/rowing-hack--carabiner-clipped-heels/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl07122023
>
> I like the thought of a simple heel restraint swap ability - happens so often in club boats.
>
> You (the club) could control the length and control the knot tying - I would not trust individuals, but concerned it could deteriorate over time!
>
> James

The link in the article says those clips are made of aluminium. I
wouldn't trust those to withstand anything but the weakest yank.

They do mention there are titanium alternatives though I couldn't find
them. Larger stainless steel would be better IMHO.

Kit

On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:36:04 AM UTC-4, Kit Davies wrote:
> On 13/07/2023 08:04, James HS wrote:
> > Do we think this would last the test of time, or the actual use?
> >
> > https://www.row2k.com/features/5824/rowing-hack--carabiner-clipped-heels/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl07122023
> >
> > I like the thought of a simple heel restraint swap ability - happens so often in club boats.
> >
> > You (the club) could control the length and control the knot tying - I would not trust individuals, but concerned it could deteriorate over time!
> >
> > James
> The link in the article says those clips are made of aluminium. I
> wouldn't trust those to withstand anything but the weakest yank.
>
> They do mention there are titanium alternatives though I couldn't find
> them. Larger stainless steel would be better IMHO.
>
> Kit
I commented on this article at Row2K last year when it was just a couple of weeks old. It appears that my observation was taken to heart to an extent.. Clearly, these CAN be a matter of life or death. It is better than Carl’s ‘favourite’ zip tie approach - but only by a little. Nota bene: this goes back to his very correct ranting against people using zip ties as tie downs several years ago.

Even if you implement this with a device with sufficient tensile strength, I would be concerned about the locking arm staying in place. These are hidden from normal view and almost never inspected. The spring may break or weaken over time, especially if it is carbon steel. It is also POSSIBLE that the locking arm gets dislodged by some object or force.

The desire to save time in changing shoes is reasonable. I suggest that a better approach might be to use a stainless shackle that has a screw locking pin. This provides the tensile strength and a more reliable attachment with a small added time to remove and insert.

On 13/07/2023 20:59, don Vickers wrote:
> On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:36:04 AM UTC-4, Kit Davies wrote:
>> On 13/07/2023 08:04, James HS wrote:
>>> Do we think this would last the test of time, or the actual use?
>>>
>>> https://www.row2k.com/features/5824/rowing-hack--carabiner-clipped-heels/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl07122023
>>>
>>> I like the thought of a simple heel restraint swap ability - happens so often in club boats.
>>>
>>> You (the club) could control the length and control the knot tying - I would not trust individuals, but concerned it could deteriorate over time!
>>>
>>> James
>> The link in the article says those clips are made of aluminium. I
>> wouldn't trust those to withstand anything but the weakest yank.
>>
>> They do mention there are titanium alternatives though I couldn't find
>> them. Larger stainless steel would be better IMHO.
>>
>> Kit
> I commented on this article at Row2K last year when it was just a couple of weeks old. It appears that my observation was taken to heart to an extent. Clearly, these CAN be a matter of life or death. It is better than Carl’s ‘favourite’ zip tie approach - but only by a little. Nota bene: this goes back to his very correct ranting against people using zip ties as tie downs several years ago.
>
> Even if you implement this with a device with sufficient tensile strength, I would be concerned about the locking arm staying in place. These are hidden from normal view and almost never inspected. The spring may break or weaken over time, especially if it is carbon steel. It is also POSSIBLE that the locking arm gets dislodged by some object or force.
>
> The desire to save time in changing shoes is reasonable. I suggest that a better approach might be to use a stainless shackle that has a screw locking pin. This provides the tensile strength and a more reliable attachment with a small added time to remove and insert.
>

Don -
With respect, I am unaware that I have ever recommended a Zip-tie in
place of a proper heel cord. Some other Carl, perhaps?

I have viewed that article & am frankly appalled. It proposes a trivial
piece of "tat", displaying a serious lack awareness of the vital safety
function of the heel cord system.

Heel cords are a vexed issue in part because nearly every
fully-adjustable stretcher out there incorporates 1 totally redundant
component - the shoe plate. We've been fitting fully-adjustable
stretchers to boats, providing swift & secure adjustment of shoe height
and inclination, for several decades.

The problem with any stretcher on which the shoes come mounted on a
moveable shoe plate is that changing the shoe height changes the amount
of heel lift because the shoes move WRT the board while the cord
attachment point is fixed WRT the board.

Adjusting the height of the shoes on our stretchers has not the
slightest effect on the setting of the heel cords - because the shoe
does not move WRT the stretcher board.

I haven't time to take this further now, but may return to elaborate on
the matter tomorrow.

Carl

--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf
Email: carl@carldouglasrowing.com Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: carldouglasrowing.com & now on Facebook @ CarlDouglasRacingShells

On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:33:32 PM UTC-4, carl wrote:
> On 13/07/2023 20:59, don Vickers wrote:
> > On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:36:04 AM UTC-4, Kit Davies wrote:
> >> On 13/07/2023 08:04, James HS wrote:
> >>> Do we think this would last the test of time, or the actual use?
> >>>
> >>> https://www.row2k.com/features/5824/rowing-hack--carabiner-clipped-heels/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl07122023
> >>>
> >>> I like the thought of a simple heel restraint swap ability - happens so often in club boats.
> >>>
> >>> You (the club) could control the length and control the knot tying - I would not trust individuals, but concerned it could deteriorate over time!
> >>>
> >>> James
> >> The link in the article says those clips are made of aluminium. I
> >> wouldn't trust those to withstand anything but the weakest yank.
> >>
> >> They do mention there are titanium alternatives though I couldn't find
> >> them. Larger stainless steel would be better IMHO.
> >>
> >> Kit
> > I commented on this article at Row2K last year when it was just a couple of weeks old. It appears that my observation was taken to heart to an extent. Clearly, these CAN be a matter of life or death. It is better than Carl’s ‘favourite’ zip tie approach - but only by a little. Nota bene: this goes back to his very correct ranting against people using zip ties as tie downs several years ago.
> >
> > Even if you implement this with a device with sufficient tensile strength, I would be concerned about the locking arm staying in place. These are hidden from normal view and almost never inspected. The spring may break or weaken over time, especially if it is carbon steel. It is also POSSIBLE that the locking arm gets dislodged by some object or force.
> >
> > The desire to save time in changing shoes is reasonable. I suggest that a better approach might be to use a stainless shackle that has a screw locking pin. This provides the tensile strength and a more reliable attachment with a small added time to remove and insert.
> >
> Don -
> With respect, I am unaware that I have ever recommended a Zip-tie in
> place of a proper heel cord. Some other Carl, perhaps?
>
> I have viewed that article & am frankly appalled. It proposes a trivial
> piece of "tat", displaying a serious lack awareness of the vital safety
> function of the heel cord system.
>
> Heel cords are a vexed issue in part because nearly every
> fully-adjustable stretcher out there incorporates 1 totally redundant
> component - the shoe plate. We've been fitting fully-adjustable
> stretchers to boats, providing swift & secure adjustment of shoe height
> and inclination, for several decades.
>
> The problem with any stretcher on which the shoes come mounted on a
> moveable shoe plate is that changing the shoe height changes the amount
> of heel lift because the shoes move WRT the board while the cord
> attachment point is fixed WRT the board.
>
> Adjusting the height of the shoes on our stretchers has not the
> slightest effect on the setting of the heel cords - because the shoe
> does not move WRT the stretcher board.
>
> I haven't time to take this further now, but may return to elaborate on
> the matter tomorrow.
>
> Carl
>
> --
> Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
> Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
> Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
> Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf
> Email: ca...@carldouglasrowing.com Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
> URLs: carldouglasrowing.com & now on Facebook @ CarlDouglasRacingShells
Carl,

I apologise for making a poor joke and not making it clear that it was inverse and, possibly, perverse. The reason I enclosed favourite in quotes was to help in that regard.

My reference was from a series of discussions several years ago about heel tie downs where zip ties had been suggested and you rightly pointed out that they were a horrible idea.

Humour in text can be confusing the hands of amateurs.

My apologies,
don

On 14/07/2023 12:54, don Vickers wrote:
> On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:33:32 PM UTC-4, carl wrote:
>> On 13/07/2023 20:59, don Vickers wrote:
>>> On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:36:04 AM UTC-4, Kit Davies wrote:
>>>> On 13/07/2023 08:04, James HS wrote:
>>>>> Do we think this would last the test of time, or the actual use?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.row2k.com/features/5824/rowing-hack--carabiner-clipped-heels/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl07122023
>>>>>
>>>>> I like the thought of a simple heel restraint swap ability - happens so often in club boats.
>>>>>
>>>>> You (the club) could control the length and control the knot tying - I would not trust individuals, but concerned it could deteriorate over time!
>>>>>
>>>>> James
>>>> The link in the article says those clips are made of aluminium. I
>>>> wouldn't trust those to withstand anything but the weakest yank.
>>>>
>>>> They do mention there are titanium alternatives though I couldn't find
>>>> them. Larger stainless steel would be better IMHO.
>>>>
>>>> Kit
>>> I commented on this article at Row2K last year when it was just a couple of weeks old. It appears that my observation was taken to heart to an extent. Clearly, these CAN be a matter of life or death. It is better than Carl’s ‘favourite’ zip tie approach - but only by a little. Nota bene: this goes back to his very correct ranting against people using zip ties as tie downs several years ago.
>>>
>>> Even if you implement this with a device with sufficient tensile strength, I would be concerned about the locking arm staying in place. These are hidden from normal view and almost never inspected. The spring may break or weaken over time, especially if it is carbon steel. It is also POSSIBLE that the locking arm gets dislodged by some object or force.
>>>
>>> The desire to save time in changing shoes is reasonable. I suggest that a better approach might be to use a stainless shackle that has a screw locking pin. This provides the tensile strength and a more reliable attachment with a small added time to remove and insert.
>>>
>> Don -
>> With respect, I am unaware that I have ever recommended a Zip-tie in
>> place of a proper heel cord. Some other Carl, perhaps?
>>
>> I have viewed that article & am frankly appalled. It proposes a trivial
>> piece of "tat", displaying a serious lack awareness of the vital safety
>> function of the heel cord system.
>>
>> Heel cords are a vexed issue in part because nearly every
>> fully-adjustable stretcher out there incorporates 1 totally redundant
>> component - the shoe plate. We've been fitting fully-adjustable
>> stretchers to boats, providing swift & secure adjustment of shoe height
>> and inclination, for several decades.
>>
>> The problem with any stretcher on which the shoes come mounted on a
>> moveable shoe plate is that changing the shoe height changes the amount
>> of heel lift because the shoes move WRT the board while the cord
>> attachment point is fixed WRT the board.
>>
>> Adjusting the height of the shoes on our stretchers has not the
>> slightest effect on the setting of the heel cords - because the shoe
>> does not move WRT the stretcher board.
>>
>> I haven't time to take this further now, but may return to elaborate on
>> the matter tomorrow.
>>
>> Carl
>>

> Carl,
>
>
> I apologise for making a poor joke and not making it clear that it was inverse and, possibly, perverse. The reason I enclosed favourite in quotes was to help in that regard.
>
> My reference was from a series of discussions several years ago about heel tie downs where zip ties had been suggested and you rightly pointed out that they were a horrible idea.
>
> Humour in text can be confusing the hands of amateurs.
>
> My apologies,
> don
>

No apologies needed, Don! We stand on the same side of that safety
fence, as on many others.

But I do have a huge problem with the supposed authorities in our sport
&, indeed, with those who propose modifications to essential safety
devices but dare not personally test & evaluate them, let alone testing
under under realistic conditions.

Cheers -
Carl

--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf
Email: carl@carldouglasrowing.com Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: carldouglasrowing.com & now on Facebook @ CarlDouglasRacingShells

On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 11:14:24 AM UTC-6, carl wrote:
> On 14/07/2023 12:54, don Vickers wrote:
> > On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:33:32 PM UTC-4, carl wrote:
> >> On 13/07/2023 20:59, don Vickers wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:36:04 AM UTC-4, Kit Davies wrote:
> >>>> On 13/07/2023 08:04, James HS wrote:
> >>>>> Do we think this would last the test of time, or the actual use?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.row2k.com/features/5824/rowing-hack--carabiner-clipped-heels/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl07122023
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I like the thought of a simple heel restraint swap ability - happens so often in club boats.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You (the club) could control the length and control the knot tying - I would not trust individuals, but concerned it could deteriorate over time!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> James
> >>>> The link in the article says those clips are made of aluminium. I
> >>>> wouldn't trust those to withstand anything but the weakest yank.
> >>>>
> >>>> They do mention there are titanium alternatives though I couldn't find
> >>>> them. Larger stainless steel would be better IMHO.
> >>>>
> >>>> Kit
> >>> I commented on this article at Row2K last year when it was just a couple of weeks old. It appears that my observation was taken to heart to an extent. Clearly, these CAN be a matter of life or death. It is better than Carl’s ‘favourite’ zip tie approach - but only by a little. Nota bene: this goes back to his very correct ranting against people using zip ties as tie downs several years ago.
> >>>
> >>> Even if you implement this with a device with sufficient tensile strength, I would be concerned about the locking arm staying in place. These are hidden from normal view and almost never inspected. The spring may break or weaken over time, especially if it is carbon steel. It is also POSSIBLE that the locking arm gets dislodged by some object or force.
> >>>
> >>> The desire to save time in changing shoes is reasonable. I suggest that a better approach might be to use a stainless shackle that has a screw locking pin. This provides the tensile strength and a more reliable attachment with a small added time to remove and insert.
> >>>
> >> Don -
> >> With respect, I am unaware that I have ever recommended a Zip-tie in
> >> place of a proper heel cord. Some other Carl, perhaps?
> >>
> >> I have viewed that article & am frankly appalled. It proposes a trivial
> >> piece of "tat", displaying a serious lack awareness of the vital safety
> >> function of the heel cord system.
> >>
> >> Heel cords are a vexed issue in part because nearly every
> >> fully-adjustable stretcher out there incorporates 1 totally redundant
> >> component - the shoe plate. We've been fitting fully-adjustable
> >> stretchers to boats, providing swift & secure adjustment of shoe height
> >> and inclination, for several decades.
> >>
> >> The problem with any stretcher on which the shoes come mounted on a
> >> moveable shoe plate is that changing the shoe height changes the amount
> >> of heel lift because the shoes move WRT the board while the cord
> >> attachment point is fixed WRT the board.
> >>
> >> Adjusting the height of the shoes on our stretchers has not the
> >> slightest effect on the setting of the heel cords - because the shoe
> >> does not move WRT the stretcher board.
> >>
> >> I haven't time to take this further now, but may return to elaborate on
> >> the matter tomorrow.
> >>
> >> Carl
> >>
> > Carl,
> >
> >
> > I apologise for making a poor joke and not making it clear that it was inverse and, possibly, perverse. The reason I enclosed favourite in quotes was to help in that regard.
> >
> > My reference was from a series of discussions several years ago about heel tie downs where zip ties had been suggested and you rightly pointed out that they were a horrible idea.
> >
> > Humour in text can be confusing the hands of amateurs.
> >
> > My apologies,
> > don
> >
> No apologies needed, Don! We stand on the same side of that safety
> fence, as on many others.
>
> But I do have a huge problem with the supposed authorities in our sport
> &, indeed, with those who propose modifications to essential safety
> devices but dare not personally test & evaluate them, let alone testing
> under under realistic conditions.
>
> Cheers -
> Carl
>
> --
> Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
> Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
> Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
> Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf
> Email: ca...@carldouglasrowing.com Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
> URLs: carldouglasrowing.com & now on Facebook @ CarlDouglasRacingShells

I think the approach in the article is super practical. All of the criticisms in this thread I think are shortsighted and unrealistic:
Do you think alumnium is going to be weaker than a shoe lace!?
The lace length is going to be set by whomever ties them--regardless of the restraint system: traditional, clip or, zip tie.

On 14/07/2023 21:23, Roman Sammartino wrote:
> On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 11:14:24 AM UTC-6, carl wrote:
>> On 14/07/2023 12:54, don Vickers wrote:
>>> On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:33:32 PM UTC-4, carl wrote:
>>>> On 13/07/2023 20:59, don Vickers wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:36:04 AM UTC-4, Kit Davies wrote:
>>>>>> On 13/07/2023 08:04, James HS wrote:
>>>>>>> Do we think this would last the test of time, or the actual use?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.row2k.com/features/5824/rowing-hack--carabiner-clipped-heels/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl07122023
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I like the thought of a simple heel restraint swap ability - happens so often in club boats.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You (the club) could control the length and control the knot tying - I would not trust individuals, but concerned it could deteriorate over time!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> James
>>>>>> The link in the article says those clips are made of aluminium. I
>>>>>> wouldn't trust those to withstand anything but the weakest yank.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They do mention there are titanium alternatives though I couldn't find
>>>>>> them. Larger stainless steel would be better IMHO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kit
>>>>> I commented on this article at Row2K last year when it was just a couple of weeks old. It appears that my observation was taken to heart to an extent. Clearly, these CAN be a matter of life or death. It is better than Carl’s ‘favourite’ zip tie approach - but only by a little. Nota bene: this goes back to his very correct ranting against people using zip ties as tie downs several years ago.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even if you implement this with a device with sufficient tensile strength, I would be concerned about the locking arm staying in place. These are hidden from normal view and almost never inspected. The spring may break or weaken over time, especially if it is carbon steel. It is also POSSIBLE that the locking arm gets dislodged by some object or force.
>>>>>
>>>>> The desire to save time in changing shoes is reasonable. I suggest that a better approach might be to use a stainless shackle that has a screw locking pin. This provides the tensile strength and a more reliable attachment with a small added time to remove and insert.
>>>>>
>>>> Don -
>>>> With respect, I am unaware that I have ever recommended a Zip-tie in
>>>> place of a proper heel cord. Some other Carl, perhaps?
>>>>
>>>> I have viewed that article & am frankly appalled. It proposes a trivial
>>>> piece of "tat", displaying a serious lack awareness of the vital safety
>>>> function of the heel cord system.
>>>>
>>>> Heel cords are a vexed issue in part because nearly every
>>>> fully-adjustable stretcher out there incorporates 1 totally redundant
>>>> component - the shoe plate. We've been fitting fully-adjustable
>>>> stretchers to boats, providing swift & secure adjustment of shoe height
>>>> and inclination, for several decades.
>>>>
>>>> The problem with any stretcher on which the shoes come mounted on a
>>>> moveable shoe plate is that changing the shoe height changes the amount
>>>> of heel lift because the shoes move WRT the board while the cord
>>>> attachment point is fixed WRT the board.
>>>>
>>>> Adjusting the height of the shoes on our stretchers has not the
>>>> slightest effect on the setting of the heel cords - because the shoe
>>>> does not move WRT the stretcher board.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't time to take this further now, but may return to elaborate on
>>>> the matter tomorrow.
>>>>
>>>> Carl
>>>>
>>> Carl,
>>>
>>>
>>> I apologise for making a poor joke and not making it clear that it was inverse and, possibly, perverse. The reason I enclosed favourite in quotes was to help in that regard.
>>>
>>> My reference was from a series of discussions several years ago about heel tie downs where zip ties had been suggested and you rightly pointed out that they were a horrible idea.
>>>
>>> Humour in text can be confusing the hands of amateurs.
>>>
>>> My apologies,
>>> don
>>>
>> No apologies needed, Don! We stand on the same side of that safety
>> fence, as on many others.
>>
>> But I do have a huge problem with the supposed authorities in our sport
>> &, indeed, with those who propose modifications to essential safety
>> devices but dare not personally test & evaluate them, let alone testing
>> under under realistic conditions.
>>
>> Cheers -
>> Carl
>>
>
>
>
> I think the approach in the article is super practical. All of the criticisms in this thread I think are shortsighted and unrealistic:
> Do you think alumnium is going to be weaker than a shoe lace!?
> The lace length is going to be set by whomever ties them--regardless of the restraint system: traditional, clip or, zip tie.
>
>

So you really think that that cheap little carabiner, with an admitted
breaking load (if lucky) of 33lb (15kg), is adequate to save a life?

And you think that whatever arbitrary length of cord the user chooses is
right, & that it will save their life if they get it wrong?

And you think it unnecessary to use a stronger cord, fitted so that it
cannot chafe & with a knot that cannot come loose?

And you think that the person who devised, tested & established the
essential criteria for the heel restraint system is short-sighted and
unrealistic?

I'm guessing you've never seen someone trapped in their boat, nor known
of people who died as a result. What makes you such an expert that you
can dismiss the concerns of those who have? That is the kind of
ignorance that kills.

Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf
Email: carl@carldouglasrowing.com Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: carldouglasrowing.com & now on Facebook @ CarlDouglasRacingShells

On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 2:05:50 PM UTC-7, carl wrote:
> On 14/07/2023 21:23, Roman Sammartino wrote:

> >
> > I think the approach in the article is super practical. All of the criticisms in this thread I think are shortsighted and unrealistic:
> > Do you think alumnium is going to be weaker than a shoe lace!?
> > The lace length is going to be set by whomever ties them--regardless of the restraint system: traditional, clip or, zip tie.
> >
> >
> So you really think that that cheap little carabiner, with an admitted
> breaking load (if lucky) of 33lb (15kg), is adequate to save a life?

Hey Carl, I'm not trying to argue, rather am curious: have you really determined that 33lb is not a sufficient force to extract heels (feet) from shoes in these unfortunate scenarios? Seems like a lot of force to me, much more than I would need to slip out of most shoes. Also, 6061 AL as I'm sure you're aware has a yield strength of around 40000psi. x-section of that carabiner is about .08*.08 inches from the images, giving a yield strength of around 256lb. Even with bending moments accounted for, I'd estimate that 33lb is probably on the conservative side. I'd be surprised if these yielded at twice that load.

Anyway I'm mostly curious about your implication that 33lb is not sufficient to pull one's heels from inverted, submerged, rowing shoes. What kind of force is applied, when extracting one's feet in such a situation?

To Roman Sammartino: those are not shoe laces in the image. They used guyline paracord which is much stronger and tougher (abrasion resistant) than most shoelaces.

> And you think that whatever arbitrary length of cord the user chooses is
> right, & that it will save their life if they get it wrong?

I think the point Roman was making about length is that if the length is wrong, it's the fault of the person installing them, and not a failure of the materials used. There may be better designs out there that minimize user error better, but considering this one is replacing what was probably shoelaces tied with knots of questionable quality, or original paracord from the boat manufacturer that was probably dissolving into dust after years of abuse, I'd say it's definitely not WORSE than what it replaced.

> And you think it unnecessary to use a stronger cord, fitted so that it
> cannot chafe & with a knot that cannot come loose?

No argument there, they claim to have used a "hangman's knot" which is not what is pictured. Picture shows a simple overhand slipknot.

On 14/07/2023 22:52, KC wrote:
> On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 2:05:50 PM UTC-7, carl wrote:
>> On 14/07/2023 21:23, Roman Sammartino wrote:
>
>>>
>>> I think the approach in the article is super practical. All of the criticisms in this thread I think are shortsighted and unrealistic:
>>> Do you think alumnium is going to be weaker than a shoe lace!?
>>> The lace length is going to be set by whomever ties them--regardless of the restraint system: traditional, clip or, zip tie.
>>>
>>>
>> So you really think that that cheap little carabiner, with an admitted
>> breaking load (if lucky) of 33lb (15kg), is adequate to save a life?
>
> Hey Carl, I'm not trying to argue, rather am curious: have you really determined that 33lb is not a sufficient force to extract heels (feet) from shoes in these unfortunate scenarios? Seems like a lot of force to me, much more than I would need to slip out of most shoes. Also, 6061 AL as I'm sure you're aware has a yield strength of around 40000psi. x-section of that carabiner is about .08*.08 inches from the images, giving a yield strength of around 256lb. Even with bending moments accounted for, I'd estimate that 33lb is probably on the conservative side. I'd be surprised if these yielded at twice that load.
>
> Anyway I'm mostly curious about your implication that 33lb is not sufficient to pull one's heels from inverted, submerged, rowing shoes. What kind of force is applied, when extracting one's feet in such a situation?
>
> To Roman Sammartino: those are not shoe laces in the image. They used guyline paracord which is much stronger and tougher (abrasion resistant) than most shoelaces.
>
>> And you think that whatever arbitrary length of cord the user chooses is
>> right, & that it will save their life if they get it wrong?
>
> I think the point Roman was making about length is that if the length is wrong, it's the fault of the person installing them, and not a failure of the materials used. There may be better designs out there that minimize user error better, but considering this one is replacing what was probably shoelaces tied with knots of questionable quality, or original paracord from the boat manufacturer that was probably dissolving into dust after years of abuse, I'd say it's definitely not WORSE than what it replaced.
>
>> And you think it unnecessary to use a stronger cord, fitted so that it
>> cannot chafe & with a knot that cannot come loose?
>
> No argument there, they claim to have used a "hangman's knot" which is not what is pictured. Picture shows a simple overhand slipknot.
>
>

Kieran -
I respect your thoughtful comments, thank you, but must profoundly
disagree in some particulars, as follows:

1. Extraction force: There's a point (if the shoe is a good but not
necessarily tight fit) when, as the inextensible sole of the shoe is
curved increasingly around the incompressible bone structure of the
foot, but at an inevitably wider radius, that the foot jams tight
between heel & toe boxes of the shoe. (This is exacerbated when the
user decides to lace the shoe relatively "securely".) And almost no
amount of force will then free that entrapped foot.
So what level of force might a desperate, trapped rower apply?

2. I devised the dead-simple heel cord restraint system on learning from
a new client how he escaped from track shoes when trapped under a large
boat in his previous boat. Built like an ox, he just tore the stretcher
apart. And I'd recently heard of cases where, as the fashion went from
clogs to bolt-in track shoes, scullers had died in their inverted boats.
So it was a big wake-up call, & I set about devising how best to
resolve it. But I'm a practical engineer, so I tested it on the water
as well as on dry land - to establish reasonable criteria.

3. Margin of safety: if you can break your last line of defence, then
you're lulled into false security because what was going to save your
life is no more fit for purpose than a chocolate teapot. So I focussed
on these factors:
a) the cords should be indestructible
b) the part of the stretcher to which they attached (& of the shoe)
should be well able to take the likely shock loads
c) what is the maximum safe amount of heel lift before the wrap-around
shortening of the foot space in a reasonably fitting shoe began to trap
the foot. My tests indicated that a maximum of 2"/50mm was more than
adequate for the needs of the rower (with a rake-adjustable stretcher) &
would ensure release even if the shoe was a close fit. But that any
more was treading into danger.
d) the installation should be tamper-proof!! (see below)
I adopted, as over-kill standard, a 4mm-diameter braided nylon cord,
looped from a firm point at the heel of the stretcher, through the shoe
& back again. In the early days there were no special rowing shoes - we
were fitting track shoes. So we looped the cord through a pair of holes
in the sole, near the heel, having first had a cobbler firmly stitch the
uppers to the sole. And the ends of the cords were tied into a knot
under the hole in the stretcher, their ends seared with a fame to
prevent loosening, and bedded in a mastic to prevent sliding and wear.

4. Carabiners: our stretcher design gave (& gives) height adjustment
without needing to alter the heel cord lengths - I strongly oppose
fiddling with heel cords by the rower - we don't permit car seat belts
to be left slack, for obvious reasons. And why, with the shoes firmly
attached to the same stretcher board, would you be taking one set off &
replacing with another set before an outing or race? Just why?

In any case, we know that cast aluminium is prone to voids & defects, so
why would we do all that, then trust our life to a thin piece of cast
aluminium, a mere toy, from a key chain? Can you be sure of that 33lb
figure - who tests it, & has it been tested in this use? I've carried
heavier shopping bags. It can corrode, it will certainly fatigue under
repeatedly loads and abuse. And some naive rower with no grasp on the
risks of foot entrapment is sure to decide it cramps their style. It's
an open invitation to abuse. Would a climber use such a device?

5. The vexed issue of fault: if a safety device intended to prevent
death or injury fails, then the law can't bring the dead back to life
but can very easily be used to hit the club & responsible officers who
thought that safety could be provided by so inadequate a construction.
Lawyers would look for what's in use, is best practice & does work.
Then the stuff will hit the fan.

Enough for now?

Carl

--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf
Email: carl@carldouglasrowing.com Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
URLs: carldouglasrowing.com & now on Facebook @ CarlDouglasRacingShells

On Saturday, July 15, 2023 at 10:45:49 AM UTC-7, carl wrote:
> On 14/07/2023 22:52, KC wrote:
> > On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 2:05:50 PM UTC-7, carl wrote:
> >> On 14/07/2023 21:23, Roman Sammartino wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>> I think the approach in the article is super practical. All of the criticisms in this thread I think are shortsighted and unrealistic:
> >>> Do you think alumnium is going to be weaker than a shoe lace!?
> >>> The lace length is going to be set by whomever ties them--regardless of the restraint system: traditional, clip or, zip tie.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> So you really think that that cheap little carabiner, with an admitted
> >> breaking load (if lucky) of 33lb (15kg), is adequate to save a life?
> >
> > Hey Carl, I'm not trying to argue, rather am curious: have you really determined that 33lb is not a sufficient force to extract heels (feet) from shoes in these unfortunate scenarios? Seems like a lot of force to me, much more than I would need to slip out of most shoes. Also, 6061 AL as I'm sure you're aware has a yield strength of around 40000psi. x-section of that carabiner is about .08*.08 inches from the images, giving a yield strength of around 256lb. Even with bending moments accounted for, I'd estimate that 33lb is probably on the conservative side. I'd be surprised if these yielded at twice that load.
> >
> > Anyway I'm mostly curious about your implication that 33lb is not sufficient to pull one's heels from inverted, submerged, rowing shoes. What kind of force is applied, when extracting one's feet in such a situation?
> >
> > To Roman Sammartino: those are not shoe laces in the image. They used guyline paracord which is much stronger and tougher (abrasion resistant) than most shoelaces.
> >
> >> And you think that whatever arbitrary length of cord the user chooses is
> >> right, & that it will save their life if they get it wrong?
> >
> > I think the point Roman was making about length is that if the length is wrong, it's the fault of the person installing them, and not a failure of the materials used. There may be better designs out there that minimize user error better, but considering this one is replacing what was probably shoelaces tied with knots of questionable quality, or original paracord from the boat manufacturer that was probably dissolving into dust after years of abuse, I'd say it's definitely not WORSE than what it replaced.
> >
> >> And you think it unnecessary to use a stronger cord, fitted so that it
> >> cannot chafe & with a knot that cannot come loose?
> >
> > No argument there, they claim to have used a "hangman's knot" which is not what is pictured. Picture shows a simple overhand slipknot.
> >
> >
> Kieran -
> I respect your thoughtful comments, thank you, but must profoundly
> disagree in some particulars, as follows:
>
> 1. Extraction force: There's a point (if the shoe is a good but not
> necessarily tight fit) when, as the inextensible sole of the shoe is
> curved increasingly around the incompressible bone structure of the
> foot, but at an inevitably wider radius, that the foot jams tight
> between heel & toe boxes of the shoe. (This is exacerbated when the
> user decides to lace the shoe relatively "securely".) And almost no
> amount of force will then free that entrapped foot.
> So what level of force might a desperate, trapped rower apply?
>
> 2. I devised the dead-simple heel cord restraint system on learning from
> a new client how he escaped from track shoes when trapped under a large
> boat in his previous boat. Built like an ox, he just tore the stretcher
> apart. And I'd recently heard of cases where, as the fashion went from
> clogs to bolt-in track shoes, scullers had died in their inverted boats.
> So it was a big wake-up call, & I set about devising how best to
> resolve it. But I'm a practical engineer, so I tested it on the water
> as well as on dry land - to establish reasonable criteria.
>
> 3. Margin of safety: if you can break your last line of defence, then
> you're lulled into false security because what was going to save your
> life is no more fit for purpose than a chocolate teapot. So I focussed
> on these factors:
> a) the cords should be indestructible
> b) the part of the stretcher to which they attached (& of the shoe)
> should be well able to take the likely shock loads
> c) what is the maximum safe amount of heel lift before the wrap-around
> shortening of the foot space in a reasonably fitting shoe began to trap
> the foot. My tests indicated that a maximum of 2"/50mm was more than
> adequate for the needs of the rower (with a rake-adjustable stretcher) &
> would ensure release even if the shoe was a close fit. But that any
> more was treading into danger.
> d) the installation should be tamper-proof!! (see below)
> I adopted, as over-kill standard, a 4mm-diameter braided nylon cord,
> looped from a firm point at the heel of the stretcher, through the shoe
> & back again. In the early days there were no special rowing shoes - we
> were fitting track shoes. So we looped the cord through a pair of holes
> in the sole, near the heel, having first had a cobbler firmly stitch the
> uppers to the sole. And the ends of the cords were tied into a knot
> under the hole in the stretcher, their ends seared with a fame to
> prevent loosening, and bedded in a mastic to prevent sliding and wear.
>
> 4. Carabiners: our stretcher design gave (& gives) height adjustment
> without needing to alter the heel cord lengths - I strongly oppose
> fiddling with heel cords by the rower - we don't permit car seat belts
> to be left slack, for obvious reasons. And why, with the shoes firmly
> attached to the same stretcher board, would you be taking one set off &
> replacing with another set before an outing or race? Just why?
>
> In any case, we know that cast aluminium is prone to voids & defects, so
> why would we do all that, then trust our life to a thin piece of cast
> aluminium, a mere toy, from a key chain? Can you be sure of that 33lb
> figure - who tests it, & has it been tested in this use? I've carried
> heavier shopping bags. It can corrode, it will certainly fatigue under
> repeatedly loads and abuse. And some naive rower with no grasp on the
> risks of foot entrapment is sure to decide it cramps their style. It's
> an open invitation to abuse. Would a climber use such a device?
>
> 5. The vexed issue of fault: if a safety device intended to prevent
> death or injury fails, then the law can't bring the dead back to life
> but can very easily be used to hit the club & responsible officers who
> thought that safety could be provided by so inadequate a construction.
> Lawyers would look for what's in use, is best practice & does work.
> Then the stuff will hit the fan.
>
> Enough for now?
> Carl
>
> --
> Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
> Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
> Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
> Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf
> Email: ca...@carldouglasrowing.com Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
> URLs: carldouglasrowing.com & now on Facebook @ CarlDouglasRacingShells

All good, Carl! :-)
A bit overkill maybe, but not unexpected, nor unnecessary. :-) We've "known" each other long enough (1993 or so?) that I knew your background and passion for this topic (and appreciate it).

On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 3:05:50 PM UTC-6, carl wrote:
> On 14/07/2023 21:23, Roman Sammartino wrote:
> > On Friday, July 14, 2023 at 11:14:24 AM UTC-6, carl wrote:
> >> On 14/07/2023 12:54, don Vickers wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:33:32 PM UTC-4, carl wrote:
> >>>> On 13/07/2023 20:59, don Vickers wrote:
> >>>>> On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 5:36:04 AM UTC-4, Kit Davies wrote:
> >>>>>> On 13/07/2023 08:04, James HS wrote:
> >>>>>>> Do we think this would last the test of time, or the actual use?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://www.row2k.com/features/5824/rowing-hack--carabiner-clipped-heels/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl07122023
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I like the thought of a simple heel restraint swap ability - happens so often in club boats.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You (the club) could control the length and control the knot tying - I would not trust individuals, but concerned it could deteriorate over time!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> James
> >>>>>> The link in the article says those clips are made of aluminium. I
> >>>>>> wouldn't trust those to withstand anything but the weakest yank.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> They do mention there are titanium alternatives though I couldn't find
> >>>>>> them. Larger stainless steel would be better IMHO.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Kit
> >>>>> I commented on this article at Row2K last year when it was just a couple of weeks old. It appears that my observation was taken to heart to an extent. Clearly, these CAN be a matter of life or death. It is better than Carl’s ‘favourite’ zip tie approach - but only by a little. Nota bene: this goes back to his very correct ranting against people using zip ties as tie downs several years ago.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Even if you implement this with a device with sufficient tensile strength, I would be concerned about the locking arm staying in place. These are hidden from normal view and almost never inspected. The spring may break or weaken over time, especially if it is carbon steel. It is also POSSIBLE that the locking arm gets dislodged by some object or force.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The desire to save time in changing shoes is reasonable. I suggest that a better approach might be to use a stainless shackle that has a screw locking pin. This provides the tensile strength and a more reliable attachment with a small added time to remove and insert.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Don -
> >>>> With respect, I am unaware that I have ever recommended a Zip-tie in
> >>>> place of a proper heel cord. Some other Carl, perhaps?
> >>>>
> >>>> I have viewed that article & am frankly appalled. It proposes a trivial
> >>>> piece of "tat", displaying a serious lack awareness of the vital safety
> >>>> function of the heel cord system.
> >>>>
> >>>> Heel cords are a vexed issue in part because nearly every
> >>>> fully-adjustable stretcher out there incorporates 1 totally redundant
> >>>> component - the shoe plate. We've been fitting fully-adjustable
> >>>> stretchers to boats, providing swift & secure adjustment of shoe height
> >>>> and inclination, for several decades.
> >>>>
> >>>> The problem with any stretcher on which the shoes come mounted on a
> >>>> moveable shoe plate is that changing the shoe height changes the amount
> >>>> of heel lift because the shoes move WRT the board while the cord
> >>>> attachment point is fixed WRT the board.
> >>>>
> >>>> Adjusting the height of the shoes on our stretchers has not the
> >>>> slightest effect on the setting of the heel cords - because the shoe
> >>>> does not move WRT the stretcher board.
> >>>>
> >>>> I haven't time to take this further now, but may return to elaborate on
> >>>> the matter tomorrow.
> >>>>
> >>>> Carl
> >>>>
> >>> Carl,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I apologise for making a poor joke and not making it clear that it was inverse and, possibly, perverse. The reason I enclosed favourite in quotes was to help in that regard.
> >>>
> >>> My reference was from a series of discussions several years ago about heel tie downs where zip ties had been suggested and you rightly pointed out that they were a horrible idea.
> >>>
> >>> Humour in text can be confusing the hands of amateurs.
> >>>
> >>> My apologies,
> >>> don
> >>>
> >> No apologies needed, Don! We stand on the same side of that safety
> >> fence, as on many others.
> >>
> >> But I do have a huge problem with the supposed authorities in our sport
> >> &, indeed, with those who propose modifications to essential safety
> >> devices but dare not personally test & evaluate them, let alone testing
> >> under under realistic conditions.
> >>
> >> Cheers -
> >> Carl
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > I think the approach in the article is super practical. All of the criticisms in this thread I think are shortsighted and unrealistic:
> > Do you think alumnium is going to be weaker than a shoe lace!?
> > The lace length is going to be set by whomever ties them--regardless of the restraint system: traditional, clip or, zip tie.
> >
> >
> So you really think that that cheap little carabiner, with an admitted
> breaking load (if lucky) of 33lb (15kg), is adequate to save a life?
>
> And you think that whatever arbitrary length of cord the user chooses is
> right, & that it will save their life if they get it wrong?
>
> And you think it unnecessary to use a stronger cord, fitted so that it
> cannot chafe & with a knot that cannot come loose?
>
> And you think that the person who devised, tested & established the
> essential criteria for the heel restraint system is short-sighted and
> unrealistic?
>
> I'm guessing you've never seen someone trapped in their boat, nor known
> of people who died as a result. What makes you such an expert that you
> can dismiss the concerns of those who have? That is the kind of
> ignorance that kills.
> Carl
> --
> Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
> Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing Low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
> Write: Harris Boatyard, Laleham Reach, Chertsey KT16 8RP, UK
> Find: tinyurl.com/2tqujf
> Email: ca...@carldouglasrowing.com Tel: +44(0)1932-570946 Fax: -563682
> URLs: carldouglasrowing.com & now on Facebook @ CarlDouglasRacingShells

Carl. I appreciate and respect your experience as a boat builder. But there's no need to be rude here.

Personally, I would trust a piece of aluminum over a piece of shoelace any day of the week. What sort of material are the heel cords you recommend made out of? I have seen way to many heel cords become frayed and brittle because of age, and the tie-down spot on the foot stretcher has a sharp edge or two, making them effectively useless. Where I row, we store our boats outside, so fabrics tend to degrade quicker than metals. I don't have engineering or scientific data to back this up. If I'm wrong here, please show me the data.

The nice thing about aluminum is that it won't rust and if the critique here is that the 33lbs of force rated on the particular product mentioned....perhaps there is a stronger or higher rated production that serves a similar function?
Additionally, what is the rating of the piece of metal that the heel tie (or carabiner) connects to on the shoe? If its less than 33lbs, then we've found our weak point. I don't think this information is something that is readily available.

It seems like we agree that length of heel restraint--regardless of the system used, matters quite a bit. This ultimately boils down to the rigger, coach, or whomever installs these things to begin with. Just like anything, if it isn't installed properly, it probably won't work as intended. Also, many clubs (such as the clubs I am affiliated with) do not have the luxury of having a proper rigger and usually the coach is some young kid who doesn't have the obligations of a full time career and/or a family yet in life. Therefore proper safety comes down to the club members themselves, which has a huge range from next to nothing, to just as good as any boatman. Having a simple and straightforward heel restraint system would go a long way. There have been so many times where I have found heel ties to be improperly installed, the technically compliant but practically ineffective "zip tie" solution, or simply non existent.