3 ring circus type 8 - type 17

[ibanfield 0]

Does anyone know if its possible to change the large rings of the three ring circus on a fully articulated harness from type 8 to type 17 or viceversa. What would be involved, how much would it cost and who could do it (rigger, manufacturer etc)?

Thanks.

Face your fears, live your dreams.

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

Does anyone know if its possible to change the large rings of the three ring circus on a fully articulated harness from type 8 to type 17 or viceversa. What would be involved, how much would it cost and who could do it (rigger, manufacturer etc)?

Thanks.

It could be easier to get a set of risers with those size of rings you like.

[ibanfield 0]

So is it possible to use type 8 (big fat rings) that are on the harness with risers that have the type 17 mini rings?

Face your fears, live your dreams.

[Glitch 0]

Yes... very common. It's much easier to swap/demo canopies this way.

Randomly f'n thingies up since before I was born...

[phoenixlpr 0]

At least I have seen before.

[billvon 2,466]

> Does anyone know if its possible to change the large rings of the three
>ring circus on a fully articulated harness from type 8 to type 17 or viceversa.

I think there's some confusion in terms here.

First is webbing type. There are type 8 (wide) and type 17 (narrow) risers. There are also standard and mini 3-ring releases. Type 8 risers can be ordered with both standard and mini flavors of rings; type 17 is mini rings only.

The base ring on the harness can be either a no.1 (standard) or a no.8 (mini.) Most harnesses today come with a no.8. A mini base ring can be retrofitted to the larger ring via a retrofit kit that was developed to replace some improperly treated harness rings a while back. The procedure requires a bolt cutter but no sewing.

A mini 3-ring release will work with either a standard or a mini base ring, although some tolerances don't line up when you put them on a standard base ring. A standard 3-ring release will work only with a standard base ring.

Almost all demo canopies available at boogies are on type 17 risers with mini 3-ring releases so they can be used on any harness/container.

[skyblu3 0]

Can you expand a little on the ''improperly treated rings''. What was this about?? How long ago?

[Tonto 1]

It was a loooong time ago. Decades. It was also the scource of the voodoo mumbo jumbo rotate your rings dance I still see people do today, probably taught at the same place that keeps the 45 degree rule fresh..

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[bliston 0]

why are only mini rings available on type 17 risers? While it might look funny, is there an actual structural issue that would prevent someone who wanted "better leverage" from putting big rings on type 17 webbing?

Forgive me if I'm not thinking of something obvious, didn't get much sleep last night...

Ben

Mass Defiance 4-wayFS website


sticks!

[councilman24 36]

Don't think it was the source of the rotate your rings deal. The rings that weren't properly hardened were slotted rings, not the original round ring. People were rotating the round harness ring long before this problem.

My 1982 Northern Lite was supject to the service bulletin. Either Rockwell hardness test the rings or cut them off and replace them with separable rings. I have at least one set of separable ring here that I use for a cutaway rig.

I had to go the local fire department to find a bolt cutter big enough. My were diffenantly hard.

I'd actually never considered using them to change a mini ring harness to a large ring harness.

Are the separable harness rings still available? I don't see them in Paragear or DJ Associates.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[billvon 2,466]

> why are only mini rings available on type 17 risers? While it might look
> funny, is there an actual structural issue that would prevent someone who
>wanted "better leverage" from putting big rings on type 17 webbing?

I don't know, but I have never seen such risers. Perhaps Mr. Booth could provide some insight.

[lekstrom10k 0]

As Terry said it was the transistion to the first rings with the harness slot built in. You would take a dial caliper {not to many digitals out yet}. and measure parallel to the risers then 90 to the risers to check for distortion. If not to specs it could stretch enough to not let the the second ring pass through "OOPS" It was back as far as 1980 and part of repack procedures. Some people would use abrasive cut-off wheels and water soaked rags to cover up things.The replacement was a pretty neat device like a ring with an old harnees riser sepreablr link under it. It almost made it look legal if you put a third canopy on for intentional cut-aways. If you change anything you have violated the T.S.O. as written then if anything happened the old lawyer shot gun goes into effect.Why did the rigger do this/ Why did the pilot allow this guy into his plane as he is responsible for antything falling out . why did the airplane owner let this guy get in the plane without T'.S.O. gear why did the DZO allow this and why did the airport owner let the DZO let the plane owner let the pilot let the rigger let jumper get the mod in the first place.Also the kid mowing the lawn that allowed the plane to taxi by on the incident day.So to me it seems obvious just get rid of lawyers instead.

[pchapman 262]

Quote

> why are only mini rings available on type 17 risers? While it might look
> funny, is there an actual structural issue that would prevent someone who
>wanted "better leverage" from putting big rings on type 17 webbing?

Just recently I saw a set of mini risers with big rings.
Pretty rare but they seem to exist.

[sundevil777 94]

Quote

My 1982 Northern Lite was supject to the service bulletin. Either Rockwell hardness test the rings or cut them off and replace them with separable rings.

My memory is that there was also a pull test that could be done - if no distortion the rings were OK. A few places set up the needed equipment to conduct the test.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[councilman24 36]

I found the SB with the pull test on the UPT web site. And I vaguely remember it. But for my Northern Lite I'm pretty sure that the options were Rockwell hardness test or replace. I remember asking around at the local University for someone to do the Rockwell test but not finding anybody. But maybe I'm imagining things. The FAA AD reference Relative Workshops service bulletin with the pull test.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[lekstrom10k 0]

Just for your information any Heat treat shop has rockwell tester . Be sure you are using the same scale as th certs. "C" is the most common. After 6:00 PM or so the bosses go home and the night shift might do it for free.

[riggerrob 561]

lekstrom,

Put down the tequila bottle and step away from the computer.

[riggerrob 561]

Yes, it is possible to replace RW-1 (standard/large) harness rings with RW-8 (mini), however, that requires a Master Rigger with a jeeesly big (Class 7) sewing machine and plenty of experience repairing harnesses. Replacing harness rings requires gently removing all the stitching in the shoulder joint, installing new hardware and sewing it all back together. Since the process might damage webbing, you can only sew webbing a maximum of three times.

I have only seen this switch done for cosmetic reasons (the factory goofed and installed mini RW-8 rings on a harness made for a big - 200 pounds plus - guy) and it requires a heck of a lot of work just to make you look fashionable.
Hee!
Hee!

Seriously, harness repairs are either done right the first time, or don't bother getting out of bed.

Many field riggers will refer this sort of major repair to a factory.
It will probably take them two hours and they will charge you more than $100.

Switching in the other direction is much easier. All you need are a (rare) set of RW-6 rings. To install RW-6 rings, merely (hee hee) cut off the original rings and screw in the RW-6 rings.
OH! Did I mention that you need a Master Rigger with a jeeeesly big set of bolt cutters?

RW-6 rings were developed on response to soft (improperly heat-treated) batches of RW-1 rings made in 1982 and 1983. RW-6 rings look like standard/large harness except that the lower bar is threaded on one end so that it can be removed. Thread dimensions are similar to military-surplus separable D-rings.
Since that problem is a long way behind us, 3-Ring Inc. will never make another batch of RW-6 rings, Para-Gear no longer stocks them and your only hope is a finding a grumpy, old, grey-bearded Master Rigger who has a set gathering dust on his back shelf.

[riggerrob 561]

To clarify, there are three sizes of (sport) risers in common usage.
First, risers made of Type 8 (1 23/32 inch wide) webbing are available with mini or standard rings.
Type 17 (one inch wide) webbing is normally only seen with mini rings.

Risers made of either type of webbing - and mini rings - can be installed on both sizes (RW-1 and RW-8) of harness rings.
However, risers (usually made with Type 8 webbing) with large rings, can only be installed on large harness rings.

[riggerrob 561]

I have seen a pair of Type 17 risers with large rings, but only one pair.

[popsjumper 2]

Ok, Rob...

I have two rigs with two sets of type 8 risers, one set on each of two parachutes/rigs (Jav 97, Jav 94).

Looking at the rings, they both appear to be the "standard" size (obviously NOT the minis).

The risers are not interchangeable between the rigs because on one set of risers, the ring will not fit through the ring on the other rig. The rings are definitely different sizes and not just warped.

This tells me:
1. Rings are not used in "standard" sizes, or
2. Rigs changed ring sizes in production years, or
3. Some modification has been done to either the risers or the rig.

Any clue on how this happened?
How do I tell which rings are "wrong" and which are "right"?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[JerryBaumchen 1,076]

Hi pops,

You've got me scatching my head.

How about posting a pic or two of them side by side?

Or measuring them with a caliper and posting the results.

Jery

[ibanfield 0]

Thanks, that helped to clear it up.

Face your fears, live your dreams.

[CReWLL 0]

Where did you find the 3 harness repairs max rule?
The possibility of damaging the webbing is on a case by case basis. You could hurt it the first time (at the factory) or on the 100th repair.

[riggerrob 561]

Quote

Where did you find the 3 harness repairs max rule?
The possibility of damaging the webbing is on a case by case basis. You could hurt it the first time (at the factory) or on the 100th repair.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Sure, you might damage webbing the first time you sew it (i.e. burred needle).
But you also might get away with un-stitching webbing three of four times before damaging it.

When I worked at Rigging Innovations, company policy was to sew a piece of webbing a maximum of three times. Sandy headed 3-Ring Inc. before moving to the West Coast, so I assumed that he merely copied the "only sew three times" rule from Relative Workshop.
But we all know what happens when we "assume!"
Hee!
Hee!

If a Talon harness had to be sewn more than three times, the webbing got replaced.
Note that R.I. is owned by a perfectionist (Sandy Reid) who insists that all repairs, re-sizes, etc. look as close as possible to new manufacture. If a Talon harness had to be sewn more than three times, it got replaced.

Softer webbings, with less resin (i.e. Type 7) tend to show damage earlier than stiffer webings like Type 7 or Type 13. You could probably get away with sewing Type 13 five or six times, but you have to draw the line somewhere.
The huge, fat needle - in Class 7 sewing machine - punches holes in webbing every time you sew it. Even without broken stitches, Type 7 webbing looks ugly after you un-stitch it the first or second time.

The other question involves how much you damaged the webbing while picking out stitching. I have seen un-coated (condition "U") Type 8 webbing ruined the first time it was unstitched. On the other hand, I have un-stitched resin-coated (condition "R") Type 13 four times before damaging it.