Forums: Climbing Disciplines: Trad Climbing: Re: [chriss] Another cam lobe retraction question: Edit Log




catbird_seat


Nov 20, 2006, 10:13 AM

Views: 10498

Registered: Apr 7, 2004
Posts: 425

Re: [chriss] Another cam lobe retraction question
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  

In reply to:
I think waht BD is refering to in the section you mention, is that when fully extended the cam is at the limit of it's rotation. Look to the section on how the cams hold the applied force, in the first part of the paper.

Someone brought up the difference between 1 axle SLCDs and the Camalots. One of the biggest differences is in the range of cam rotation. The Camalot uses the axles to stop the cams from overrotating. Limiting the largest part (largest radius) of the cam from going above the axles (holding the cam vertically). This is regardless of where the other cams are.

Single axle cams have the "cam stops" on the upper part of the cams. So the (single axle) cams are limited by the postion of the opposite cam. The largest part of the cam can rotate until it is completely opposite the opposing cam. The cam stop moves with the opposite cam.

Check this with some SLCD cams in your hand. Hold 1 cam compressed and then move the opposing cam through the full possible range.

Both single and double axle SLCDs are perfectly safe if used correctly. Someone also hints that the single axle design is safer than the double. The cam range issue mentioned above make the Camalot extend out to its maximum range if it should ever need to and load like a chock.

chris
Chris, you hit on something that no one has mentioned before. The double axle design has an "unheralded" advantage, which I think is the true reason why people like them so well. This advantage is that because the springs act between each lobe and the axle base, rather than one lobe against the other, there is a greater tendency for the lobes to remain at equal retraction, even though one may be careless in placement by "pushing" the cam into the crack, rather than "placing" it.

Not having the mechanical engineering background, I am at a loss to adequately express this in technical terms, but I've noticed this just from empirical observation. Just take a Friend and, without retracting the cam lobes with the trigger, push it into a crack. Do this several times and note how often the cam lobes are equally retracted. Now do this same test using a double axled Camalot. What do you find?


(This post was edited by catbird_seat on Nov 20, 2006, 10:13 AM)



Edit Log:
Post edited by catbird_seat () on Nov 20, 2006, 10:13 AM


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?