Well I am amazed they don’t test this being that the harness and the rope are the two of the most important things in a belay system.

if the harness loops fail at least they could still grab the rope with their hands and stand a chance.

if the harness loops fail at least they could still grab the rope with their hands and stand a chance.

Well I am amazed they don’t test this being that the harness and the rope are the two of the most important things in a belay system.

Wild guess here: You voted for Bush, huh?

Jay

What does voting for Bush have to do with being stupid?

they don't make harnesses stronger than ~15 kN or so because applying more than about 15 kN of force to your lower body will fracture your pelvis and bruise your internal organs.

So, you're saying that if I were to generate a force greater than 15 kN my harness is supposed to break, because the ground is going to be a better catch?

I'm seeing allot of stupid in this thread.

What does voting for Bush have to do with being stupid?

Do you mean the first election or the second one?

"Fool me once shame on you, fool my twice , blah, blah, duh...won't get fooled again"

Fool me once shame on you, fool my twice , blah, blah, duh...won't get fooled again

So, you're saying that if I were to generate a force greater than 15 kN my harness is supposed to break, because the ground is going to be a better catch?

I'm seeing allot of stupid in this thread.

they don't make harnesses stronger than ~15 kN or so because applying more than about 15 kN of force to your lower body will fracture your pelvis and bruise your internal organs.

Really, so if you and a partner are climbing, and his fall puts over 15kn on the anchor, his harness fails. You wouldn't want your harness rated to, say, 19kn so you live?

(if someone can explain it better, go for it)

>Cam

I have a metolius safe tech and every attachment point on it is rated to >10kn. I think the answer is that factor two fall could not generate forces greater than that on the harness itself.

Considering that the strength of the rope itself is about 10kn...

...and a standard figure 8 creates a 60% loss in efficiency...

The rope is a lot stronger than 10 kN. The rope limits the impact force to around 10 kN.


I have no idea what you mean by that.

Jay

The rope is a lot stronger than 10 kN. The rope limits the impact force to around 10 kN.


I have no idea what you mean by that.

Jay

The strength loss from a standard figure 8 on a bight is around 60%. As a tie in knot, the overall strength of the rope is reduced by 25 to 30%. (I don't have the direct link to Black Diamond's tests but this one cites it.

http://www.rockandice.com/...d=7&type=gearguy

The point is that I don't believe that the highest factor fall could impose more than 10kn on the harness itself.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think so.

Just so we are clear, we are talking about the harness itself (i.e. the various attachment points, buckles, leg loops etc.) not the belay loop which is routinely rated greater than 15kn.

"Fool me once shame on you, fool my twice , blah, blah, duh...won't get fooled again"

So we're talking tie-in points?

>Cam

I take it you're voting for Hillary??

You're about to get fooled 3 times.

I guess when you're a climbing bum it's easy to be a democrat. Once you get a real job and start paying taxes everything changes.

I'm giving them all this money for what? So I can support all the homeless people out there?

I don't know what the efficiency of a figure 8 knot is, but at least I now know what you're talking about. What you're wrong about is the strength of the rope.

Jay

I think it's fucking to hard to get a thing about these kN and resistance and impact forces if you are not into maths and physics. I myself trust the certified manufacturers.

I agree 100%. I think the best I can aspire to is a reasonable layman's understanding. If I see the UIAA/CE marks, I pretty much go with it.

And of course, there is research out there to suggest that figure-8 knots have almost 100% efficiency in static nylon materials (Tmoyer/Charmston/etc. high strength cord tests in 96. Getting a little old - would like to see more recent research).

Regardless, I think it's easy for anyone who understands the situation in abstract to realize that harnesses AND climbing ropes are well and away stronger than needed.

(and, for the record, stop confusing impact force with tensile strength . Dynamic ropes are far stronger than ~10kN)

The listed impact strength is usually around 10 or less on most of the ropes I've seen. If the breaking strength of a 10.2 mm rope is 17, if we multiply that by .7 we get 11.9 kn.

I think generally we are in agreement though regarding the necessity of the strength of the harness itself to be greater than 10?

I take it you're voting for Hillary??

You're about to get fooled 3 times.

I guess when you're a climbing bum it's easy to be a democrat. Once you get a real job and start paying taxes everything changes.

I'm giving them all this money for what? So I can support all the homeless people out there?

I take it you're voting for Hillary??

You're about to get fooled 3 times.

I guess when you're a climbing bum it's easy to be a democrat. Once you get a real job and start paying taxes everything changes.

I'm giving them all this money for what? So I can support all the homeless people out there?

For the third time: The tensile strength of a climbing rope is way higher than 10 kN. The impact force rating of a rope, which is around 10 kN is not the rope's strength. It's the maximum impact force you'd feel if weighed 70 kg and were a test dummy in a UIAA test drop.

Jay

I'm giving them all this money for what? So I can support all the homeless people out there?

I'm seeing allot of stupid in this thread.

just to answer the question about tensil strenght - a 10.6 Blue water breaks at 22kn, 15 with an 8.
one more thing John Long states that there has never been an incident of a modern climbing rope breaking when subjected to normal use - mis use is another thing, ie: sharp edges, rockfall, chemicals, etc.

Unless you're a fatass.

Exactly. Read my post. If the impact force (the weight the climber would feel is 10, or put another way, the weight the harness would feel is 10kn) and the breaking strength of the rope is 17 or even 20kn (which after we adjust for decreased strength due to the knot is 30% less) why are we even having this discussion. My point was, forgetting about the fact that the impact force on the harness is 10, if the tensile stregth is 17 and that's adjusted by the knot to 11.9 what would the everloving point be to a harness with a tensile strength of 15kn? The breaking point of the rope is less than the harness forgetting about the fact that the rope's dynamic properties mean the force it would impose on the harness is way less than it tensile strength...

It's friday. I need a drink.

You win.

:jglo knocks over king:

We are having this discussion because you keep brining up the strength of the rope, which is irrelevant.

As I understand it, the EN standard for climbing harnesses is 15 kN, not 10. The Petzl fall simulator will tell you that you can generate 13 kN of force on the climber in a factor-2 fall, so, it seems to me, that even 15 kN is not a sufficient margin of safety. I hope my harness is stronger than that.

Jay

I haven't seen the Petzl calculator but if the impact force of a rope is 10kn on a static anchor, how could it generate more force than that in a real world setting?

...if the harness loops fail at least they could still grab the rope with their hands and stand a chance.

For starters, the maximum impact force allowed by the EN 12 kN, not 10, and I used a factor-2 fall in the calculation, whereas the test standard is 1.78. And finally, I used a heavier climber than the weight used in the test.

Jay

by the whole "at least you could grab the rope" thing i wasn't saying it would actually happen. just trying to point out that if one were to put the components of a belay setup on an importance scale (which is ridiculous anyways), i would suspect the harness would be the lowest.

think about it...if anything else fails, the climber falls no matter what (assuming you can't grab the rock, of course). if the harness breaks, they are still technically within reach of hanging onto the rope and not falling. doesn't matter though...i was just trying to figure out why OP would say the harness is more important than any other component

and jay: i wasn't of voting age last election, but yep i would have voted for bush over gore or kerry

did your mother have any children that lived? If, after surviving a fall that is sufficiently severe enough to cause harness failure (even at a VERY conservative 10kN, equivalent to approximately 2260 lbs of force), you honestly think that you're going to be able to grab a rope and hang on? Never mind that you're clearly not strong enough to lift 2000 lbs, do you think you could bare-hand grip a 1/2" rope firmly enough to lift 2000 lbs?




I hope you're fixed...


stupid people should not breed.

Unfortunately, they tend to reproduce the fastest.

...is your IQ any higher than room temperature? if a harness is faulty or damaged it wouldn't take 10kN to break. sit down, focus, and try a little bit of creative thinking. is it so far-fetched to imagine someone using a harness that probably should have been retired a year ago? they start climbing, take a fall and hear a loop start to pop so they grab onto the rope as it fails? odds are very slim, but it's not inconceivable...

...and jay: i wasn't of voting age last election, but yep i would have voted for bush over gore or kerry...

did your mother have any children that lived? If, after surviving a fall that is sufficiently severe enough to cause harness failure (even at a VERY conservative 10kN, equivalent to approximately 2260 lbs of force), you honestly think that you're going to be able to grab a rope and hang on? Never mind that you're clearly not strong enough to lift 2000 lbs, do you think you could bare-hand grip a 1/2" rope firmly enough to lift 2000 lbs?




I hope you're fixed...


stupid people should not breed.

Unfortunately, they tend to reproduce the fastest.

is it so far-fetched to imagine someone using a harness that probably should have been retired a year ago? they start climbing, take a fall and hear a loop start to pop so they grab onto the rope as it fails? odds are very slim, but it's not inconceivable.

of course someone wouldn't be able to grip a rope hard enough to hang on during a factor 1 fall. imbecile.

did your mother have any children that lived?

As long as we're quoting Stand by Me, now might be a good time to ask, "Does the word retarded mean anything to you?"

what would you call Beth Thomas’ bra strap?

ANY fall.

i'm loving the misinterpretations of my posts tonight. let's start thinking outside the box here people. Ja Rule, i didn't mean only factor 1 falls, i was using it as an example. sometimes you shouldn't take things so literally.


but as long as we are...you could hold yourself during a 1ft fall, and probably higher if you're holding onto an eight

I take it you're voting for Hillary??

You're about to get fooled 3 times.

I guess when you're a climbing bum it's easy to be a democrat. Once you get a real job and start paying taxes everything changes.

I'm giving them all this money for what? So I can support all the homeless people out there?

You mean to tell me that people with mental disabilities should be expected to hold a job and take care of themselves?

The poor things can barely post on the internet!

They try, though.

So I wrapped the rope around a biner 2 or 3 times and proceeded to rappel down.

What side, exactly, am I on? I never took place in your silly little political exchange. All I ever discussed in this thread was harness strength.

Reading comprehension FTL.

You're right, you just joined the cool kid clique by egging somebody on. I apologize.

We should round up poor people and kill them. Fucking poor people, making us all look bad.

Wild guess here: You voted for Bush, huh?

Jay

Go fuck yourself.

Go fuck yourself.

What does voting for Bush have to do with being stupid?

I take it you're voting for Hillary??

You're about to get fooled 3 times.

I guess when you're a climbing bum it's easy to be a democrat. Once you get a real job and start paying taxes everything changes.

I'm giving them all this money for what? So I can support all the homeless people out there?

In my first year of climbing I needed to rappel 40 feet. I had left my one and only belay device on the ground with my belayer.

So I wrapped the rope around a biner 2 or 3 times and proceeded to rappel down. Soon the rope twists came right across the non-locking gate, opened it, and I was off.

This happened very very slowly. So slow in fact that I was able to reach up, grab the rope then let the biner unclip. So yes, I was hanging maybe 25 feet off the ground, from one hand. While hanging I grabbed a sling and tied a prussick and then had my belayer toss me up my belay device. It was a significantly sketch moment.

Did I catch the rope? Yes, but I eased onto it, I did not fall.
Could I do it again? Very unlikely.

That incident might be proof that you can be a total idiot and get away with it, as long as you're 19.

I hate this argument. You mean you don't get any benefits from taxes? You probably won't get social security cause your president is going to ruin that. You mean to tell me that people with mental disabilities should be expected to hold a job and take care of themselves? I have a job, I pay taxes, I'm not republican. I guess once you realize that all your taxes are paying for a foreign occupation, the purpose of which is to strengthen our hold on the world's oil reserves, it's easy to be a democrat. (which, by the way, I'm not). You're so worried about f-ing taxes, stop voting for people who give tax breaks to the wealthy. It's not wonder why the gap between the have and have-nots is growing. There is hardly a middle class anymore. Ask anybody who was alive in the 50s and 60s. ...homeless people... heh. Keep hording your resources selfish, not only are you not a member of a community, you also can take your money with you when you die.

oh jeez, im trying so hard not to go on a political rant. Basically, don't vote for hillary for so many reasons. 1)take money from rich and just give it to the poor? wheres the sense in that? the rich(er) people actually work but get their money taken away to give to the poor people who dont work but get free money. 2) her whole election campaign is centered around the fact that shes a woman. just recently she came out of a debate that she lost badly and said that the other people in the debate were picking on her because she was a woman. so if she becomes president and some other country starts nuking us, is she just gonna whine and say that its because shes a woman? doesnt sound like much of a president to me. im gonna cut myself off now before i right another three pages on why not to vote for hillary. but by the way, i dont see obama complaing that other people are picking on him because he is black, and everyone seems to overlook the fact that we havent had a black president either.

by the way I'm not selfish at all. I donate quite a bit of money to charity. I've also given quite a bit of money to some of my friends and helped them out from time to time. I consider myself pretty generous. I just don't think the government should dictate who I give my money to. (Not to mention that most of the money you give to the government goes to overhead - such as non-binding resolutions.) I prefer to give my money to good hardworking people, not lazy people who take advantage of the system. There is a big difference between someone who is mentally challenged (my sister is - and she does get social security and she does need it) and someone who is perfectly capable but lazy and would rather sit at home and collect social security than work. These people need to grow up, get off the couch and do something productive with their lives.

And I hate how liberals demonize the rich. Yeah it sucks that they are rich and you are not. But then again a poor guy never offered me a job.

And just so you know the war in Iraq is not as big a part of the budget percentagewise as you think. It's actually quite small. I don't remember off the top of my head, but if you actually do some research I'm sure you can find it and enlighten us all.

Flame away - and how about a little logic this time.

Finally somebody who uses knows how to use that watermelon shaped thing sitting on his shoulders. if only the rest of America could be so bright.

Finally somebody who uses knows how to provide argument ruining irony. If only everybody I debate could be so self-less.

For the love of god, somebody please move this to the soap box. The OP has acknowledged that his question has been answered. Please do not let this political crap infect the temple of truth that is "General."

Having said that, you are all idiots.

The social programs in this country put in place largely by the democrats are shamefully inadequate and only meant to make it look like they are sympathetic. The republicans on the other hand are just straight out assholes. No other way to describe it.

Rich people do suck and poor people do need help. Anyone who says otherwise is either rich or has never seen a homeless person or come within 100 yards of a homeless person in their life. I spend every day in New York City. Homelessness is a bit of a problem here. I trip over the homeless nearly every day and they take up all of our park benches. Since we can't drown them all in the east river like kittens we might as well feed them and give them someplace to sleep (other than my park bench). Unless you "republicans" want to come down here, roll up your sleeves and start drowning homeless people like kittens, you better do something because lower middle class people like me have no where to read a newspaper.

Now then, mods please move to Soap Box before the right to bear arms and the whole 'is there a God/no, STFU god boy!' thing comes up.

I agree completely on all points. Oh, and I'm a god boy.

For the love of god, somebody please move this to the soap box. The OP has acknowledged that his question has been answered. Please do not let this political crap infect the temple of truth that is "General."

Having said that, you are all idiots.

The social programs in this country put in place largely by the democrats are shamefully inadequate and only meant to make it look like they are sympathetic. The republicans on the other hand are just straight out assholes. No other way to describe it.

Rich people do suck and poor people do need help. Anyone who says otherwise is either rich or has never seen a homeless person or come within 100 yards of a homeless person in their life. I spend every day in New York City. Homelessness is a bit of a problem here. I trip over the homeless nearly every day and they take up all of our park benches. Since we can't drown them all in the east river like kittens we might as well feed them and give them someplace to sleep (other than my park bench). Unless you "republicans" want to come down here, roll up your sleeves and start drowning homeless people like kittens, you better do something because lower middle class people like me have no where to read a newspaper.

Now then, mods please move to Soap Box before the right to bear arms and the whole 'is there a God/no, STFU god boy!' thing comes up.

For the love of god, somebody please move this to the soap box.

<snip>

Having said that, you are all idiots.

<snip>

Now then, mods please move to Soap Box before the right to bear arms and the whole 'is there a God/no, STFU god boy!' thing comes up.

STFU, you are so wrong. Why was there a Great Depression? I'll tell you why. People got lazy for several years. Very, very lazy, all around the world, and they all just wanted a free handout from the government. Luckily the rich hardworking people of the world started WWII and killed off all of the lazy people (the rich ones didn't have to fight) and then there were no more lazy people for awhile and it was much better.

C'mon now... that's just ridiculous. This is a serious dialogue in a forum designed for legitimate discussion of american politics (screw you, canada!). We all know that the Great Depression came long after WWII. Now if you want to use sarcasm to mock serious posts I suggest you go back to 'General'...

oh wait...

Whoa who who... stop right there. With Harper as Prime Minister, American politics ARE Canadian politics. Our homeless are headed right on up there, side by side with the best NYC has to offer. Another couple of years of this and our natural talent for being the best at useless things will takes right past you weak-assed Americans when it comes to idiotic governmental policies.

nuff said...

Oh no!!! Not Canadian politics!!!! Forget Soap Box. For the love of all things holy, mods, please lock this thread and send it to the recycling bin. We're all gonna die!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111!

Oh no!!! Not Canadian politics!!!! Forget Soap Box. For the love of all things holy, mods, please lock this thread and send it to the recycling bin. We're all gonna die!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111!

STFU God Boy!!!!!!

(Sorry. Couldn't resist )

--Andy P

you definitely have a point... Mods! Please make me stop!