|
socalclimber
Feb 27, 2008, 4:44 PM
Post #51 of 93
(1772 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437
|
With all due respect, you do not understand the concept. It has nothing to do with re-tensioning anything. IT'S AN INDICATOR IF THE SYSTEM IS BEING OVER TENSIONED OR NOT. JUST LIKE THE OIL LIGHT ON YOUR CAR. IF IT COMES ON, YOUR LOW ON OIL. IN THIS CASE IF THE SYSTEM IS BEING OVER TENSIONED, THEN THE LOOP IN THE ROPE WILL START TO SLIP, THEREFORE, THE SYSTEM IS BEING OVER TENSIONED.
IF ANYONE IS USING THIS TYPE OF SETUP TO RE-TENSION A SYSTEM, THEN THEIR IDIOTS! My god, I've stated this multiple times on this thread, Majid made the same statement.
What part are you not clear on?
|
|
|
|
|
g_i_g_i
Feb 27, 2008, 5:24 PM
Post #52 of 93
(1757 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2005
Posts: 53
|
socalclimber wrote: With all due respect, you do not understand the concept. It has nothing to do with re-tensioning anything. IT'S AN INDICATOR IF THE SYSTEM IS BEING OVER TENSIONED OR NOT. JUST LIKE THE OIL LIGHT ON YOUR CAR. IF IT COMES ON, YOUR LOW ON OIL. IN THIS CASE IF THE SYSTEM IS BEING OVER TENSIONED, THEN THE LOOP IN THE ROPE WILL START TO SLIP, THEREFORE, THE SYSTEM IS BEING OVER TENSIONED. IF ANYONE IS USING THIS TYPE OF SETUP TO RE-TENSION A SYSTEM, THEN THEIR IDIOTS! My god, I've stated this multiple times on this thread, Majid made the same statement. What part are you not clear on?
So, we have this fixed tyrolean traverse that is permanently mounted there to avoid long hikes back to the campground. I am a climber who's just topped out, and I want to use the line(s) to cross the canyon. When I get to the anchor, I notice that overtime the lines have loosened a bit. Well, I don't want to have to ascend the line when I get to the other side, so I think I'll just retension it. The line is hanging by the prusiks, so it's easy to just retension it without having to rig anything really, just pulling it through.
I guess that according to your standards I am an idiot. (or rather "my idiot").
If I really want the line to be extra taut, I can rig a tensioning system, then block the line with the prusiks, take my material and cross, knowing that on the other side there is a similar (but unsupervised) anchor, so, unless there is no slack on the other side, I am not overtensioning.
But why would I want to waste time to have the line extra tensioned when my only goal is to cross the canyon, and I don't need a super tensioned line to do that? And what if I don't notice that there is no slack on the unsupervised side, and by mistake I overtension the line?
So please stop telling me that I don't understand, and if you think of a different way this system should be used, explain it.
|
|
|
|
|
binrat
Feb 27, 2008, 5:49 PM
Post #53 of 93
(1747 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2006
Posts: 1155
|
g_i_g_i / socialclimber
There many ways to skin a cat. For this aplication I think that they want a "safety"" mechanism in place as it is unattended ropes. Unknowing person may over weight the ropes pushing the rope to failure. Prior to failure the TP will slip to release the extra tension from that over weighting.
socialclimber:
when you say lower and raise with a guiding line do you mean vertically ( vertical or overhung) or low angle stuff like moving a patient across a very uneven ground? I have used a guiding line for deflecting the path of a litter on a highline (english reeve), for moving a litter away from the wall on near vertical slopes, and moving alitter across a scree(sp?)field.
Binrat
|
|
|
|
|
socalclimber
Feb 27, 2008, 9:40 PM
Post #54 of 93
(1726 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437
|
binrat wrote: socialclimber: when you say lower and raise with a guiding line do you mean vertically ( vertical or overhung) or low angle stuff like moving a patient across a very uneven ground? I have used a guiding line for deflecting the path of a litter on a highline (english reeve), for moving a litter away from the wall on near vertical slopes, and moving alitter across a scree(sp?)field. Binrat
Either or. Guiding lines can be used in a variety of fashions. And yes, you can even use them in a horizontal setup if need be, i.e. redirecting a vertical setup to move around a large boulder or what have you to get the patient to level ground.
As I understand it, and this is not fact, the term "High Line" .vs. "Guiding Line" are no longer interchangeable, they are now indeed different.
Hopefuly Majid will pipe in since he's more current than I am at this point. I stopped doing SAR stuff about 3 years ago, but it was made clear to us that these are both different concepts and systems.
Confused yet? Yup... know the feeling
|
|
|
|
|
shoo
Feb 27, 2008, 10:20 PM
Post #55 of 93
(1708 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2006
Posts: 1501
|
Two questions. First, why aren't the black ropes tied directly to the anchor points rather than to an individual bolt? It seems to me that if the prussiks are going to slip, you want to have that black rope equalized off of several points rather than just one. Even if the prussik will "absorb" some of the force and equalize it, why not just tie the ropes to the anchor points?
Second why the criss-cross anchor set up? It's more efficient to minimize (admittedly low already) angle between points. I suppose that if you believe that there's a danger that an entire half of your anchoring rock will break loose somehow, you'd want this setup. If that were the case, then you'd definitely want to have the black ropes straight to the anchor points anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
binrat
Feb 27, 2008, 10:33 PM
Post #56 of 93
(1703 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2006
Posts: 1155
|
socalclimber wrote: binrat wrote: socialclimber: when you say lower and raise with a guiding line do you mean vertically ( vertical or overhung) or low angle stuff like moving a patient across a very uneven ground? I have used a guiding line for deflecting the path of a litter on a highline (english reeve), for moving a litter away from the wall on near vertical slopes, and moving alitter across a scree(sp?)field. Binrat Either or. Guiding lines can be used in a variety of fashions. And yes, you can even use them in a horizontal setup if need be, i.e. redirecting a vertical setup to move around a large boulder or what have you to get the patient to level ground. As I understand it, and this is not fact, the term "High Line" .vs. "Guiding Line" are no longer interchangeable, they are now indeed different. Hopefuly Majid will pipe in since he's more current than I am at this point. I stopped doing SAR stuff about 3 years ago, but it was made clear to us that these are both different concepts and systems. Confused yet? Yup... know the feeling
I guess I'm of the newer generation because highlines are rigged differently compared to the guiding line.
Cheers
Binrat
edited because of my fat fingers
(This post was edited by binrat on Feb 27, 2008, 10:43 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Feb 27, 2008, 10:51 PM
Post #57 of 93
(1688 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
GI GI
ok, lets take this to one level up . There are no tensioning system built on that side anchor (not on the image I post), therefore how are you going to take the slack out of the rope if you have no MA built-in on that end?.
Do not tell me you are going to use your hands to take the slack off the system on two separate ropes evenly and if so, how tight do you think you could tension those two rope by just using the hands?
Now I am willing to bet $5000 that you are wrong. $2500 to cover the cost of a course which I took last year that was 90 hours long in Yosemite and all we did was building systems like what you see here and another $2500 so I could retake it the course again just for the fun of it .
Do we have a bet?
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Feb 27, 2008, 11:14 PM
Post #58 of 93
(1678 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
socalclimber wrote: binrat wrote: socialclimber: when you say lower and raise with a guiding line do you mean vertically ( vertical or overhung) or low angle stuff like moving a patient across a very uneven ground? I have used a guiding line for deflecting the path of a litter on a highline (english reeve), for moving a litter away from the wall on near vertical slopes, and moving alitter across a scree(sp?)field. Binrat Either or. Guiding lines can be used in a variety of fashions. And yes, you can even use them in a horizontal setup if need be, i.e. redirecting a vertical setup to move around a large boulder or what have you to get the patient to level ground. As I understand it, and this is not fact, the term "High Line" .vs. "Guiding Line" are no longer interchangeable, they are now indeed different. Hopefuly Majid will pipe in since he's more current than I am at this point. I stopped doing SAR stuff about 3 years ago, but it was made clear to us that these are both different concepts and systems. Confused yet? Yup... know the feeling
Guide line, High line and Tyrolean are three different systems even due they all look very similar. Guide line is a fixed line with a built-in MA and generally a load that just rolls on the line with one separate line controlling the movement. MA is used to lower or raise the line to clear obstacles. An example of guide line is like lowering a subject on the hill side over some large rocks etc or transporting a subject from 10 story high building with a 45 degree angle in to a parking lot
Tyrolean is setting up a line that has no horizontal control and the subject is in charge moving the load by himself . Basically a fix line, a load on a pulley and the subjects just move himself from one side to other (assuming there are no Vs in the middle).
The high lines are similar to Tyrolean with exception of both horizontal and or combination of vertical movements .In addition to MA for tensioning the lines there could be other MA for raising and or lowering. Some complex high lines could have 4-6 lines going across a section and each lines may have belay built-in belay and or safety prusik.
All three systems especially the complex high lines are consider very dangerous due to fact that if they are not rigged correctly, system could fail. So this is what I know on these systems but feel free to correct me.
Now, is the name Tyrolean came from Austria or is the name of the person who came up with this system?
(This post was edited by majid_sabet on Feb 27, 2008, 11:25 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
sticky_fingers
Feb 27, 2008, 11:19 PM
Post #59 of 93
(1674 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 420
|
On rc.com, they're called a Trollean Traverse.
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Feb 27, 2008, 11:32 PM
Post #60 of 93
(1669 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
majid_sabet wrote: GI GI ok, lets take this to one level up . There are no tensioning system built on that side anchor (not on the image I post), therefore how are you going to take the slack out of the rope if you have no MA built-in on that end?. Do not tell me you are going to use your hands to take the slack off the system on two separate ropes evenly and if so, how tight do you think you could tension those two rope by just using the hands?
majid_sabet wrote: Now I am willing to bet $5000 that you are wrong. $2500 to cover the cost of a course which I took last year that was 90 hours long in Yosemite and all we did was building systems like what you see here and another $2500 so I could retake it the course again just for the fun of it . Do we have a bet?
a) paid too much
and
b) should ask for a refund because you apparently didn't learn jack shit... then again, maybe it wasn't their fault.
(This post was edited by trenchdigger on Feb 27, 2008, 11:32 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
binrat
Feb 28, 2008, 12:11 AM
Post #61 of 93
(1652 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2006
Posts: 1155
|
I was told once the tyrolean came from an area in the Dolomite Alps. They were the first ones to use rope for horizontal movement in the alps.
Binrat
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Feb 28, 2008, 12:29 AM
Post #62 of 93
(1639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
trench
Every time you respond or butt in to a post that isn’t your specialty (like you got any), you are confirming that you are my bitch.
|
|
|
|
|
g_i_g_i
Feb 28, 2008, 3:55 PM
Post #63 of 93
(1601 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2005
Posts: 53
|
Hey Majid,
ok, you're right, what was I thinking, I was way off...
But you're also a poor soul who needs to post his bullshit quiz topics just to show off, and there is no course that can fix that.
Thanks for teaching me something the worst possible way.
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Feb 28, 2008, 4:20 PM
Post #64 of 93
(1588 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
majid_sabet wrote: GI GI ok, lets take this to one level up . There are no tensioning system built on that side anchor (not on the image I post), therefore how are you going to take the slack out of the rope if you have no MA built-in on that end?. Do not tell me you are going to use your hands to take the slack off the system on two separate ropes evenly and if so, how tight do you think you could tension those two rope by just using the hands? Now I am willing to bet $5000 that you are wrong. $2500 to cover the cost of a course which I took last year that was 90 hours long in Yosemite and all we did was building systems like what you see here and another $2500 so I could retake it the course again just for the fun of it . Do we have a bet?
So how did it get tight in the first place?
|
|
|
|
|
Valarc
Feb 28, 2008, 4:40 PM
Post #65 of 93
(1576 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2007
Posts: 1473
|
majid_sabet wrote: trench Every time you respond or butt in to a post that isn’t your specialty (like you got any), you are confirming that you are my bitch.
quoting this one because majid loves to edit his posts...
|
|
|
|
|
binrat
Feb 28, 2008, 4:47 PM
Post #66 of 93
(1565 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2006
Posts: 1155
|
shoo wrote: Two questions. First, why aren't the black ropes tied directly to the anchor points rather than to an individual bolt? It seems to me that if the prussiks are going to slip, you want to have that black rope equalized off of several points rather than just one. Even if the prussik will "absorb" some of the force and equalize it, why not just tie the ropes to the anchor points? Second why the criss-cross anchor set up? It's more efficient to minimize (admittedly low already) angle between points. I suppose that if you believe that there's a danger that an entire half of your anchoring rock will break loose somehow, you'd want this setup. If that were the case, then you'd definitely want to have the black ropes straight to the anchor points anyway.
shoo
I will try to answer for you.
first, redundancy. If the webbing fails then the whole line with webbing is gone. Having it into a bolt hanger takes links out of the equation.
Think again redundancy, having the webbing criss - crossing if 1 ara of the rock fails then you still have aleast 1 anchor.
|
|
|
|
|
binrat
Feb 28, 2008, 4:52 PM
Post #67 of 93
(1556 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2006
Posts: 1155
|
shockabuku wrote: majid_sabet wrote: GI GI ok, lets take this to one level up . There are no tensioning system built on that side anchor (not on the image I post), therefore how are you going to take the slack out of the rope if you have no MA built-in on that end?. Do not tell me you are going to use your hands to take the slack off the system on two separate ropes evenly and if so, how tight do you think you could tension those two rope by just using the hands? Now I am willing to bet $5000 that you are wrong. $2500 to cover the cost of a course which I took last year that was 90 hours long in Yosemite and all we did was building systems like what you see here and another $2500 so I could retake it the course again just for the fun of it . Do we have a bet? So how did it get tight in the first place?
There are a few easy ways to tighten the system.
Make a MA that would connect onto the end of the rope, or build a MA that would piggy back on the tandem prussiks that would be removed after tensioning.
Binrat
|
|
|
|
|
shoo
Feb 28, 2008, 4:55 PM
Post #68 of 93
(1552 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2006
Posts: 1501
|
binrat wrote: shoo I will try to answer for you. first, redundancy. If the webbing fails then the whole line with webbing is gone. Having it into a bolt hanger takes links out of the equation. Think again redundancy, having the webbing criss - crossing if 1 ara of the rock fails then you still have aleast 1 anchor.
The way I'm looking at it, the webbing anchors are perfectly redundant by themselves. Each two point webbing anchor is tied with a knot such that if any single point or strand of webbing fails the system will still be loading at least one point. That's pretty much the definition of redundancy right there.
As for the crossing, from where I'm looking, it appears that the bolted rock is from one single solid piece of stone. The risk of the stone splitting right between the middle two bolts and one half falling out seems so small to me that I would consider it negligible.
|
|
|
|
|
reg
Feb 28, 2008, 6:02 PM
Post #69 of 93
(1526 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1560
|
majid_sabet wrote: trench ......you are confirming that you are my bitch.
we gotta get you a women, majid - ur using that too much! 
|
|
|
|
|
zeke_sf
Feb 28, 2008, 6:17 PM
Post #70 of 93
(1520 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2006
Posts: 18730
|
Valarc wrote: majid_sabet wrote: trench Every time you respond or butt in to a post that isn’t your specialty (like you got any), you are confirming that you are my bitch. quoting this one because majid loves to edit his posts...
His posting ethics are indeed weak. We can only hope his advice isn't similarly flawed. We are counting on you Majid! Don't use butane when jet fuel is the gas that will make the rocket go!
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Feb 28, 2008, 7:41 PM
Post #71 of 93
(1489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
binrat wrote: shockabuku wrote: majid_sabet wrote: GI GI ok, lets take this to one level up . There are no tensioning system built on that side anchor (not on the image I post), therefore how are you going to take the slack out of the rope if you have no MA built-in on that end?. Do not tell me you are going to use your hands to take the slack off the system on two separate ropes evenly and if so, how tight do you think you could tension those two rope by just using the hands? Now I am willing to bet $5000 that you are wrong. $2500 to cover the cost of a course which I took last year that was 90 hours long in Yosemite and all we did was building systems like what you see here and another $2500 so I could retake it the course again just for the fun of it . Do we have a bet? So how did it get tight in the first place? There are a few easy ways to tighten the system. Make a MA that would connect onto the end of the rope, or build a MA that would piggy back on the tandem prussiks that would be removed after tensioning. Binrat
That's kind of what I assumed. So the two level up analysis says build another anchor (preferably in line with the system) and build an MA system to tighten it through the prussiks if it gets loose and you don't want to replace it. It seems the prussiks serve a double purpose here to some extent.
|
|
|
|
|
cintune
Feb 28, 2008, 7:46 PM
Post #72 of 93
(1482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1293
|
Here's a simplified app that shows the force multiplication that results from various degrees of tensioning in a traverse.
http://www.tagsafety.com/info/tyrolean.php
As far as the prusiks go, the significant thing is that they provide rope-and-bolt-friendly shock-absorption when in use. Their diagnostic value, which Majid stresses, is only accessory to their superiority over attaching static line directly to the bolts and then riding the line. If for some reason someone starts bouncing, the prusiks slip instead of the knotted rope or the anchor failing.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Feb 28, 2008, 8:12 PM
Post #73 of 93
(1464 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
zeke_sf wrote: Valarc wrote: majid_sabet wrote: trench Every time you respond or butt in to a post that isn’t your specialty (like you got any), you are confirming that you are my bitch. quoting this one because majid loves to edit his posts... zeke sf His posting ethics are indeed weak. We can only hope his advice isn't similarly flawed. We are counting on you Majid! Don't use butane when jet fuel is the gas that will make the rocket go!
I do not try to follow people’s post trying to dump negative comments that are not related to their subject and I always welcome intelligent and intellectual arguments especially, if it is related to topic I post . I never say I am right or wrong but even when If I do,at least I will try to bring enough facts and evidence to prove my point. The whole point of posting this was not to ask you guys wtf this system is or does. I know why these sorts of systems are built but, I always look forward to find out more about other applications, pros and cons and any other info which I may not be updated on.
NOW, on the unethical part me; when some college boy (trench n00b and his associates) comes in a tries to say something that is not related to the topic or his comments contains racial BS, you are guaranteed that I will rip his as* apart.
|
|
|
|
|
zeke_sf
Feb 28, 2008, 8:17 PM
Post #74 of 93
(1460 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2006
Posts: 18730
|
majid_sabet wrote: zeke_sf wrote: Valarc wrote: majid_sabet wrote: trench Every time you respond or butt in to a post that isn’t your specialty (like you got any), you are confirming that you are my bitch. quoting this one because majid loves to edit his posts... zeke sf His posting ethics are indeed weak. We can only hope his advice isn't similarly flawed. We are counting on you Majid! Don't use butane when jet fuel is the gas that will make the rocket go! I do not try to follow people’s post trying to dump negative comments that are not related to their subject and I always welcome intelligent and intellectual arguments especially, if it is related to topic I post . I never say I am right or wrong but even when If I do,at least I will try to bring enough facts and evidence to prove my point. The whole point of posting this was not to ask you guys wtf this system is or does. I know why these sorts of systems are built but, I always look forward to find out more about other applications, pros and cons and any other info which I may not be updated on. NOW, on the unethical part me; when some college boy (trench n00b and his associates) comes in a tries to say something that is not related to the topic or his comments contains racial BS, you are guaranteed that I will rip his as* apart.
Ah, Majid, we all know you play a bit of a game and don't structure your responses to have the most intellectual of conversations at all times. But that's how it goes here. Deleting your posts isn't good form is all we are saying about ethics.
Go ahead and make all those dudes your bitch! That's also what this site is about.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Feb 29, 2008, 12:15 AM
Post #75 of 93
(1415 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
Zake
I delete my old post after few weeks or so it has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreement with a particular person. This is just to keep no record on-line and have it low key. As far as talking on any intelligent and or getting in to an intellectual conversation well, it depends who I am talking too and how deep I want to cover a subject. I personally try to stay away from too many scientific argument due to fact that I may not be able to present or explain what I would like to say and I do not want be judged base on what people may read on some forum. Trench is been punk as* for long time I keep stopping myself from not getting in to on-line bashing with him or any of his similar buddies but once someone goes in to my sh*t list, they are there for long time plus, I do not know the fuc8ing guy and if he disagrees with a topic or something he sees then, he should get his punk as* down and use his knowledge and prove his point like how everyone else has done such as yourself, GI GI and the rest .He is posting BS, start his typical wabbit bashing with no reasons or make a dumb comment and then hide is not the way a man make his point therefore, I call him my lady cause he can not take like a man.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
