|
|
|
|
diebetes
Oct 31, 2008, 11:46 AM
Post #76 of 87
(2687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2007
Posts: 106
|
swaghole wrote: davidwebb1969 wrote: My personal comments on the anchor setup are: 1. Over engineered 2. When I create an anchor using artificial gear, two pieces of gear make one anchor point. 3. If i am going to use clip gate biners I use 2 and I opposite and oppose them, 4. As someone has already stated that if the right anchor point fails, the load will be redirected onto the left anchor point thus shock loading a possibly leaving one of the 5 pieces you have in the left supporting the entire system, 5. Your main knot on the left anchor point is sitting on the edge, if you are using this for a long period of time it COULD affect the integrity of the cordalette, 6. If the anchor point on the right was to fail I would envisage the 2 x .75 camalots could be left taking the entire load. Overall a good system that could be simplified to clear up some clutter within your system. My personal preference is to always use locking biners within a anchor system, but that is just my preference. Dave Thanks for the good feedback. Very good reply.
Now you're just being a jerk; I made very similar points. I guess I should have numerated them.
And to davidwebb- you must own twice as many locking biners as I do. If I can visually inspect the biners in my anchor, I don't use lockers, except for the masterpoint/shelf of the cordelette area.
|
|
|
|
|
swaghole
Oct 31, 2008, 11:53 AM
Post #77 of 87
(2682 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2006
Posts: 371
|
diebetes wrote: swaghole wrote: davidwebb1969 wrote: My personal comments on the anchor setup are: 1. Over engineered 2. When I create an anchor using artificial gear, two pieces of gear make one anchor point. 3. If i am going to use clip gate biners I use 2 and I opposite and oppose them, 4. As someone has already stated that if the right anchor point fails, the load will be redirected onto the left anchor point thus shock loading a possibly leaving one of the 5 pieces you have in the left supporting the entire system, 5. Your main knot on the left anchor point is sitting on the edge, if you are using this for a long period of time it COULD affect the integrity of the cordalette, 6. If the anchor point on the right was to fail I would envisage the 2 x .75 camalots could be left taking the entire load. Overall a good system that could be simplified to clear up some clutter within your system. My personal preference is to always use locking biners within a anchor system, but that is just my preference. Dave Thanks for the good feedback. Very good reply. Now you're just being a jerk; I made very similar points. I guess I should have numerated them.
WTF?? I just pointed out that the previous poster put up a nice effort in his post with what I thought was good, clear info. You must be PMSing - don't be so sensitive.
|
|
|
|
|
epoch
Moderator
Oct 31, 2008, 12:04 PM
Post #78 of 87
(2680 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 32163
|
cracklover wrote: swaghole wrote: FWIW, the rock is very dense granite. The right hex wasn't going anywhere. Bomber placement in a constricting crack with rock that is 8" thick. I could have dropped my truck on it. The rock would need to break for that piece to fail. carabiner96 wrote: Acadian granite is 2.3x the density of normal granite. That boulder isn't going anywhere. Uh... I don't know how to say this, so I'll just use a picture:  That used to be three popular climbs at Otter Cliffs. Cheers! GO
Gabe is correct. While that anchor appears to be solid, the rock there is ever-evolving. Especially since it is right on the ocean and is always succeptable to being moist. I was the one who took the above photo, and watched the rangers trundle a huge block to further increase the "safety" of the cliff. Clicky!
Otter Cliffs present a unique climbing spot, in that there are ample places to make anchors around and nothing higher than your waist. While I, too, have used that particular block as part of many of my anchors, I try to not depend on a singular feature unless I absolutely have to. Simplicity is the best, but if the situation calls for it, then a little creativity can go far.
If you want to see another Acadian anchor that has been deemed suspect by a few check this out: clicky.
Anchors are entirely subjective, imo, and there is no one "right" way to do things. As long as the OP followed the SERENE ideology then there isn't much to fret about. The chance that the rock would miraculously (sp?) explode on him that day or any given day at that location are particularily slim.
|
|
|
|
|
Arrogant_Bastard
Oct 31, 2008, 3:40 PM
Post #79 of 87
(2656 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2007
Posts: 19994
|
davidwebb1969 wrote: 1. Over engineered 2. When I create an anchor using artificial gear, two pieces of gear make one anchor point.
These two points seem to contradict each other.
|
|
|
|
|
davidwebb1969
Nov 1, 2008, 2:43 AM
Post #80 of 87
(2619 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 13, 2008
Posts: 21
|
I am not sure how you figure out two pieces of Artificial Protection equals an anchor point, and a total of 4 pieces of artificial protection is over engineering. We are referring to a top rope anchor not a lead climbing belay.
Two pieces of gear per point is just safe.
|
|
|
|
|
evanwish
Nov 1, 2008, 6:09 PM
Post #81 of 87
(2580 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2007
Posts: 1040
|
majid_sabet wrote: [IMG]http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/9454/screenhunter005ry7.gif[/IMG]
the I beam isn't seccured,
the tree's on its side (weak)
the wheel isn't attached to anything
and that's a non-locker at the masterpoint..
but that's all ok it was a nice picture
|
|
|
|
|
Arrogant_Bastard
Nov 3, 2008, 5:20 PM
Post #82 of 87
(2529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2007
Posts: 19994
|
davidwebb1969 wrote: I am not sure how you figure out two pieces of Artificial Protection equals an anchor point, and a total of 4 pieces of artificial protection is over engineering. We are referring to a top rope anchor not a lead climbing belay. Two pieces of gear per point is just safe.
I have a hard time interpreting your post, as your writing is terrible, so I'm left to take a guess at what the hell you’re talking about.
For starters, I don’t build my anchors differently based on if they are for TR or a multi-pitch anchor. An anchor should be built bombproof, regardless. The exceptions would be 1) I may extend the anchor over a lip for TR, and 2) I’d be more inclined to build a 4 piece anchor as opposed to 3 for TR because I’m not there to watch the pieces and constantly weight them, increasing chance for something to move.
That said, I usually build my anchors with 3 points. I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with having these 3 points made of single pieces if they’re all decent size in good rock. If you’re suggesting I should use two equalized pieces at each point I’m suggesting that’s retarded, or as you said ‘over engineered’. If I’m using small pieces I might consider equalizing them, but I don’t consider a .75 Camalot in a good crack to be a small or questionable piece.
|
|
|
|
|
graniteboy
Nov 10, 2008, 9:29 PM
Post #83 of 87
(2456 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 1, 2001
Posts: 1092
|
Your "BFB" block and your confidence in it not moving reminds me of the "BFB" block that USED to sit at the top of the Salathe on El Cap, until T Skinner and P Piana anchored to it (probably the umpteen hundredth climbers to do so) and it came off and damn near killed both of them on the last day of their first free ascent of that route.
I knew an old Aussie guy called Dennis back in the early 80s who died in similar circumstances....placed a cam under a "BFB" that cut loose when he loaded it and it landed on him as he lowered off.
Big blocks that are unattached and just sitting on top of a slab are not to be trusted, In my mind.
Also, although there is some foreshortening and
thus distortion of the view in the picture of your terminal cordellette angle, I would reckon it's closer to 90 degrees than 45....which means it will load an unnecessary increase in the actual load to each of your 2 main anchor sets (the single cam on right and the multiple points on left). But maybe that's just an optical illusion due to camera angle.
All in all, I'd say you spent a long long time building an anchor that I would not personally trust.
|
|
|
|
|
JAB
Nov 14, 2008, 2:02 PM
Post #84 of 87
(2389 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 26, 2007
Posts: 373
|
davidwebb1969 wrote: 3. If i am going to use clip gate biners I use 2 and I opposite and oppose them,
That is over-engineering right there. Lockers for the masterpoint, non-lockers for clipping the pieces of protection, is perfectly ok.
|
|
|
|
|
brent_e
Nov 27, 2008, 9:11 PM
Post #85 of 87
(2321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 5111
|
carabiner96 wrote: carabiner96 wrote: Acadian granite is 2.3x the density of normal granite. That boulder isn't going anywhere. Again, this was A JOKE. Normally, I don't care if people don't get it, but if people think i'm serious on this one then I just look like a tard.
I actually did a search, Mo. it didn't make any sense and i didn't know your were teasin.
|
|
|
|
|
jollymon
Nov 29, 2008, 4:48 AM
Post #86 of 87
(2266 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 5, 2008
Posts: 55
|
Okay without reading any of the other posts Ill jump in here head first. I cant really see whats holding the blue cord and yellow cord together. I would have gone for much less then a 45 degree angle asa there is pretty ample placements and a solid downward pull with no real upward action....(looking at that horizontal crack in front of the BFB. Solid, wanna hang my Yaris from it?
Oh and also thats alot of arrows all over the place. but it gets the point across....I guess thhat was a useless observation.
-Jolly
|
|
|
|
|
carabiner96
Nov 29, 2008, 10:52 PM
Post #87 of 87
(2242 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 12610
|
brent_e wrote: carabiner96 wrote: carabiner96 wrote: Acadian granite is 2.3x the density of normal granite. That boulder isn't going anywhere. Again, this was A JOKE. Normally, I don't care if people don't get it, but if people think i'm serious on this one then I just look like a tard. I actually did a search, Mo. it didn't make any sense and i didn't know your were teasin.
sucka!
|
|
|
|
|
|
