|
|
|
|
ctardi
Jun 13, 2006, 4:31 PM
Post #26 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2004
Posts: 1278
|
In reply to: In reply to: Yup, I get what you are saying, but it's like anything else, million ways to do it, do what you are most comfortable with. Why did you post this thread? I strongly suspect it was just an exercise in mental masturbation for you. But if you're honestly looking for opinions, here's mine in brief: You're making a concrete foundation that's 10% thicker than it needs to be, and then potentially skimping on the concrete between the bricks you lay on top of the foundation because you don't have enough left. GO
Just interested in the opinions out there, have already made a couple of changes to what I will do. I'm still not seeing any reason not to do the figure eight at the master point that way, unless the extra rope used puts the anchor in a bad spot.
ACMG has good guidelines if I can do something how they suggest, why not do it?
Microbarn - This rope would be going over the edge, as I said earlier, it gets threaded through a peice of webbing. The webbing is not strength, it's protection.
radistrad - I didn't really trust the clove hitch the first few times, but it is much easier to equalize, and with the overhand backup, I don't see it coming undone under normal circumdance.
I'd just use this on either bolts, or bomber trees, or one of each. I'm not quite up to 3 point anchor building, but i'm learning. :)
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jun 13, 2006, 5:20 PM
Post #27 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: ACMG has good guidelines if I can do something how they suggest, why not do it?
I answered that question earlier. The reason not to do it is if you could use that extra four feet of rope for something more productive - extending the anchor over the lip was just one example.
What I'm saying is that this anchor is only part of the true anchor, if you're extending it over the lip. And depending on how you do that, and on the configuration of the top of the cliff, this may be the right solution to the wrong problem. I'm saying you still haven't really explained how you extend this anchor, and I think it's potentially a major flaw that could be fixed by doing something different with the anchor itself.
In reply to: Microbarn - This rope would be going over the edge, as I said earlier, it gets threaded through a peice of webbing. The webbing is not strength, it's protection.
Huh? If the rope is going over the edge, then why does it need to be extended. And what's this about webbing? What's it threaded through?
GO
|
|
|
|
|
microbarn
Jun 13, 2006, 5:28 PM
Post #28 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2004
Posts: 5920
|
In reply to: Microbarn - This rope would be going over the edge, as I said earlier, it gets threaded through a peice of webbing. The webbing is not strength, it's protection.
Until this statement, I thought we were at an understanding. I am not getting the webbing strength vs protection. I didn't think we were ever talking about webbing.
|
|
|
|
|
fulton
Jun 13, 2006, 5:46 PM
Post #29 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2004
Posts: 210
|
I do not like your anchor. Do it like this instead: figure eight on first bomber peice --> several feet of slack later (enough to get over the edge) clove hitch a locker, then clove hitch another locker a foot or so away --> clip your ropes into the lockers --> throw rope over the edge --> now take the free end leading from the second locker and clove hitch it into the SECOND bomber piece --> adjust the clove hitch on the second bomber peice until you feel tension. Now you have an 'equalized' (but not really) anchor with two COMPLETELY independent points.
I saw this method explained in Climbing Issue a few years ago, and though I don't use it myself, it looks better than what you've got.
|
|
|
|
|
microbarn
Jun 13, 2006, 5:50 PM
Post #30 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2004
Posts: 5920
|
haha, well what DO you use then?
As ctardi said before, we are still dealing with a 2 point anchoring system. Your suggested system seems to be directed at more points. It also seems to be directed at multipitch where you are swinging leads.
Did I miss something?
|
|
|
|
|
joeforte
Jun 13, 2006, 6:38 PM
Post #31 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2005
Posts: 1093
|
Did anyone read this whole thread? He's using the webbing as an extra "sheath" for around the rope. He's threading the static line through tubular webbing, and it is the static line that will be running over the edge. A static rope, plus a webbing sheath is pretty much as bomber as you can get with standard climbing gear for running over an edge, unless you carry one of those PVC rope protectors.
I think he was asking more particularly about the knots and equalization, which looks great, besides maybe the clove being backed up, which he agreed he would do.
Why flame him for using the double figure eight? He is learning how to setup toprope anchors, and is being super safe about it. Nothing wrong with that. I'd gladly climb with this guy, rather than some know-it-all who accidentally overlooks the simple stuff.
In my opinion, you can't ever be too safe or too bomber with toprope setups. I can see in an alpine environment, when time, or gear is at a premium, you have to be as efficient as possible. But in this case, go overkill, as long as it's not cutting into your afterwork climbing time! :lol:
Lookin good man, keep it up. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
pendereki
Jun 13, 2006, 7:09 PM
Post #32 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2004
Posts: 323
|
Yup, I read the whole thread and I pretty much agree with you.
I would climb with either of you!
CM
(I really expected that this thread would be about the sliding-X thread)
|
|
|
|
|
phlsphr
Jun 13, 2006, 7:26 PM
Post #33 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 10, 2003
Posts: 262
|
In reply to: Did anyone read this whole thread? He's using the webbing as an extra "sheath" for around the rope. He's threading the static line through tubular webbing, and it is the static line that will be running over the edge. A static rope, plus a webbing sheath is pretty much as bomber as you can get with standard climbing gear for running over an edge, unless you carry one of those PVC rope protectors. I think he was asking more particularly about the knots and equalization, which looks great, besides maybe the clove being backed up, which he agreed he would do. Why flame him for using the double figure eight? He is learning how to setup toprope anchors, and is being super safe about it. Nothing wrong with that. I'd gladly climb with this guy, rather than some know-it-all who accidentally overlooks the simple stuff. In my opinion, you can't ever be too safe or too bomber with toprope setups. I can see in an alpine environment, when time, or gear is at a premium, you have to be as efficient as possible. But in this case, go overkill, as long as it's not cutting into your afterwork climbing time! :lol: Lookin good man, keep it up. :wink:
Not to hard to read this whole thread--since it consists only of your post and a reply. On the other hand, if you are talking about some other thread (as you obviously are), I have no idea what thread you are talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
ctardi
Jun 13, 2006, 9:26 PM
Post #34 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2004
Posts: 1278
|
In reply to: In reply to: ACMG has good guidelines if I can do something how they suggest, why not do it? I answered that question earlier. The reason not to do it is if you could use that extra four feet of rope for something more productive - extending the anchor over the lip was just one example. What I'm saying is that this anchor is only part of the true anchor, if you're extending it over the lip. And depending on how you do that, and on the configuration of the top of the cliff, this may be the right solution to the wrong problem. I'm saying you still haven't really explained how you extend this anchor, and I think it's potentially a major flaw that could be fixed by doing something different with the anchor itself. In reply to: Microbarn - This rope would be going over the edge, as I said earlier, it gets threaded through a peice of webbing. The webbing is not strength, it's protection. Huh? If the rope is going over the edge, then why does it need to be extended. And what's this about webbing? What's it threaded through? GO
Okay, I could have worded this better...
By extending an anchor, I meant that I would use this setup if my bolts/trees/whatever are back from an edge, because my work rope is long enough for anything within 8 meters from the edge.
I'm using the webbing like a sleeve, just slipped over the work rope, to protect it over the edge of the rock. I'll post a photo when I get home to show what I mean.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jun 14, 2006, 2:23 AM
Post #35 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: ACMG has good guidelines if I can do something how they suggest, why not do it? I answered that question earlier. The reason not to do it is if you could use that extra four feet of rope for something more productive - extending the anchor over the lip was just one example. What I'm saying is that this anchor is only part of the true anchor, if you're extending it over the lip. And depending on how you do that, and on the configuration of the top of the cliff, this may be the right solution to the wrong problem. I'm saying you still haven't really explained how you extend this anchor, and I think it's potentially a major flaw that could be fixed by doing something different with the anchor itself. In reply to: Microbarn - This rope would be going over the edge, as I said earlier, it gets threaded through a peice of webbing. The webbing is not strength, it's protection. Huh? If the rope is going over the edge, then why does it need to be extended. And what's this about webbing? What's it threaded through? GO Okay, I could have worded this better... By extending an anchor, I meant that I would use this setup if my bolts/trees/whatever are back from an edge, because my work rope is long enough for anything within 8 meters from the edge. I'm using the webbing like a sleeve, just slipped over the work rope, to protect it over the edge of the rock. I'll post a photo when I get home to show what I mean.
Ah, gotcha. Well if the power point of this anchor is what the toprope runs through, then I think it's fine. And sure, it's sensible to run the rope through tubular webbing if it's over a sharp edge.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
ctardi
Jun 14, 2006, 3:48 AM
Post #36 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2004
Posts: 1278
|
OK, I think we are both on the same page now. :D :wink:
fulton - That is essentially the same, except for the master point, where the rope is attached. I could see myself trying that, but i'm not sure if I like it.
|
|
|
|
|
microbarn
Jun 14, 2006, 12:54 PM
Post #37 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2004
Posts: 5920
|
I have seen the protective webbing over the rope. No need for the pic. Thanks for the explanation.
|
|
|
|
|
fulton
Jun 14, 2006, 3:14 PM
Post #38 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2004
Posts: 210
|
In reply to: fulton - That is essentially the same, except for the master point, where the rope is attached. I could see myself trying that, but i'm not sure if I like it. |
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jun 14, 2006, 3:47 PM
Post #39 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: In reply to: fulton - That is essentially the same, except for the master point, where the rope is attached. I could see myself trying that, but i'm not sure if I like it. Yes, very similar except for the master point. In fact, there really isn't a "master point" at all using the method (that I) previously described, rather; this method essentially creates two COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT anchor points that share the same length of static cord. The real advantage with this method is that you can adjust each 'arm' of the anchor without affecting the other 'arm'. Conversely, any adjustment in your system affects ALL component parts (by shifting the master point)--thus any single adjustment (of one 'arm') would require subsequent adjustment to the other 'arm'.
Hmm, in practice, wouldn't the toprope pull both "master point" biners together, creating a single equalized point with some irrelevant slack rope between them? So in effect, you do create a toprope point that shifts exactly in the same manner that ctardi's master point shifts with any change to the position of the gear or the length of the rope on either side.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
ctardi
Jun 14, 2006, 3:51 PM
Post #40 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2004
Posts: 1278
|
I played with his system last night, and found no advantage.
I can move one arm, without really effecting the other. On both systems.
And yes, the top rope just drew both biners together. If I didn't have enough rope, I would use this.
|
|
|
|
|
kmsmoguls
Jun 16, 2006, 1:15 AM
Post #41 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 9, 2005
Posts: 140
|
Hey ctardi. How did you tie the figure 8 to have two strands at the power point? You can tie a figure 8 on a bight and make it so it has two strands. Unfortuantely that is not totally redundant. I just learned this myself when I took a rock leader class at North Conway and the guide tested the knot. If one of the stands that acts as your powerpoint was cut it could work its way out making the knot and anchor fail. He said that him and two other people had to put it under significant weight to get it to fail but they could.
They showed me another way to tie a similar knot that is bomb proof, unfortunately it is almost impossible to explain. I won't even attempt it because I know that I will confuse everyone. An alternative might be to tie two consecutive figure 8s on a bight. That way everything is redundent. Hope I didn't confuse anyone.
Erik
|
|
|
|
|
ctardi
Jun 16, 2006, 4:45 AM
Post #42 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2004
Posts: 1278
|
I started with four strands of rope...that's about as much as I can explain.
Photos to come tomorrow... :)
|
|
|
|
|
zeke_sf
Jun 17, 2006, 8:11 AM
Post #43 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2006
Posts: 18730
|
I totally agree.
|
|
|
|
|
ctardi
Jun 17, 2006, 5:46 PM
Post #44 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2004
Posts: 1278
|
I believe is is talking about my thread titled 'Anchor'.
Thanks Joe!
|
|
|
|
|
rocketsocks
Jun 17, 2006, 5:59 PM
Post #45 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2006
Posts: 179
|
It's a shame that it is technologically impossible to link to other threads on this forum.
Worse yet is the impossibility of inserting some short explanatory remarks explaining the situation for those who lack context.
Oh to live in such a cruel and strange world.
P.S. What do you guys think about that new piece of gear on the market? You know, the one that does that thing.
|
|
|
|
|
kachoong
Jun 17, 2006, 6:03 PM
Post #46 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 15304
|
In reply to: Did anyone read this whole thread?
In reply to: A static rope, plus a webbing sheath is pretty much as bomber as you can get with standard climbing gear for running over an edge, unless you carry one of those PVC rope protectors. |
|
|
|
|
justthemaid
Jun 17, 2006, 6:40 PM
Post #47 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2004
Posts: 777
|
In reply to: It's a shame that it is technologically impossible to link to other threads on this forum. Worse yet is the impossibility of inserting some short explanatory remarks explaining the situation for those who lack context.
I assume you are being facetious.^^^^^
...and Joe, I agree a link or explanation of what you are talking about would have been nice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jun 19, 2006, 12:12 AM
Post #49 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
Mkay, I am going to merge this thread into the original thread that is being referred to. So for context for those who came in late, this section of the thread was once upon a time seperate due to a slight technical malfunction on the part of the OP of this section of this thread, in other words I am fixing some pilot error. :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
oldsalt
Jun 19, 2006, 12:50 AM
Post #50 of 54
(4452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 19, 2004
Posts: 919
|
I enjoyed this thread, but I'm bugged by one question....
Why not use 16" woofer for the bass of your anchor?
|
|
|
|
|
|
