|
kmsmoguls
Sep 8, 2006, 6:48 PM
Post #1 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 9, 2005
Posts: 140
|
When building an anchor what would you rather have: maintaining equalization or no extension if a piece fails. For example:
A trango alpine equilizer has the ability to remain equalized even if there is a change in direction of pull. If limiter knots are used it minimizes the amount of extension if a piece failed but it doesn't eliminate extension.
Or
A cordelette prevents any extension but it doesn’t maintain equalization of the direction of force changes.
Obviouslly with climbing there are frequently trade offs because no system is perfect. What do you thing is more important. Thanks for your help.
Erik
|
|
|
|
|
devils_advocate
Sep 8, 2006, 7:06 PM
Post #2 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2006
Posts: 1823
|
Hold on, let me get a couple of Valium and liter of Vodka. I have to prepare for another 50 pages of the same information not agreed upon in the sliding-x debate.
|
|
|
|
|
bill413
Sep 8, 2006, 7:17 PM
Post #3 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 19, 2004
Posts: 5674
|
Oo - oo!!! I know this one!!!!!
[*waves hand franticly*]
It depends!
:)
Are the pieces such that equalization (really distribution) is more important? Is the terrain or stance such that I worry more about extension?
Hey Devil - care to share the vodka?
|
|
|
|
|
trebork2
Deleted
Sep 8, 2006, 7:28 PM
Post #4 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
When a fall occurs at first nothing will be equalized. A fall creates so much force that a cordolette or your equalizer will catch on the carabiner and not move until some of the force is let up.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Sep 8, 2006, 8:30 PM
Post #5 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
For the *most* part I don't care about either concern.
Bugaboo!
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
devils_advocate
Sep 8, 2006, 8:51 PM
Post #6 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2006
Posts: 1823
|
In reply to: Hey Devil - care to share the vodka?
Sure, but I only have enough Valium to comatose one of us... so you're going to have to find your own.
|
|
|
|
|
el_jerko
Sep 8, 2006, 8:54 PM
Post #7 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 3, 2005
Posts: 179
|
I am not sure if this is the right answer, but I tend to fear extension above all else.
|
|
|
|
|
alexmac
Sep 8, 2006, 11:21 PM
Post #8 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2005
Posts: 550
|
I personally go for equalized, and instead of the hard drugs for this thread 20 year old single malt and I am not sharing!!!
When done with the bottle , ROCK!!!! as you whip at the repeat posters heads.
Damn, need another bottle.
|
|
|
|
|
jeremy11
Sep 9, 2006, 1:56 AM
Post #9 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2004
Posts: 597
|
I'm much more concerned with each piece being solid. Other than that,
cordalette, limited sliding x, or equalette (3-4 points clove hitched limited sliding x) depending on the situation and mood...
|
|
|
|
|
ecjohnson
Sep 9, 2006, 2:10 AM
Post #10 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2005
Posts: 176
|
I have some morphine left over from my shoulder surgery.
|
|
|
|
|
cintune
Sep 9, 2006, 2:15 AM
Post #11 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1293
|
I'm sorry, what was the question again?
|
|
|
|
|
dune
Sep 12, 2006, 3:31 PM
Post #12 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 80
|
My gut says equalization goes out the window first. But I like the "it depends" answer the best. If you have 2, 3 or 4 absolutely bomber pieces you don't need to worry all that much. Just build your anchor and clip into it. Keep moving and don't waist your time doinkin around. If you've got some questionable pieces try to incorporate as much of both equalization and minimal extension as possible. The reality is you'll never have true equalization except in the most perfect setup. Sliding x is the best thing to remedy that but then you have extension problems (which can be minimized but not removed). I don't use the sliding x if any of my pieces are less than ideal. I used to, but not anymore. I think it’s more efficient to just equalize "cordalette style" the best I can. There are always factors that might warrant the sliding x, like if there is the possibility of a pendulum directly on the anchor or if you’re not sure the angle of force but those are exceptional situations. My rule is: If you don’t have full confidence in your anchor keep plugging in pieces until you do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dune
Sep 13, 2006, 5:36 PM
Post #14 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 80
|
I just skim read about 1/4th of the sliding X thread… never read it before today. I should have. If you haven’t you should too. I’m blown away. It seems like the extension shockload issue is over blown. Extention != shockload. Tests are proving with solid numerical statistics that the shockload effect is a non-issue (always wondered about that but never really knew). And it looks as though when dealing with a less than perfect set of placements that equalization and redundancy without the evils of shock loading can be achieved with sliding anchor configurations. In my mind the issue becomes simplicity of rigging… still reading, but the sliding x/equalette is gaining more stock in my mind. I’m still not totally sold on all its aspects, I like simple solutions. The equalette has been around a while but it’s been an issue of simplicity for me and no one has published a bonafide solution without wanking on your checkbook or making it overly complex. John Long’s new book is supposed to go into detail… and I’m ready to read it.
So I would not sacrifice equalization at the risk of increased extension. How’s that for a 180? Does that mean my anchors on multi pitch climbs will change significantly? Probably not, but I don’t know yet.
|
|
|
|
|
brent_e
Nov 2, 2006, 9:24 PM
Post #15 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 5111
|
:lol:
|
|
|
|
|
krusher4
Nov 2, 2006, 10:13 PM
Post #16 of 17
(3305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2005
Posts: 997
|
Think about this: You can sell one of "your boys" for 12K!! I could dirtbag it for 2 years on that kind of money. Would you be will to make that sacrifice?
|
|
|
|
|
dontmaytagme
Nov 15, 2006, 5:24 AM
Post #17 of 17
(1925 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 1, 2003
Posts: 224
|
[reply]Oo - oo!!! I know this one!!!!!
[*waves hand franticly*]
[b]It depends![/b]
:)
Are the pieces such that equalization (really distribution) is more important? Is the terrain or stance such that I worry more about extension?
Hey Devil - care to share the vodka?[/reply]
Sweet reply .. Thank goodness this was the third post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
