|
the_leech
Feb 20, 2007, 5:09 PM
Post #1 of 298
(11168 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2007
Posts: 392
|
Does anyone have information about whether a clove hitch would slip at lower forces if tied around two biners, rather than one biner? The situation I’m thinking of is anchoring into the master point on a multipitch climb. I’d clip two biners to the master point and then clove hitch the rope around both biners. Traditionally, I clove hitch only one biner on the master point, then used a overhand on a bite clipped into a second biner as backup. But one clove hitch around two biners would be faster to rig. It also seems that it would provide better equalization when using an equalette, since both biners would be equally weighting each strand of the equalette master point. Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
grampacharlie
Feb 20, 2007, 5:18 PM
Post #2 of 298
(11148 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2006
Posts: 388
|
If my understanding of you post is correct, I think you may be making things too complicated for yourself. When I tie into a masterpoint on a multi-pitch anchor, I use one clovehitch on one locking biner. If I feel the need for a backup, then tying an overhand on a bite on the slack end of the rope just after my clove is enough for me. This will keep the rope from slipping too far through the clove if unexpectedly weighted, and unless your carabiner breaks, you'll be fine.
|
|
|
|
|
bbirtle
Feb 20, 2007, 5:46 PM
Post #3 of 298
(11119 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 28, 2007
Posts: 102
|
I'd question the need to clove hitch "multiple things." The whole point of a master point is that it should already be equalized - there is no need to back it up by clipping into something else. If you need to do equalization, do it at the anchor, and then clip into it (once).
|
|
|
|
|
coastal_climber
Feb 20, 2007, 7:22 PM
Post #4 of 298
(11033 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2006
Posts: 2542
|
I do a figure 8 on 2 biners, but I suppose a clove hitch on 2 would work fine.
|
|
|
|
|
devils_advocate
Feb 20, 2007, 7:31 PM
Post #5 of 298
(11020 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2006
Posts: 1823
|
the_leech wrote: Traditionally, I clove hitch only one biner on the master point, then used a overhand on a bite clipped into a second biner as backup. But one clove hitch around two biners would be faster to rig. It also seems that it would provide better equalization when using an equalette, since both biners would be equally weighting each strand of the equalette master point. Any thoughts? That's how I do it... since adaptation of the equallete. Without digressing back into the equalette vs. cordalette discussion: I think if you're using the equalette it's safer to use two biners - one on each of the two strands between the knots. And I think the system as a whole works smoother if you tie both of them together (i.e. single clove hitch). Sorry, I have no info on slipping. I don't think it would, and I think some of the talk on the extremely low slip force of the clove is BS. If it worries you just throw a backup on a piece (wouldn't be weight bearing, just protects against slip). Or just use an 8 on the biners - but there are times when the hitch is extremely convienient.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Feb 20, 2007, 7:48 PM
Post #6 of 298
(11006 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
How much time do you reckon you're gonna save? 10, maybe 15 seconds or something? DMT
|
|
|
|
|
azrockclimber
Feb 20, 2007, 8:22 PM
Post #7 of 298
(10961 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Posts: 666
|
dingus wrote: How much time do you reckon you're gonna save? 10, maybe 15 seconds or something? DMT ... if that....
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 20, 2007, 8:38 PM
Post #8 of 298
(10943 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
grampacharlie wrote: When I tie into a masterpoint on a multi-pitch anchor, I use one clovehitch on one locking biner. If I feel the need for a backup, then tying an overhand on a bite on the slack end of the rope just after my clove is enough for me. This will keep the rope from slipping too far through the clove if unexpectedly weighted, and unless your carabiner breaks, you'll be fine. R.I.P. Jay
|
|
|
|
|
shimanilami
Feb 20, 2007, 8:39 PM
Post #9 of 298
(10939 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Posts: 2043
|
My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. On some occasions, if I don't have any lockers left, I'll use two opposing regular biners. They'll only slide if you don't pull the clove hitch up snug, but once you pulled everything neat and tight, nothing moves. It seems good to me and I'm comfortable with it. I've never backed up a clove hitch with another knot. In fact, I've never even thought to do it, but now that I do, it seems to me that it's an extra step that negates the ability to adjust your position. Further, if you don't trust the clove hitch, why not just go straight to the Figure 8 in the first place? IMO this is a waste of time and effort.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 20, 2007, 8:51 PM
Post #10 of 298
(10923 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay
|
|
|
|
|
shimanilami
Feb 20, 2007, 9:04 PM
Post #11 of 298
(10904 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Posts: 2043
|
jt512 wrote: shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay I'm not concerned about my locker, rope, or MP failing. If I was, I would back them up. What is your suggestion, Jay? Note that if your reply contains "PAS", I will know that you are joking.
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Feb 20, 2007, 9:08 PM
Post #12 of 298
(10897 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
jt512 wrote: shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay Does your partner belay you with two carabiners in his/her belay device?
|
|
|
|
|
stickyfingerz
Feb 20, 2007, 9:08 PM
Post #13 of 298
(10897 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2005
Posts: 110
|
jt512 wrote: shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay Trenchdigger beat me to it.
(This post was edited by stickyfingerz on Feb 20, 2007, 9:09 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
dlintz
Feb 20, 2007, 9:15 PM
Post #14 of 298
(10888 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 9, 2002
Posts: 1982
|
trenchdigger wrote: jt512 wrote: shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay Does your partner belay you with two carabiners in his/her belay device? Irrelevant since someone is actually holding the belay device. I wouldn't think of not backing up a clove-hitch since by definition it is a hitch knot. d.
(This post was edited by dlintz on Feb 20, 2007, 9:15 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 20, 2007, 9:21 PM
Post #15 of 298
(10868 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
stickyfingerz wrote: jt512 wrote: shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay Trenchdigger beat me to it. One nice feature of this site is that it is a continual reminder that the majority of new climbers out there don't know what they are doing. Jay
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Feb 20, 2007, 9:22 PM
Post #16 of 298
(10866 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
dlintz wrote: trenchdigger wrote: jt512 wrote: shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay Does your partner belay you with two carabiners in his/her belay device? Irrelevant since someone is actually holding the belay device. You HOLD the belay device? With your hands? And you think that should the belay carabiner break, you will be able to hold the rope with your hands with enough force to prevent a fall? Well, OK. There are LOTS of places in the rope system that lack redundancy. And while I don't begrudge those who use two carabiners to two separate points of an anchor, I also don't see one locker to a powerpoint as "One foot in the grave, the other on a banana peel" scenario that some do. If we take this to it's logical conclusion, then the only safe anchor setup is six individual pieces, independently equalized (no cordlette, thankyouverymuch,) to two different three-point anchor points, with each strand of a double rope system to those locking biners, and 2 slings from the harness to two OTHER pieces. As they say in the Navy: "Charlie Foxtrot."
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 20, 2007, 9:37 PM
Post #17 of 298
(10841 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
reno wrote: dlintz wrote: trenchdigger wrote: jt512 wrote: shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay Does your partner belay you with two carabiners in his/her belay device? Irrelevant since someone is actually holding the belay device. You HOLD the belay device? With your hands? And you think that should the belay carabiner break, you will be able to hold the rope with your hands with enough force to prevent a fall? Well, OK. There are LOTS of places in the rope system that lack redundancy. And while I don't begrudge those who use two carabiners to two separate points of an anchor, I also don't see one locker to a powerpoint as "One foot in the grave, the other on a banana peel" scenario that some do. That would be 4 feet in the grave, actually, since two people's lives would be relying on a single locking carabiner (ditto for a single clove hitch). But, hey, you big thinkers just keep analyzing. Jay
|
|
|
|
|
dlintz
Feb 20, 2007, 9:38 PM
Post #18 of 298
(10840 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 9, 2002
Posts: 1982
|
reno wrote: dlintz wrote: trenchdigger wrote: jt512 wrote: shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay Does your partner belay you with two carabiners in his/her belay device? Irrelevant since someone is actually holding the belay device. You HOLD the belay device? With your hands? And you think that should the belay carabiner break, you will be able to hold the rope with your hands with enough force to prevent a fall? Well, OK. There are LOTS of places in the rope system that lack redundancy. And while I don't begrudge those who use two carabiners to two separate points of an anchor, I also don't see one locker to a powerpoint as "One foot in the grave, the other on a banana peel" scenario that some do. If we take this to it's logical conclusion, then the only safe anchor setup is six individual pieces, independently equalized (no cordlette, thankyouverymuch,) to two different three-point anchor points, with each strand of a double rope system to those locking biners, and 2 slings from the harness to two OTHER pieces. As they say in the Navy: "Charlie Foxtrot." Point missed. People could use a clove on 3 biners if they wanted....whatever, but not backing up a single clove hitch seems dumb to me. d.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 20, 2007, 9:51 PM
Post #19 of 298
(10821 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
dlintz wrote: reno wrote: dlintz wrote: trenchdigger wrote: jt512 wrote: shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay Does your partner belay you with two carabiners in his/her belay device? Irrelevant since someone is actually holding the belay device. You HOLD the belay device? With your hands? And you think that should the belay carabiner break, you will be able to hold the rope with your hands with enough force to prevent a fall? Well, OK. There are LOTS of places in the rope system that lack redundancy. And while I don't begrudge those who use two carabiners to two separate points of an anchor, I also don't see one locker to a powerpoint as "One foot in the grave, the other on a banana peel" scenario that some do. If we take this to it's logical conclusion, then the only safe anchor setup is six individual pieces, independently equalized (no cordlette, thankyouverymuch,) to two different three-point anchor points, with each strand of a double rope system to those locking biners, and 2 slings from the harness to two OTHER pieces. As they say in the Navy: "Charlie Foxtrot." Point missed. People could use a clove on 3 biners if they wanted....whatever, but not backing up a single clove hitch seems dumb to me. d. There are two points. One, is a single clove hitch a sufficient tie-in (no); and, two, is a single locking biner a sufficient tie-in (no). Since nobody reads books anymore, I'll spell it out. The purpose of tying in with a clove hitch is for adjustability, not security. As a rule of thumb, you want to be tied in with a figure 8 somewhere in the anchor as a back up. Relying on a single locking biner for a tie-in is just stupid. There is little point in building redundancy into an anchor and then tying in to a single-point failure point. You have two lives at stake, for heaven's sake. Note that the stock-in-trade tie-in to the master point with a clove hitch to a single biner, backed up by a fig-8 to another locking biner solves both problems. Jay
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Feb 20, 2007, 9:54 PM
Post #20 of 298
(10815 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
jt512 wrote: As a rule of thumb, you want to be tied in with a figure 8 somewhere in the anchor as a back up. The clove is the backup. The Fig 8 is the primary, albeit with a little slack? DMT
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 20, 2007, 9:57 PM
Post #21 of 298
(10814 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
dingus wrote: jt512 wrote: As a rule of thumb, you want to be tied in with a figure 8 somewhere in the anchor as a back up. The clove is the backup. The Fig 8 is the primary, albeit with a little slack? DMT Fair enough. Jay
|
|
|
|
|
grampacharlie
Feb 20, 2007, 9:59 PM
Post #22 of 298
(10812 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2006
Posts: 388
|
Hey Jay, when did I say that two people were going to tied into one locker at the materpoint? Couldn't there be room on the masterpoint for a locker that re-directs the second's line, or better yet, holds an auto locking device meant to belay off the anchor like a reverso? A clove hitch by nature will slip if there is no precaution taken to limit this, hence the overhand on a bite after the hitch which is highly unlikely to get pulled through the clove. Now as for redundancy, I don't use two ropes, and I've never had a carabiner break under bodyweight, so I will take my chances with that. The master point(connected to three or four peices of gear, or two bomber bolts) is where you'll find redundancy, as it is where the second is going to attach themselves when they reach the anchor. That's what it's there for. Just because you don't understand a post does not mean you should attack like the person behind it is retarded. I simply gave my standard attatchment practice for the way I attach myself to the anchor. That is what I beleived the OP was asking for. If I though I was going to have to draw a diagram for you I wouldn't have posted at all.
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Feb 20, 2007, 10:05 PM
Post #23 of 298
(10804 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
jt512 wrote: There is little point in building redundancy into an anchor and then tying in to a single-point failure point. You have two lives at stake, for heaven's sake... Jay Not necessarily. But being a "great thinker", you should be able to figure out why. While I generally double-clip the anchor with the rope and either a purcell prusik or daisy (the horror!), I have clipped in singly with the rope on a single locker (though not when my second's security also depended solely on that connection) and feel the risk is comparable to belaying with a single locking carabiner. So how do you fit two lockers through your gri-gri? I had to dremel the hole out in mine to make it large enough...
|
|
|
|
|
dlintz
Feb 20, 2007, 10:20 PM
Post #24 of 298
(10779 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 9, 2002
Posts: 1982
|
jt512 wrote: dlintz wrote: reno wrote: dlintz wrote: trenchdigger wrote: jt512 wrote: shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay Does your partner belay you with two carabiners in his/her belay device? Irrelevant since someone is actually holding the belay device. You HOLD the belay device? With your hands? And you think that should the belay carabiner break, you will be able to hold the rope with your hands with enough force to prevent a fall? Well, OK. There are LOTS of places in the rope system that lack redundancy. And while I don't begrudge those who use two carabiners to two separate points of an anchor, I also don't see one locker to a powerpoint as "One foot in the grave, the other on a banana peel" scenario that some do. If we take this to it's logical conclusion, then the only safe anchor setup is six individual pieces, independently equalized (no cordlette, thankyouverymuch,) to two different three-point anchor points, with each strand of a double rope system to those locking biners, and 2 slings from the harness to two OTHER pieces. As they say in the Navy: "Charlie Foxtrot." Point missed. People could use a clove on 3 biners if they wanted....whatever, but not backing up a single clove hitch seems dumb to me. d. There are two points. One, is a single clove hitch a sufficient tie-in (no); and, two, is a single locking biner a sufficient tie-in (no). Since nobody reads books anymore, I'll spell it out. The purpose of tying in with a clove hitch is for adjustability, not security. As a rule of thumb, you want to be tied in with a figure 8 somewhere in the anchor as a back up. Relying on a single locking biner for a tie-in is just stupid. There is little point in building redundancy into an anchor and then tying in to a single-point failure point. You have two lives at stake, for heaven's sake. Note that the stock-in-trade tie-in to the master point with a clove hitch to a single biner, backed up by a fig-8 to another locking biner solves both problems. Jay Preachin' to the choir. My post was referring specifically to the single clove scenario. [/minor thread drift] d.
|
|
|
|
|
shimanilami
Feb 20, 2007, 10:40 PM
Post #25 of 298
(10757 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Posts: 2043
|
jt512 wrote: stickyfingerz wrote: jt512 wrote: shimanilami wrote: My standard routine is to clove-hitch to a single locker at the MP. This is the cleanest, most easily adjusted set-up I've come up with. And it completely lacks redundancy. Jay Trenchdigger beat me to it. One nice feature of this site is that it is a continual reminder that the majority of new climbers out there don't know what they are doing. Jay Another nice feature of this site is that it reveals pompous, condescending, self-righteous, and presumptuous assholes for what they really are. The only valid criticism anyone has come up with is that I do not back up my clove hitch, which I will take into consideration. In the meanwhile, you can tie in with as many ropes and lockers as you want to, Jay.
|
|
|
|
|
|