|
WVUCLMBR
Mar 24, 2008, 5:50 PM
Post #26 of 44
(1705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2007
Posts: 668
|
I 2nd ja1484 ......KISS (keep it simple stupid).
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Mar 24, 2008, 5:50 PM
Post #27 of 44
(1704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
You don't sling the tree with the webbing you want. You sling the tree with the webbing you have. That's why its a good idea to learn more than one way to do these things. The webbing you have is probably not long enough for one of these superette-The One Anchor setups. My Precious.... DMT
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Mar 24, 2008, 6:22 PM
Post #28 of 44
(1687 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
wiki wrote: How about this. Less webbing, less biners, less knots. Sorry about the drawing - I'm no Majid. You just tri-axially loaded your 'biners.
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Mar 24, 2008, 6:46 PM
Post #29 of 44
(1671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
majid_sabet wrote: epoch wrote: binrat wrote: can't see M.S. picture but how about wrap 2 pull 1? Binrat You just described the Majid pic. Though the majid pic isn't redundant, nor is your statement. The anchor you see above is the the most redundant anchor. Also what makes the anchor strong is not the multi mix CF but simplicity. The W2P1 anchor has the least tension on the knot( the weakest part) which makes the entire anchor strong. Redundant? Not one bit. As for strength... How strong is a water knot? A conservative estimate says you lose 30-40% of the webbing strength, right? Even assuming a W2 P1 perfectly isolates the knot (which it generally doesn't), the W2 P1 is still weaker than a 2-loop setup, all other things equal, unless the water knot weakens the webbing more than 50% (which it shouldn't). The W3 P2, on the other hand, provides a decent advantage over the 3-loop but would require a butt-load of webbing to create around an 8' diameter boulder!
|
|
|
|
|
ja1484
Mar 24, 2008, 6:48 PM
Post #30 of 44
(1662 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 11, 2006
Posts: 1935
|
trenchdigger wrote: wiki wrote: How about this. Less webbing, less biners, less knots. Sorry about the drawing - I'm no Majid. You just tri-axially loaded your 'biners. With a tied off powerpoint? I'm pretty sure that's not possible. Maybe I'm reading his diagram wrong...it is a bit unclear. Care to expound?
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Mar 24, 2008, 7:02 PM
Post #31 of 44
(1648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
ja1484 wrote: trenchdigger wrote: wiki wrote: How about this. Less webbing, less biners, less knots. Sorry about the drawing - I'm no Majid. You just tri-axially loaded your 'biners. With a tied off powerpoint? I'm pretty sure that's not possible. Maybe I'm reading his diagram wrong...it is a bit unclear. Care to expound? Drawing looks like a couple of lengths of webbing with overhands on bights in the ends (rabbit runner style), clipped straight to the biners. Is that wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Mar 24, 2008, 7:38 PM
Post #32 of 44
(1634 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
funny how trench provides balh blah blah on anchors where he never had an hour of training on building and analyzing such anchors just talk and talk. When you reach 1000 hours of rigging anchors or taking training building stuff then you are qualified to talk about W2p1 or W3p2 till then, you are rookie so get out there and rig, Move it move it move it and put your helmet on Junior
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Mar 24, 2008, 7:49 PM
Post #33 of 44
(1623 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
I climb on the first version all day long. As far as the assertion that the biners are poorly placed Pfft, the rope will have so much friction that the biner will probably have less than 10 lbs of pull on them. Locking biners, you're good. BTW, the Skinner -Pianna story of that huge boulder pulling off of the top of Salethe Wall/El Cap after they used it for an anchor and almost killing them after they topped out and were hauling is always worth remembering in these situations.
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Mar 24, 2008, 8:21 PM
Post #34 of 44
(1604 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
majid_sabet wrote: funny how trench provides balh blah blah on anchors where he never had an hour of training on building and analyzing such anchors just talk and talk. When you reach 1000 hours of rigging anchors or taking training building stuff then you are qualified to talk about W2p1 or W3p2 till then, you are rookie so get out there and rig, Move it move it move it and put your helmet on Junior You truly are clueless.
|
|
|
|
|
ja1484
Mar 24, 2008, 8:30 PM
Post #35 of 44
(1595 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 11, 2006
Posts: 1935
|
trenchdigger wrote: ja1484 wrote: trenchdigger wrote: wiki wrote: How about this. Less webbing, less biners, less knots. Sorry about the drawing - I'm no Majid. You just tri-axially loaded your 'biners. With a tied off powerpoint? I'm pretty sure that's not possible. Maybe I'm reading his diagram wrong...it is a bit unclear. Care to expound? Drawing looks like a couple of lengths of webbing with overhands on bights in the ends (rabbit runner style), clipped straight to the biners. Is that wrong? That would be triaxial. I was under the impression he just tied everything off with a single OHbight or 8bight. I dunno...hard to tell in the diagram.
|
|
|
|
|
DeletedUser
Mar 24, 2008, 9:07 PM
Post #36 of 44
(1577 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 26, 2007
Posts: 3
|
trenchdigger wrote: majid_sabet wrote: funny how trench provides balh blah blah on anchors where he never had an hour of training on building and analyzing such anchors just talk and talk. When you reach 1000 hours of rigging anchors or taking training building stuff then you are qualified to talk about W2p1 or W3p2 till then, you are rookie so get out there and rig, Move it move it move it and put your helmet on Junior You truly are clueless. Question: How many RC.com'ers does it take a over-ANALyze a simple anchor?? Answer: Count the previous posts. Get a life people and spend a little more time climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
carabiner96
Mar 24, 2008, 9:15 PM
Post #37 of 44
(1563 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 12610
|
DeletedUser wrote: Get a life people and spend a little more time climbing. And right now you are...
|
|
|
|
|
binrat
Mar 24, 2008, 9:26 PM
Post #38 of 44
(1551 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2006
Posts: 1155
|
carabiner96 wrote: DeletedUser wrote: Get a life people and spend a little more time climbing. And right now you are... surfing Rc.com while belaying his partner
|
|
|
|
|
knudenoggin
Mar 24, 2008, 9:34 PM
Post #39 of 44
(1539 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2004
Posts: 596
|
carabiner96 wrote: Going to throw a bight on there for the masterpoint? I don't agree that the load is "borne on 4 arms of tape", more that it is born by two slings, because the four arms are not independent. Certainly NOT--that would eliminate the equalizing. Count how much tension is on the competing set-ups. With an powerpoint knot, any shift left/right dumps the load on the the legs of that side. My set-up has double material going over the edge. *kN*
|
|
|
|
|
uso5590
Mar 24, 2008, 10:01 PM
Post #40 of 44
(1528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 1, 2007
Posts: 11
|
Well everyone, thanks for the responses. This is what i have gathered: The first setup would be a "good enough" anchor. The best overall setup would be two huge loops around the boulder, with water knots on the back of said boulder, to reduce the stress on them. Both loops tied with independent OH/8 bight knots to create the power point. Sound right? not to open a new can of worms, but wouldn't two O/O non-lockers be best idea for the power point? A very experience climber told me that the locking mechanisms side load the biners, and you want something that can be flush up against one another...
|
|
|
|
|
DeletedUser
Mar 24, 2008, 10:17 PM
Post #41 of 44
(1523 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 26, 2007
Posts: 3
|
carabiner96 wrote: DeletedUser wrote: Get a life people and spend a little more time climbing. And right now you are... I'm browsing rc.com ... reading the very few things on here that have any form of credibility. I'm not posting 3817 times in less than 2 years. I check this site only occasionally and every time I do it's the same clowns arguing over-analyzing every nuance of every anchor, knot, etc. carabiner96, my comments weren't meant at you but I guess you looked in the mirror and figured that they did apply to you. Clown.
|
|
|
|
|
knudenoggin
Mar 24, 2008, 10:38 PM
Post #42 of 44
(1506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2004
Posts: 596
|
uso5590 wrote: Well everyone, thanks for the responses. This is what i have gathered: The first setup would be a "good enough" anchor. The best overall setup would be two huge loops around the boulder, with water knots on the back of said boulder, to reduce the stress on them. Both loops tied with independent OH/8 bight knots to create the power point. Sound right? See my remarks above: why the powerpoint?
|
|
|
|
|
carabiner96
Mar 25, 2008, 1:18 AM
Post #43 of 44
(1473 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 12610
|
DeletedUser wrote: carabiner96 wrote: DeletedUser wrote: Get a life people and spend a little more time climbing. And right now you are... I'm browsing rc.com ... reading the very few things on here that have any form of credibility. I'm not posting 3817 times in less than 2 years. I check this site only occasionally and every time I do it's the same clowns arguing over-analyzing every nuance of every anchor, knot, etc. carabiner96, my comments weren't meant at you but I guess you looked in the mirror and figured that they did apply to you. Clown. I'm going for 4 g's by the end of the month...watch the fun!!!
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Mar 25, 2008, 1:48 AM
Post #44 of 44
(1467 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
uso5590 wrote: not to open a new can of worms, but wouldn't two O/O non-lockers be best idea for the power point? A very experience climber told me that the locking mechanisms side load the biners, and you want something that can be flush up against one another... The side-loading doesn't worry me. I like O/O non-lockers except for cases when the involved rope and/or sling might come up against the gate. So I tried to avoid that combo around areas of congestion like the attachment points to my harness. I might also be concerned if someone were TR'ing and decided to climb a little above the TR anchor as sometimes is done to get the most out of the pitch. So I would be comfortable with O/O non-lockers for a TR where the pitch "ended" below them. Bill L
|
|
|
|
|
|