|
carabiner96
Oct 28, 2008, 9:26 PM
Post #2 of 87
(15211 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 12610
|
My only comment is it might be a little overkill.
Reminds me of acadia.
|
|
|
|
|
swaghole
Oct 28, 2008, 9:28 PM
Post #3 of 87
(15204 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2006
Posts: 371
|
carabiner96 wrote: My only comment is it might be a little overkill. Reminds me of acadia.
Yes, overkill but I time. And yep, it's Acadia. Nice guess!!
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Oct 28, 2008, 9:30 PM
Post #4 of 87
(15199 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Are any of those blocks forming the cracks actually secure? They look pretty small, especially your "BFB."  
|
|
|
|
|
carabiner96
Oct 28, 2008, 9:33 PM
Post #5 of 87
(15182 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 12610
|
Don't get me wrong, I love overkill. See?
A fun day with my bros.
|
|
|
|
|
hafilax
Oct 28, 2008, 9:33 PM
Post #6 of 87
(15179 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 12, 2007
Posts: 3025
|
Is the boulder detached? Does it thud or ring?
You have 4 pieces leveraging on a boulder and one piece in an independent crack. Could you have placed something in the crack between the front face and the boulder.
The lone hex on the front right will take roughly half of the force and the 4 around the block will share the other half in some way. A 5 piece anchor is usually overkill but if time and gear isn't an issue and it's not dangerously complex then OK. Do you really carry 3 long pieces of cord with you or is this because you were craging/top roping?
My initial strategy would be to go with one piece in the vertical crack, one in the horizontal (a tricam if it would go) and one under the boulder. The anchor would be spread over somewhat independent features yet still compact which simplifies rigging it together. The final product would depend on how I felt about the actual placements.
|
|
|
|
|
carabiner96
Oct 28, 2008, 9:35 PM
Post #7 of 87
(15174 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 12610
|
Acadian granite is 2.3x the density of normal granite. That boulder isn't going anywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Oct 28, 2008, 9:35 PM
Post #8 of 87
(15174 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
Not a big fan of that right most hex. Its hard to get a feel for how far things will shift or how bomber the hex is but if it fails, it looks like all weight will go onto a single .75 camalot, causing it to rotate in the process.
How is the belay being used, top rope, bringing up the second?
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
Oct 28, 2008, 9:41 PM
Post #9 of 87
(15160 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
swaghole wrote: Something I set up recently. Let me know what you think and how it can be improved.
4 out of 5 pieces are on one side of the main cordelette and only one piece on the other side. If that one Hex pops then the rest of the anchor will see a change in the direction of pull, possibly loading only one piece.
And as someone else said, you've got 4 out of 5 pieces relying on the one boulder not moving to maintain their placement. Lots of eggs in one basket. I'd spread it out to other cracks if possible.
|
|
|
|
|
swaghole
Oct 28, 2008, 9:43 PM
Post #10 of 87
(15158 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2006
Posts: 371
|
hafilax wrote: Is the boulder detached? Does it thud or ring? You have 4 pieces leveraging on a boulder and one piece in an independent crack. Could you have placed something in the crack between the front face and the boulder. The lone hex on the front right will take roughly half of the force and the 4 around the block will share the other half in some way. A 5 piece anchor is usually overkill but if time and gear isn't an issue and it's not dangerously complex then OK. Do you really carry 3 long pieces of cord with you or is this because you were craging/top roping? My initial strategy would be to go with one piece in the vertical crack, one in the horizontal (a tricam if it would go) and one under the boulder. The anchor would be spread over somewhat independent features yet still compact which simplifies rigging it together. The final product would depend on how I felt about the actual placements.
The boulder was about close to 18 inches in height and more then 24 inches in width where i place the pro. It was also about 10 feet long and solid. Rock solid. Had my partner jump on it and nothing moved. I did use a second feature on the right for redundency.
|
|
|
|
|
swaghole
Oct 28, 2008, 9:51 PM
Post #11 of 87
(15139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2006
Posts: 371
|
notapplicable wrote: swaghole wrote: Something I set up recently. Let me know what you think and how it can be improved. Bonus points to the one who can figure out where this is located. [image]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3024/2981657659_9e84671a89_b.jpg[/image] http://farm4.static.flickr.com/...659_9e84671a89_b.jpgNot a big fan of that right most hex. Its hard to get a feel for how far things will shift or how bomber the hex is but if it fails, it looks like all weight will go onto a single .75 camalot, causing it to rotate in the process. How is the belay being used, top rope, bringing up the second?
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.
|
|
|
|
|
hafilax
Oct 28, 2008, 9:54 PM
Post #12 of 87
(15121 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 12, 2007
Posts: 3025
|
People trundle surprisingly large boulders with little effort and some smaller boulders are impossible to dislodge. It could be on ball bearing pebbles for all I know from the photo. Your friend may have jumped on it but your gear is pushing up on it.
Regardless, if there are options for building an anchor out of independent features that are close together that is what I try to do. The placements dictate the end result though.
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Oct 28, 2008, 9:58 PM
Post #13 of 87
(15113 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
Holy hell that's a lot of gear!
And the blocks all look like the cams will lever them off. Couldn't you have slung them with all that cordage?
|
|
|
|
|
mattb1921
Oct 28, 2008, 10:06 PM
Post #14 of 87
(15099 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2006
Posts: 144
|
Man that is a ton going on. In your picture you put a cam and said that it was there just because. I believe it was the .75 Camalot, why bother if the other one is good. You also seemed to use lots of slings and cord. Why not untie your cords and make them single lines and eliminate some of them slings. The rock seems to be pretty smooth and assuming you are using proper cord it should not be a problem.
I think that sometimes when people build anchors for toprope they tend to think hey I got the gear might as well use it. By doing so you have introduced tons of angles that if something goes wrong on one piece the whole thing could go out of whack. Simple is often better.
The boulder seems to pass the hug test. Does the boulder angle down toward the cliff? Is it is my brain playing tricks on me?
|
|
|
|
|
mattb1921
Oct 28, 2008, 10:17 PM
Post #16 of 87
(15070 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 30, 2006
Posts: 144
|
hafilax wrote: People trundle surprisingly large boulders with little effort and some smaller boulders are impossible to dislodge. It could be on ball bearing pebbles for all I know from the photo. Your friend may have jumped on it but your gear is pushing up on it.
I have to agree with this. Your friend jumping on it means nothing. Did you sit down and try and use your legs to push it around?
I was in an AMGA course a few months back and a guy in our class used a huge boulder (bigger than the one you described) to build the anchor. He jumped on it and pushed it with his arms and it didn't move so he used it. Well when his anchor was tested the instructor got on the opposite side of pull and pushed it with his legs and it moved. What the guy didn't notice is that it was sitting on a slope slightly angled toward the cliff on small rocks (acted like ball bearings). Ever since then I am extremely careful when checking out boulders for toprope.
|
|
|
|
|
Arrogant_Bastard
Oct 28, 2008, 10:18 PM
Post #17 of 87
(15066 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2007
Posts: 19994
|
Holy love of God.
Yes I know how to improve it, take out two of those pieces, a couple of the slings, and the superfluous cordalette (or both). Sometimes when the gear is good it’s nice to add a piece or equalize two at one point in the anchor – but you sure as hell shouldn’t have to equalize two .75s in a parallel crack. If it takes that much redundancy to give you faith in an anchor to bring up a second how the hell can you lead over gear?
Personally, I would have moved it all over to the crack with the medium hex and use the ‘horizontal’ behind it – 3 pieces, cordalette if that’s your thing, belay on.
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Oct 28, 2008, 10:27 PM
Post #18 of 87
(15052 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
carabiner96 wrote: Acadian granite is 2.3x the density of normal granite. That boulder isn't going anywhere.
Don't be so sure. Cams provide a lot more leverage than you think. I have seen cams leverage a block and be pulled out.
Second (directed at swaghole), are you sure that angle is 45 degrees? It looks more like 100. Could be an illusion, Though.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
knieveltech
Oct 28, 2008, 10:35 PM
Post #19 of 87
(15037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431
|
This is total crap. You forgot the car tire and the I-beam. I also don't see a canoe, or any olives. Oh yeah, you used the wrong color arrows as well.
Edited to add: Poor form asking for a critique then arguing with the advice given.
(This post was edited by knieveltech on Oct 28, 2008, 10:39 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
swaghole
Oct 28, 2008, 10:36 PM
Post #20 of 87
(15031 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 20, 2006
Posts: 371
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: carabiner96 wrote: Acadian granite is 2.3x the density of normal granite. That boulder isn't going anywhere. Don't be so sure. Cams provide a lot more leverage than you think. I have seen cams leverage a block and be pulled out. Second (directed at swaghole), are you sure that angle is 45 degrees? It looks more like 100. Could be an illusion, Though. Josh
Illusion. And the camera makes my ass look fat
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Oct 28, 2008, 10:38 PM
Post #21 of 87
(15018 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
Looks to me like you could have tied off the entire BFB or a part of it to replace one or two of the placements under it. You'd need to cinch it up tight so it doesn't slide off, but as long as it's getting pulled to the right by the right arm of the anchor, I think that would work OK. One worry would be the right arm failing, then (depending on the direction of pull) it might fall off.
What about tying off the block in the front? The one that essentially lies in between and behind the purple slings.
Does that angle actually look like 45 degrees to anybody else out there? To me it looks more like 90 degrees, which is fine, too. Just wondering if my eyes are playing tricks on me, I guess.
What I'd do:
Search for keyhole placements for passive protection (&tricams) underneath that block (hard to tell with angle of the hill I guess). If less than two are available, replace with cams underneath it. Tie off the block in the front.
If I doubted the integrity of both those structures even a tiny bit I'd stuff a cam or tricam in the crack on the right side of the screen, just in front of where it becomes covered by the boulder (behind the intersection).
Thoughts? Ought to be pretty clean looking, and satisfactorily redundant.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Oct 28, 2008, 10:58 PM
Post #22 of 87
(14961 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
two question for OP
1- where is the direction of your load and based on your setup, which group of your anchor is the stroungest?
2- if for whatever reason you loose your left anchor or the entire right anchor set up, what direction your master will end up ?
|
|
|
|
|
knieveltech
Oct 28, 2008, 11:09 PM
Post #23 of 87
(14943 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431
|
majid_sabet wrote: two question for OP 1- where is the direction of your load and based on your setup, which group of your anchor is the stroungest? 2- if for whatever reason you loose your left anchor or the entire right anchor set up, what direction your master will end up ?
Hey Major, if the OP loses the entire left side of the anchor then chances are he isn't going to give a fuck about the direction of pull because he's going for a ride with a 50 ton granite toboggan chasing him down the route. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Oct 28, 2008, 11:18 PM
Post #24 of 87
(14928 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: two question for OP 1- where is the direction of your load and based on your setup, which group of your anchor is the stroungest? 2- if for whatever reason you loose your left anchor or the entire right anchor set up, what direction your master will end up ? Hey Major, if the OP loses the entire left side of the anchor then chances are he isn't going to give a fuck about the direction of pull because he's going for a ride with a 50 ton granite toboggan chasing him down the route. Just a thought.
homeboy
you build equalize anchor so you could share load. based on OP's setup, the direction of his master is more toward the right side anchor which is only one piece.
think about that 90 degree angle !!!!
(This post was edited by majid_sabet on Oct 28, 2008, 11:19 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Oct 28, 2008, 11:21 PM
Post #25 of 87
(14921 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
swaghole wrote: notapplicable wrote: swaghole wrote: Something I set up recently. Let me know what you think and how it can be improved. Bonus points to the one who can figure out where this is located. [image]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3024/2981657659_9e84671a89_b.jpg[/image] http://farm4.static.flickr.com/...659_9e84671a89_b.jpgNot a big fan of that right most hex. Its hard to get a feel for how far things will shift or how bomber the hex is but if it fails, it looks like all weight will go onto a single .75 camalot, causing it to rotate in the process. How is the belay being used, top rope, bringing up the second? The anchor was used for top-rope (lower down the cliff and climb up before the tide gets to you). That's why there's a redirect for lowering off a grigri. 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.
If the hex is truck then your good to go, although I would have backed it up. You've got a whole pile of redundant equalization going on to the left and then all that is compromised by the single piece on the right.
I see the potential for the block to shift but I don't share the others great concern given the anchors purpose and in light of the hex way in the back there. That is assuming the hex is isolated from possible movement of the BFB.
All things considered, there are a number of ways for it to kill you and those you love but I have belayed/been belayed off alot worse also.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
