|
|
|
|
Neoshade
Jul 27, 2010, 3:37 PM
Post #1 of 42
(19207 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2009
Posts: 31
|
Here's a thought I'd like to get some opinion on.
(I'm not a beginner climber, but I think this is the best place for this)
I always use two carabiners for my master point for all recreational climbing (mountaineering is a whole different game).
My initial preference is to use two lockers.
However, when using two identical locking 'biners, the gates rub against each other's spine, and this causes them to un-screw a bit and wear the gate a lot. They are also difficult to tighten under minor load (like when you climb to the top, TAKE, and double-check the anchor).
So I've come to the solution of using either one Non-locking and one Locking with opposed gates (same biner, different gates) such as the Petzl OK screwlock and OK straight gate.
OR
Using two locking 'biners of different shapes so that their gates and spines are not aligned.
Now It hasn't happened yet, but perhaps this 2nd method will cause one of the 'biners to spin around and cross-load because it's not weighted. (Also an anchor with separate loops for different anchor points, such as an Equallette is not to be used with this.)
Has anyone else encountered this problem of rubbing gates or used this 2nd method of different shape carabiners (one HMS, one Oval)?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Neoshade
Jul 27, 2010, 3:40 PM
Post #2 of 42
(19204 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2009
Posts: 31
|
Thought:
My ideal setup would be a locking HMS and a locking Oval of the exact same height/length. Such that both are weighted equally, but the gates do not abrade each other's spine.
|
|
|
|
|
patmay81
Jul 27, 2010, 3:53 PM
Post #3 of 42
(19187 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2006
Posts: 1081
|
I don't think equal loading of master point biners is critical, as one single biner is more than sufficient to hold any top rope loads.
Also, you mention possibility of cross loading the biner with the longer spine (since it will not be under load). If a biner is not loaded then it can't be cross loaded.
I very often use oval nonlockers for my master point, so that there are no issues with the gates/screws rubbing. I have also used a locker and nonlocker together. I think using two different shaped/spine length biners would defeat the purpose of having more than one biner.
|
|
|
|
|
styndall
Jul 27, 2010, 4:01 PM
Post #4 of 42
(19179 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2002
Posts: 2741
|
I'd just go with two opposite and opposed non-lockers, or maybe three if you're feeling paranoid.
|
|
|
|
|
sittingduck
Jul 27, 2010, 4:04 PM
Post #5 of 42
(19170 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 19, 2003
Posts: 338
|
Neoshade wrote: Thought: My ideal setup would be a locking HMS and a locking Oval of the exact same height/length. Such that both are weighted equally, but the gates do not abrade each other's spine.
If you contact a local top-rope enthusiast group, they will most likely recommends two identical opp&opp D-shaped lockers.
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Jul 27, 2010, 4:05 PM
Post #6 of 42
(19169 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
Neoshade wrote: (I'm a beginner climber, and I think this is the best place for this)
I usually just use any two carabiners, opposite and opposed, for a master point. Most of the time, one of those is a locker. I just use whatever is left on my harness.
|
|
|
|
|
malcolm777b
Jul 27, 2010, 4:09 PM
Post #7 of 42
(19160 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 9, 2009
Posts: 204
|
Neoshade wrote: My initial preference is to use two lockers. However, when using two identical locking 'biners, the gates rub against each other's spine, and this causes them to un-screw a bit and wear the gate a lot. They are also difficult to tighten under minor load (like when you climb to the top, TAKE, and double-check the anchor). So I've come to the solution of using either one Non-locking and one Locking with opposed gates (same biner, different gates) such as the Petzl OK screwlock and OK straight gate. OR Using two locking 'biners of different shapes so that their gates and spines are not aligned. Now It hasn't happened yet, but perhaps this 2nd method will cause one of the 'biners to spin around and cross-load because it's not weighted. (Also an anchor with separate loops for different anchor points, such as an Equallette is not to be used with this.)
I also wouldn't be worried about a locker flipping and crossloading. First, you would have to have a locking biner failure. Second, strength of a locking biner loaded across the gate should be more than adequate for forces encountered in TRing (look at the rating stamped on the spine).
|
|
|
|
|
geezergecko
Jul 27, 2010, 4:16 PM
Post #8 of 42
(19153 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 26, 2002
Posts: 729
|
If you use 2 identical screw lockers then the rubbing of the spine against the locking cylinder will unscrew when placed in one overlapped orientation and screw tighter when placed in the other overlapped orientation. The idea is to have the spine of one biner pushing against the outward rotating side of the cylinder of the other biner which then causes it to close.
|
|
|
|
|
Neoshade
Jul 27, 2010, 4:57 PM
Post #9 of 42
(19122 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2009
Posts: 31
|
"I'm a beginner Climber"
HAHAHAHAAHAHA
Very funny.
I was taught by rather paranoid over-safe people, and I've spent the past few years developing a better understanding between practices are overkill, that are just a "good idea" and those that will outright kill you if you don't adhere to them.
Learning overly safe practices is far far better than the alternative, however, understanding when, how, and why corners may be cut, or massive redundancies may be reduced is absolutely imperative to safe climbing.
You will not always have all of the gear and time to build ideal anchors, especially moving into Trad climbing and mountaineering, and when encountering anchors and methods of other climbers.
- I'm not saying that climbing should ever involve "cutting corners" but rather that there are situations where gear runs thin, time is critical to safety, and the ability to understand and evaluate an anchor or setup outside your own common practice is necessary.
So, to the point, I use super-redundant dual lockers on my recreational top-rope anchors, especially around new climbers that are learning.
But do I realize that's overkill, and that even a single locker is fine for many situations (ie: mountaineering).
BTW I use two Quickdraws on a sport anchor like everyone else. Except that I have a QD with one end replaced with an identical locker. :D
@johnwesely: When you're weekend top-roping, do you really not come prepared with carabiners dedicated to the master-point anchor?
These get trashed on pretty hard, and your QD rack shouldn't be cycling through this role. Not to mention "whatever is left on my harness" could mean two completely different Non-lockers in which case you run the risk of one spinning and cross-loading.
(YEs, Spinning and cross-loading of one of the carabiners IS common, especially the non-weighted one. When releasing the belay, bouncing on rappell, and flicking the rope over obstructions, the anchor will bounce around and the carabiners can spin.
...johnweasly, I'm sure you are referring to sport or trad climbing, as "whatever's left on your harness" implies that you climbed your way up to get there.
I'm talking about setting TR anchors from above. :)
@geezergecko: That's an interesting point. It would be a matter of finding carabiners who's load-point is off-center between the spine and the gate such that when opposed, the spines don't rub at all, or rub against the outside of gates and self-tighten. very smart :)
Ultimately, I think the consensus is correct: The best setup for a weekend TR is a matching locker and non-locker opposed, Or two asymmetrical lockers who's gates/spines don't touch, or as Malcolm77b said "two opposed regular biners, with a locker backup (locker being larger than the normal biners).
(Of course, two opposed non-lockers are fine if you're ok without a locker.)
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Jul 27, 2010, 5:05 PM
Post #10 of 42
(19118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
Neoshade wrote: "I'm a beginner Climber" HAHAHAHAAHAHA Very funny. ... johnweasly, I'm sure you are referring to sport or trad climbing, as "whatever's left on your harness" implies that you climbed your way up to get there. I'm talking about setting TR anchors from above. :)
I would say after what you just did to my name, we are square.
In all seriousness, I was just messing with you because you asked a super basic question that there was a whole thread about less than two weeks ago.
|
|
|
|
|
ToeMoss
Jul 27, 2010, 5:40 PM
Post #11 of 42
(19099 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2009
Posts: 12
|
johnwesely wrote: Neoshade wrote: "I'm a beginner Climber" HAHAHAHAAHAHA Very funny. ... johnweasly, I'm sure you are referring to sport or trad climbing, as "whatever's left on your harness" implies that you climbed your way up to get there. I'm talking about setting TR anchors from above. :) I would say after what you just did to my name, we are square. In all seriousness, I was just messing with you because you asked a super basic question that there was a whole thread about less than two weeks ago.
I lol'd  ...
Anyways, try this...2 identical lockers along with an identical non-locker. Oppose the lockers and pick a direction for the non-locker. Squish non-locker between lockers.
You can then lead up, clip the non-locker, call take, and clip lockers at leisure. 3 biners is overkill, but I'm led to believe that the biner/rope area increase will decrease wear. Also, the gates of the locker will be spaced further apart.
It's paranoid overkill, but you said so yourself, Neoshade, safety first..
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Jul 27, 2010, 5:46 PM
Post #12 of 42
(19089 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
ToeMoss wrote: johnwesely wrote: Neoshade wrote: "I'm a beginner Climber" HAHAHAHAAHAHA Very funny. ... johnweasly, I'm sure you are referring to sport or trad climbing, as "whatever's left on your harness" implies that you climbed your way up to get there. I'm talking about setting TR anchors from above. :) I would say after what you just did to my name, we are square. In all seriousness, I was just messing with you because you asked a super basic question that there was a whole thread about less than two weeks ago. I lol'd ... Anyways, try this...2 identical lockers along with an identical non-locker. Oppose the lockers and pick a direction for the non-locker. Squish non-locker between lockers. You can then lead up, clip the non-locker, call take, and clip lockers at leisure. 3 biners is overkill, but I'm led to believe that the biner/rope area increase will decrease wear. Also, the gates of the locker will be spaced further apart. It's paranoid overkill, but you said so yourself, Neoshade, safety first..
|
|
|
|
|
Neoshade
Jul 27, 2010, 6:14 PM
Post #13 of 42
(19064 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2009
Posts: 31
|
redlude97 wrote: If you had set up a TR with 2 lockers and a nonlocker, why would you be leading it?
I think he's talking about setting up a TR for others to climb after leading it himself.
a TR can be set up by walking to the top or by climbing there... either way :P
|
|
|
|
|
ToeMoss
Jul 27, 2010, 6:15 PM
Post #14 of 42
(19062 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2009
Posts: 12
|
redlude97 wrote: ToeMoss wrote: johnwesely wrote: Neoshade wrote: "I'm a beginner Climber" HAHAHAHAAHAHA Very funny. ... johnweasly, I'm sure you are referring to sport or trad climbing, as "whatever's left on your harness" implies that you climbed your way up to get there. I'm talking about setting TR anchors from above. :) I would say after what you just did to my name, we are square. In all seriousness, I was just messing with you because you asked a super basic question that there was a whole thread about less than two weeks ago. I lol'd ... Anyways, try this...2 identical lockers along with an identical non-locker. Oppose the lockers and pick a direction for the non-locker. Squish non-locker between lockers. You can then lead up, clip the non-locker, call take, and clip lockers at leisure. 3 biners is overkill, but I'm led to believe that the biner/rope area increase will decrease wear. Also, the gates of the locker will be spaced further apart. It's paranoid overkill, but you said so yourself, Neoshade, safety first.. If you had set up a TR with 2 lockers and a nonlocker, why would you be leading it?
Person 1 leads up, sets TR. Persons 2 thru whatever TRs. Last person up, doesn't like to TR? I don't know man, it's redundancy and that's all that matters!! Don't question me like I'm a beginner climber. I'm actually very skilled, trust me.
|
|
|
|
|
hafilax
Jul 27, 2010, 6:18 PM
Post #15 of 42
(19054 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 12, 2007
Posts: 3025
|
I prefer to use 2 non-locking ovals but in the end use whatever biners I have at hand.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Jul 27, 2010, 6:27 PM
Post #16 of 42
(19043 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
ToeMoss wrote: redlude97 wrote: ToeMoss wrote: johnwesely wrote: Neoshade wrote: "I'm a beginner Climber" HAHAHAHAAHAHA Very funny. ... johnweasly, I'm sure you are referring to sport or trad climbing, as "whatever's left on your harness" implies that you climbed your way up to get there. I'm talking about setting TR anchors from above. :) I would say after what you just did to my name, we are square. In all seriousness, I was just messing with you because you asked a super basic question that there was a whole thread about less than two weeks ago. I lol'd ... Anyways, try this...2 identical lockers along with an identical non-locker. Oppose the lockers and pick a direction for the non-locker. Squish non-locker between lockers. You can then lead up, clip the non-locker, call take, and clip lockers at leisure. 3 biners is overkill, but I'm led to believe that the biner/rope area increase will decrease wear. Also, the gates of the locker will be spaced further apart. It's paranoid overkill, but you said so yourself, Neoshade, safety first.. If you had set up a TR with 2 lockers and a nonlocker, why would you be leading it? Person 1 leads up, sets TR. Persons 2 thru whatever TRs. Last person up, doesn't like to TR? I don't know man, it's redundancy and that's all that matters!! Don't question me like I'm a beginner climber. I'm actually very skilled, trust me.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Jul 27, 2010, 6:28 PM
Post #17 of 42
(19042 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
Neoshade wrote: redlude97 wrote: If you had set up a TR with 2 lockers and a nonlocker, why would you be leading it? I think he's talking about setting up a TR for others to climb after leading it himself. a TR can be set up by walking to the top or by climbing there... either way :P
|
|
|
|
|
Neoshade
Jul 27, 2010, 6:52 PM
Post #18 of 42
(19023 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2009
Posts: 31
|
So I decided to photograph examples of the master-points that have been discussed here.
I'm just going to use smiley faces for my indication of preference, as they're all safe to use.
Two identical Lockers 
Super secure. Note the asymmetry of the offset-D biners keep the gates away from the spines.
One locker, one non-locker; identical 
This is my new personal favorite for all occasions.
Two non-lockers 
Probably the most common, safe enough.
Two non-lockers and an extra locker for backup only
Why beat up a biner that's not even being weighted?
Still, not a bad idea. Redundant and locking.
For bolted Sport routes with QuickDraws
One Quickdraw with a locker
Super safe. My preference for sport.
One could even set up two draws with lockers for some nice overkill.
Two Quickdraws
Standard procedure for sport climbing. Why not make one a locker if others will be TR'ing on it?
More to come on opposed lockers in non-sport TR's
|
|
|
|
|
hafilax
Jul 27, 2010, 7:08 PM
Post #19 of 42
(19005 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 12, 2007
Posts: 3025
|
I guess I should add a little reasoning behind using 2 non-locking ovals.
-large round rope path with no added friction due to scissoring like with D-shaped biners
-gates protected by the spine of the other biner if both attached to same slings
-cheap
-if you decide to pull the rope and lead it you don't have to fuss with any lockers
-2 biners is more than enough of a safety factor for TR so lockers are far from necessary
|
|
|
|
|
Neoshade
Jul 27, 2010, 7:10 PM
Post #20 of 42
(19005 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2009
Posts: 31
|
If one DID want to use two lockers for their TR anchor, just because they liked the overkill, here are the issues:
Gates will rub spines if using symmetrical carabiners. (Oval or some HMS). This causes annoying wear, but it is not unsafe.
It was pointed out if gates are going to rub the spines, then they ought to do do on the outside of the screw, such that it tightens it, not loosens.
However, I'm not sure if they'll stay this way, or just end up with the screws rubbing on the inside like this:
I suppose it depends on the carabiner design. I'm still unsure exactly how the rubbing on the outside of the screw will tighten it. It would have to rub primarily in one direction. Seems a bit of an iffy fix.
I would simply avoid using two identical symmetrical lockers if you're going to go the double-locker route, and are worried about the gates wearing or unscrewing.
So my preference leans to using asymmetrical carabiners such that the gate screw doesn't rub the spine of the other much at all:
The last option that was brought up (by me  ) was to use two carabiners of different sizes, but this encourages spinning and cross-loading of the larger, and as such, I think is not such a good idea.
I would like to hear if anyone does this though.
|
|
|
|
|
Neoshade
Jul 27, 2010, 7:13 PM
Post #21 of 42
(18999 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2009
Posts: 31
|
Very good point on the scissoring effect, and the nice wide rope-bearing surface, and yeah, everything else you said.
hmmm, now I'm thinking of going this route for all my sport & trad climbing. 
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Jul 27, 2010, 7:33 PM
Post #22 of 42
(18984 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
Every one of your pictures and descriptions is overkill and beyond adequate IMO. They all work and are perfect.
However - a few things to toss in there which have not been mentioned and are probably more important. The larger the surface area for the rope, the less wear your rope gets. Toproping is signifigantly harder on a rope than leading.
I buy dedicated phat 11mils for toproping. I do lead with them when the rock is sharp and I want phat and thick for safety, in fact we core shotted my 1 year old Beal 11mil 2 weeks ago. Seen below the next route over from where it must have rubbed on a crystal.
As we are doing new routes (that's my sling on a pinnacle 250 feet off the deck -this is the first rap down this line ever) the rock is sharp and will be until a bunch or rope wear softens it.
Same pinnacle left and behind the climber down there. The red rope is the one. Fortunately it's still plenty long and strong for TRing although I haven't done much this year.
Next, as I don't want to wash my rope much, AND I friggan hate getting the black aluminum oxide that rubs off from the aluminum carabiners, I use steel lockers exclusively unless I have to carry stuff much distance. Steel lockers come in different thicknesses: get thick ones. Furthermore, I encourage belays to be done with Gri Gris or Cinchs for the same reason and when I have to rap, I use a DMM V-twin as it's the only stainless ATC device.
But that's me. Do what ever you want. I've noticed that my middle marks wash off when I clean the ropes, and I consider that a safety issue. So I try and not have to wash the ropes often.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Jul 27, 2010, 7:57 PM
Post #23 of 42
(18967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
vaporlocks for TRing LOL
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
Jul 27, 2010, 8:13 PM
Post #24 of 42
(18955 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
Neoshade wrote: @johnwesely: When you're weekend top-roping, do you really not come prepared with carabiners dedicated to the master-point anchor? These get trashed on pretty hard, and your QD rack shouldn't be cycling through this role.
ive been climbing a long time and have always used my longest draws on the anchors- and i cannot say that i have ever experienced a carabiner getting 'trashed' from top rope anchor duty. ever. in fact, ive only ever trashed a biner in one of two ways- belay biners that get worn down over the course of years from rappelling or using my old ovals as funk biners for bolt removal. so, in short, dedicated TR biners strikes me as pretty unneccessary.
In reply to: Not to mention "whatever is left on my harness" could mean two completely different Non-lockers in which case you run the risk of one spinning and cross-loading. (YEs, Spinning and cross-loading of one of the carabiners IS common, especially the non-weighted one. When releasing the belay, bouncing on rappell, and flicking the rope over obstructions, the anchor will bounce around and the carabiners can spin.
really? ive never seen this occur, but i suppose it could if you're using oval or D carabiners.
In reply to: Ultimately, I think the consensus is correct: The best setup for a weekend TR is a matching locker and non-locker opposed, Or two asymmetrical lockers who's gates/spines don't touch, or as Malcolm77b said "two opposed regular biners, with a locker backup (locker being larger than the normal biners). (Of course, two opposed non-lockers are fine if you're ok without a locker.)
i think alot of this sort of thing is reaching past the problem at hand. you note that you were taught by paranoid over-safe people, which leads me to believe you were taught by beginners who do not understand the forces involved with top-roping or how to identify individual scenarios and how to best solve them, instead opting for something thats so overkill, it will work in any situation- which is fine, i guess, but it strikes me that we would be better served by better understanding what these systems are actually doing and how they are doing it and then applying the best solution to a given situation.
i would also note that you point out that learning overly safe practices is better than learning how corners may be cut, etc, etc- again, i would argue that these different systems (most pointedly, non-locker TR setups) are NOT cutting corners and understanding WHY they are not is a better approach than just teaching crazy overkill.
in my experience, crazy overkill practices from beginners tend to lead to crazy big, complicated systems like majid's pictures that tend to be so complex and overbuilt, that they are far less safe than their less overkill counterparts.
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Jul 27, 2010, 8:13 PM
Post #25 of 42
(18955 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
One more thing I do. I put the ropes in their own bag that has a label that identifies it. For instance, after I got home and chopped the end of that red rope (interestingly called an "Enduro") off from where the core was showing, I changed the label to indicate it so I'll be less likely to have a short rope when I need a long one.
This label idea was an outgrowth of me marking my slings with dates. It shocked me how much time was flying. Skinny slings, unlike the old 1" tubular webbing that would do workhorse duty for 30 years, really need to be retired timely. I'm 3 years to make my 8mm slings go from lead to toprope only.
See the rope label on the bag in this pic? You can click on it to see it closeup. The static line labels are yellow and the dynamic are blue so I can grab and go and not get screwed.
The only thing unique on this label is that the rope ends had been marked 60 and the rope bag had been marked 50. I got it dirt cheap brand new, and all I need for TR is a 50. Of course, I started dragging it out here for safety, and shortly after I took this pic, I learned to my chagrin that it was truly a 50. Unfortunately it was when I was out in the deep woods on this very cliff, far from anybody, no cell reception, solo, exhausted, dehydrated, overworked and overheated in the sun calling it a day after soloing a new route, and the rope did not reach the next rap anchors. 10 feet short. Dead vertical cliff. Long way to the ground too.
I put those labels on there to avoid this very thing, proving that you don't get everything you want! I've since changed the tag. The tag is a great help as well in that I am a stickler for keeping all of my ropes in rope bags all of the time. I use to think they were a stupid waste of money until I saw one fall apart on a kid while he was rapping. His bodyweight was @ 140 lbs and his femur was sticking out of his levis after he bit dirt. We had to quit climbing for the day, splint and carry to get him the 50 some odd miles to the nearest hospital and it all sucked. Except for saving his life, that was good. But so needless. I figured kids rope had touched battery acid. Also, grabbing the rope I want out of the 20 I have is easy when they are tagged.
But I got a great deal on that rope!
(This post was edited by billcoe_ on Jul 27, 2010, 8:35 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
